robert's notes

Lend Me Your Ears - Prof. Max Atkinson

Wed, 29 Dec 2010 05:22:48 -0800

study those speakers who most inspire you. Enthusiasm is key.

simplicity, brevity and clairty -

- a speakers job is to summarise and give life to main points

- key to effective speaking is an objective understanding of the needs of your listeners.

- having a sense of sequence and structure plays an important role in helping us to make sense of what we're hearing.

- win 'minor victories' by interacting more directly with the audience - best forms being laughter and audience participation.

- look out and make strong eye contact with the audience

- pause with purpose - allow audience to take things in one chunk at a time --> sometimes pausing at counter-intuitive places like between an adverb and a verb can be very effective

With a little advanced planning, it's easy enough to produce dynamic effects with chalk and talk - writing on a flip chart helps audiences follow an argument. It not only constrains speakers to develop their arguments at a comfortable pace for the audience, but can also convey an impression of authority, spontaneity and liveliness.

Rhetorical techniques

1. contrasts - contradictions (not this but that), comparisons (more this than that), opposites (black or white), phrase reversals and repetition, balance and anticipation

2. puzzles and questions - puzzle-solution formats, rhetorical questions

3. lists of three - give the impression of completeness

4. combined formats <-- obviously have an even greater impact. (see pages 198 - 210)

Painting words with pictures

1. imagery, poetics and the oral tradition

2. everyday imagery

3. similies, metaphors, analogies

4. anecdotes <-- importance of stories. People with reputations as effective speakers invariably excel at using illustrative anecdotes to get their points across - hardly ever take more than a minute to deliver.

Being an effective speaker goes beyond deciding what to say to working out how to say it in a way that's most likely to appeal to your audience.

Using 'for example...' people's heads and eyes move upwards in anticipation of what is to come. Following it up with an illustrative anecdote shows a degree of sensitivity and responsiveness to the audience's problem of understanding. Focus is on making them truly remember 1 key message.

Checklist

1. analysing the audience

2. brainstorming the topic

3. creating the structure

4. saying it creatively

5. creating the visual aids

6. rehearsal

7. preparing for question time

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Local by Social : How local authorities can use social media to achieve more for less

Tue, 07 Dec 2010 01:20:00 -0800

Local by Social: by Andy Gibson

The expectations are growing on councils (and councillors) to engage, work openly, be more accountable and move quicker on issues - and social media/internet tools represent an extraordinary opportunity to do this.

Councils are beginning to use these tools to achieve real value against their objectives, by engaging citizens, listening more and harnessing local energy to help with public activities.

The problem though for councils, is that not engaging now represents a far greater risk than engaging. Citizens will still use these networks to talk about you, whether you add your voice to the conversation or not. These are bottom-up spaces. Citizens therefore expect their council to engage with them on their terms, via their channels, and to be openly available online >> in fact, it is clear that if councils don’t use these tools, the citizens will do it for them, and bypass the council entirely << creates problems in reputation management.

Driven from top (e.g. localism bill) and bottom then, there is a massively strong political context then for doing this.

These sites (tools) aren’t just about sharing knowledge or facts, they are about self-expression and relationships - information is being socialised.

Opportunities - new ways of working, cost savings, service improvements and greater democratic engagement << being online is also amazing at building trust. Even if people don’t engage directly with material from council meetings, the fact that they know they can is still important - and it only takes 1 or 2 citizens to then take this and make it into something like Saddleworth News.

Internal - Within councils, wikis, discussion forums and micro-messaging tools like Yammer are providing dynamic new ways to share info and retain knowledge. They also provide good practise for workers to get competent and confident with speaking online.

Innovation - Councils need to see innovation as a core activity, because it is their future. Failure is only a waste of time if nothing is learnt.

Like so much with what is happening at the moment - what is the alternative? News and opinions about you is circulating already, at the very least you should be listening to this.

Control - their is none (although you can look to influence). The only way to ‘control’ what people are saying about you on social media is to join in the conversation, not as the voice of authority shutting things down, but as a real person engaging openly and honestly with the criticisms. By positioning yourself in the conversation to begin with, and allowing your staff to build relationships with people there, you can reduce the risk of one piece of bad news dominating the debate.

Community - by invigorating the local community, and bringing the conversation to a shared platform, it makes it easier for everyone to talk to each other, saving the council time working out who is saying what, and how to reach them.

Many community organisations and small campaigns would benefit hugely from support and endorsement from their council, and by nurturing innovative projects councils can support the best to become more successful. Lessons learnt here can then be applied in their own work.

Fairness - treating people fairly does not mean giving everyone the same thing; it means meeting them on their own terms - discovering these terms are where internet tools are immense. And in not trying to provide the same service for everyone - we can alleviate pressure on existing structures (and save money).

Council role - councils can, and should, support activities. The most obvious thing they can do is of course listen to what is going on, and contribute information and comment wherever they can. Another easy way to help is to make public data accessible to those who want it - enable people to create for you << councils then can innovators and also innovation enablers.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

some notes from the Local by Social online conference - 3-9th Nov

Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:52:00 -0800

Hyperlocal – a web site covering a small community of interest

Hugh Flouch – best examples come when online activity is blending with the real world. Research also suggests that the community/voluntary led participation initiatives tend to have the biggest impact on decision makers.

Giles Gibson – the big asset that has yet to be tapped is local knowledge and expertise. Harness that and service delivery gets far simpler and more effective, local democracy can start to be taken off the life-support machine and we can deliver more for less. Demographics are important – dictate levels of participation.

Dave Briggs – the opportunity here is for local councils to tap into existing communities to use them as focus groups or sounding boards, for quick, cheap, informal and effective engagement or consultation.

Carrie Bishop – people doing something for themselves that strengthens their sense of community. Directness and honesty online are vital.

Ingrid Koehler – the more we can help people to get used to the tools and understand that we all make mistakes and everybody’s learning… the better it will be. Makes #localgov vulnerable, but out of this comes opportunities.

Dan Slee – see his slides on the value that a council-led Flickr page can have - . Maybe what stops #localgov from engaging en mass is the officers fear of sticking a head above the parapet, coupled with ignorance of the medium.

Carl Whistlecraft – re. the argument that cllrs don’t like social media as they can’t control agenda – can they ever really control it. They always have had to confront issues they would sooner not. Re. change in council approach, make it cllr – use the enthusiastic ones to drive change from bottom-up.

Shirley Ayres – re. why tweet? It is the new information network

@tweetyhall – the place to find cllrs who tweet

http://twitter.com/_attenti_/local-councils - list of councils that do/do not use twitter

http://twitter.com/~!/Directgov/ukcouncils

Tim Davies – one page guides to most social media tools

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes on: Deborah Mattinson - how politicians stopped listening and why we need a new politics

Sat, 04 Sep 2010 08:11:00 -0700

Deborah Mattinson (@debmattinson) - personal pollster to Gordon Brown for the past 25 years.

Audio of her introducing book with Polly Toynbee at an RSA event here

_____________________________

Over the past 25 years voters and politicians have stopped listening to, and trusting each other.

Voters are not however anti-politics (there is plenty of evidence to show there is a latent desire to get involved - Demoracy UK), they are instead anti-professional politicians, political media and political parties - basically the whole of Westminster Village.

So what needs to be done differently???
1. politicians must be more ‘in touch’ with individuals and the national mood. In doing so they must be prepared to talk about stuff that is out their comfort zone. empathy - walk in their constituents shoes.
2. respond to people in a way that demonstrates what you believe in and how your values really translate into policies that affect peoples lives (see what a leader must do below)
3. bring an end to peter pan politics (where the voter never grows up)

As Polly Toynbee says re. 3. --> the voter must take some responsibility and lift itself out of these almost-fashionable ignorance to political goings-on.

Tessa Jowell says that politicians (if not everyone?) has to keep themselves open when they don’t know the answers. There are also to many private conversations between politicians and the media - should they all be offered openly through social media? They don’t have to be a spectacle, just there, accessible and approachable.

A leader must do three things:

1. provide vision
2. translate that vision into action
3. convey that vision to a wider audience and inspire them to share it.

= show me, don’t just tell me
Have to be;
- Pertinent
- Plain
- Personal
- Positive

symbolic policies are emphatically important

leaders mustn't use focus groups to tell them where to go - people do like, need and want leadership - they like strong leaders, even Thatcher, because they know where they stood. And people don’t know what they want, but they can give you an accurate picture of what they have.

Women are less interested in abstract political debate - only motivated by policies that affect their lives.

Underlying message -

- people don’t actually know what their elected representatives do. We need an open conversation about this. We need a job description for example.
- too much political jargon adumbrates whats is really going on.
- politicians must be more risky with themselves.

*trust is strongly linked to personal relationships* -> draw ideas from customer service

The Big Society - We're already doing it

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 00:32:00 -0700

Can the Big Society be nore than a slogan? - by Geoff Mulgan, Director, the Young Foundation

Reading Geoff Mulgan's piece three key ideas on society jump out.

1. Society becomes strong by exercising powers, not having things done to it.

2. Society, for most people, is ultimately about there being others around to help when we need it.

3. Society can be strengthened by an active state.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Questions to Jay Rosen about the political press and its failings

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 06:10:00 -0700

Democracy in America - Questions to Jay Rosen (@jayrosen_nyu) about the political press and its failings

Articles originates from The Economist

The idea of objectivity should be replaced by 'here's where we are coming from' --> see comments on Nic Newman's piece - is this why young adults are more likely to go direct to political parties websites? - they know where there the spin is.

Journalists get too bogged down in the 'who's winning' game - focusing on this demonstrates a lack of understanding --> so how can it be educational???

"My own view is that journalists should describe the world in a way that helps us participate in political life"

The alternative to chasing clicks is building trust and an editorial brand - which is more sustainable in the long run?

A journalist must (like a politician) genuinely listen to their audience - "because listening is what gives you the authority to recommend what is not immediately in demand."

for anyone who actually reads this I am starting to collate views on the media's failings with the delicious tag 'canwetrusthemedia'

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes on: Youth Participation - Growing Up?

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:01:14 -0700

Youth Participation - Growing Up? by Barbara Soetan (@barbarasoetan) for the LGiU. See also @elevationetwork, @vwcampaign and@yparticipate.

if we want to tackle disengagement, if we want to tackle deprivation, if we want all young people to have a bright and happy future, then we have to listen and respect what young people have to say.

Young people matter - around a fifth of the population is under 19.

negative media tends to overshadow any positve contributions.

UN Convention on the Rights of a Child --> every child has the right to be listened to and involved in decisions which affect them.

We must see every step or engagement with politics as a gradual transition into youth mainstreaming - no step is too small.

*Young pople are more likely to discuss politics with peers* --> see Nic Newman's paper also most likely to complain that there is too little info on candidates.

Young people want personal development and to acquire new skills.

Main areas where the yourth are consulted

- the Children and Young People's Plan

- leisure activities

- health, including sexual habits, drug and alcohol misuse

- environment, green spaces and recycling

- community safety, including bullying and policing

if expectations are not met then it all seems like tokenism.

Why is youth participation important?

- active service users and can therefore offer first hand experience.

- offer a unique energy and can act as advocates for disengaged peers.

- most people seem to want (and even welcome?) their LA's to come to them on through social networks.

Clearly though LA's are not marketing this as wholesomely as possible. Other barriers include a lack of confidence in the longevity of participation opportunities due to lack of funding and fears of tokenism.

A strong call from the youth for politics to be repackaged with more focus on the small 'p' politics and common interests.

Youth representaion is especially meaningful when young people have a budget and the power to decide its allocation. Also need to be able to fundraise and gain sponsorship <-- greater sustainability and ownership.

*At a time when education is getting more competitive and the youth are looking for further ways to acquire, nurture and activate new skills - is now a perfect time to give the paltforms this generation requires?

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes on: People Places Power: How localism and strategic planning can work together

Sun, 22 Aug 2010 00:55:00 -0700

Original 'People Places Power' document can be found here <-- written by Jonathan Carr-West (@joncarrwest), Head of Centre for Local Democracy at the Local Government Information Unit

we need a fundamental shift in the way we think about local service delivery and the relationship between people, places and power.

The Localism and Decentralisation Bill begins to give substance to the rhetoric of the Big Society --> communities can take over local public services, buy community assets and influence planning decisions.

There is a political necessity to engage the public in tough spending decisions. Public satifaction is relative to the amount of involvement felt in decision making - people do not like having things done to them.

Citizens are aso inevitably going to have to step into the gaps caused by the spending cuts. Here the Big Society actually becomes a practical solution rather than an ideological one.

Long-term global challenges are also reasons why something akin to the Big Society is essential.

Finding solutions to such complex dilemmas will require us to draw on the talents and insights of as many members of society as possible.

As James Surowiecki puts in - 'in part because individual judgement is not accurate enough or consistent enough, cognitive diversity is essential to good decision making.'

Relationship with local government is likely to be the key factor in the success or failure of the Big Society.

Councillors must see themselves more as community facilitators.

What is at play in all of this is the old tension between representative and participative democracy.

Lessons from Total Place - an approach based on the idea of local authorities leading a collaborative effort across the public sector in which local agencies co-ordinate activities - focusing on outcomes for communities.

New technologies are essential for all of this - especially resource mapping, data sharing and effective multi-agency co-operation.

Place based budgeting will be part of the future approach to public finance and public services.

TP is 'centralism at a local level' vs the Big Society which is essentially fragmentary. It is voluntary, episodic and driven by particular interests and passions.

we must accept high levels of ambiguity and more risk.

What is a council for???

Not to serve as the local arm of government but as the governmental arm of local communities.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes on: Local Government 3.0: How councils can respond to the new web agenda

Sat, 21 Aug 2010 08:47:00 -0700

A Local Government Information Unit discussion paper
see @AndySawford, @joncarrwest and @AmeliaCookson

Building on typology set out by Stephen Coleman and John Gotze (Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation), there are four potential aspects of e-democracy.

- direct of plebiscitary democracy mediated through the web i.e. internet facilitates participation e.g. e-voting.
- government using the web to communicate with the public and assess public opinion - web also as a means of accessing govt services.

- online communities or civic networks translating into activism in society
- online participation in deliberative policy making.
(these last two = interactive, generative politics.)

Number 10 petitions has had over 8 million signatures - obviously a latent desire to speak out.

Charles Leadbeater - the logic of With - the ethic of web 2.0 is create, connect, combine and collaborate. But govt is not With the people.

What problem is e-democracy trying to solve?

1. long term social challenges - require individuals and communities to work together
2. we are entering an era of severely constrained public finances - citizens will be required to play a more collaborative role in the provision of these services.
3. the crystallisation of dissatisfaction with the current system of representative democracy.

The most important task for any new politics then is to find new ways to build social capital, to reinvest in and develop the sorts of public relationships that allow communities to pool their creativity and intelligence and generate collective action.

social media allows collaborative, non-hierarchical co-ordination online creates powerful coalitions who are able to initiate real world offline action - so the democracy that the web creates is participative, decentralised and non-hierarchical.

The key is not how central govt can use social media, it's how active bubbles can be brought together and create more civic action.

older people are the most active citizens - and they are the fastest growing group of internet users.

People want the information that really/only/specifically matters to them.

Re. criminal justice system... Louise Casey's research for the Cabinet Office showed that lack of confidence in the criminal justice system is linked to both fear of crime nationally and locally.

Justice is contentious, and the public should have a way to express their perspective on how justice is served. - social networks would also allow for positive stories to emerge.

younger people are more likely to be involved in informal political activity, in particular online social networking - two hours a day on the internet.

demonstration against knife crime shows that young people can and will harness the power of new technologies to mobilise themselves on issues of direct impact and meaning to them.

how young people are engaged in social network sites - varied - Davies T & Cranston P Yoiuth Work and Social Networking.

Collaboration is becoming a more vital currency than control.

Open, collaborative, non hierarchical - therefore democracy - must be central to all our activities online and off.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes on: NYT’s Nisenholtz’s Speech: The Importance Of Engagement

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:29:00 -0700

Notes on: NYT’s Nisenholtz’s Speech: The Importance Of Engagement - by @josephtartakoff

Key Idea - emotion drives engagement. Doesn’t really touch upon much new but;

- reaffirms the importance of identity.
- does it demonstrate how 'engagement' is becoming the new money-making buzzword?

Martin Nisenholtz, the SVP for digital operations at The New York Times Company, delivered the keynote address at the Wharton School of Business’ “Future of Publishing” conference on 30th April. Full speech can be found here

When Zuckerberg says that “web experiences want to be social,” he’s not just referring to social sites. He’s talking about the need for engagement across the web, including on publishing sites.

Re. NYT’s incoming paywall (2011) “the more engaged our users are with us, the more value we deliver to them, the more likely they will be to pay.”

But in thinking deeply about engagement—- what it means on the Web (and maybe off the Web) - we’ve begun to view it as the essential moat around which our defenses are based; it is the emotional connection that our users have with us.

The media arts – including journalism – are fundamentally about storytelling. - But what is “storytelling” in an interactive network? What’s different about it online? It is about creating an essential human connection.

Why, for example do people spend so much more time with the print edition of The Times than they do, on average, with the web site?

Sheryl Sandberg, the Queen of user engagement and the COO of Facebook has outlined what she believes are four “shifts” taking place among users today:
The shift from anonymity to real identity
The shift from pull to push
The shift from temporal to permanent connections
The shift from the “what” to the “who”

Identity is, in my view, a fundamental building block for engagement <-- this Facebook has now proven it to be true.

Facebook works because it is rooted in identity.

The idea of users helping users is fundamental to the DNA of the web. Tim Berners-Lee wrote the worldwide web protocols, in part, so that scientists could link to one another, communicate with one another and help one another.

“I’ve always thought that among our most leverageable assets is our audience.” --> I’m referring to our audience as knowledgeable participants in the life our web site. This creates the essential emotional bond that will lead to real engagement in an interactive setting.

a site like nytimes.com must fully transform from a broadcast news experience, to an interactive network.
It must transition from being on the web, to being of the web.

What does it mean when we’re structuring geo-location (i.e. Foursquare) on millions of people? What does it mean to our readers and what does it mean to the businesses that serve them? And let’s not lose the notion of more whimsical interfaces. All this meta-data is springing essentially out of something that’s really fun.

Betaworks About page, there’s a quote from a guy named David Reed who captures the essence of this new information ecology nicely. He writes, “The boundaries of your resources (read “site”) become liquid, public, shared.”

@robandale

Permalink | Leave a comment »

A brief introduction to Computer Assisted Reporting

Sun, 15 Aug 2010 07:51:45 -0700

Basic CAR Skills

- ‘Computer Assisted Reporting’ is simply about using IT to gather and analyse data in way that allows journalists to produce original news stories.
- As Heather Brooke recently said, increasingly it is through CAR that journalists are finding their exclusives

The first step, according to David Donald is to CAR is learning how to use a spreadsheet. I’m using Google Spreadsheets to you can view these figures yourself (they also offer nice tutorials on how to start using spreadsheets)

Once you’ve got your set of data you’ll have something that looks like this;

*This spreadsheet shows the number of twitter followers of major news organisations in the UK and US - and the White House and Downing Street to add some intrigue .

This data however doesn’t really tell that much of a story - to find the interest we first have to establish a base on which to work from. This is done by ‘sorting’ the data.

To sort simply highlight all desired cells, click tools --> sort --> the column you want sorting (in this case it is B as I’m arranging the data by number of followers) --> select high-to-low/low-to-high --> sort, and you’re away.

This then gives this;

... which is a bit more interesting and you (and your audience) are now able to draw conclusions from the data. What this base also does though is direct you towards further lines of investigation.

For instance, this news services featured in this selection are extremely varied so a direct comparison isn’t really fair. One way then to assert who is currently using twitter to best effect may be to see who’s followers figures are increasing the quickest.

(Reporter tip: In most CAR, the really interesting stories lie in the ‘rate of change’ of the figures)

The first set of figures were taken on July 17th, now 12 days later we can see how they have increased.

Using the ‘Formula’ box we can then enter a calculation that will work out the rate of change for each twitter account (as the answer is to go in cell D3, this cell must be selected first). THe equation for this is;

= (new number (C3) - old number (B3) ) / old number (B3)
which gives you;

=(C3-B3)/B3

You can then use the the blue square at the bottom of the D3 square to drag that formula into all other cells beneath - giving you 18 ‘rates of change’ in a very short space of time indeed.

By then highlighting the D column and ‘sorting’ again, you can now see who is proportionately attracting new followers the quickest (highlight the column again and click the % box in the tool bar to put figures into percentages)

Other ways to sort data -

- range =C3:C18 (difference between highest and lowest number)
- median = C3:C18 (the middle value - interesting to compare the average)

Relevant tit-bits of information -

- the AP style guide recommends giving numbers to 2 decimal places
- if you are starting with imprecise (often rounded numbers) then don’t use decimal places at all at this may only further distort the data
- audiences enjoy being able to see figures and do their own equations - so use the figures as much as possible don’t clog up the report with unnecessary narrative (as I probably have with this).
- when requesting data, always ask for it un-aggregated and raw

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes on: The data revolution: How WikiLeaks is changing journalism

Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:25:00 -0700

The 'data revolution: How WikiLeaks is changing journalism' debate took place at the Frontline Club on Thurs 12th Aug and featured Heather Brooke, Julian Assange and Mark Stevens.

Key ideas

- the press have become a stenographer for the powerful

- the more power increases, so too must the level of transparency

- the right to free speech is pointless if it costs millions to defend it - will an offshore reporting industry develop?

Will Dutton has coined the term '5th Estate' (a 'lite' version of the tradtional 4th estate)

but all these new forms of journalism are due to tools in technology.

Heather Brooke - the 4th estate has abdicated its duties and failed to be be the gunslinger of the public - so Wikileaks is just picking up the baton which has been dropped.

Re. Iceland and the IMMI - to counteract libel tourism we may start seeing journalistic tourism. Here we can draw parallels between offshore banking and offshore reporting.

The Guardian newspaper may still be based in London, however its online version may be based in Iceland

--> but the way the media has been structuired over the last generation is just to be the voice who shouts louder than anyone else in that country - how will this affect potential change?

Publishers are now beginning to be refugees, moving around countries in order to find a safer home.

Mark Stevens - the first ammendment (the biggest protector of free speech) is actually becoming meaningless as it costs too much to defend.

CAR - journalists are crap at maths, however it is increasingly through computer assisted reporting that stories emerge.

You can see my introduction to CAR on the helpmeinvestigate.com blog

We are in an age of electronic data - so how society looks at the powerful is surely about to change???

We have created a fairytale persona for the powerful - but they are normal people who are equally fallible

- society therefore must take more initiative and take more pro-active decisions.

but to do this constructively citizens must be able to go in and see for themselves.

Politicians continue using this cloak of privacy and the myth of 'national security'

If they continue to use this all the time it will surely lose it's value?

Julian Assange speaks of scientific juornalism (also see Ben Goldacre's repository of news) as a way of keeping journalism honest.

The press have become a stenographer of the powerful

We are entering a new exploration of privacy. There is a saying in Germany (i think) that we must have transparent government - not transparent people. However the opposite is currently happening.

And... the more power increases so too must the need for transaprency.

But have the powerful really got more power - or just more perceived power because their incomes have increased so rapidly over the last generation? See 'Unjust Rewards' by Poly Toynbee and David Walker.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes on Wikinomics - how mass collaboration changes everything

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:47:00 -0700

a big thank you to @maxdickins for this

- mass internet collaboration: foster the creativity of a massive community of people.

- The Long Trail: scale of internet means you only need a very small level of engagement to generate a large number of ideas.

- Wikinomics by design

take cues from your lead users
build critical mass
supply an infrastructure for collaboration
take your time to get the structure and governance right
make sure all participants can harvest some value
create conditions of trust
let the process evolve organically
collaboration starts internally

- You need to offer appropriate incentives. Although people do not necessarily monetary incentives, participants in peer production communities have many different motivations for getting involved.

- the wisdom of the crowds: the aggregate knowledge that emerges from the decentralised choices and judgements of groups of individual participants.

-there are always smarter people and better enterprise outside the company. The people inside a company have limited time, energy and creativity. They can only come up with so many good ideas. So - open up the creative process to outsiders via the internet.

- it is very important that collaborator have specific knowledge.

- innovation often begins at the fringes - collaboration is so cheap and easy to do, so why not take a chance?

- Knowledge Commons...
- Online publication of all research and knowledge on a certain topic: by aggregating old research you can help people find solutions to the problems because the material is easily available. It allows academics to save time doing literature reviews and therefore put more time and energy into creative problem solving. By making accumulated knowledge easily accessible, areas for progress are easier to spot, and academics with no background can contribute as that barrier to entry is removed. One hub saves a lot of time.
- Also, if you one hub you have strength in numbers - you have more people working on problems so you are more likely to get creative solutions. You also have credibility and can mobilise PR to get your findings into the mainstream. The Human Genome is a great model for similar projects, possibly involving philosophy - could we find the forms?

- availability of information and mass collaboration have implications for improving accountability, democracy and policy formation.

- a club feel is essential for collaboration - e.g. the Geek Squad employees are called agents and have fancy dress

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes on Nic Newman's RISJ Working Papers

Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:30:00 -0700

#UKelection2010, mainstream media and the role of the internet - July 2010

- the biggest media story of the 2010 election was the leadership debates - internet seen as something of a sideshow

- +7% turnout for the 18-24 age group - how much did social media contribute to this

- ‘Twitter cemented itself as a core tool of communication amongst political and media elites with 600 candidates and 198 of those elected engaging . However, this is well less than a third in all respects.

- whilst television remained the dominant medium for many, young people in particular got much of their news via online social recommendations - online was more important than TV.

- People increasingly trust their friends more - could this trust be used to win votes or help restore faith in a political system tainted by the parliamentary expenses scandal?

- it’s all about offering ‘additional value’ rather than just doing the same as everyone else - I just wonder if ‘UGC’ should become user-generated content?

Vote Match - it was the main vehicle by which young people exchanged info and had a fundamental impact on voting decisions - my generation has grown up in such a cynical environment that we have a natural barrier to political rhetoric, so solid data like this is more important as we know there is no spin.

Kate Day said she was surprised at the level of debate (on Debate2010) - why surprised? if you take the time to build a dedicated service people take on more responsibility - have to feel that someone id listening --> Claire Wardle.

It is essential to reach out to audiences on their terms, using tools and services that they use every day --> but who has actually pursued a conversation by approaching them on facebook?

Mark Pack - ‘The Lib Dem approach to online campaigning was to use caricature and humour upfront --> ‘people are more likely to share content with others, especially with friends outside the political bubble.’

- To a degree, what facebook does is restore what used to happen - public meetings. In recent times, there have been very few during the campaign itself, because not many people turned up. Now, facebook allows those things to happen again.

re. social media being used by politicians - It is humanising and authentic and it personalised... as a politician.

Alberto Nardelli - People now have the tools to organise themselves spontaneously and very easily to co-ordinate a response to information which a mainstream publication is putting out.

‘the fact that they could engage with... and the campaign team through new media made them feel that... was more likely to understand where they were coming from in methods that they felt accustomed to.

but you still can’t beat knocking on doors - it’s all about the face-to-face. - motivate activists and channel messages - social media will get people out and get interest - but not change minds on its own.

the idea of politics as an ongoing networked conversation may take more time to catch on.

social media amplifies what goes on in real life = the reflected impact of social media is the most important.

- a key attraction was the sharpness, consistency and humour.

It is interesting to note that the younger group seems far more willing to go directly to party materials - less cynical than the older group or digital natives so more likely to take the initiative and actively compare policies and make up their minds themselves.

broadcasters prioritises media-hype over facts.

are we more open with voting intentions - we were discussing it openly (bar a few tories who perhaps were embarrassed)

Richard Allan - may not be traditional engagement but it did ‘get young people thinking about the fact that there was a cabinet’ and in this sense represented the start of a new type of digital political literacy.

Meg Pickard - ‘where we have seen social media really come alive in this campaign has been where it has been able to add extra perspective and community or social discovery and fun in the case of the posters and playfulness.’ - that is which initiatives are all failing-because they just seem too starched, too rigid and too control.

- next time we need to think more about how you translate what happens in the digital world into mobilisation, agenda changing, hustings hijacking, to answer spe3cific questions about specific topics.

Peter Balzalgette - we now have the mass and micro audience.. but not yet learnt how to maximize them and work out how these things go together.

- people now scavenge their information from a range of sources and make up their own minds.

William Dutton - two-step flow of information. Most people are not directly affected but opinion leaders, people who are active and really care about elections, will be heavy users and they then influence others to take it up.

In the end - it is all about building meaningful, two-way relationships with voters and audiences of the future.

------------

The rise of social media and its impact on mainstream journalism - Sept 2009.

- news organisations are abandoning attempts to be first for breaking news, focusing instead on being the best at verifying and curetting it.

- same values, new tools --> extra layer of info and diverse opinion -> increasingly engaging through social media via friends.

- social media is becoming as important as search engines and control is heading to the audience.

*audience comments under an article are like vox-pops* --> unfolding conversation in partnership with audiences.

Jeff Jarvis - news should be a conversation - journalists must now be curators, enablers, organisers and educators --> helping people understand the world where they can -> social workers? note parallels here with politicians.

Clay Shirky - many-to-many conversations

William Dutton - we now have the ‘fifth-estate’

Dan Gilmore - there is always someone who knows more than you

Shane Richmond - not the quality of the content, but its relevance to the audience.

Meg Pickard - journalists of the future will increasingly use these social networks to find and maintain interesting contacts and sources --> publishing a story is not the end, it’s the start of a conversation --> advertisers are increasingly interested in engagement.

Julian Shambles - invest in quality content that people want to talk about and share.

Jennifer Preston - find sources, track trends, engage in conversation

Robert Peston - establish credentials as a repository fort information - if you an authority people will come back to your work --> do more than the big story, do the nitty-gritty (but do people appreciatwe and respect this?)

Jemima Kiss - be disciplined and open-minded about possibilities

Emily Bell - trust is now in people as much as brands.

Jeremiah K. Owyang - empowered communities will define the next generation of products

Roo Reynolds - Q. how do we get even more people to talk about our stuff? A. make really good stuff and share t while making it linkable and findable.

Adrian Monck - receivers are not as absorbed by media as its producers

*a key challenge for many news organisations is to encourage more journalists to engage with these tools, make contracts, crowdsource - for this you must have the right mind-set.

same values - new tools.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Notes from Lord Puttnam' s - 'Parliament and Young People – bringing the two together in a digital world'

Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:20:16 -0700

there is common anger, disappointment and a sense of missed opportunity on some of the really big issues like climate change, the financial crisis and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The youth feel that the entire current generation of politicians just don’t get it. Politicans are divorced from the real world.

We’re staring into our future and it simply doesn’t work - ‘great recessions don’t last, but great ideas do!’

It’s about the ‘fit’ and ‘reflection’ of contemporary living - It’s about the whole way that the current political system operates and interacts with the general public, not just here but in all Western democracies. Unless we find a way of fixing it could this be the way democracy dies.

At the heart of this is the hopelessly tragic relationship between politics and the media - both are to blame and we now face parallel inadequacies. Between them they have constructed a battlefield on which the big losers are truth, illumination and common sense. - surely the most important things we need if we are to understand the world.

politicians feel trapped as contemporary media seeks to undermine rather than underpin - obsession with the trivial makes intellectual discourse almost impossible.

Digital technologies are fundamentally changing just about every aspect of our lives.

There is a growing gulf between how young people see the world and how politics is conducted in this country. The electorate must place confidence on their Parliament.

‘Reform that you may preserve’

The failed present vs a more imaginative future.

Parliament instinctively tries to obstruct any kind of digital technology.

We don’t just demand access to information, but all the free to take, re-mix it and make new objects out of it. Should politicians be nurturing this?

‘Democracy Live is a brilliant new initiative, the stuff of which any politician who wishes to seriously engage with their electorate would have embraced at just about any point in history.’

enabling mechanism that can if used correctly significantly increase interest and understanding of the work of Parliament.

‘Youth’ will only connect with issues that are of a genuine concern to them.

Lord Puttnam strongly advises reading these -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/01/coalition-media-cynicism-david-laws

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/opinion/25brooks.html

The honest and freewheeling are leaving politics.

The radicalism of my parents generation never really turned out how they hoped. Politics is about the art of the possible.

Permalink | Leave a comment »