Posted by
Gurstein, Michael on
Nov 18, 2006; 5:40pm
URL: http://civicaccess.416.s1.nabble.com/BBC-Web-fuelling-crisis-in-politics-tp756p757.html
In some ways it is Malarky, Michael, but in other ways it is very
interesting as it shows how the politicians (and I would guess any of
the comparable Canadian politicians and their policy honchos who have
any idea or thoughts on the matter) are regarding these questions...
What's interesting of course, is that he doesn't seem to see that the
ways in which governments have either refused or been incapable of
figuring out how to link their activities into the on-line world is a
large part of the cause of the "irresponsibilty" that he is pointing
to...
But "we" also, I think share some of the blame here by not really
developing effective models of how to usefully engage the online world
in policy discussion/deliberation to some sort of effective outcome...
Not that "we" have the answers, but I think that "we" should be
addressing those issues rather more and once having addressed them "we"
should be looking for how to model what works and doesn't (and yes, that
is the useful role for academics/researchers...
I would say that Russell McOrmond (on this list I think) and his group
around Canadian copyright issues have gone about as far along this road
as anyone I've seen and I think anyone interested in this subject (I
know that I am) would do well to take a very close look at what he and
his colleagues have been doing.
I think in the context of this discussion how they have attempted (and
occasionally) achieved direct linkage into some of the policy
folks/discussions (and where and why they have mostly failed -- for the
most part because they were dealing in Canada with folks like Mr. Tayler
-- to this point) is I think especially revealing.
Best to all,
MG
-----Original Message-----
From:
[hidden email]
[mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael
Lenczner
Sent: November 17, 2006 7:52 PM
To: civicaccess discuss
Subject: [CivicAccess-discuss] BBC -Web 'fuelling crisis in politics'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6155932.stmI think the most polite word for this is "malarky".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6155932.stm"Mr Taylor said Mr Blair's online grilling from voters - and other
initiatives such asenvironment secretary David Miliband's blog and
Downing Street's new online petition service - showed the government was
making good progress in using the internet to become more open and
accountable.
But he said more needed to be done by the web community in general to
encourage people to use the internet to "solve problems" rather than
simply abuse politicians or make "incommensurate" demands on them. ....
"The internet has immense potential but we face a real problem if the
main way in which that potential expresses itself is through allowing
citizens to participate in a shrill discourse of demands."
I have sympathy for our public officials trying to figure out how to use
the web. It's not easy. But characterizing citizens for being "shrill"
when they speak up? Especially given the confrontational way the
British Parliament office approached TheyWorkForYou for two years before
they supported the project? jeesh. Good things this guy is outta
there.
_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca