From  mobiliza+on  to  consensus:    Innova&ng  cross-­‐media  services  to  organize  crowds  into    collabora&ve  communi&es  

Montathar  Faraon  

Mass  mobiliza&on  

•  Defini+on.  A  process  that  engages  and  mo&vates  a  wide  range  of  partners  and  allies  at  na&onal  and   local   levels   to   raise  awareness  of  and  demand  for   a   par&cular   development   objec&ve   through   face-­‐to-­‐face   dialogue  (Unicef).  

•  O7en  used  by:  –  Grassroots-­‐based  reac&ve  protests  (e.g.  Occupy)  

–  Revolu&onary  movements  (e.g.  Arab  Spring)  

•  Why?  –  Dissa&sfied  with  their  condi&ons  (e.g.  social,  economical,  poli&cal).  Not  a  new  

phenomenon,   people   have   been   angry   throughout   history   (e.g.   French  Revolu&on)  

•  Recent  examples:  –  Greece,  USA  (New  York),  UK  (London),  MENA,  Spain,  etc.  

•  Social  media  have  played  a  key  role  in  many  mass  mobiliza&on  efforts.  

•  But  what  comes  aRer  mobiliza&on?  

•  Given  a  collabora&ve  tool,  people  would  be  given  the  opportunity  to  mass  mobilize   and   elaborate   a   common   goal   using   social   media   and   online  collabora&ve  applica&ons.  

•  Social  media  as  alterna&ve  press  –  accessible  plaUorm  for  ci&zen   journa-­‐lism.  

•  Social  media  capabili&es:  –  Many-­‐to-­‐many  communica&on  

–  The  speed  which  informa&on  can  be  spread  

–  User-­‐generated  content  

Mass  mobiliza&on  by  social  media  

•  Social  media  have  shown  their  usefulness  of  means  of  mobiliza&on.  

•  Social  media  and  online  collabora&ve  applica&ons:  –  (1)   Social   media   allow   massive   mobiliza+on   through   online   networks   but  

there   is   not  much   to   support   the   collabora&on  of   the  mobilized   crowds   in   a  consensus-­‐seeking  manner.  

–  (2)   Online   collabora+ve   applica+ons   allow   for   collabora+on   but   lack   the  means  of  massive  mobiliza&on.    

–  (3)   Social  media  and  online   collabora&ve  applica&ons  generally   lack   features  and   func+onali+es   for   civic   engagement   in   society,   that   would   allow   their  u&liza&on  in  the  seeking  of  consensus  among  the  mobilized  community.  

•  =>  Integrated  plaIorm  for  ac+ve  boJom-­‐up  oriented  par+cipa+on.  –  Mobiliza&on  of  crowds  of  shared  interest  to  form  communi&es.  

–  Collabora&on  within  communi&es  for  consensus-­‐seeking  and  co-­‐crea&on.  

 

Organizing  crowds  into  collabora&ve  communi&es  

•  How  do  we  do  this?  

•  Design  a  process  and  a  medium  that  directs  the  efforts  of  the  mobilized  crowds  to  co-­‐crea&ve  democra&c  processes.  

–  Mobiliza&on  

–  Community  building  

–  Consensus-­‐seeking  

•  Adapta&on  of  exis&ng  social  media  (e.g.  Facebook  and  Twi^er)  and  online  collabora&ve  applica&ons  (e.g.  Google  Docs)  through  for  example  APIs  and  mashups.  

Platform for active bottom-up participation  

Design  concept  for  ac&ve  bo^om-­‐up  plaUorm  

•  Design  concept  

•  Mock-­‐up  –  An  experiment  possible  using  exis&ng  applica&ons.  

–  Mobilize  a  small  test  group  (to  the  street?)  with  SMS,  Twi^er.  

–  Elaborate  collabora&vely  a  shared  agenda  using  a  shared  Google  document.  

•  Target  group/personas  

•  Prototype  

•  Tes&ng  

•  Feedback  

•  Outcome?  

Broader methodological framing  

Missing  from  exis+ng  applica+ons:  

•  Scalability  to  large  mass  use.  

•  Integra&on  of  social  media  and  online  collabora&on  applica&ons.  

•  Adapta&on  for  purposes  of  democracy.  

•  Organiza&on  of  the  democra&c  decision-­‐making  flow  (e.g.  vo&ng).  

•  Management  of  disagreement.  

•  Dissemina&on  of  informa&on.  

•  Membership:  openness,  invita&ons.  

•  Security  issues  (e.g.  vo&ng)  

•  Usability.  

•  PlaUorm  choice  and  adapta&on.  

Challenges  

Prospec+ve  uses/users:  

•  Individuals  

•  NGOs  

Mechanisms  of  influencing:  

•  Visibility  in  mass  media  

•  Visibility  in  social  media  

•  Interfaces  with  government,  e.g.  ci&zen  ini&a&ves  

Risks  

•  Why  the  concept  might  not  work?  

Prerequisites  

•  Free  access  to  the  applica&ons  

•  Sufficient  skills  of  the  public  

•  Freedom  of  the  Internet  

Considerations  

Authors  

•  Montathar  Faraon  (montathar.faraon@sh.se)  

•  Victor  Villavicencio  (victor.v.osorio@gmail.com)  

•  Robert  Ramberg  (robban@dsv.su.se)  

•  Mauri  Kaipainen  (mauri.kaipainen@sh.se)  

Thank you for your attention!