Archive for the ‘Web/Tech’ Category

Knowledge 1, Internet 1

Tuesday, December 8th, 2009

Last night I was reading a post by Iain Dale, which had been cited as a “here’s the proof!” link by someone in a discussion elsewhere.

The post is a bit of an “in my day” article, repeating the old chestnut that in the 1970s everyone was worried about a new ice age, and therefore decades of research on global warming is all just nonsense. Teach the controversy, and all that.

Mr Dale specifically recalls being “taught” about global cooling at school in the 1970s. Well, I was at school in the 1970s too, and I don’t remember that at all – certainly there was no awareness of global cooling anywhere near the current awareness of global warming.

But this was just typical Internet debate: a duel of anecdotes, prejudices and perspectives without any facts behind them. 1-0 to the Internet in the battle with knowledge.

Fifteen seconds of Googling later, I’d found a blogpost on Nature pointing out that only seven peer reviewed articles in the 1960s and 70s suggested global cooling, whereas over forty suggested global warming even at that early stage in the research. It even had a reference to Posted in Web/Tech | Comments Off

Comment is Fascist, but votes are representative

Tuesday, November 24th, 2009

While researching the latest fraud woes of the UK Independence Party, I came across this article in the Times. Reporting on the alleged OLAF investigations being conducted on UKIP MEP Michael Nattrass, it has received just five comments in the nine days since it was put online.

This perhaps shows the public’s level of interest in the affairs of the European Parliament, but what’s more interesting is what those comments say. One of them is pro-UKIP – it roughly says that fraud is OK if it’s done by people you agree with, an attitude with which the Daily Mail would thoroughly agree. More surprisingly all the other comments are pro-BNP. 80% BNP support is roughly thirteen times more than the BNP got from actual real voters in the European elections, and more than a hundred times the BNP’s level of support at the 2005 General Election.

Why do newspapers have comment functionality again?

The decline of the Wiki volunteer

Monday, November 23rd, 2009

I spent a little time this afternoon at FutureGov’s Crowdsourced Council event in London. A wide range of engagement projects were demonstrated, from improved consultation methods (Consultwise – no website at the moment) to more citizen-created approaches (QuietRiots).

There were lots of good projects there, but I don’t think I saw anything that passed the Wikipedia test – projects that would survive and thrive if they very suddenly became very popular. I think this is an important test for online debate tools because you don’t want to create communities that can’t survive scaling to “real community” size – four hundred thousand people, for instance, in Manchester.

By coincidence, Michael Grimes tweeted an article from the Wall Street Journal that described the problem that Wikipedia is currently having retaining its participants. Extract below:

In 2005, journalist John Seigenthaler Sr. wrote about his own Wikipedia write-up, which unjustly accused him of murder. The resulting bad press was a wake-up call. Wikipedians began getting more aggressive about patrolling for vandals and blocking suspicious edits, according to Andrew Lih, a professor at the University of Southern California and a regular Wikipedia contributor.

That helped transform the site into a more hierarchical society where volunteers had to negotiate a thicket of new rules. Wikipedia rolled out new antivandalism features, including “semiprotection,” which prevents newcomers from editing certain controversial articles.

“It was easier when I joined in 2004,” says Kat Walsh, a longtime contributor who serves on Wikimedia’s board of trustees. “Everything was a little less complicated…. It’s harder and harder for new people to adjust.”

I have a vague recollection that AOL had the same problem with the “hosts” of its various communities back in the day, when AOL was a player. As I remember it, hosts were paid in kind (reduced membership fees, more connection time – yes, kids, connection time on internet services was once rationed), but generally did it for the prestige within the community. After a while it became harder to attract and retain hosts – the job became more time-consuming as more people joined, the initial hosts got bored and new ones couldn’t be found, and the tone of the debate changed as different groups discovered the net.

The question this raises for me is whether the free-content model of the Internet is sustainable in the longer term. Is Murdoch’s decision to take the Times and his other publications behind a paywall far-sighted rather than pig-headed?

GOP.com

Monday, October 19th, 2009

I’m having a wander around the new Republican social networking site, GOP.com. It doesn’t look like a huge advance on the Obama campaign site, although without registering you can’t see everything. A quick look at the Group and States page suggests that levels of activity are still pretty low – eight groups in total and sparse membership in state groups (CA, with 27 members, is the most popular).

It was interesting to see that they had a Code for America page – although I think it should more honestly be called “Code for the Party” since there is already a MySociety-type non-partisan organisation called Code for America.

We are the robots

Tuesday, October 13th, 2009

The new Kraftwerk box set coincides with an equally cool, but less retro, robot launch. Sidekick Studios have placed the Vinspired Voicebox robot in the Houses of Parliament, and it is faithfully reproducing the comments that young people are leaving at its website.

The live stream should appear below, there is also a Flickr set of selected earlier messages.

Video clips at Ustream

MyConservatives.com debuts

Friday, October 2nd, 2009

The new interactive site MyConservatives.com launches today. Dominic Campbell has a full write-up of it at PDF. It seems like the first version prioritises fundraising and campaigning (on user-defined issues), rather than discussion.

An early test for them is whether they can get a critical mass of users (there are only 250k Tory party members, probably less, and the political branding will repel as well as attract). They also need to avoid the splintering that iCan saw into a million micro-campaigns.

The Not-So-Hidden Politics of Class Online

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

Well worth reading Danah Boyd’s analysis of the social and racial self-segregation being seen in US social media use, taken from a talk given at the Personal Democracy Forum earlier in the year. Snippet:

For decades, we’ve assumed that inequality in relation to technology has everything to do with “access” and that if we fix the access problem, all will be fine. This is the grand narrative of concepts like the “digital divide.” Yet, increasingly, we’re seeing people with similar levels of access engage in fundamentally different ways. And we’re seeing a social media landscape where participation “choice” leads to a digital reproduction of social divisions.

Big lies and little lies

Tuesday, September 29th, 2009

According to the BBC,

Police are trying to find who is responsible for more than 50 racially and sexually abusive letters. Gordon Brown’s Fife constituency office received a letter in April, while others were sent to mosques, hospitals, universities and private homes. Much of the hate mail, mostly posted from Hampshire, includes references to “repatriation” and “exit Europe”.

This shows a sad lack of vision and ambition on the part of the letter writer. He (and let’s be honest, it’s a he) could have put the same content on a website comments page with twenty thousand (or 280,000) pageviews a day, and been hailed as the honest upstanding voice of the people. Send the same on paper to fifty people, and the police are out hunting you down. There’s no justice.

Don't worry about the middle classes

Friday, September 4th, 2009

Much of the comment about the new Pew Internet and Civic Engagement Survey has been around its finding that wealthy and well-networked people are the most likely to participate in civic activities online. The already-engaged, in other words, are the beneficiaries of much engagement work.

I don’t think we should worry too much about that. That isn’t because I think poor people don’t matter, or that the politically disengaged deserve to stay disengaged. I think that the demographics of online engagement will solve themselves if we get democratisation right.

After all, the same middle-class bias is seen in voter turnout in the offline world. Voters are older, richer and more middle-class than the non-voters and since online civic engagement is designed by and for the politically-active, it is hardly surprising that those engaged online are old, rich and middle-class too.

The rewards of political engagement online also accrue mostly to those who already have strong views. The man ranting about privatisation on Comment is Free and the libertarian on Free Republic share the misperception that the great mass of the people are behind them. In fact, the great mass of the people don’t know what to think and aren’t particularly bothered about it. What use do they have for a discussion forum, however elegantly designed?

Fixing the class bias in politics without expanding the political class is impossible – and expansion of the political class has to come as a consequence of wider and deeper political engagement both online and off.

To do that, governments need to nurture political spaces with their attention, so civic participation has results beyond a warm fuzzy feeling. The civic engineers need to create spaces in such a way that people aren’t just reciting political cliches, but are really discussing and developing ideas in possession of the facts.

Most importantly, though, the people themselves need to be brought to realise, through advertising or through campaigning, that political engagement is more than a hobby for old rich people, it’s a vital part of the duty we have to our world. This last point sounds like moralising – and it is. Democratic transformation in politics can only come through citizens, and an engaged and dutiful citizen can’t be created by a well-designed website.

Political debate?

Monday, July 27th, 2009

It pains me to link to a Jeremy Clarkson article, but so be it. I thought the article’s dog-whistle racism and sneering xenophobia showed that it wasn’t just in the blogging community that British political debate is dying on its arse. The papers lead where the bloggers follow.

Judging by something I was reading the other day, our public debate isn’t even living up to the standards of 2,200 years ago. In 249BCE Publius Claudius Pulcher lost 120 Roman ships in a disastrous naval battle. Three years later, his sister was held up in a crowd when leaving the games in her carriage. In a moment of Clarksonism, she cried out “If only my brother were here to lose more ships and thin out this rabble!”. She didn’t get a well-remunerated column in the local papyrus, she was prosecuted by the plebeian aediles and fined 25,000 ases (about eighty thousand pounds on a day-wage basis).