Subverting democratic process for democracy: video republic

One of the challenges of 4iP is to create some projects that help us all get more direct democracy than current 'democratic' systems afford. Apparently we needn't try too hard: YouTube's doing it already.

The systems have been unable to change quickly enough (or at all) beyond the 'safe' model that encourages elites to represent us (as Billy Connolly has said: anyone who wants to be a politician should, as a consequence, never be allowed to become one). Social media means we don't have to continue down the path of this elite choosing which issues are important enough to take on; we can use the wisdom of the crowd to filter and prioritise issues, and even get around to sorting some of those out amongst themselves.

The new fascinating read from Demos on the "Video Republic" shows just how far YouTube and other video sites have gone in opening up alternative democratic routes for youngsters. And, true to form, there's a YouTube video explaining this, too.

John Connell picked the item up from this parish's online bookmarks and has speedily summarised the main issues, all of which touch on areas that still require development, though, or just cogniscence by those in positions of power to do something about it. Basically: there's more to be gained from us all, foot soldiers and political or decision-making elites, harnessing the power that online video has unleashed:

• Preparing young people for ‘digital citizenship’
• Liberating the audiovisual creative commons
• Broadcasters, both public and private, should release the audio-visual material gathering dust in their archives rather than ensnaring it in complex and expensive digital rights disputes.
• A digital copyright amnesty:
  There are some categories of older public service broadcast material that could be afforded Creative Commons status. This process could be encouraged by a digital rights amnesty where copyright holders relinquish ownership to the public.
• Tackling unsuitable content:
  Rather than looking to censor online content – which has been shown to be ineffective - regulation should be based on developing peer or community led censorship and age ratings. Video-hosting platforms should enable involve users in what content to include and exclude on their sites.
• Internet social responsibility
• ISPs, video-hosting services and social networking sites should pool a small portion of their profits into a foundation to support video making, widen internet access.
• A ‘virtual video-making academy’ funded by the private sector would improve the quality of videos on and offline.
• Setting the statistics free:
  Most important information about online activity still remains out of reach of the public. Video-sharing platforms should collaborate with bodies such as national statistics agencies and academic institutions to release statistics.
• Connecting the ‘republic’ with mainstream politics:
  Political figures need to avoid using online video to communicate in the same way that they would use television. Instead they should find innovative ways of harnessing the enthusiasm of their supporters.
• Official bodies like the Central Office of Information should initiate the creation of short videos that detail the processes of democracy, decision making and public service in the UK.

All of these could be met with "it's easier said than done"; it would be rather cool for 4iP to just do it rather than talking about it.

Comments

[Alan Coady]

Interesting! Interesting also to note Christina Lamb say on this morning's "Start The Week" that, since embracing technology,
the Taliban are easier to communicate with than NATO whose protocols and systems slow everything down.

[Joe Nutt]

Just one comment, amongst very many which I could make of Demos's naive piece of video agitprop. One of the most dominant messages it offers is this: "I am whatever I say I am." How can anyone responsible for teaching other people's children, approve of that either as a philosophy or a practice in a digital context?

[Ewan McIntosh]

Well, Joe, show us RM's video retort. What is RM saying it is in this medium? The fact is not that Demos or teachers approve of this as a statement of fact. It's simply a statement of fact. Go speak to young people, or better still, avoid them saying what they think you want them to say by looking at what they produce, and you'll see that most young people's self-presentation online is what they are within the context of themselves and their friend group.

An important point here is that the audience does not generally include you, me, their teachers or RM.

Therefore, if we want to change what we see online, it's down to more than 'approving' of it, which in itself comes over more Jean Brodie than 21st century learning.

[Joe Nutt]

I think you missed my point Ewan, but in doing so demonstrated perfectly what I find genuinely so worrying about techno-zealotry, and I promise you this is not a personal attack, it is a very well thought out criticism of many vocal people in the field, developed over years of working, researching and writing in it myself. The huge, bold lettered flashing text, “I am whatever I say I am” that figures so strongly in the Demos video, is not an innocent, guileless fact at all, but a powerful message, articulated very cleverly, consciously and professionally. As all film theorists know, the camera always lies because the moment you select something to capture in the viewfinder, you are making a decision which says something about you and your intent. This is as true of landscape photography as it is of the other end of the scale, an agitprop film of the Demos kind, whose whole purpose is to modify or influence the behaviour of its audience. That’s why Demos exist, it’s their entire raison d’être. They are a Thinktank!

Unlike Demos, I’m not in the business of producing agitprop. I’d be very happy to show you the video material we do produce, which has a very precise commercial purpose and judging by customers’ responses, is of a very high quality educationally. One of the most significant features of online activity, as I’m sure you know from your reading of the research, is the extremely high level of deceit and fraudulent behaviours, users exhibit. Second Life has created an entire business out of this fact. So my question was really very simple. Given that fact, do you think it’s educationally the right thing to do, to encourage teenagers to lie about themselves online? Which is, I’m afraid, what the Demos video encourages them to do.

[Ewan McIntosh]

Thanks for expanding on that, and apologies if what I'm writing came over as OTT. However, it's worth reading some of danah boyd's fairly comprehensive research into 'false' personas online. Children and young people are not lying, and her necessarily complex explanation of why this is true will more eloquently explain why so. While I root out the actual article, here's what she said yesterday on the topic:
http://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/2008/10/danah-boyd-on-h.html

[Ewan McIntosh]

And the paper that explains it all...

http://www.danah.org/papers/WhyYouthHeart.pdf

[Joe Nutt]

Ewan,
Much appreciated, I will read and digest.
Joe

[Jamie Buchanan-Dunlop]

It's an interesting area. I think that youth disenchantment with mainstream media is a good starting point. It is not disenchantment with the media, but more the commentators that is the problem. The young people, whom I have had the pleasure of teaching, are more likely to value the views of a peer rather than a politician.

We started to address this issue with the two Offscreen Expeditions (www.offscreened.com/expedition/2007 and www.offscreened.com/expedition/2008) by providing a platform for young people from the UK to visit the Middle East and speak to their peers about their experiences in online video as well as through art, photos and the written word. We brought young Middle Eastern pupils to the UK this year.

Yes, those views were still edited and mediated by the expedition leaders but feedback from pupils was that they felt they were gaining a better insight into another part of the world than from traditional media sources.

The current citizenship curriculum in England should provide pupils with the skills and values needed to investigate the world and become involved. Technology then becomes an enabler for communication between different parties, a motivator as it's oftern fun and an oppportinity to involve wider audiences.

I think that video is not as exciting as mapping as a tool for active citizenship. Of course digital maps can contain video, but maps provide a template for investigating issues and laying out the plans to solve them.

I have rambled more about this at: http://digitalexplorer.co.uk/2008/10/12/the-geo-web-next-steps/

Maybe it's time for another coffee?!

[Alan Parkinson]

That's a very interesting comment Jamie, with lots of avenues to explore. I think as well as Citizenship, we should be placing Geography at the forefront of subjects which provide pupils with the "skills and values needed to investigate the world and become involved.." Interesting times for geography education if we get the educators/gatekeepers interested in developing these skills.