Election 2012: Campaigns, Coverage & the Internet

Posted by:
March 15, 2012 at 1:56 pm


A rockstar panel spoke at the AT&T Conference Center for South by Southwest Interactive on how social media is giving the presidential race a much needed makeover.

Claudia Milne with BBC, Micah Sifry with Personal Democracy Media,
Michael Scherer with Time Magazine, Teddy Goff and Zeynep Tufekci all gave compelling arguments for how candidates for the 2012 election are capitilizing on social media to spread their message and gain supporters.

Both Republicans and Democrats are both capitilizing on the amazing resources that lie at their fingertips.

The panel said that Facebook and Twitter are the most used means for social media, but Google + and the other plethora of sites out there can and should be used to gain the biggest advantage over competitors. Social media isn’t unique to the presidential race this year. Presidential candidates in 2008 began to take advantage of it, and since then every candidate that has any hope of being elected, from mayors to state senators and of course presidential candidates, better be Tweeting and sharing.

And it’s not just about the immediate contact from one campaign to potential supporters, but also the effect that a Tweet or share can have down the road. When Candidate X posts something on Facebook or Tweets it, media outlets can pick this up and if newsworthy, they might publish in print, online, on radio or t.v., which is priceless.

The room was overflowing with two dozen people sitting in the hallway outside the door to listen. Hopefully the politicians are taking this much interest in the topic or they might be left in the past because social media is the future of politicking.

 


How Not to Die: Using Tech in a Dictatorship

Posted by:
March 12, 2012 at 11:55 am


““We are about upgrading our humanity and our own freedom.” –  Mark Belinsky

Iphones, Twitter, Facebook and the like aren’t just for Americans wanting to talk about what bar to meet at or what celebrity said what anymore. Now this amazing technology has made its way into the hands of some of the most oppressed people on Earth. From  Burma to Tibet to Liberia and Egypt, citizens are using technology to rise up against oppressive regimes.

Brian Conley, Deanna Zandt, Mark Belinsky and Sabrina Hersi Issa talked about their unique experience with the ability of technology to aid in the democratic process around the world.

Belinksy, co-founder and president of Digital Democracy, explained how the ability of North Koreans to use USB flashdrives to watch politcal videos instead of having to use DVD’s has made it much easier to hide them from the authorities. This is very important when such acts could have you arrested. Belinksy called this the “right to be forgotten.”

Blinksy also used the term blowback to describe what happend when technology companies work with oppressive governments. Blowback is the unintended consequences of actions companies or governments take. He said that the “blowback was enormous” when Yahoo worked with the government in China and people got arrested for using yahoo email. Yahoo came under fire for doing this.

Even though technology does play a very powerful role in liberating people, it can’t do everything. “Technology is magic… but technology won’t solve our problems, we will solve our problems and technology will help us,” said Zandt, author and media technologist.

Hersi Issa talks about her experience with technology in oppressed countries and where she sees things going in the near future in the video below.


Turning Slacktivism into Online Activism

Posted by:
March 11, 2012 at 2:06 pm


Boyd Neil, a former political activist and trade unionist, spoke on the importance of utilizing the internet to help fuel social movements. Neil, a self-proclaimed “left-wing activist,” was arrested during a demonstration in Cananda on the one year anniversary of the War Measures Act, a “fascist” law (as he called it) that limited the freedom of Canadians. He went on to organize for unions and other political movements.

Neil compared the difference between being an activist in the 1970′s and today. Speaking about technology he said that, “the tools that activists have in order to challenge things in society that we think are wrong are huge for organizers.” Of course in his day there was no Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Cellphones, livestream or any of the other technological tools that activists today are able to take advantage of. The Arab Spring was one example of activists using technology to make social change today.

Neil  argues that being an activist online, as in blogging, Tweeting, using Facebook, etc., is not being lazy, but rather is a different and new form of activism. He also argues that it is up to the organizers to engage those people who show interests. He outlined a four step plan to get people active. First is connection, as in; someone “liking” a post on Facebook or Retweeting something on Twitter. Then is engagement and influence; in other words, getting the person to research the topic and tell their network of friends about it. And finally is action; getting the person to get off the couch and go out and act. Neil says that “it’s the job of the organizer to get people active.”


Fixing Broke(n) Governments Through Serious Games

Posted by:
March 11, 2012 at 11:51 am


Luke Hohmann

“I am not a fan of being a customer of my government” – Luke Hohmann

Luke Hohmann, CEO of The Innovation Games Company, creates games that corporations use to make better decisions when it comes to their budgets. Now he is bringing this same innovative and surpirsing approach to budget management from the corporate world to the government.

Starting in 2011 Hohmann used these “serious games” to help out the city of San Jose. About 1,000 volunteers made up of citizens, neighborhood associations leaders and  the youth commission from around the city broke up into to small groups of seven to use these games to remake the government budget. Citizens had to take the actual budget and make cuts to it in order to balance it and also streamline desired city services.

Results showed how citizens were able to balance the city budget by working together to cut programs and raising taxes. To make a change in the virtual budget citizens had to agree unanimously.Hohmann said that the citizens didn’t always spend all of the available money when taxes were raised. This might sound all positive but citizens observed how regulations on the tax system set up hindered the budget process.

For example, by adding a sales tax of one quarter of a cent they raised about $20 million dollars more than they needed, but because the law mandates they can’t raise it by any less than a quarter of a cent, they were not able to raise it by a smaller amount. This meant that instead of being able to raise it by the needed amount, the citizens would be overtaxed and government would be incentivised to spend more money.be

Overall, these “serious games” showed how powerful citizens can be when they have an accessible means by which to make change. In fact, they were so successful that the city of San Jose actually implemented many of the results that were proposed in the 2011 budget including: reductions in fire and police department staffing, and elimination of some services and funding of key proposals. The 2012 budget has not been finalized yet.

 


More information can be found at InnovationGames.com.


LearningJar and BloomBoard LaunchEdu Winners

Posted by:
March 7, 2012 at 10:31 pm


Inaugural SXSWedu Winners are LearningJar (HigherEd) and BloomBoard(K12).


Slider by webdesign