Digital Utopia vs. Digital Cynicism, Barcelona, april 8th 2013

#newCommunication #newLeadership #newPolitics

1

communication, strategy & leadership architects

www.ingenia-‐pro.com @ingenia_pro

"Digital Utopia vs. Digital Cynicism" Barcelona, 8th of April 2013.


2



The Talking Points following the presentation:

http://prezi.com/ewhszgfcpx2t/digital-‐utopia-‐vs-‐cynicism-‐barcelona-‐april-‐8th-‐2013/ 1. Digital World beginning. Three different stages of Power: 1. Local Power (middle ages) 2. State Power (modern age) 3. People Power age started when the Digital World began: -‐ In 1971, the first e-‐mail. -‐ 30 years ago the Internet era started. (In 1983, the first military "internet", commercially opened in 1995.) Internet was the door-‐in to new & huge possibilities: -‐ Access, more open & inclusive structures; bottom-‐up, -‐ New social organization based on citizen’s empowerment; -‐ Another chance to improve deliberative Democracy, Vs. -‐ Leaving behind all the old structures. Revolution was a word to summarize those huge opportunities. Today "What's happening in the Cloud in just a minute?” 2. Utopia vs. Cynicism: what is really happening? Let's take a look: A. Digital Human Rights: access & censorship. -‐ Non-‐democratic censorship: Bahrain, China, Iran, Syria, Vietnam, Cuba, Belarus, Russia or North Korea.


3



1. Iran elections 2009: just a few hours before the polls open it wasn't possible to send SMS + Opposition Parties Websites were down. 2. China & its ‘Great Firewall’s intranet: 10 years to build it and 40.000 Police Officers spying and more than 50 laws. Two threats: foreign -‐dangerous-‐ websites (black list + dangerous words to be forbidden) & intern dissidence. This intranet -‐government controlled platforms include Chinese Weibo (twitter) or RenRen (facebook) or it's own Google but with the tied and expected controls by the Chinese officials. 3. Russia: the Duma passed last year a law that permits the censorship of a blacklist of sites that do not comply with the desires of the Putin Government -‐ (Public and Private) Censorship on democratic states: they can control communications. "CIA -‐and the Democratic Governments-‐ are watching US": 24/7 monitoring. They have all the information: what we read, what we shop, what we do, bank accounts and credit cards data. Privacy and the Digital Life. Facebook or Twitter, as private companies have the right/freedom to close/block accounts with any reason, without explaining why, without giving answers to anyone. B. The twittevers bubble: 200 milions users vs. 7.000.000.000 citizens. -‐ Up to 90% of a typical twitter feed is basically a waste of everyone’s time; -‐ partisan sniping and gaffe-‐driven garbage; -‐ separating the wheat from the chaff; -‐ "Facebook users are exhibitionists, and Twitter one, narcissistic"; -‐ fake identities; buying followers/influence; -‐ trending topic obsession; -‐ we don't listen; we only want to be heard;


4



-‐ we can't measure the quality of the interaction; -‐ there's no conversation, no room for debate neither persuasion; -‐ Tribal patterns: "I follow -‐only-‐ the people that shares my same -‐partisan, ideological-‐ values". So what about independent, centrists or undecided voters or supporters? We are leaving behind the middle-‐ground people; -‐ unverified/manipulated/smears leading; C. Communication or misinformation? -‐ 24/7 spiral timelines non-‐stop; It moves so fast that if you're not continuously checking in, you completely lose track of the conversation — and it’s almost impossible to figure out what happened three hours ago, much less two days ago. We can’t save Twitter for later, like rss, blogs, and books... -‐ double screen effect: Huge TV events & translated/interpreted in digital Real Time. Millionaire Global audience: watching, listening, understanding, reacting -‐ in favor or against it-‐ Olympics, Oscars, SOTU, Presidential Debates. But we are loosing attention & interest. -‐ People are the New Media Outlets. They lost the monopoly of deciding what's news. You've got this power in your hands. 3. Digital networks Achilles heels: a. Tribes Polarization: talking about issues is like a "Barça vs Madrid"; watching a global event is seeing to tribes saying "Yes" and "No". The others are excluded? Are not counting any more? The example of the blogosphere we follow and the books we read depending -‐ only-‐ in our ideology. We don't get to know or understand the others, the opponents, People thinking different to us.


5



b. Click/sofa/slacktivism: Social activism and mobilization, requires discipline, commitment, structure, organization, hierarchies, strategy ... c. there's no conversation at all. Unilateral Communication. 4. What Digital Networks are useful for? -‐ Enables spreading the word, raising the voice, activism, outreach, mobilization, engagement, fundraising, building networks and organizations... -‐ FEMA sandy; -‐ White House' "We the People": open+acces+transparent government vs But what about the "death star/strange" petitions? -‐ Obama SOTU + Marco Rubio rebuttal water + reaction + the printed press haven't been published yet: -‐ Government Pressure: Governments before going or not going to war they will receive huge pressure from the organized society. -‐ Accurate and relevant information: If you look for it, you can have it easily and free 5. conclusions: -‐ Democratic societies have limits and "kind of" censorship. -‐ Digital life has secured more horizontal access information & more democratic communication structures. -‐ Twitteverse is not representative at all.


6



-‐ We are doing the same we did, nothing new, but more easily. Digital life enables you to do something you have always done a little easier than before.” -‐ Digital tools and digital social networks: ·∙ does not connect different arguments and people; ·∙ don't promote a cold and balanced conversation; ·∙ connects tribes and opinions and reproduces the ancient tribalism of human beings. -‐ Inclusive listening & conversation -‐ also with undecided, independents or centrists; -‐ never consider Internet isolated from TV, radio, cinema, papers or face-‐to-‐ face communications; -‐it's worth investing money, time and other resources trying to force citizens to be rational, participative, involved, committed to public affairs, when there's a huge majority of citizens who are emotional, unengaged, and basically lazy with public affairs. -‐ People still have the power. -‐ FINAL: "don't be a joke" in your digital & real life, like @realDonaldTrump. You can make the difference. 6. Future trends: -‐ Polarized vs distributed communication; -‐ cooperation;


7



-‐ Leave behind the "structural only inside" tribes communication: Digital conversation: logos(why it's important for the public listening to us?9, ethos (credibility, reputation), pathos (emotion); -‐ Today's ego-‐narcissistic-‐showing off attitude vs future Utility & Value; -‐ All about communications is personal, digital tools will improve the contact and personal relations: nano-‐micro Communicating personal ; -‐ Big data is nothing without soul. -‐ Communication 24/7 vs slow-‐Communication 7. Some resources (in the prezi presentation).

Digital Utopia vs. Digital Cynicism, Barcelona, april 8th 2013

Education

Transcript of Digital Utopia vs. Digital Cynicism, Barcelona, april 8th 2013