I blogged last Fall about an initiative here in Canada called Student Vote that runs in parallel to the general election. The program educates over 400,000 young people about political issues and allows them to cast mock ballots that are tallied according to riding, as would real ballots.
As the voting public digests the results of yesterday’s Federal election, I thought I’d bring it up once again. Viewing the disparate results between young students and those eligible to vote, I have to believe that as this next generation matures, they will elect a fairly different (and greener) Parliament than we did this time around.
Welcome back to another edition of the Wikinomics Roundup: Week in Review, where I capture in brief, some of the thoughts, discoveries, and discussions that graced the blog throughout the past week.
This week in the roundup:
Jeff DeChambeau discussed privacy and digital surveillance
Dan Herman introduced us to ‘vote swapping’ and identified how this Web 2.0 technology now has the potential to influence elections
Don Tapscott highlighted some new research findings in order address a common misconception about video games and gamers
Denis Hancock reviewed some of the pitfalls of the traditional crowdsourcing model and introduced us to Poptent
For months several of us have posted about the impact of collaboration and social networks on the election south of the border. The allure of Obama vs. McCain, not to mention their respective approaches towards technology makes for an interesting case study.
But if you’re Canadian and concerned that either the current Conservative government will get a majority hold of Parliament, or conversely concerned that it will fail to do so, then there are several appropriate story lines to follow up North. The first is a growing Facebook group called ‘Anti-Harper Vote Swap Canada,’ which now boasts over 12,000 members.
The group works as follows:
“In a completely legal fashion, it allows voters in different ridings to swap votes to best ensure the Conservatives don’t win. Almost anyone who is opposed the Conservatives can take part. If your preferred party has no chance in your riding (or if they are absolutely certain of winning) you can use your vote elsewhere to help candidates from the same party beat the Tories, while at the same time voting strategically to stop the Tories in your own riding.” Read More »
We’ve written before about how Obama has deployed technology and engaged the Net Generation to enhance his bid for the Oval Office. See here, here, here, here, and here.
After two campaign signs disappeared from his lawn, Preston Fosback decided to monitor it via an Internet camera. From the article:
Dozens of viewers now take shifts, based on their time zones, so as not to leave the sign unwatched at any time. Viewers in Europe take over for those turning in on the West Coast, who are in turn relieved by a dedicated crew of Australians. It’s attracted more than 40,000 viewers and ranks among the top 10 most-watched videos on Ustream.tv, the Web site that hosts the video, among videos of the two presidential candidates and comedian Dane Cook.
The video (and ongoing commentary) can be found here.
I’ve written several times about the impact of social networks on this year’s US Presidential election - see here and here. And let’s be honest, the use of such networks and new web 2.0 technologies has been dominated by Obama. He’s embraced social networks like no other candidate in an attempt to connect with young voters and build transparency and a real sense of community action into his candidacy.
Here’s more evidence: Obama’s VoteforChange.com is touted as a non-partisan Web site encouraging people to get out and vote (yes, even though the name of the URL is his campaign slogan). It’s a rather simple program that helps users find out where and when they can vote. But here’s the genius—this kind of transparent, easy-to-use online system is a great way to tap the Net Geners - some of whom might be first time voters with questions as to the process, and others who simply want a more accessible and transparent leader… And who do Net Geners vote for?
In short, the site does three things:
It helps young people register to vote regardless of who they are voting for.
It’s the first initiative of it’s kind to make an antiquated process more web friendly, and the interface is intuitive and easy to use.
It educates young voters about their polling locations and helps then understand and get involved.
Obama isn’t explicitly telling people that he has the best value out there - he’s simply providing a trusted source of information. One more example of how he’s tapping the web 2.0 to show what he’s all about.
VP Candidate Sarah Palin (here is the SNL skit if for some reason you haven’t seen it) has allegedly had her yahoo account (really) hacked. Not confirmed, but the rumour is that the hacker contacted Yahoo claiming to be the Alaska governor and said he lost the password. Oddly enough, he was able to answer the security question about where she met the “First Dude”…Wasilla high school.
On the heels of the interesting conversation generated by Anthony’s post regarding Patient Opinion and it’s interaction with the National Health Service, I thought I’d point to an interesting article by the UK-based National Computing Council on Web 2.0 deployment for local government. Like Anthony, they wonder why many of the most innovative citizen-centric activities happen outside of government, noting innovative examples such as MySociety.org and LGSearch as being at the leading edge of what can be provided to, and crowdsourced with citizens. That said, they also point to a variety of Web 2.0 esque applications being developed by local councils, and while most are rather simple, their final guidelines on the integration and use of tWeb 2.0 tools are is spot-on. See below:
UK National Computing Council guidelines for Web 2.0 deployment
Don’t think about Web 2.0 or e-government as being just about technology. It is about saving time and making life easier and more efficient for citizens.
Make sure you are resourced to cope. No point setting up a blog that encourages comments if you can’t respond to each comment.
Carefully plan your strategy if using blogs. Read More »
I’m in Krems Austria at the Talk of the Future Conference. I have the opening keynote this morning. Last night I heard an amazing talk from Dr Franz Joseph Radermacher, head of the Research Institute for Applied Knowledge Processing and the Chair of Computer Sciences at the University of Ulm. Member of the club of Rome and an expert in artificial intelligence.. It was a profound talk. My notes are below:
The issue is not the individual. The issue is human kind as an intelligent system. We’ve been living for 4 million years. What keeps us together? Communication.
Innovations are powerful mechanism to change input output mechanisms. There is a universal mechanism of communication where by superior innovations become part of standard procedure. It took 4 million years to get us to 20 million people. 8,000 BC. Up to that point we were hunters and collectors. Read More »
This guest blog is by Steve Ressler, founder of GovLoop.com, a social network connecting the government community. Mr. Ressler is also a contributor to the nGenera Gov 2.0: Wikinomics, Government, and Democracy project and the co-founder of Young Government Leaders, a professional organization of more than 2,000 government employees. Ressler has published articles on generational issues and Web 2.0 in various publications including The Public Manager and presented on these topics at a range of venues including Harvard’s Kennedy School and Brookings Institute.
—-
It’s official - Gov 2.0 is here to stay. From nGenera’s Gov 2.0: Wikinomics, Government, and Democracy project, NAPA’s Collaboration Project, and Mashable’s recent Gov 2.0 column, a lot has been written on the potential power of web 2.0 technologies in government. Government agencies across numerous jurisdictions have begun focusing on how Web 2.0 technologies can help foster workplace collaboration and innovation. Organizations such as the U.S. Department of State, U.S. Transportation Security Agency, and National Resources Canada have implemented organizational wikis to provide a central point for ideas and discussion.
But while government organizations have begun to focus on fostering workplace collaboration from the inside, a new type of collaboration is developing outside the formal reach of government agencies. As part of the Gov 2.0: Wikinomics, Government, and Democracy research series, I recently completed a paper entitled “Net-Gen Networks: How Agencies Can Leverage Outside Innovation Internally.” In this analysis, I document the rise of informal networks in the government sector built around Web 2.0 applications as a means of facilitating collaboration, idea sharing and innovation both within and across agency lines. Whether via social networks like Facebook, wikis, or blogs, these networks have created new authoritative resources for employees without the input or control of their superiors.
Bravo to Quebec’s open source software association for suing the provincial government for not tendering software purchases. Turns out the government used a rule that allows them to avoid tenders when there is only one option (in this case, Microsoft). I guess no one told them about the other options, you know, the free ones.
This brings up some interesting questions. Whose responsibility is it to submit a tender bid for open source? Do governments have the responsibility to consider it even without a bid? And can governments really justify spending a lot of money on things they can get for free (even if the free version has an interface that is intimidating to white-haired public servants)?
But more importantly, governments are missing a tremendous opportunity by ignoring open source. Imagine if even a fraction of the millions of dollars most governments spend on proprietary software was spent on open source initiatives. First of all, the software would become far more customized towards what government needs. Second, rather than funneling tax payer money to one company, it would be an investment for every company in the economy. Third, it would create skilled jobs. Fourth, it would help create the critical mass necessary for open source to overtake proprietary software: something that would benefit the entire economy.
As citizens, I say we start demanding that our governments leverage open source software to save money and invest in our economy.
Building on Will’s posts about Obama using text messaging to announce his running mate (which I thought was brilliant), there is a great video on the BBC web site documenting how democracy has become digitized. It’s 10 minutes, but I highly recommend you take a peek.
Web 2.0 and the tools made available have changed the face of American politics. Not only are campaigns finding new ways to reach out to citizens, they’re also finding ways to engage them to become active participants and volunteers. Some people may argue that the ‘old people’ (so to speak), are the ones that vote; but for this election, Obama has mobilized the largest demographic – the children of the baby boom. And coincidentally, many of them are now coming of age and have the power to make a difference. The numbers speak for themselves. As Don Tapscott wrote in a previous post – During the Iowa preliminary, Obama had won by a landslide in millennial votes. His 28,000 vs. Clinton’s 5,400 and Edwards’ 6,900.
One rainy day earlier this summer, nGenera’s Gov 2.0 Program Director, Dan Herman, locked three summer interns in a room (Ben and Jude, and I) and asked us to think about what life - and government - would be like ten years from now. One of the results was the following short story about a day in the life of a man named Donald, in the year 2018. Hope you enjoy.
7:00 AM. The alarm rang, and Donald pressed the confirm button to silence it. His bedroom monitor switched on and began playing his morning video feeds.
I got an email a few weeks back from a freelancer who wanted some information related to government 2.0, notably how do you measure it’s value, success or progress, i.e. show me the metrics.
His take, “all theory and fanfare” with no real substance.
According to Stanford law professor Dr. Lawrence Lessig, the U.S. government is prepared to react to an online version of 9/11 with a digital equivalent to the Patriot Act, i.e. locking down the Internet.
He likens this to a post i9/11 future, one where our online rights and privacy will face unprecendented scrutiny by government. You can watch part of his talk at Fortune’s Brainstorm Tech conference in California where he made the comments below.
This message mirrors part of the thesis proposed by author and Harvard Law School Professor Jonathan Zittrain in his new book “The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It.” In it, Zittrain argues that we’re on the path to Internet lockdown thanks to a combination of proprietary devices and malicious intent. You can read my colleague Naumi’s review here.
There’s some great discussions and ranting taking place about this pretty much everywhere so I’ll pass on the summary of what’s being said and instead pose two questions: what constitutes an i-9/11 attack, and what would such an act allow that isn’t already being done today?
I will be the first to admit that I am something of a Facebook stalker. Although it sounds creepy, it just means that I have kept up with friends’ lives via Facebook. Some Facebook stalkers take it to a whole new level, browsing strangers’ profiles within their networks. I do not do that.
I say all of this to preface the fact that I am not really a stalker even though I just spent the last hour on criminalsearches.com, where anyone can enter in someone’s name and get a whole list of criminal offenses ( if any) for free. Most criminal records are public information and anyone can search individual state databases for free. The cool thing about CriminalSearches is that it aggregates all of these disjointed databases and delivers a more comprehensive result with much less time and effort. Launched just last month, CriminalSearches is garnering serious attention.
So what did I turn up in an hour’s time? I found my black sheep cousin and all six of his quite impressive drug and alcohol convictions. I even found an old high school teacher (who was fired the year after I graduated) who now has a conviction for assault. Nice.
In my last blog I pondered my personal brand and how to manage my information. While I am fortunate—or maybe just law abiding—enough to not have any dubious offenses tarnishing my online identity, there are likely thousands more who find themselves struggling to move past a youthful indiscretion or other similarly embarrassing-but-not-as-bad-as-it-sounds offense in a society that highly stigmatizes criminal activity.
In theory, a judge decides how much time and effort it will cost a convict to repay their debt to society. After that period is over, the ex-convict’s debt is considered paid and the ex-convict moves on with their life. But now, with such data so readily available, a convict’s debt to society will now be decided by the court of public opinion for better or worse.
CriminalSearches may become a powerful law enforcement tool. One blog about CriminalSearches describes how a family researched the criminal record of the person suspected of killing their son. The blogger claims that the site’s alias information helped investigators find missing records that put the suspect behind bars.
While that may be a rare case, it benefits society to be able to thoroughly screen people they come in contact with and in whom they place their trust. While some people may be upset to find themselves listed as a criminal for a traffic offense, others will highly value this information when hiring drivers and nannies and babysitters. Parents could even look up their kids’ friends’ parents to see if they are safe drivers and trustworthy people before letting their kids hop in the backseat or attend a sleepover.
But there is a fine balance between society’s right to know and the individual’s right to move on with their lives. How will society adapt to such pervasive and powerful information in an increasingly voyeuristic world?
In any case, better look yourself up and see what dirt there is on you. It’s all a part of curating that ever-expanding online identity. If you find incorrect information, such as a ticket that was supposed to be dismissed or expunged, contact the authority that issued the citation and clean up your image. It’s the only one you get.
Don’t ask me how it happened. I was just planning to check my email last night, but for some reason I ended up on the United Nations website. I spent a couple hours searching through the information. It was amazing how much it contains. Dan Herman actually wrote a blog post about it a few months back.
The website is filled with research papers, news, and reports highlighting what innovative governments, businesses, and educators can do to empower the people. It also breaks them down into a variety of case studies like Debate Europe where European citizens can share their opinions, concerns and ideas on the future of the European Union. The French National Commission of Public Debate (CNDP) has an innovative site that allows citizens to debate on infrastructure projects in France. Chunceon, Korea citizens have direct web access to the Mayor’s office to submit ideas and then receive feedback on them. Seeing case studies like these can really help allowing people to interpret and to better understand the opportunities available to their countries, states, provinces, and small towns. They even have some of our own Anthony Williams’ stuff in there. Read More »
Welcome back to another edition of the Wikinomics Roundup: Week in Review!In this week’s roundup, I will capture in brief, some of the thoughts, discoveries, and discussions that graced the blog throughout the past week.
In case you missed it, you can catch last week’s roundup HERE. From now on the Wikinomics Roundup will have a nice new home on the left side of the page, under Regular Features. Come visit!
Interesting statistics announced today by the China Internet Network Information Center (CINIC) that 253 million people in the country are now online, meaning China now has the world’s largest number of Net users in the world (topping the US’ 223 million). These numbers are still much inferior to the country’s stock of mobile-phone users (500 million) but nonetheless, the continued growth of China’s online participant community bears watching. Least of all because the current user-base represents a penetration rate of only 19% suggesting that as the country develops, and as infrastructure spreads West throughout China, it will dwarf the rest of the worlds (i.e. start publishing/marketing in Mandarin). CINIC projects the number of Chinese users to grow to 490 by 2012.
The growth of China’s online community has been acknowledged by many within the Chinese Communist Party, including the country’s most powerful leader, Hu Jintao. In mid-June he took part in an online web-chat at the People’s Daily website that marked the first time a senior party official publicly engaged with internet users. While commentators noted that “there was no real substance to the online conversation,” it has since been referred to as symbolic of the central governments acknowledgement of the internet as an important source of public information and public opinion. Read More »
The other day I found myself perusing the New York Times like I’m apt to do anytime I need a few minutes to de-focus and relax. The third most emailed article of the day, “If You Have a Problem, Ask Everyone,” caught my eye. “Hmm,” I think to myself. “That sounds collaborative. I’ll check it out.” Low and behold, the article is about InnoCentive, an innovation intermediary that brings together external experts to solve companies’ R&D problems.
Innocentive, founded in 2001, has grown nearly 30 percent since September of last year from 115,000 members to 145,000. Don Tapscott and Anthony Williams talk about InnoCentive in the Ideagoras chapter of Wikinomics, so it’s no surprise that it’s making waves. What interests me, though, is that this article was the third most emailed article of the day.And just to clarify, it’s the overall most popular, not the just science section. Imagine all of those people reading about ideagoras! Maybe I just get a little too excited to see Wikinomics in the mainstream media, and maybe I’m forgetting who reads the New York Times. But wikinomics is infectious, and I clearly have the bug.
More interestingly though, according to the NYT article, is that the presumptive Republican nominee for president, Sen. John McCain, has “proposed that the government offer $300 million to whoever invents a battery compact enough, powerful enough and cheap enough to replace fossil fuels.”Maybe he’s a little technologically-challenged, but at least it seems he’s ready to collaborate. If the government embraces McCain’s proposal, perhaps we will see a solution sought on yet2.com or Innocentive. Perhaps even you can be a part of that solution.
An article on CNN.com explains the growing trend of web 2.0 usage in Congress. Leading the way is Rep. John Culberson of Texas. He uses twitter.com, qik.com, and utterz.com to reach his constituents. Culberson’s goal is to “Shine sunlight in every dark corner of the Congress, to make the Congress and the government as transparent as humanly possible.” Culberson isn’t alone. Many members of congress and politicians from all areas of the government have been utilizing the amazing networking potential of web 2.0 applications. I’m sure you have all seen or at least heard of McCain and Obama’s use of Youtube for the presidential election. Use of web 2.0 sites has allowed politicians to communicate more effectively with their constituents. Online videos and blogs have proven far more effective and cost efficient than billboards and bumper stickers.
The growing use of web 2.0 has also led to a growing concern by many. The House Franking Commission, which regulates the uses of taxpayers’ money for communicating with constituents, has considered restricting use of sites like youtube and qik. The concern of inappropriate usage of taxpayers’ money is legitimate, but I for one think that we need more transparency in the government. Web 2.0 sites provide a very cost efficient means of creating this transparency through increased communication.
Culberson is on the right track and I hope the Franking Commission doesn’t thwart his positive efforts. In response to this concern Culberson said, “They will not stop me. They can no more regulate the Internet than they can regulate the wind.”
I don’t know if his gunslinger mentality is right… but I like it
Technology and the US election I've written several times about the impact of social networks on this year's US Presidential election - see here and here. And let's be honest, the use of such networks and new web 2.0 technologies has been dominated by Obama. He’s embraced social networks like no other candidate in an attempt to connect with [...]
