inicio mail me! sindicaci;ón

What’s it all about Alfie?

by Rob Paterson

In the 1960’s there was a breakthrough film for Michael Caine called Alfie. Alfie was a compulsive womanizer whose charm never seemed to fail. The film ends with him alone with only a dog for company. But the film is not about hot women and getting laid it is about loneliness and the need for love. I feel the same about a lot of the discourse about Social Software. We all love to trade tips about how cool this feature is or that one. But it is so easy to forget about what is it all about. What is the underlying question in our lives that Social Software may solve?

This is what I intend to explore on this site with you.

My own answer is this. Something is wrong with the institutions that we have grown to depend on.

In 1990, the literacy rate for whites in America was about 90%.

[photopress:literacyusfall.jpg,full,centered]

Today more than 50% of Americans can barely comprehend what they read. The school system says that if only they had more resources, they would be more successful. Today Cuba has better health outcomes than the US. Every month it seems there is a new scandal about side effects from drugs. Sicko is exposing how health insurance really works. Today food has never been cheaper. Farmers are broke, we face an obesity crisis and within 20 years much of our farmland will not be able to grow food. Gore Vidal has his new solar energy system shut down by his power company.

“[utility companies] have no intention for anyone to use solar power so long as there’s a drop of oil anywhere in the world.”

Much of New Orleans remains a ruin. The Telcos seek to control our access to the web – the US (13th in the world) has a pitiful broadband system compared with many other countries. America spends more on defense than all other countries in the world put together but is clearly not able to project its power effectively in Iraq or maybe anywhere. Hardly a week goes by when a senior corporate leader is not exposed for doing something immoral. In November 2008, the new President will have spent a billion dollars to win the election. Most of this money will have been spent on conventional media. When it takes a billion to become President – some people are going to have more influence than the poor old American Public.

What’s the problem? It seems that our institutions have turned inward and now serve only themselves.

There are great ideas out there that have the power to turn all of this around. We know that a local local direct food system will renew our food system. We know that if we put our resources behind parents of young kids that most of our learning, behavior and health problems would diminish, we know that if we invested in renewables and networks what we use to subsidize coal and oil that we could approach energy independence. We know that a military that saw its role in cultural terms could act with authority in a troubled world for a fraction of the cost.

The issue is not ideas. Every field has more than 20 years of great thinking ready to make a difference. The issue is power.

Like the Catholic Church in the 15th century, the institutions have the power to keep the ideas contained, the innovators cowed, co opted or crushed. The cost of our political system means that our representatives are owned by the interests that only serve themselves.

So what is to be done? How can we get our power back? I think the answer is that we need to remember what Luther did. He had a simple and appealing idea. You did not need to go to an institution to speak to God. We do not need many of these institutions either. We too can go direct. He circumvented the mass media of his time – the pulpit – and used the press to go direct and very cheaply. He made deal with key Princes who also wanted to be free of the costs of paying taxes to the Empire and to Rome. There are organizations like Google who don’t want to be in the pocket of the Telcos either.

Social Media is the key to all of this.

With it farmers connect to consumers – the village market is re-created. Kids learn what appeals to them from committed teachers like the old universities in Padua. Those of us with lifestyle issues such as weight, trauma etc help each other. Maybe we work with Google, Public radio and the universities to wire up around the Telcos?

Those with the ideas can break into the open and get the support they need. Successful projects can be amplified. Heroes applauded. Injustice and betrayal exposed.

I am a very fortunate person in that I have the honor to work with many who are trying to do just this. I plan to introduce you on these pages to some of the men and women who have taken up the broken sword of the king and begun the journey to find our own renaissance. For that is what followed Luther’s great break with the stifling institutions of his time.

We will meet people in media, food, learning, health, the military, science, finance, business and even politics. We will look at the great thinkers who have already found what is at the heart of much of our institutional failure. We will discover that most of them have the same underlying insight – that the problem is to be found in the nature of our relationships – that we have substituted kinetic or the use of power over emotion or the use of Trust.

The greatest paradox of all is that a new technology has the power to take us home away from machine relationships to being more human and more aligned to nature. So what Social Media is all about is remembering how to be human again.

Share and Enjoy:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Print this article!
  • TwitThis
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • Google
  • StumbleUpon
  • SphereIt


12 Comments »

Dave PollardJuly 17th, 2007 at 2:05 pm

Hi Rob: Excellent summary of social media’s lost potential, lost momentum and lost direction. The question will be, I think, whether we have the imagination and other capacities to use social media to be what we can be and do what we can do, despite our apparent lack of power, and some of the constraints of the media themselves.

I have just been reading the work of Gustavo Esteva, a colleague of Illich, who said that it is important that we free ourselves “from technologies and other obstacles” to true social interaction, communion, friendship, exchange. Some social media have actually been exploited to estrange us, separate us, give us an excuse not to spend time in conversations that are personal, intimate, collaborative, meaningful, and take the time to allow true communication and learning to occur.

I don’t blame technologies for this; it is what we do with them. Do we have what it takes to learn to use them properly, to help us be more human instead of simply more remote? I’m not sure.

Steve M.July 17th, 2007 at 2:08 pm

Rob – I could not agree more. This fundamental change is not only going to occur at the corporate level, but also at the level of the individual. The indvidual “average” american is so used to hearing these issues that you have brought up, but so few are used to being able to do something about it. Our cultural perception is going to need to change. It will change as these tools develop, but I find that many folks from all generations are just too used to “the way it is”.

That will change but not without some battles, especially as transparency spreads. The best part for me is that as change occurs the individual will have a much more profound effect than before. It is an exciting time!

Marc RigauxJuly 17th, 2007 at 2:23 pm

Simply brilliant.

Jon HusbandJuly 17th, 2007 at 5:14 pm

Very well done, Rob.

I’m guessing you know what I think .. and extrapolated forward, yes we are in for some very exciting times. As transparency spreads and more humans get more used to operating in this new environment, the pressures on the previous social architectures and established institutions can only grow.

Unless … governments and corporations act together to constrain and control, for example through denying / blocking net neutrality legislation. And if they do, it will at least be clear that it has happened and the critical mass will have (by and large quietly) acquiesced.

Jeremy ThomasJuly 18th, 2007 at 6:41 am

Rob – well put and very passionate. This is the first time I’ve heard the social computing revolution compared a “renaissance”, and I must say I like the analogy.

Rob PatersonJuly 18th, 2007 at 7:20 am

Thanks all of you
Rob

Michael ClarkeJuly 18th, 2007 at 9:27 am

I completely agree with this – and the other potential of Web 2.0 is to enable us to learn to listen to the polyphony of all voices, not just the privileged ones with the biggest megaphones.

Bill IvesJuly 19th, 2007 at 8:03 am

Your perspective is a wonderful addition to this conversation and I look froward to reading more. I have heard a bit about the work of the Digital Divide group – http://www.digitaldivide.org/dd/index.html – that you are likley quite aware of. They seem to be exploring similar ideas and actions.

Rob PatersonJuly 19th, 2007 at 8:10 am

Bill – I agree and its not only in other countries but at home – I posted today coincidentally about this when referring to PEI – http://smartpei.typepad.com/robert_patersons_weblog/2007/07/wireless-on-pei.html

Our government paid millions to our Pipe who did not do what they were asked to do – leaving the rural part of the Island cut off. Now a private group are going ahead instead

Dennis HowlettJuly 19th, 2007 at 6:36 pm

Social media is a silver bullet? It’s the answer to falling literacy? Can I have some of that dope you’re smoking please?

Rob PatersonJuly 20th, 2007 at 4:45 am

Dennis – I did not say that social media is a silver bullet nor did I say that it on its own has anything to do about literacy – I said that it enabled people to connect to each other in a more human way that the power over approach in the traditional institution.

I obviously have not been clear enough and I will use your comment to expand on my post

Thanks even though you are being I think a bit rude
Rob

JoshJuly 23rd, 2007 at 1:39 pm

A great read.

It’s unfortunate that the statistics about literacy makes it appear as though you have a racial bias.

Your conclusion is appealing and well-written.

Quoting you:
“We will discover that most of them have the same underlying insight – that the problem is to be found in the nature of our relationships – that we have substituted kinetic or the use of power over emotion or the use of Trust.”

That’s merely an effect, an emergent phenomenon. The real insight is to be found in the set of causes of this… Fiat money is one.

» Subscribe to the RSS feed for these comments

Your comment

Want an image to appear near your comment? Go to gravatar.com

HTML-Tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Additional comments powered by BackType