According to the article, Crabtee stated a few points which hits the major ache of the politic in British. If politics were to compare with video games, its just like a process that requires a continuous action and reaction. There is a saying where if a gamer having a trouble, gamer will rather seek help from their game friends or so-called pro-gamer than the game designer and complain about how hard is the game. This brings a meaning where internet society works in a way where we would seek help from people which is closer to us than to a farer person. This is also what known as reciprocal online.
Another significant example would be, if you are hungry and while cooking instant mee,you found out that the packet did not provide you spice. The first thing that you do will probably call your mom and ask about the spice. However, its not your mom's fault for not putting in the spice but the manufacturer's fault. This is how society works,one will help each other within the society or group rather than find the origins for the matter. Instead of the government start to gather and provides help from the internet through government websites, it would be better if government provide alternatives for netizen to voice out through a forum or discussion group so that netizen would found some common interest within themselves and constribute to the politic.
Another point that hits the british government is that, e-democracy is still useless when user is not active in internet or not interest with your activity. As internet is a wide space for every single human, one will never ever try to google something which are not interested them, they don't even bother to type it out! Imagine that will you type wrestling when you're a nerd or just interest in girl's stuff. It would be meaningless if e-democracy apply when no user is interest about it.
In Crabtee's article, he mention about application which brings the meaning of a software/space that allows people from same interest gather together and opens up a discussion. The major problem now is there is no one starts to make these application which can change the whole society's perspective. This is known as civic hacking. The hacking here refers to software which is the application that able to change something within the society.
In a nutshell, government should first know where their citizen is, and provide them a space to connect and communicate so that government can lead them to support the e-democracy. It works as the club concept.When everyone start dancing in the pool,others will follow. The way to make them move,is simply provide the right music.
Hey there Chea! Thanks for posting on this reading! Gives me a different insight on hacking: Civic hacking.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I really like all the examples given. It relates to our everyday life! The instant noodle example really does bring out the point that as citizens, when we're in trouble and we can't turn to the State or the "big guys" to solve our problems (they just take too long), through the Internet, we can seek help from people who have been in such situation before. I suppose, you scratch my back, I scratch yours too? :)
Also I agree that if you're not into something, there's no point trying to change you ferociously. As I recall, the article relates this point to politics. I think this is one solid point. My father has been inching me towards politics for some time now, and maybe because I'm still young, I haven't developed an interest in politics.
So if politics were brought into the Internet as a new avenue to gage to audience, I still wouldn't venture into the path and liking politics. I might even just avoid it! But I do think that this might be applicable to some. It might draw somebody else's attention. But rather, on a big scale, I think it would take time for e-democracy to be fully utilized and appreciated by people. Step by step, slowly they'll get there.
I love your punchline, "It works as the club concept.When everyone start dancing in the pool,others will follow. The way to make them move,is simply provide the right music."
Get the right tool, then you'll get the right result. Propose the right question and then seek for the right solution. Accuracy wins.
Thanks for the post! Online reciprocity, e-democracy and civic hacking! Nicely done!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI like the way you structure your sentence with the example, easy to understand. For the first example, people seek help from friends rather than the creator or those professional peoples who involve in creating the game, as a game player, they seek challenge for the game, they will find the same level peoples to solve the problem out rather than looking for someone we don't know. So they started to discover the game..
ReplyDeleteThis is not stereotype, I realize video gamers can be friend easily,simply by just talking about the game, because of the common interest to bring them together in advance. They can seek help from the friend in cyber world.
For me, i personally think for e-democracy work in Malaysia, as we can see in social networking like Facebook. The result is quite obvious.
Hi Erene,
ReplyDeleteYour post is detailed. I like this point "e-democracy is still useless when user is not active in internet or not interest with your activity". I am an Internet active user and I am not interested on politic. However, sometime (only sometime), I would read politic news, check out politicians' social networking accounts but nothing to do with e-democracy. I would read news and their Twitters and it does not mean I really very care. I guess e-democracy would not be useful for me.
On the other hand, nowadays many people discuss politic through social networking sites, if the politician also participate their discussion, an informal e-democracy will form and they can discuss civic problem and come out with solution. Why not to do so? but how many politicians will really adapt to this trend and reach the citizen through Internet?