Epic fail (When 'satires' DON'T hit their mark)

[Note: This is a comment I tried to post on HK Magazine in reply to Chip Tsao's article on the Spratly Islands issue where the Philippine government has also laid its claim. My post was not published, and later my IP address was blocked. Supposedly, my post was suspected of being spam. How could it be when you have to be a registered user to post a comment? Maybe because I'm makulet hehe. http://hk-magazine.com/feature/war-home]


When does satire cross the line to racial insult? When the irony's missing, which is the case in this sentence: "As a nation of servants, you don’t flex your muscles at your master, from whom you earn most of your bread and butter."

Instead of becoming a genuine criticism and commentary on a political issue, the other finer points of this article have been lost and its entirety degenerated into a racial insult from someone who now comes across as a racial asshole pretending to be a journalist. With that single sentence, he seemed to have conveniently forgotten his own people's history and struggle with servitude.

I appreciate satire like any genuine writer should. I believe nothing is sacred enough to be spared from criticism and humour.

But true irreverence is an art (and not an easy one) that casts light on conclusions based on an in-depth study of society. In this art form, irony is militant, wit a deadly weapon.

Regrettably, Mr. Chip Tsao employed neither. Instead he summoned a myopic
conclusion from the depths of his malnourished mind, laced it with some remarks he thought were funny, and added a dash of insult to his own government lest he be accused of not being satirical enough. Sad to say, the formula failed to produce the desired irony. He has missed the mark. Several, in fact.

Instead, his attempts of satire became the act of a bully. With a single sentence he lambasted the Filipino people, ridiculed their honour, rubbed salt on the wounds of separation from family of migrant workers earning an honest living, and spit on their sufferings as a nation.

He pounced on the Filipino people when he should have picked on the Philippine government. There lies the difference between satire and unadulterated BULLSHIT.

Sorry, but this is an epic fail in satire.

Democratising and socialising data to empower the public domain - part 3/3

Some inspirations

Digital Public Square of the District of Columbia
Vivek Kundra, America’s Federal Chief Information Officer (CIO), spearheaded this project when he was still the Chief Technology Officer of D.C. This portal allowed online access to different government data and services, making it easier for the public to interact with the federal government. A major part of this project was the innovation contest, ‘Apps for Democracy’, where D.C. released its database to the public and encouraged talented technologists and creatives to create the most useful applications from DC's Data Catalog.

The result: 47 applications ranging from web applications, widgets, Google Maps mash-ups, iPhone apps, Facebook apps, and other digital utilities were developed, representing $2,000,000+ in value and a 4000% ROI. http://www.istrategylabs.com/government-20-the-rise-of-citizen-innovation-through-open-data/

MAPLight.org
MAPLight.org is a public database that illuminates the connection between campaign donations and legislative votes. Two public databases are combined: a database of all known campaign contributions to any legislator, and a database on how legislators voted on specific bills and resolutions. Bringing the data on money and voting together in an accessible way is groundbreaking as it opens the doors for the public to the legislative processes in the US in an accessible and creative way. The World Summt Awards describes this website as a “…treasure for journalists, NGOs, and bloggers. It helps, citizens to hold legislators accountable. MAPLight.org, findings makes complex research publically available in an instant and shows that public scrutiny can be also visually appealing, easy-to-use, and customizable.”

Whitehouse2.org
It’s daring and simple in its approach and that’s why it’s gaining a multitude of followers. Imagine how the White House might work if it was run completely democratically by thousands of people on the internet. Whitehouse2 does exactly this. All you have to do is endorse or oppose priorities and find people to support or fight against it. From the creators: “The more people who endorse a priority, the higher it rises in the charts. The more people who join the network, the more clout we will have with the President and the media.”

Other initiatives
In the UK, there’s a competition called ‘Show us a better way’ where the citizens are asked for their help in developing better ways to publish vast non-personal information that the government collects & creates on the public’s behalf. The winner gets £20K to develop the idea to the next level.

NASA has multiple Twitter-streams in the realm of micro-blogging, and they leverage YouTube and other new media to publicize their work.

Again, in the US, extra-governmental efforts include, GovLoop, an online community for government employees. In only seven weeks, it has attracted over 500 users from federal, state, and local governments. There was also the event, ‘Social Media in Government’, which aimed to “capture the power of social media in your organization, along with helpful tools, tips and techniques to get started.” Activities like these already pave the way and provide the tools for public servants to share ideas and knowledge.

Can you imagine how similar application or website in the Philippines, such as MAPlight.org or Whitehouse2, would un-Zen the powers-that-be? I wonder how many representatives, senators — and even Presidents? — would oppose it or bog it down with charges of malicious intent orsubversion? Who would welcome the sunlight and who would burst into flames?

“Mabuhay ang social media!” Long live E-democracy!”, pero wait lang…
Social media and digital technology are only tools that can be used to enhance democratic processes. They are not equivalent to democracy itself. One needs only to think at how the digitalisation of government bureaus can be (has been) prone to abuse of power if only technology has been improved, but the innate structures and processes within an organisation remained corrupt.

Case in point: the digitalisation of the Bureau of Internal Revenue in the Philippines (BIR), for example, has not put a stop to abuse of power and corruption. Digging into the records of small entrepreneurs is only a mouse click away, and thus ‘auditing’ can be done more efficiently. By auditing I mean the process whereby the unlucky entrepreneur, whose business supposedly needs to be audited, is forced to pay the tax chiefs an insane amount of money to just close the case. Why resort to paying rather than fighting? Because the entrepreneur knows it won’t be a fair process: the auditor will magnify every small error and s/he will end up paying so much more than what’s needed. Honesty and openness is not given any ground to take root.

Another major consideration: the growing popularity of E-democracy needs to be seen in the light of phenomenon called 'digital divide'. For let us not forget, despite the tremendous growth of social media and daily advancements in digital technology, 80% of the world still remain disconnected, living at the margins of the digital grid. It’s not enough to think of applications of E-democracy in developed countries; the more difficult challenge is to think of how a technology that fosters sharing, collaboration and transparency can be utilised to uplift the quality of life in underdeveloped lands.

E-democracy is not just about the tools or the technology that’s employed, but also the structures and processes that an organisation embraces. Social media is neither the latest, shiny, new gadget in the market to be used superflously without a good strategy nor a solution to be taken outside the realm of democratic principles.

Democratising and socialising data to empower the public domain - part 2/3

Starting points for practicing E-democracy

“A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency.
As Justice Louis Brandeis wrote, "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants."”
(Memorandum of the Freedom of Information Act by Barack Obama)

In a nutshell, good governance operating within the E-democracy framework should seek to:

• Democratise data to enhance civic participation. Provide citizens real access to relevant information and the actions they can take. It’s not just about dissemination of information but democratization: genuine access to data that the public sector can built on to make it more relevant for their everyday lives or bring them closer to making informed decisions on issues.

• Bring government to the people, wherever they are. Utilise new media tools and strategy to make government services more effective, accessible, and transparent. Social networking and microblogging are becoming part of the daily media diet, so governmental institutions should start utilising these tools.

• Encourage accountability through transparency. Acknowledge, assess, and embrace social media.

• Start or join in the public and social dialogue; be present and active in the information eco-system of public domain. Strengthen and diversify engagement through meaningful online dialogues and information exchange on public issues.

• Leverage social media. Use existing (user-generated, co-creation driven) technology to reach wider audiences at minimal cost to taxpayers. Mashable content can help transform raw data into concrete conclusions and action points that really matter to different sectors.

• Leverage the wisdom of crowds (public and civil servants). Social media creates an open dialogue not only between government and citizens but also between different government agencies as well.

• Make politics relevant by encouraging grassroots movements. Invest in collaboration and participation: help build the sidewalks, public squares, town halls, hearing rooms and community centres in government’s interfaces, that will ensure the public can assemble, discuss, decide, act and collaborate with government.

• Improve the relevance of information resources.

• Improve the quick distribution of information resources.

• Develop and disseminate best practices and tools to promote community conversation and engagement, civic education, and information exchange.

• Review organisational capacities and identify areas that need to be improved in order to respond the demands of managing E-democracy products and processes.

• Empower participants with online skills and experiences to have an impact on their communities and governments.

-end of part 2-

Democratising and socialising data to empower the public domain - part 1

This month’s article is brought to you by the letter ‘E’ and ‘D’ —‘E’ for ‘electronic’, ‘D’ for ‘democracy’.

Taken apart, they each constitute a vast body of meanings. Google them and you’ll get 471,000,000 hits for ‘electronic’ and 67,800,000 for ‘democracy’. Taken together, these words take on a new meaning that definitely outweighs the sum of their parts.

E-democracy thrives in a framework that acknowledges the Internet and other forms of digital technology as political media; each one possessing the radical potential to drive democratic processes and be transformed in return.

The word ‘democracy’ is derived from the Greek word ‘demos’ (people) and ‘kratos’ (rule / strength). There are many detailed definitions and forms of democracy, but in general it’s founded on the principles that:

• All citizens enjoy universally recognised equal freedoms and liberties.
• All citizens have equal access to political, social, cultural and economic power and decision-making.

Decision-making is a collective endeavour and requires direct involvement by “…all residents of a particular geographical area and of a viable population size beyond a certain age of maturity (to be defined by the citizen body itself) and irrespective of gender, race, ethnic or cultural identity. (Wikipedia, 2009)

Put democratic intent into the realm of the electronic and you’ll get a new way of looking at the ABCs of data: Accessibility (who gets access to data), Bureaucracy (who and what structures control the production and distribution of data), and Consciousness (what kind of information is being disseminated). This framework impacts the whole question of how information can be harnessed and put to use in the digital era, specifically with the onset of Web 2.0.

Web 2.0 meets Gov 2.0
In general, E-democracy as a paradigm focuses on creating more democratic communities by enhancing democratic processes and values (e.g. participation, accountability, transparency) through information and communication technologies and strategies. What makes the notion of E-democracy more interesting these days is the framework where it’s taking place: Web 2.0.

Wikipedia defines the term "Web 2.0" as “…a perceived second generation of web development and design, that aims to facilitate communication, secure information sharing, interoperability, and collaboration on the World Wide Web. Web 2.0 concepts have led to the development and evolution of web-based communities, hosted services, and applications; such as social-networking sites, video-sharing sites, wikis, blogs, and folksonomies.”

‘Gov 2.0’ is a take on Web 2.0 in the sense that principles of good governance such as transparency, accountability, grassroots empowerment and communication converge with similar values emanating from Web 2.0 technologies. ‘Gov 2.0’ aims to capitalize on the momentum for change and broad engagement, wherein the democratization of data brought about by Web 2.0 technologies have played a significant role. It’s a platform where technologists can rise to the call of public service and where different stakeholders in government and civil society — policy-makers, elected officials, upper management in city, state, and federal agencies, private-sector internet business and cultural leaders, and the citizens — can establish a common agenda for the pursuit of good governance and stronger democracies.

This is how I see it: in order to govern – and to govern democratically - one needs to ensure that citizens have the means to raise their voice and be heard; provide venues to gather and organise; stimulate and safeguard processes for discussion, collective decision-making and action.

The digital realm is currently widely used by citizens to interface with government. Government uses websites, portals, e-services and the like to disseminate information. But just providing information is not enough. Steven Clift, Founder and Board Chair of E-democracy.org, asks: where is ‘democracy’ in these interfaces?

By the same token, interactive media proponents like those in our profession should explore how democracy can be designed so “that it survives and thrives online”. We should identify “…the incremental contributions the Internet” and other digital technology can make when democratic principles are applied to it. Clift posits: how do we “…make those tools, features, practices, and rights universally accessible to all people in all cities, states, and countries?”

-end part 1-

Paalam, Francis M.

Friday the 6th, 20009. Every Filipino friend and contact of mine on Facebook had a status similar to mine: we were all deeply saddened by the passing of Francis 'Kiko' Magalona -- the Master Rapper, the Man from Manila, musician, actor, true son of showbiz, 'tatay' (father) to eight. A creative man, an unlikely nationalist and a true artist of this generation. His failures and truimphs -- his music -- were intrinsically woven into my teenage years. We could all connect to him, because he was just like us: young, restless, reckless, hopeful. A true patriot, he painstakingly crafted his art to not only exist for art's sake, but used his voice to chronicle the conflicts and struggles of Philippine society. Most of all, he loved his country and was proud to be Pinoy. It was this pride that fueled his craft and impressed upon the minds of many, both young and old. When he sang that he was proud to be Pinoy, that he loved his country, that he wanted change, that he was 'ready to defend', my soul sang with him.

Although we are left to cherish his poetry and music, his absence will reverberate in the core of the Pinoy music industry, and it will swell in hearts of ordinary Pinoys he has touched, like me. Rest in peace, 'kababayan ko'.