I was at a conference today during which much was made about how social media – well it was tabbed as ‘The Internet’ but I think they meant social media – is changing the way democratic societies across the globe govern themselves. The assumption is that those in power will be forced to listen to the voices of those they represent, and be accountable. In this vein, it was mooted that China will have democracy forced upon them, and there is nothing they will be able to do about it. Hmmm…
Well, OK, you can see how social media, or The Internet, gives many fora for opinion/discussion and can act as an effective lobbying/rallying tool. You can even see that there is little any government or ruling party could do to silence those voices – take China and its efforts to block access to YouTube – this is clearly a losing battle.
However, it is just another way for people to speak – it does not enable listening! Yes it can create a two-way conversation, yes you can feel as if you are speaking directly to the person – rather than through convoluted channels that might dilute your message… but who is listening? What assumptions are they making about you?
Anyone who works in an e-media team in the public sector, will tell you how difficult it is to champion the use of any social media tool to any great effect. And, other than responding to the perennial cry: ‘I want a blog’ – which never, ever really means I want a blog (Miliband excepted of course) there is little or no interest. This could be due to the fact that there is a great nervousness around it: mis-information and wild assumptions all ultimately culled by risk aversion/avoidance. Sure, there are some great examples of its effective use: Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), Number Ten’s e-petition site and the Ministry of Justice Governance of Britain site are all great examples of effective and supported use of social media tools – however, these are the exceptions and hardly about to start affecting the political philosophy behind democracy – or even give those who govern our country too much to be concerned about.
I remember being impressed by the Wispa campaign, where a Facebook group successfully nagged Cadbury’s to bring back their favourite 80s chocolate bar; I can’t see how nagging will ever enforce an EU referendum, for example, or change policy, or get you out of your tax liabilities.
Yet I keep hearing how these voices cannot, will not and should not be silenced… and a true democratic society would utilise the opportunity afforded by social media. My feeling is that there is nowt you can do to lower the noise level, but to enable real change, or the change that is suggested could be afforded by social media, a fundamental shift needs to take place in the way people listen. Until then, nagging/lobbying/campaigning through social media tools will have very little effect.
That is my view on social media and democratic change. HOWEVER, there is a great opportunity for any ruling nation to use social media tools to consult, deliver messages and perhaps better understand society’s concerns, but that is another conversation – and one that I know can be answered by members of public sector e-media teams across the globe.
8 Comments
March 4, 2008 at 5:00 pm
I found your site on technorati and read a few of your other posts. Keep up the good work. I just added your RSS feed to my Google News Reader. Looking forward to reading more from you.
Mike Harmon
March 6, 2008 at 8:56 am
Are we in danger of seeing the noo meeja through Old Media and Old Political eyes. e-petitions, online consultations et al are just politics, comms and pr in shiny new clothes. even leaving aside any cynicism that might suggest that nothing’ll happen, it is still at its heart a top-down, Oliver Twistish set of relations.
The real power of all this lies in the wiki-effect where politics is taken out of the hands of the politicians and reworked at the local (or local-virtual levels). Then politicians, policy makers and thinkers have to come to the people who are networking and delivering networked services, rather thgan inviting them for tea and biscuits in Whitehall.
As more and more communities use these tools to empower them to develop and deliver innovative and powerful network-effect solutions and strategies – with or without Political support, the more Government (big and small g) will have to run to catch up.
People with wikified, wisdom of crowds, opens source content power to reframe debates, create new ideologies and cultural practices will not passively accept ‘consultations’ with an ‘e’ tagged on the front. They’ll be too busy changing politics and society from below.
This of course does not mean that a Government cannot impose law from above, it just changes the legitimacy of that law and its political or electoral base. Hegemony, Gramsci called it. If only he had put an ‘e’ in front of it.
March 7, 2008 at 3:42 pm
I really like this post, I have also subscribed to your blog.
Its really interesting how politicians always talk about engaging with the public and reducing apathy but when given such an amazing opportunity manage to get it so wrong.
As with all this kind of things I suspect adoption will only kick in when politicians can see the opposition reaping the benefits.
keep up the good work.
Simon
March 7, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Thank you for your kind words and encouragement, Simon. You are very right about big ‘P’ politics and social media assumptions – will be v interesting to see what happens in this space over the next 12 months (watching the mayoral campaign too – think that will get quite fun!)
March 10, 2008 at 10:07 am
[...] Emma’s: Are we in danger of seeing the noo meeja through Old Media and Old Political eyes. [...]
March 10, 2008 at 11:44 am
[...] blogs can improve collaboration within businesses. The same can surely be said for Government. As Emma Mulqueeny Says [...]
March 11, 2008 at 3:02 pm
[...] probably stay with the topic of Civil Serf for a few days – as there’s an interesting debate [...]
March 11, 2008 at 6:02 pm
[...] probably stay with the topic of Civil Serf for a few days – as there’s an interesting debate [...]