Session idea: Encouraging active citizenship may be seem like a good idea, but it isn't really.
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Paul Evans
Jun 18, 2009, 9:07:31 AM6/18/09
to LocalGovCamp
I'm going to be deliberately provocative here, but it's a position
that I'd defend - up to a point - and I think it's a question that we
all need to ask ourselves before we get involved in social media-
related projects in local government. Here's the argument:
Active citizens are time-rich nosey busybodies and do-gooders that
promote their own self-interest at the expense of the people that
don’t have the time, energy or obsessiveness to engage in public
affairs. At least if we force these people to channel their energies
through political parties, they will have to spend most of their time
competing for the once-every-few-years votes from the rest of us –
those of us who don’t have the time, energy, inclination or fanaticism
to go to consultations, circulate petitions or run campaigns.
If local authorities seek to go directly to citizens in order to find
out what their policies should be, they risk being overtaken by
positions that reflect the obsessions of busybodies rather then the
wider concerns of the rest of us.
What do you think? Fancy an argument? ;-)
that I'd defend - up to a point - and I think it's a question that we
all need to ask ourselves before we get involved in social media-
related projects in local government. Here's the argument:
Active citizens are time-rich nosey busybodies and do-gooders that
promote their own self-interest at the expense of the people that
don’t have the time, energy or obsessiveness to engage in public
affairs. At least if we force these people to channel their energies
through political parties, they will have to spend most of their time
competing for the once-every-few-years votes from the rest of us –
those of us who don’t have the time, energy, inclination or fanaticism
to go to consultations, circulate petitions or run campaigns.
If local authorities seek to go directly to citizens in order to find
out what their policies should be, they risk being overtaken by
positions that reflect the obsessions of busybodies rather then the
wider concerns of the rest of us.
What do you think? Fancy an argument? ;-)
Jon Bounds
Jun 18, 2009, 9:26:44 AM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
Not something I agree with, but a nice starting place for a discussion.
I've been thinking around how the UsNow film stops just at the point when the myFC football club crowdsource project becomes interesting — when attention wanes and the "community" (the club and it's original supporters) are in trouble.
-
Jon Bounds
social media | web | consultancy | training
tel: 07974 789 455
site: www.jonbounds.co.uk
msn/email: j...@jonbounds.co.uk
I've been thinking around how the UsNow film stops just at the point when the myFC football club crowdsource project becomes interesting — when attention wanes and the "community" (the club and it's original supporters) are in trouble.
-
Jon Bounds
social media | web | consultancy | training
tel: 07974 789 455
site: www.jonbounds.co.uk
msn/email: j...@jonbounds.co.uk
O'Dea Sharon
Jun 18, 2009, 9:29:17 AM6/18/09
to LocalGovCamp
I'd agree to some extent. The evangelical stance of things like UsNow (which I loved, btw) overlooks a lot of the realities of working in government, particularly that we are responsible for providing some very unfashionable services.
The idea of the people deciding hw the whole of a council's budget being voted on by people is great in theory, but would likely result in increases for middle-class interests like parks and libraries at the expense of less fashionable spending - like, for instance, services for people with mental illness.
The task for all of us, then, is to broaden the specrum of society that takes part in decision-making, whether by on or offline means. Right now the vast majority of people who participate in local decision-making *are* the older, whiter, and time-rich (usually relatively cash-rich, too). In my view, social media has enormous potential to open this up those those who normally don't have the time, interest or inclination to participate, and for that reason it would be a real waste to dismiss it out of hand.
Now I've never gone along to a community meeting, because like a lot of people I don't have the time. But I will take five minutes to complete a questionnaire, because I have the means to do that. One can't replace the other, but I'd argue they can complement each other and in doing so bring more people into the decision-making process.
Sharon.
-----Original Message-----
From: localg...@googlegroups.com on behalf of Paul Evans
Sent: Thu 18/06/2009 14:07
To: LocalGovCamp
Cc:
Subject: [localgovcamp] Session idea: Encouraging active citizenship may be seem like a good idea, but it isn't really.
I'm going to be deliberately provocative here, but it's a position
that I'd defend - up to a point - and I think it's a question that we
all need to ask ourselves before we get involved in social media-
related projects in local government. Here's the argument:
Active citizens are time-rich nosey busybodies and do-gooders that
promote their own self-interest at the expense of the people that
don’t have the time, energy or obsessiveness to engage in public
affairs. At least if we force these people to channel their energies
through political parties, they will have to spend most of their time
competing for the once-every-few-years votes from the rest of us –
those of us who don’t have the time, energy, inclination or fanaticism
to go to consultations, circulate petitions or run campaigns.
If local authorities seek to go directly to citizens in order to find
out what their policies should be, they risk being overtaken by
positions that reflect the obsessions of busybodies rather then the
wider concerns of the rest of us.
What do you think? Fancy an argument? ;-)
This email and the information it contains are confidential and intended solely for the exclusive use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, this email should not be copied, forwarded, or printed for any purpose, or the contents disclosed to any other person. If you have received this email in error, please notify the London Borough of Sutton immediately on +44(020) 8770 5000 or email ITsec...@sutton.gov.uk and then delete the email.
Although the London Borough of Sutton operates anti-virus programmes, it does not accept any responsibility for any damage whatsoever that
is caused by viruses being passed.
This message has been scanned for malware.
The idea of the people deciding hw the whole of a council's budget being voted on by people is great in theory, but would likely result in increases for middle-class interests like parks and libraries at the expense of less fashionable spending - like, for instance, services for people with mental illness.
The task for all of us, then, is to broaden the specrum of society that takes part in decision-making, whether by on or offline means. Right now the vast majority of people who participate in local decision-making *are* the older, whiter, and time-rich (usually relatively cash-rich, too). In my view, social media has enormous potential to open this up those those who normally don't have the time, interest or inclination to participate, and for that reason it would be a real waste to dismiss it out of hand.
Now I've never gone along to a community meeting, because like a lot of people I don't have the time. But I will take five minutes to complete a questionnaire, because I have the means to do that. One can't replace the other, but I'd argue they can complement each other and in doing so bring more people into the decision-making process.
Sharon.
-----Original Message-----
From: localg...@googlegroups.com on behalf of Paul Evans
Sent: Thu 18/06/2009 14:07
To: LocalGovCamp
Cc:
Subject: [localgovcamp] Session idea: Encouraging active citizenship may be seem like a good idea, but it isn't really.
I'm going to be deliberately provocative here, but it's a position
that I'd defend - up to a point - and I think it's a question that we
all need to ask ourselves before we get involved in social media-
related projects in local government. Here's the argument:
Active citizens are time-rich nosey busybodies and do-gooders that
promote their own self-interest at the expense of the people that
don’t have the time, energy or obsessiveness to engage in public
affairs. At least if we force these people to channel their energies
through political parties, they will have to spend most of their time
competing for the once-every-few-years votes from the rest of us –
those of us who don’t have the time, energy, inclination or fanaticism
to go to consultations, circulate petitions or run campaigns.
If local authorities seek to go directly to citizens in order to find
out what their policies should be, they risk being overtaken by
positions that reflect the obsessions of busybodies rather then the
wider concerns of the rest of us.
What do you think? Fancy an argument? ;-)
Although the London Borough of Sutton operates anti-virus programmes, it does not accept any responsibility for any damage whatsoever that
is caused by viruses being passed.
This message has been scanned for malware.
Dave Briggs
Jun 18, 2009, 9:34:03 AM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
This is clearly a great subject for a discussion session.
My point be to clarify exactly what role social media - or engagement
activity more widely - has to play in local democracy.
My line is that it should be elected politicians that decide policy.
That's why we have a representative democracy. But what that policy is
can be *informed* by engaging and consulting with residents, community
groups, other organisations and businesses.
Likewise, how those policies are implemented could also be an area
where input from residents could be useful.
Requiring anyone who wants to contribute in some small way to stand
for election is far too limiting. If I'm only interested in recycling,
say, I probably don't want to be responsible for the representation of
my constituents views on every area of policy.
Dave
--
Dave Briggs, Digital Enabler
d...@vebrig.gs | http://davepress.net | 07525 209589 (Mobile)
Sign up for my monthly digital participation newsletter at
http://davepress.net/newsletter
My point be to clarify exactly what role social media - or engagement
activity more widely - has to play in local democracy.
My line is that it should be elected politicians that decide policy.
That's why we have a representative democracy. But what that policy is
can be *informed* by engaging and consulting with residents, community
groups, other organisations and businesses.
Likewise, how those policies are implemented could also be an area
where input from residents could be useful.
Requiring anyone who wants to contribute in some small way to stand
for election is far too limiting. If I'm only interested in recycling,
say, I probably don't want to be responsible for the representation of
my constituents views on every area of policy.
Dave
Dave Briggs, Digital Enabler
d...@vebrig.gs | http://davepress.net | 07525 209589 (Mobile)
Sign up for my monthly digital participation newsletter at
http://davepress.net/newsletter
Andrew Beeken
Jun 18, 2009, 10:31:30 AM6/18/09
to LocalGovCamp
Interesting; I was going to propose a session on Duty to Involve and
the impact that social media could have on this (mainly because I'm
doing a presentation to our members on this next month!) so this could
maybe tie in there? Or maybe not?
> > This email and the information it contains are confidential and intended solely for the exclusive use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, this email should not be copied, forwarded, or printed for any purpose, or the contents disclosed to any other person. If you have received this email in error, please notify the London Borough of Sutton immediately on +44(020) 8770 5000 or email ITsecur...@sutton.gov.uk and then delete the email.
>
> - Show quoted text -
the impact that social media could have on this (mainly because I'm
doing a presentation to our members on this next month!) so this could
maybe tie in there? Or maybe not?
>
> > Although the London Borough of Sutton operates anti-virus programmes, it does not accept any responsibility for any damage whatsoever that
> > is caused by viruses being passed.
>
> > This message has been scanned for malware.
>
> --
> Dave Briggs, Digital Enabler
> d...@vebrig.gs | http://davepress.net| 07525 209589 (Mobile)
>
> Sign up for my monthly digital participation newsletter athttp://davepress.net/newsletter- Hide quoted text -
> > Although the London Borough of Sutton operates anti-virus programmes, it does not accept any responsibility for any damage whatsoever that
> > is caused by viruses being passed.
>
> > This message has been scanned for malware.
>
> --
> Dave Briggs, Digital Enabler
> d...@vebrig.gs | http://davepress.net| 07525 209589 (Mobile)
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Tracey Todhunter
Jun 18, 2009, 10:42:01 AM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
Hi Paul - at the risk of also being provocative - I'd like to counter this by saying "active" citizens" are those people who are the most active within their communities - the people who just get on with what they can do to make a difference in their communties - organising youth groups, food buying co-operatives etc; in the North West there is a new support network for these individuals called the Community Activists Network. These are not the "usual suspects" that you see invited along to council meetings, but ordinary people and what I'd like to explore is how these individuals can be encouraged to play a more visible role in "civil society". I'm sure we've all learnt from participatory budgeting that it's always not the most deserving or appropriate, but the most adept at getting their issues in front of an audience who succeed.
Look forward to discussing this on Saturday
--
Tracey Todhunter
Freelance Writer and Community Development Trainer
Co Founder: Low Carbon Communities Network (www.lowcarboncommunities.net)
phone:07595 291 504
twitter: lowcarbondiary
Blog: http://lowcarbondiary.communitycarbon.net
Look forward to discussing this on Saturday
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Paul Evans <paulie...@gmail.com> wrote:
--
Tracey Todhunter
Freelance Writer and Community Development Trainer
Co Founder: Low Carbon Communities Network (www.lowcarboncommunities.net)
phone:07595 291 504
twitter: lowcarbondiary
Blog: http://lowcarbondiary.communitycarbon.net
Richard Battams
Jun 18, 2009, 11:22:29 AM6/18/09
to LocalGovCamp
I think there's something in this too.
I've been involved with Stakeholder forums and there is a 'profile' of
people that will turn out on a wet Tuesday evening at 6pm in response
to a council invitation and the offer of a free buffet.
We talk a lot about hard to reach groups and then manage to get
representation from these groups along in their droves - I think our
real hard to reach groups are the working joes and josephines that
either don't have the time or just want the council to 'get on with
it' without bothering them. I think that some of the social media
techniques might get more participation from these non-participants
but will allow even more participation by the already actives.
No conclusions there - just some thoughts
I've been involved with Stakeholder forums and there is a 'profile' of
people that will turn out on a wet Tuesday evening at 6pm in response
to a council invitation and the offer of a free buffet.
We talk a lot about hard to reach groups and then manage to get
representation from these groups along in their droves - I think our
real hard to reach groups are the working joes and josephines that
either don't have the time or just want the council to 'get on with
it' without bothering them. I think that some of the social media
techniques might get more participation from these non-participants
but will allow even more participation by the already actives.
No conclusions there - just some thoughts
Stuart Harrison
Jun 18, 2009, 11:32:27 AM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
I dunno, I think the 'already actives' are generally the ones who are less involved in online stuff and social media. So really, engaging with and involving people in that section of society means you are going to get a more representative view.
Admittedly, there will still be gaps, but that's when you need to look at other methods of engagement, or (being more ambitious) try and bridge the digital divide so there are less gaps.
Admittedly, there will still be gaps, but that's when you need to look at other methods of engagement, or (being more ambitious) try and bridge the digital divide so there are less gaps.
Dave Briggs
Jun 18, 2009, 11:36:24 AM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
I agree with Stuart.
Engagement activity based on meetings is, in my view, deliberately exclusionary.
An example: most of the time I work in London, and I get back home
between 7 and 8 every night. Given the choice between going to a
planning meeting at the local council, say, or seeing my son before he
goes to bed is a no brainer.
But there is time, whether during a lunch break, or on the train, when
I have internet access and could engage with the Council
electronically.
I'm sure this is a common scenario. Given the opportunity to engage, I
would, but the current arrangements are completely inaccessible to me.
Dave
Engagement activity based on meetings is, in my view, deliberately exclusionary.
An example: most of the time I work in London, and I get back home
between 7 and 8 every night. Given the choice between going to a
planning meeting at the local council, say, or seeing my son before he
goes to bed is a no brainer.
But there is time, whether during a lunch break, or on the train, when
I have internet access and could engage with the Council
electronically.
I'm sure this is a common scenario. Given the opportunity to engage, I
would, but the current arrangements are completely inaccessible to me.
Dave
Wayman, Paul (Strategic Services - Solihull MBC)
Jun 18, 2009, 11:47:44 AM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
I too have been at the frontline wondering if meeting the usual suspects
at public consultations was really helping to inform and shape services.
Take the latest Daily Mail campaign for banning wheelie bins many people
(including me) have them and really don't have a problem with them at
all but the articles would lead one to think that each household hates
them. This type of journalism is the last gasp of a dying media I know
but at some point social media needs to take a stand. My suggestion is
that the democratic route is still valid but needs to be backed up by
strong evidence from the not so vocal majority!
-----Original Message-----
From: localg...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:localg...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Battams
Sent: 18 June 2009 16:22
To: LocalGovCamp
Subject: [localgovcamp] Re: Session idea: Encouraging active citizenship
may be seem like a good idea, but it isn't really.
**********************************************************************
DISCLAIMER:
‘This e-mail and files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Solihull Council unless explicitly stated otherwise. Solihull Council may monitor the contents of e-mail sent and received via its network for the purposes of ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures. The contents of e-mails may have to be disclosed to third parties following a request under legislation such as the Data Protection Act 1998 or the Freedom of Information Act 2000.’
**********************************************************************
at public consultations was really helping to inform and shape services.
Take the latest Daily Mail campaign for banning wheelie bins many people
(including me) have them and really don't have a problem with them at
all but the articles would lead one to think that each household hates
them. This type of journalism is the last gasp of a dying media I know
but at some point social media needs to take a stand. My suggestion is
that the democratic route is still valid but needs to be backed up by
strong evidence from the not so vocal majority!
-----Original Message-----
From: localg...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:localg...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Battams
Sent: 18 June 2009 16:22
To: LocalGovCamp
Subject: [localgovcamp] Re: Session idea: Encouraging active citizenship
may be seem like a good idea, but it isn't really.
DISCLAIMER:
‘This e-mail and files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Solihull Council unless explicitly stated otherwise. Solihull Council may monitor the contents of e-mail sent and received via its network for the purposes of ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures. The contents of e-mails may have to be disclosed to third parties following a request under legislation such as the Data Protection Act 1998 or the Freedom of Information Act 2000.’
**********************************************************************
Eastwood , Ken
Jun 18, 2009, 11:56:57 AM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
I agree completely. A different take on 'digital exclusion' perhaps (being digitally enabled and savvy but not having developed mechanisms or channels to use) ?
I often worry about the value of old style engagement. Been to many meetings attended by the usual suspects in anoraks and the seasoned single issue campaigners. Not right that a tiny minority should have influence over the majority.
The 'new' neighbourhoods agenda risks making this worse of course.
Ken.
-----Original Message-----
From: localg...@googlegroups.com [mailto:localg...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave Briggs
Sent: 18 June 2009 16:36
To: localg...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [localgovcamp] Re: Session idea: Encouraging active citizenship may be seem like a good idea, but it isn't really.
*** Barnsley MBC Disclaimer:
This e-mail and any files attached are confidential for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender as soon as possible and delete the communication from your system without copying, disseminating or distributing the same in any way by any means.
Any views or opinions expressed belong solely to the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Council. In particular, the Council will not accept liability for any defamatory statements made by email communications.
Recipients are responsible for ensuring that all e-mails and files sent are checked for viruses. The Council will not accept liability for damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. No guarantees are offered on the security, content and accuracy of any e-mails and files received. Be aware that this e-mail communication may be intercepted for regulatory, quality control, or crime detection purposes unless otherwise prohibited.
The content of this email and any attachment may be stored for future reference.
I often worry about the value of old style engagement. Been to many meetings attended by the usual suspects in anoraks and the seasoned single issue campaigners. Not right that a tiny minority should have influence over the majority.
The 'new' neighbourhoods agenda risks making this worse of course.
Ken.
-----Original Message-----
From: localg...@googlegroups.com [mailto:localg...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave Briggs
Sent: 18 June 2009 16:36
To: localg...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [localgovcamp] Re: Session idea: Encouraging active citizenship may be seem like a good idea, but it isn't really.
This e-mail and any files attached are confidential for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender as soon as possible and delete the communication from your system without copying, disseminating or distributing the same in any way by any means.
Any views or opinions expressed belong solely to the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Council. In particular, the Council will not accept liability for any defamatory statements made by email communications.
Recipients are responsible for ensuring that all e-mails and files sent are checked for viruses. The Council will not accept liability for damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. No guarantees are offered on the security, content and accuracy of any e-mails and files received. Be aware that this e-mail communication may be intercepted for regulatory, quality control, or crime detection purposes unless otherwise prohibited.
The content of this email and any attachment may be stored for future reference.
Marsh Arun
Jun 18, 2009, 12:32:45 PM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
My two peneth,
I can't remember if I read it here or heard it somewhere else, but generally (and it is a big generalisation) aren't the 'digitally active' less likely to require, and therefore be interested in, the majority of council services?
Therefore making your council website some kind of all singing, twitter feeding, social networking, interacting, meta tagging, wiki working wonder site may not work that well - the sort of people who like that thing are busy on twitter and Facebook and those that don't, will be even more put off than they already are.
I have only contacted my council to do one thing since moving in a year ago - to buy parking permits. If I wanted to oppose a planning application I'm fairly sure I can simply email the planning dept. If I felt really strongly about the issue I could make the time - say one evening in a year - to attend the planning meeting.
Many councils have Twitter accounts, but already there have been complaints that residents expect instant responses to complex issues. Perhaps the question is not whether councils should allow more engagement online, but if they should be institutionally changed in order to make online engagement more worthwhile?
Sorry for going on!
Arun Marsh
www.localgov.co.uk
I can't remember if I read it here or heard it somewhere else, but generally (and it is a big generalisation) aren't the 'digitally active' less likely to require, and therefore be interested in, the majority of council services?
Therefore making your council website some kind of all singing, twitter feeding, social networking, interacting, meta tagging, wiki working wonder site may not work that well - the sort of people who like that thing are busy on twitter and Facebook and those that don't, will be even more put off than they already are.
I have only contacted my council to do one thing since moving in a year ago - to buy parking permits. If I wanted to oppose a planning application I'm fairly sure I can simply email the planning dept. If I felt really strongly about the issue I could make the time - say one evening in a year - to attend the planning meeting.
Many councils have Twitter accounts, but already there have been complaints that residents expect instant responses to complex issues. Perhaps the question is not whether councils should allow more engagement online, but if they should be institutionally changed in order to make online engagement more worthwhile?
Sorry for going on!
Arun Marsh
www.localgov.co.uk
Paul Evans
Jun 18, 2009, 12:38:53 PM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
I think that it's not about how councils should avoid reaching out to the public using social media. I think it's more the case of how councils - and particularly councillors - can be armed to deal with unrepresentative demands and be helped to use tools that will inevitably be used against them.
--
Paul Evans
Tel: 0845 126 1341 or 07973 714206 (mobile)
pa...@memeserver.co.uk
http://www.memeserver.co.uk
Local Democracy blog: http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/Paul0Evans1
Find out more about the Political Innovation Camp - PICamp:
http://www.picamp.org
I've covered this subject a fair bit on my blog here: http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk/2009/03/10/will-victor-be-the-eventual-victor/
I'd also add that the ability to use tools like this would arm them to deal with the other dominant group that often trump the public interest - the people who currently work for local authorities. Councillors are particularly poorly armed against local government senior management and it's not always a good thing.
2009/6/18 Marsh Arun <a.m...@hgluk.com>
--
Paul Evans
Tel: 0845 126 1341 or 07973 714206 (mobile)
pa...@memeserver.co.uk
http://www.memeserver.co.uk
Local Democracy blog: http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/Paul0Evans1
Find out more about the Political Innovation Camp - PICamp:
http://www.picamp.org
Dave Briggs
Jun 18, 2009, 12:42:06 PM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
I'm kind of not wanting to push this one any more as it might impinge on
discussions on Saturday! However, I can't resist.
Arun - as I'm sure you will hear an awful lot on Saturday, the way a lot
of the thinking is going around digital engagement is that the Council's
website is not the place to do it. Rather, existing communities can be
tapped into and dialogue started with groups of people online that
otherwise - for whatever reason - don't normally get involved in this
sort of thing.
A lot of it is about making issues less boring - encouraging those folk
that don't normally get involved to do so. Part of this can be helped by
the web, which is great for mobilising people around issues that are of
interest to them. So we aren't asking people to engage with their
council (snor), but rather helping them make the things that matter to
them work better.
Dave
discussions on Saturday! However, I can't resist.
Arun - as I'm sure you will hear an awful lot on Saturday, the way a lot
of the thinking is going around digital engagement is that the Council's
website is not the place to do it. Rather, existing communities can be
tapped into and dialogue started with groups of people online that
otherwise - for whatever reason - don't normally get involved in this
sort of thing.
A lot of it is about making issues less boring - encouraging those folk
that don't normally get involved to do so. Part of this can be helped by
the web, which is great for mobilising people around issues that are of
interest to them. So we aren't asking people to engage with their
council (snor), but rather helping them make the things that matter to
them work better.
Dave
Dave Briggs
Jun 18, 2009, 12:47:01 PM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
I would have thought that the new web tools would provide a greater
plurality of views - leaving councillors and councils with more opinions
to consider... which makes thing more, rather than less representative.
But as you say, Paul, the councillors and councils need to understand
this stuff to be able to do that properly.
Great discussion!
Dave
Paul Evans wrote:
> I think that it's not about how councils should avoid reaching out to
> the public using social media. I think it's more the case of how
> councils - and particularly councillors - can be armed to deal with
> unrepresentative demands and be helped to use tools that will inevitably
> be used against them.
>
> I've covered this subject a fair bit on my blog
> here: http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk/2009/03/10/will-victor-be-the-eventual-victor/
>
> <http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk/2009/03/10/will-victor-be-the-eventual-victor/>I'd
> also add that the ability to use tools like this would arm them to deal
> with the other dominant group that often trump the public interest - the
> people who currently work for local authorities. Councillors are
> particularly poorly armed against local government senior management and
> it's not always a good thing.
>
> 2009/6/18 Marsh Arun <a.m...@hgluk.com <mailto:a.m...@hgluk.com>>
> > <Batt...@walsall.gov.uk <mailto:Batt...@walsall.gov.uk>>
plurality of views - leaving councillors and councils with more opinions
to consider... which makes thing more, rather than less representative.
But as you say, Paul, the councillors and councils need to understand
this stuff to be able to do that properly.
Great discussion!
Dave
Paul Evans wrote:
> I think that it's not about how councils should avoid reaching out to
> the public using social media. I think it's more the case of how
> councils - and particularly councillors - can be armed to deal with
> unrepresentative demands and be helped to use tools that will inevitably
> be used against them.
>
> I've covered this subject a fair bit on my blog
> here: http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk/2009/03/10/will-victor-be-the-eventual-victor/
>
> <http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk/2009/03/10/will-victor-be-the-eventual-victor/>I'd
> also add that the ability to use tools like this would arm them to deal
> with the other dominant group that often trump the public interest - the
> people who currently work for local authorities. Councillors are
> particularly poorly armed against local government senior management and
> it's not always a good thing.
>
>
>
> My two peneth,
>
> I can't remember if I read it here or heard it somewhere else, but
> generally (and it is a big generalisation) aren't the 'digitally
> active' less likely to require, and therefore be interested in, the
> majority of council services?
>
> Therefore making your council website some kind of all singing,
> twitter feeding, social networking, interacting, meta tagging, wiki
> working wonder site may not work that well - the sort of people who
> like that thing are busy on twitter and Facebook and those that
> don't, will be even more put off than they already are.
>
> I have only contacted my council to do one thing since moving in a
> year ago - to buy parking permits. If I wanted to oppose a planning
> application I'm fairly sure I can simply email the planning dept. If
> I felt really strongly about the issue I could make the time - say
> one evening in a year - to attend the planning meeting.
>
> Many councils have Twitter accounts, but already there have been
> complaints that residents expect instant responses to complex
> issues. Perhaps the question is not whether councils should allow
> more engagement online, but if they should be institutionally
> changed in order to make online engagement more worthwhile?
>
> Sorry for going on!
>
>
>
>
>
> Arun Marsh
> www.localgov.co.uk <http://www.localgov.co.uk>
>
> My two peneth,
>
> I can't remember if I read it here or heard it somewhere else, but
> generally (and it is a big generalisation) aren't the 'digitally
> active' less likely to require, and therefore be interested in, the
> majority of council services?
>
> Therefore making your council website some kind of all singing,
> twitter feeding, social networking, interacting, meta tagging, wiki
> working wonder site may not work that well - the sort of people who
> like that thing are busy on twitter and Facebook and those that
> don't, will be even more put off than they already are.
>
> I have only contacted my council to do one thing since moving in a
> year ago - to buy parking permits. If I wanted to oppose a planning
> application I'm fairly sure I can simply email the planning dept. If
> I felt really strongly about the issue I could make the time - say
> one evening in a year - to attend the planning meeting.
>
> Many councils have Twitter accounts, but already there have been
> complaints that residents expect instant responses to complex
> issues. Perhaps the question is not whether councils should allow
> more engagement online, but if they should be institutionally
> changed in order to make online engagement more worthwhile?
>
> Sorry for going on!
>
>
>
>
>
> Arun Marsh
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I think there's something in this too.
> >>
> >> I've been involved with Stakeholder forums and there is a 'profile'
> >> of people that will turn out on a wet Tuesday evening at 6pm in
> >> response to a council invitation and the offer of a free buffet.
> >>
> >> We talk a lot about hard to reach groups and then manage to get
> >> representation from these groups along in their droves - I think our
> >> real hard to reach groups are the working joes and josephines that
> >> either don't have the time or just want the council to 'get on with
> >> it' without bothering them. I think that some of the social media
> >> techniques might get more participation from these non-participants
> >> but will allow even more participation by the already actives.
> >>
> >> No conclusions there - just some thoughts
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Briggs, Digital Enabler
> d...@vebrig.gs <mailto:d...@vebrig.gs> | http://davepress.net | 07525
> >>
> >> I think there's something in this too.
> >>
> >> I've been involved with Stakeholder forums and there is a 'profile'
> >> of people that will turn out on a wet Tuesday evening at 6pm in
> >> response to a council invitation and the offer of a free buffet.
> >>
> >> We talk a lot about hard to reach groups and then manage to get
> >> representation from these groups along in their droves - I think our
> >> real hard to reach groups are the working joes and josephines that
> >> either don't have the time or just want the council to 'get on with
> >> it' without bothering them. I think that some of the social media
> >> techniques might get more participation from these non-participants
> >> but will allow even more participation by the already actives.
> >>
> >> No conclusions there - just some thoughts
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Briggs, Digital Enabler
> 209589 (Mobile)
>
> Sign up for my monthly digital participation newsletter at
> http://davepress.net/newsletter
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Paul Evans
> Tel: 0845 126 1341 or 07973 714206 (mobile)
> pa...@memeserver.co.uk <mailto:pa...@memeserver.co.uk>
>
> Sign up for my monthly digital participation newsletter at
> http://davepress.net/newsletter
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Paul Evans
> Tel: 0845 126 1341 or 07973 714206 (mobile)
Paul Evans
Jun 18, 2009, 12:53:21 PM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
Dave,
I do think that a discussion like this needs an 'outcome' - something that people can go away and do - perhaps collaboratively.
I really like the idea of getting a lot of people in local government to use either Debategraph or 'Mixed Ink' to crowdsource a description of all of the classic issues that councils face so that councillors and the public can be introduced to something that is attractive and readable when they raise an issue so that they can understand that theirs isn't the only perspective.
Something like this shifts the value away from 'weight of numbers' and towards 'weight of argument' - two very different things.
2009/6/18 Dave Briggs <d...@vebrig.gs>
Andy Mabbett
Jun 18, 2009, 4:23:10 PM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
In message
<b3f9b34a-a731-47a7...@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
Paul Evans <paulie...@gmail.com> writes
<b3f9b34a-a731-47a7...@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
Paul Evans <paulie...@gmail.com> writes
>Active citizens are time-rich nosey busybodies and do-gooders that
>promote their own self-interest at the expense of the people that don’t
>have the time, energy or obsessiveness to engage in public affairs.
A fascinating topic for a session - what would have happened if that
view had prevailed in the days of, say, Boulton, Watt and their fellow
Lunar Society members?
--
Andy Mabbett
Says "NO! to compulsory UK ID Cards": <http://www.no2id.net/>
and: "Free Our Data": <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>
(both also on Facebook)
Paul Evans
Jun 18, 2009, 7:29:46 PM6/18/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
If you have a point to make Andy, it's always a good deal more fascinating if you make it rather than imply it....
2009/6/18 Andy Mabbett <an...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
Christine Forrester
Jun 19, 2009, 5:43:08 AM6/19/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
> I do fancy a discussion on this, as it is one of the issues that is critical
if we are talking about new media as a means of increasing citizen participation
- which seems to be very much in vogue at the present time. I would agree with
you that there are real risks that the agendas become dominated by those with
the time and inclination to go onto various sites to give their opinions and who
may be skewing the agenda. I would disagree that all active citizens are
time-rich nosy busy bodies etc etc - some are, but many are not. The issues are
not solely about the mechanisms and technologies for reaching out, but also
about how the discussions are conducted and why it is that so many people feel
so disengaged from the processes that impact on their lives - what has shifted
us from a society where electoral participation in the early 1950s was at over
80% in general elections to an average of under 60 % now. (and this was evident
even before the current expensesgate scandal!). What does our "democracy" now
mean? More tomorrow, I hope!
Chris
if we are talking about new media as a means of increasing citizen participation
- which seems to be very much in vogue at the present time. I would agree with
you that there are real risks that the agendas become dominated by those with
the time and inclination to go onto various sites to give their opinions and who
may be skewing the agenda. I would disagree that all active citizens are
time-rich nosy busy bodies etc etc - some are, but many are not. The issues are
not solely about the mechanisms and technologies for reaching out, but also
about how the discussions are conducted and why it is that so many people feel
so disengaged from the processes that impact on their lives - what has shifted
us from a society where electoral participation in the early 1950s was at over
80% in general elections to an average of under 60 % now. (and this was evident
even before the current expensesgate scandal!). What does our "democracy" now
mean? More tomorrow, I hope!
Chris
will perrin
Jun 19, 2009, 5:23:14 PM6/19/09
to LocalGovCamp
political parties are doing so well these days- the combined
membership of the top three parties is less than the membership of
netmums and their local branch networks are dying.
people who are not members of political parties have no influence on
their individual priorities in a local area, as opposed to their
manifesto bundle. local politicians who are the local manifestation
of the parties are also of course time rich busybodies with a very
high average age.
active citizens can allow a real focus on local issues
the web if used simply and plainly in a way just about anyone on the
web can handle (ie not social media rich) then it can make it easier
for the less time rich to engage by serving up information in an easy
to digest way, cutting through all the baroque nonsense of local
consultations see this example:
http://www.kingscrossenvironment.com/2009/05/gifford-street-bank-trees-houses-warehouses-you-decide.html
there are a whole load of other examples here
http://www.kingscrossenvironment.com/things-i-like-about-this-site.html
until we active citizens started to focus methodically on cleaning up
the streets in kings cross the local politicans simply ignored the
scandalous fly tipping and underperformance of the street sweepers.
happy to have a session on NI4 and how the web can drive communtiy
empowemrent
cheers
w
membership of the top three parties is less than the membership of
netmums and their local branch networks are dying.
people who are not members of political parties have no influence on
their individual priorities in a local area, as opposed to their
manifesto bundle. local politicians who are the local manifestation
of the parties are also of course time rich busybodies with a very
high average age.
active citizens can allow a real focus on local issues
the web if used simply and plainly in a way just about anyone on the
web can handle (ie not social media rich) then it can make it easier
for the less time rich to engage by serving up information in an easy
to digest way, cutting through all the baroque nonsense of local
consultations see this example:
http://www.kingscrossenvironment.com/2009/05/gifford-street-bank-trees-houses-warehouses-you-decide.html
there are a whole load of other examples here
http://www.kingscrossenvironment.com/things-i-like-about-this-site.html
until we active citizens started to focus methodically on cleaning up
the streets in kings cross the local politicans simply ignored the
scandalous fly tipping and underperformance of the street sweepers.
happy to have a session on NI4 and how the web can drive communtiy
empowemrent
cheers
w
Paul Evans
Jun 23, 2009, 4:53:29 AM6/23/09
to localg...@googlegroups.com
I've posted something about this session on my blog - here: Comments welcome!
http://blog.localdemocracy.org.uk/2009/06/23/community-sites-and-active-citizenship-a-localgovcamp-roundup/
2009/6/19 will perrin <william...@googlemail.com>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages