I am going to take this time to revisit some earlier posts which I seem to be missing and which I did not save, so here I will recreate from my failing memory some of the comments, and add a few postscripts.
Tim O’Reilly’s comments on Open Source was rather foreshadowing of what was to come in the world of open source ware over the next decade since he presented this talk. Even the metaphor he uses of agriculture is even more compelling in light of all of the biotechnology and the movement against Monsanto. I especially appreciated his line, “We need a Sierra Club for the internet. If we value the environment that brought us the Internet, we need to act to protect it.” He says, and it seems apparent that the best ideas for the internet and the programs that have come to be considered integral part of our on-line lives such as wikipedia, would not have happened without the spirit of collaboration that any new territory or environment or project invites its participants to engage in. We are at a crossroads right now where these rights are in serious jeopardy, and we rely on the trailblazers to lead us to the next stage. But the very essence of the internet and its participatory, collaborative nature depends on the continuation of that essence. Right now the risk of corporate (patent) monopoly and government regulation is like an evil looming presence lurking in the shadows, and we have to be diligent to hold off the hopefully not inevitable takeover.
So this brings us to “How does networked collaboration figure into e-government? How has it affected governmental communication? What are the effects of a participatory culture on participatory democracy? What kinds of crowdsourced news and activism have you come across, what made it effective/ineffective and what would make it more effective?” Networked collaboration has had a huge impact on government. SInce Obama is credited with bring Twitter into the election, most politicians have utilized all forms of social media to reach their constituents. The administration created a tool at whitehouse.gov to create petitions and get signatures. Every single day I receive emails from a multitude of organizations asking me to participate by signing a petition, calling a political representative or, of course, sending a donation. There are several organizations that I receive these messages from, including the Sierra Club, because this is a great way to become involved in issues, find out what is happening legislatively directly from the sources and take action. I have been a member of moveon for many years for a funny reason. Eli Pariser, one of its founders, went to Simon’s Rock College of Bard, which my sons also went to, so there was that connection. I also participate with change.org, ewg. org, and a host of other mostly environmental and social justice organizations, such as ushahidi. It is challenging to deal with all of these groups because some of the issues overlap, or are, in fact exactly the same. So when big issue pop up, there are many organizations emailing for action, which I am happy to oblige because it is simple to add your name to a petition or call a senator or congressperson. This allows a level of participation and collaboration that would not have been possible a few short years ago. I think it will take time to see how effective it actually is in the long run. This year’s election will become more intense as the months go by, and I hope we will see a giant leap in the participatory culture’s impact on participatory government.
Regarding Facebook: I am very pleased that Facebook did not play a role in this class. I do not now, and never have had a Facebook account despite the numerous attempts of various people to convince me how much I need to be on it. This networked environment seems to be losing some of its status of late according to a recent article, and growth seems to be holding, but no longer growing in leaps and bounds.
Over the last month I had a strange encounter with the role and power that Facebook has for many people. A sad event brought up the odd insidious place Facebook holds. As some of you know, I live in a small, ruralish town in upstate NY. A young lady my children went to school with was diagnosed with cancer about a year ago. The Sunday afternoon before Thanksgiving my son, who is a sophomore at Fordham Lincoln Center, texted me to ask if Michelle had passed away. I asked why he was asking, and his response was he was seeing posts all over Facebook. Later that evening I went to the grocery store and saw another student from the school and she confirmed it was true. I was a teacher at the school for a while, so I know everyone. I emailed a former colleague to meet to attend the funeral, and a few of us met for an early dinner. The conversation got around to when it happened, and how the information got out. Michelle’s mother asked her close friends that it specifically not go out on Facebook until several hours later. But the word got out eventually because young people cannot help but reach out with posting. What struck me was that the adults I was having this discussion with including the school guidance counselor, who were actually called on the telephone and advised of the news, were reluctant to believe that it was true because there was nothing on Facebook yet! I found it incredible that the adults were looking to the social network to verify terribly sad news that was verbalized to them through the old-fashioned telephone. They needed Facebook confirmation, and couldn’t believe the information without seeing it posted because they have become so accustomed to that process of spreading news.