My Definition of Digital Activism

I was asked recently in an exercise to write on a small piece of paper what I know about digital activism.  In an effort of conciseness, I developed the following equation for what factors go into a successful occurrence of digital activism.  Keep in mind, these are also organized based on the order in which they would – or should – happen, although the process can happen so quickly that it can be difficult to make the distinction between them.

Circumstance: There is a certain situation or problem whereby an individual, a group or an organization seeks to have their voice heard or their problem solved.  An example could be a repressive situation, a crisis, or a specific political cause.

Goals: From this circumstance and desire for a greater share-of-voice come the goals of the individual, group or organization identifies the goals or solutions to their situation/problem. What do they ultimately hope to achieve? It’s at this point that the circumstances  are such that someone or a group of people decide they’re going to take action.

Strategy: As expected, once you’ve established your goals, most of the successful campaigns have a big-picture strategy that was developed during the process.

Technology: Once the above landscape is made clearer, a digital technology or technologies are identified as being the most useful and capable to implement.  This decision can be made base don various factors: what’s used most, what infrastructure is in place, what level of “reach” the tool has, etc.

Tactics: This is when you get down to the detailed way in which you’re going to use the technologies/technologies to get to your end goal.

It’s important to note in this model where the technology decision is made.  The thing is, this isn’t always how instances of digital activism come about.  Sometimes it’s a mix of all of these at once, sometimes it seems like things “transpire” organically because there’s a certain technology available.

However, at some level (whether the process seems organic or not), this choice of tool comes after some assessment of the landscape and identification of the problem and development of goals, and after the decision is made to take action.

Open Access to Government Data: Benefits versus risks

I was listening to a back episode of NYT Tech Talk podcast from 9 December on this story about governments offering up data for developers to mash-up things like phone apps that can give you the safest route home at night (using government crime data) and other such things.

While I support open access to information (and remember that most of this information is available already, although perhaps not so readily), I also recognize the dangers of allowing people access to data without proper context or filters.  The article talks about it a little bit, but there are unfortunately a LOT of people who just don’t know how to properly analyze data, and there are also unfortunately a lot of people who are willing to manipulate or abuse data for their benefit.

It’s a really interesting topic as we’re entering an era when, at least in this country, people are starting to demand access to certain things, and transparency is a huge issue.  Do we have a line in mind when it comes to the amount of data?  Is it a matter of what form it comes in?

While I tend to agree that, in the absence of perfect data, actions can and sometimes should still be taken (As Evgeny Morozov has stated on several occasions), what happens when people a little less thoughtful get their hands on only limited data?

It would be ideal, of course, to have the data already run through a series of “experts” and analysts (not that that means it’s necessarily truth), or at the very least put in some format that allows people to understand all of the factors involved in a given situation and put the data into context…. but then we’d be really running budgets thin on the amount of government time that process would take.

So what then? Disregarding the instances alluded to above where action is still necessary with inadequate information, how to we handle the desire for access to information (disregard the instances alluded to above where action is still necessary with inadequate information) against the risks it might hold in terms of interpretations or abuse?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Feed me!

What I thought

Check out our book release!




Obviously you were wondering what time it was....

A barrister bookcase is furniture.

Get Adobe Flash player

Follow me

My Company