The politicisation of social media

“Conflicts are inherent in social relationships.
Where social relationships thrive, so will dissent. Where dissent is present, a cause will rise — either to strengthen dissent or attempt to crush it.”

Social media has already been one of last year’s major buzz, with companies eager to make their presence felt in a network thriving robustly in their absence. But last week saw social media catapulted to the global scene, hugging the headlines not because of the corporate, but the political. What was once a vague concept for many, now started to assume a more concrete form. And what was once thought of only as a cool way of broadcasting ones breakfast platter, now unravelled its radical potential to the public.

Twitter made the primetime news in many countries, including the Netherlands when the electoral turmoil in Iran broke out. Major TV networks were already covering the Iranian elections, but the cries of discontent were heard first and more loudly on social networks such as Twitter, Facebook and blogs. Social media was first to deliver stories of dissent that was snowballing into a movement.

Traditional media was criticised for not giving enough coverage to the protests not until it exploded in social media spaces, with #iranelection shooting up as the #1 trending topic on Twitter. “While word of riots in the streets of Tehran spread like wildfire on Twitter, CNN stayed largely silent on the story, surprising and dismaying many.” Users expressed their consternation by posting on Twitter’s #cnnfail. Even CNN saw the need to explain its actions — or inaction — in the eyes of many digizens.

Many people worldwide would probably remember this event as the moment when social networks morphed into political movements on a global scale. You know the threshold’s been crossed when even the U.S. State Department asked Twitter to delay their network upgrade. For some, this might even be the event that politicises their own usage of social media: where status updates become a form of real-time citizen news reporting, and are aggregated to produce the loudest shout-out ever.


The social is political
The growing role of social media in advancing political issues is not a new phenomenon. We are all mediated by political events as individuals, groups, networks and nations. Our personal digital spaces, which have given birth to social media venues, are crafted and bounded by the political. Think privacy laws, anti-piracy policies, right to information and expression, and information governance, production and distribution.

Conflicts are inherent in social relationships. Where social relationships thrive, so will dissent. Where dissent is present, a cause will rise — either to strengthen dissent or attempt to crush it. The digital technology behind social media makes it possible for causes to grow within networks. The habit of sharing thoughts can easily cross over to sharing opinions. As Clay Shirky described in his book, ‘Here Comes Everybody’, the open nature of most social networks, the simplicity of use, and the minimum amount of participation needed, allow groups of people to progress more easily from sharing to cooperation, collaboration and collectivism. The relationship between users and networks may be ad hoc and casual in the beginning, but with each phase, the amount of coordination increases.

Whereas traditional media function as sources of information, interactive social media are also means of coordination. A tool like Twitter with its open APIs and ‘half-baked’ development allows users to gather in different virtual networks and share APIs, content and scripts. Accessible not only via the website, but also 3rd party applications and SMS; and also decoupled from organisational constraints, Twitter managed to lower the barriers to access to and distribution of news. Equally important, users were able to co-own both the cause and the means of production and distribution, while sharing the product of their labour. Individual autonomy is maintained, but each little action by individuals is aggregated, with the results bearing an impact greater than the sum of its parts. Here lies social media’s radical potential.

As Shirky opined in a TED interview:

“Reading personal messages from individuals on the ground prompts a whole other sense of involvement. We're seeing everyone desperate to do something to show solidarity like wear green -- and suddenly the community figures out that it can actually offer secure web proxies, or persuade Twitter to delay an engineering upgrade -- we can help keep the medium open.”


After the shout-out
So what happens after you’ve added your voice and shown solidarity to a cause? It’s great for buzz and awareness creation, but how else can a cause advance?

Specifically for political cases such as the Iranian electoral fall-out, the general community would benefit from collaborative efforts on how to avoid censorship, or at least be ready with an alternative plan of action.

In general, a political cause can be treated like any other commercial campaign. Different cross-media channels (online and offline) should be explored for different purposes. Twitter, for example, may provide real-time breaking news coverage, but a blog is a better venue for analysis. Regular eyeball sessions for supporters in Facebook can extend and sustain interest on the cause allowing online activism to take root offline.

As social media becomes more entrenched in politics, users will be more inclined to challenge and shift existing perspectives, demand even more transparency and be more critical of causes. Online causes need to be more matured and preferably integrated with offline channels, and must be able to clearly present and distinguish its message to avoid creating ‘cause fatigue’.

Similar to the corporate world’s concern on the ROI of utilising social media in their business, there may still be a lot of criticism for the real impact of social media on activism. But social media’s direct impact of on a cause is not the only relevant means to measure its success. The number of supporters, tweets, shared content or posts are good conversion measures, but in the long run, it revolves around sustaining awareness in a network’s consciousness, and building and sustaining a relationship with different networks.

Users may engage now with a cause, and then later disengage, but the seeds of awareness have been planted, a connection made, and a relationship created that can be leveraged in the future.

Susan Boyle: whose story are we truly telling?

So many have heard of Susan Boyle and so much has been said about her in such a short amount of time, that it’s now even quite cliché to make her a dinner topic. It’s easy to forget that her story just hit the Net in April and, within a matter of two months, has left a very bright trail across the virtual landscape. From accumulating 100 million views on YouTube during the first nine days (by comparison, Avril Lavinge’s ‘Girlfriend’ video took more than two years to accumulate 118 million views), to guest appearances in Larry King and Oprah, and to becoming a cultural icon as seen on references in South Park, The Simpsons and The SIMS 3.

She’s become the (social) media darling within two months, and in that same period, it seems like the same thing that ‘created’ her is now out to destroy her. Criticisms are flying out her way because she decided to add some colour to her wardrobe and change her appearance ever so slightly. After being heralded as the shining proof of the wisdom behind the saying, ‘Don’t judge a book by its cover’, she is now being judged exactly by what she has changed in her appearance. And this bothers me greatly.

In being witnesses to her story; in sharing it, reacting to it and eventually, co-creating it, I wonder whether we are truly telling the story of Susan Boyle and not something we’ve fashioned for ourselves.

Anti-brand as brand
The story and the telling of the story are essential elements in building and driving brands especially in the Internet age. Amidst the ever-growing influx of information, the brand with the most memorable story, the one that resonates stronger in our own lives and the one that moves us the most is the one we are most likely to listen to, advocate and share.

Susan Boyle represented the opposite of the Hollywood star. While glamour, outer beauty, sex appeal and youth were the standards by which today’s entertainment industry abided —standards that only a selected few could meet — Susan Boyle compensated for this ‘lack’ with her amazing voice that soared above the expectations of the crowd. Obviously the expectations were downright wrong or set at the lowest notch ultimately because of her appearance, so when she did sing with amazing ease, the story we already had in our head, took a drastic turn. Such sudden shifts always make up for an exciting story, and exciting stories full of twists and turns are the stuff people like to talk about.

By being the anti-brand; by taking the role of the opposing force; the emerging change that could potentially sweep away the current foundations of Hollywood stardom, Susan Boyle became a distinct brand of her own. She represented the greater majority of people who could only aspire to Hollywood’s standards of stardom. She became the great protagonist of this story about the glittering city and the common folks at the margins. She was the underdog that survived the fight, the Cinderella whose inner beauty outshone the pretentious social-climbers, the little David that threw the shot mightily at his opponent and defied the expectations of all. We’ve set up Susan Boyle as the hero. But the moment we defined her role, we excluded other meanings and other paths her story could take.

A feminist view
With Paul Potts fresh on the minds of viewers around the world, it would’ve been expected that comparisons or associations would be made with Boyle. Unlike Potts who was shy and unsure of himself, Boyle was confident and ready. She walked on the stage, this 47 yr. old woman looking like your everyday home-maker, and not appearing one bit a super star-in-the-making. She didn’t look like anyone you would see on billboards or music videos. But she held her head high and announced she was to rock the audience. She was funny and cheeky and people didn’t like that. They wanted someone of her ‘station’ and appearance to be meek like Paul Potts. And afterwards, if she proved herself deserving, they would applaud and permit her 15 minutes of fame.

As everyone now knows, Susan Boyle blew their cynicism and self-righteousness away. A 100 million page views later, some plucked eyebrows and wardrobe upgrade; the same people, the same media who sang praises for her talent and professed that books shouldn’t be judged by their cover, are now lambasting her. Why? Because we are disappointed that an icon of non-Hollywood coolness is starting to succumb to the glamour of make-overs and this was a decision we already excluded for her since we assigned her a new role. Susan Boyle is changing the story in our head and we don’t like that.

However, if it were Paul Potts who opted to change his looks, make himself look more confident or dress more smartly, do you think he would’ve gotten this same negative publicity? He would’ve been praised and encouraged for changing; the media would’ve given their nod of approval. But because Susan Boyle is a woman, anything she does with her appearance is magnified and scrutinised.

Mediating Susan Boyle
The more I think of it, Susan Boyle was first set-up to be despised before she could be loved. Before she took on the sympathetic role of the underdog, she was set-up on Britain’ Got Talent as a potential source of comic relief. The way the producers directed the telling of her story would have made a lot of people want to smirk at Susan Boyle and downplay any potential talent she could possess. They were preparing to stage the dramatic highlight and they accomplished that successfully.

After showing the spunky side of Susan and the cynicism of some members of the audience (remember the woman who rolled her eyes when Boyle said she wanted to be like Ellen Paige?), the context was already architectured to elicit exactly the kind of response the viewers gave.

This story was perfect for the internet: short, unexpected, dramatic. It was also perfect because it resonated the aspirations of a lot of people in a time of financial and socio-political crisis: as long as I keep the faith and dream the dream, I can face the odds and survive in the end. I can keep on hoping and I will earn the respect and admiration of my peers. I can acquire value and account for something.

And Susan Boyle has done exactly this. It took her a lot of courage to pick up again the dream she set aside to care for an ailing mother. She faced the mockery and disbelief in her. She trusted herself and took the risk. And indeed, for this she deserves everyone’s respect.

But as the contest progresses and she takes on the challenges given to her, I think we all should try to remember the most important thing: it’s about her talent, her singing prowess first and foremost.

Before she became a phenomenon, a cultural reference, a Twitter trend, and a YouTube most-viewed video, she was an ordinary person like you and me who had a dream and wanted to make it real. Whether she opts for a make-over or not; whether she remains the Susan Boyle we imagined her to be or she breaks out of the shell we’ve placed her in; whether in the telling of her story she acquires new roles and changes as a character, we should strive to first listen to her sing.

There will lots of new stories about Susan Boyle especially after the semi-finals. New videos will be posted and shared. New comments will be added to all the conversations. I just hope we can still see after all this has come to pass that the most important story of all about Susan Boyle was the story she herself told.

My activist roots (a tribute to Dad on his 87th bday)

For someone who writes about a lot of things, I've never really written anything about my father. When he died in 2004, I wrote an entry in my journal but nothing more even though so many things remained to be expressed in words and shared to those who care. Perhaps it’s the fierce love shared between us, the intimacy and intricacy of our bond as father and daughter that prevents me from articulating in words that which dwells silently in the bosom of my dreams, rage, pain and hope. This piece is but an overview of what I want to write about him as there are so many details and insights I want to share when it comes to our bond with each other. This is a first attempt; a tribute to my Daddy on what would’ve been his 87th bday last May 16.

===========
I’m a LaSallista. ID# 8943206. A lot of notions, both positive and negative are attached to this label. Perhaps the one that comes first to mind is the term ‘elitista’. Today’s La Salle deserve to be seen in a more progressive light, though as it has been active in championing social issues, thanks partly to more open and progressive minds among the younger generation of brothers (led by the president Bro Armin Luistro). But in the years after Cory (and I can speak best about my time in the early 90’s), activism and La Salle were conflicting worlds. And yet, I managed to be a resident of these two worlds.

If I were to think of how I ended up in La Salle and why I joined Malate (La Salle's literary publication), Tapat (progressive student party) and LSDA (La Salle Students for Democratic Action), a lot of the reasons would lead me back to my father. Those from my batch in Malate and Tapat and even peeps in SC (Student Council) would probably still remember him, and the lunches be brought for me which ended up being shared by everyone. I think even the guard at the LS and Engineering gates would remember, because he visited me so frequently. I think there was a time when he dropped by on a weekly basis, even going to the SC office to check if I was hanging around there. Actually, even the canteen ladies in the SPS building (which housed the publications) knew him and would often tell me when I happened to swing by 'Uy, hinahanap ka ng daddy mo'. I remember being annoyed sometimes that he visited me so often. I thought: I’m all grown-up, I’m running a university literary publication and my Dad’s trying to check up on me. It didn’t occur to me that maybe he simply missed me.

My dad, Prof. Bayani Alcala, was true to his name. 'Bayani' he was, a true ‘hero' in both his failings and triumphs, in the personal and the political. He was a WWII veteran (who sadly never got his pension because of guess what -- bureaucrats in the Philippine Veterans Office, but ranting on that deserves another article), a political detainee, and a dedicated teacher to the end. Most of all, he was a loving father who always put his family’s needs before his. In our family, the children got the biggest piece of the chicken. He never bought himself new clothes, he was always saving and making sure we got everything we need. It still escapes me how he supported us, and even though the only reason I was able to study in La Salle was because of my scholarship, my dad still had to pay for all the other expenses of a college student. How he did that on a teacher’s salary and a few project studies on the side, I still don’t know. Especially now that I know how difficult it is to support oneself and how every movement you make costs money.

Dad, or ‘Prof’ to his friends, was "invited" on August 22, 1971, between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. by agents of the Philippine Constabulary and detained along with Rogelio Arienda and Nemesio Prudente. He was apprehended "on reasonable belief" that they had "participated in the crime of insurrection or rebellion; that "their continued detention (was) justified due to the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus." He was released in November. Didn't get to know about this until I was about 10, I think.

So my dad was †he reason why I was already reciting 'subversive' poetry (taken from the University of Lyceum's student paper) in poetry contests in kindergarten (I won btw, so the judges must have sympathetic to the cause). He was the one who planted the idea of a Jesus for the masses in my head and why 'armed struggle' is sometimes inevitable. He said we were descendants of Rajah Soliman and we should be proud of our heritage. He said if I had enough faith, I could move a mountain. I tried that, by the way. Tried to move Mount Makiling to our backyard. Guess you know what happened. But I didn't lose the faith.

Dad made me read Conrado de Quiros' column (in the Globe back then) and updated me on the U.S. bases issue. I didn't know that the little red book lying around was indeed THE little red book. Because of him, I started writing about injustice for my 'formal' and 'non-formal' themes in Filipino classes. I got a 100% for one article, which I proudly showed him. Later that night, as he tucked me to sleep, he asked nonchalantly if there were people talking to me in school about societal issues, oppression and Marcos' government. I shrugged no. I didn't get what he was talking about.

One morning, we heard on the radio that an attempt was made on PUP president Nemesio Prudente's life. My dad suddenly shouted with rage and went inside his room, still cursing. That was the first time I saw him so angry. I didn't understand then that it was not only an attempt to end his friend's life, but was also an attack on the beliefs he held dear.

So you see, my dad was the one who enlightened me on this aspect of life. Naturally, when I began to ask and answers questions myself; when I began to act on the beliefs he instilled in me, he became frightened. The reason why I entered La Salle was so that dad could steer me away from 'aktibistas' in U.P. (University of the Philippines) That I passed in U.P was more a matter of pride for him, but he wanted me to go to La Salle. The fact that Ateno (Ateneo de Manila University) was nearer to U.P. also sealed my fate.

The very first time I joined a rally (anti-tuition fee increase in front of the Dep't of Education) and he found out, was the second time I saw him so mad. Again, I didn't understand.

Now I do. He was just being a parent, an over-protective one, but a loving father nonetheless. He accepted the fact that I was indeed my father's daughter and instead of pulling me away from dangerous roads, he chose to walk by my side. He joined me in a number of rallies, some even a bit dangerous that I worried for him because his age naturally made him less agile, and for his temper, because I knew he would take on a battalion of soldiers if they threatened my safety. But we stayed on the concrete pavements. I let him worry for me, and I worried for him.

A most cherished memory with my dad was on Sept. 16, 1991, that historical moment when the Senate finally ended the bases treaty. It was raining and I didn't mind -- I loved it. I was taking part in history! So many other Filipinos have fought bravely so that this day would dawn upon our nation. My dad, a professor at PUP (Polytechnic University of the Philippines) was with the school delegation, searched for me in the throng of masses, an umbrella in his hand. History might be unravelling right before his eyes -- a history wherein he played a great role as guerrilla fighter, political detainee and a founding member of MAN (Movement for the Advancement of Nationalism) -- and all that concerned him at that moment, was that his reckless daughter probably was too lazy to take an umbrella and would get drenched in the rain.

I was already soaked to the bones, but I obliged. For a few minutes we stood together under the umbrella, while the crowd danced in celebration around us. I was beaming with pride. I was genuinely happy and proud to be able to share that moment with my father.

A large part of who I am now was due to my dad. I'm so proud of him. Think he made a good choice sending me to La Salle after all.

Recycled vegetable oil to fuel your car

Hats off to environmentalist and writer Ricky Nunez of the Philippines for using recycled vegetable oil to fuel diesel engine!

Galing ni Ricky ;-) Padayon, tol! Uy, tubong-Malate Lit yan at Lasallista ;-)

p.s. Imagine, smelling fried chicken along the highway instead of fumes -- is that for hobbits or is that for hobbits??? This is so Filipino hehe. Go, Pinoy!

I like Susan Boyle

You must've already seen Susan Boyle's fantastic performance in Britain's Got Talent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY&feature=related

She walked on the stage,this 47 yr. old woman, looking like your everyday home-maker, and not appearing one bit a super star-in-the-making. Her looks aren't really what you would want to see on billboards or music videos. Her head held high, she came there prepared to rock the audience. She was funny and cheeky, she was confident. And people don't like that. That's why she was met with ridicule and cynicism by what seemed like majority of the audience. They wanted her to be meek like Paul Potts, another underdog of Britain's Got talent who eventually won 1st place.

People already judged her even before she started to sing. Even the judges were sort of guilty of that. They already made up in their minds that she was just going to be one of those desperate characters seeking their 5 minutes (yep, it's shorter now) of fame that would be make good material for the bloopers section of the show. They thought she had no right being confident and aspiring to be like Elaine Paige. They wanted to put her back in her place, that's why all they kept rolling their eyes.

They were dead wrong. Susan Boyle blew them away with her soaring, clear, powerful voice. I like her because she knew she had talent and she didn't play the meek, unsecure woman.

'Never judge a book by its cover' rings truer every time stuff like this is revealed around us.

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'.