Notes from the 5th Internet, Law and Politics Conference: The Pros and Cons of Social Networking Sites, organized by the Open University of Catalonia, School of Law and Political Science, and held in Barcelona, Spain, on July 6th and 7th, 2009. More notes on this event: idp2009.
Politics Track Gather Up
Daithí Mac Sithigh
Two major questions today: what will we do? how will we stay safe?
Innovation come not by using specific technology or platforms but on the effective uses we put into them.
The safety issue seems not to be approachable by the Law alone, being self-regulation and self-commitment a good share of it, and collaboration and co-operation another good share of it.
In a time of crisis, the international community turns its attention to the Information Society
. But this is not about hardware, but about organizational change, institutional change. A major planning has to take place to deal with focal issues like e-commerce, network safety or e-Administration.
We’d do well to learn from sub-national or even local successes in open data initiatives, or data sharing initiatives. And what a different it makes to move from the “e-” Government to the “o-” Government.
And open data might be a necessary step to change not only government but also democracy and politics, to enable citizen participation and engagement.
We’re seeing times where political crisis and financial crisis is accompanied by a demand for transparency, openness, open data, etc. And it looks like broadly demanded political reforms could move towards this direction.
This is, for instance, how Politics 2.0 evolve from Politicians 2.0 towards Political Spaces 2.0.
Politics 2.0 can be presented as a virtuous circle, where everybody is part of that circle, and where the sense of “small” (as in a small issue) can have a brand new meaning (and not be small or irrelevant at all).
Will, hence, the unconventional ways of doing politics become the conventional or mainstream ones? Do we want that?
What is the right agenda? Does a creative use of public information (initially well intended) have bad consequences?
Next steps?
- W3C Access to Government interest group
- Pulic Services 2.0 declaration
- From “come back tomorrow” to “come back next year”?
- Social networks and social questions
More Information
- IDP2009: Day 2 Report (slides), Daithí Mac Sithigh’s slides of his presentation
- IDP2009: Written Report of Day 2, by Daithí Mac Sithigh
- El twitter del V Congrés d’IDP, Joan-Baptista Gavaldà i Moran’s compilation of all twitts tagged #idp2009
5th Internet, Law and Politics Conference (2009)
If you need to cite this article in a formal way (i.e. for bibliographical purposes) I dare suggest:
Peña-López, I. (2009) “5th Internet, Law and Politics Conference (VIII). Daithà Mac Sithigh: Politics Track Gather Up” In ICTlogy,
#70, July 2009. Barcelona: ICTlogy.
Retrieved month dd, yyyy from
https://ictlogy.net/review/?p=2431
Previous post: 5th Internet, Law and Politics Conference (VII). Political participation and Social Networking Sites
Next post: Digital Divide and e-Participation: a bibliography
2 Comments to “5th Internet, Law and Politics Conference (VIII). Daithà Mac Sithigh: Politics Track Gather Up” »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI
DaithÃ’s The wrapping-up was great, as it was the first day.
Just one thing: I believe the transition that Donaire was referring to was not from “Politics 2.0”, but from “Politicians 2.0” — you know, politicians using Twitter and so on.
The ppt was in Catalan, and it said “PolÃtics 2.0”. The tricky translation point is that “PolÃtics” is Catalan for “Politicians” not for “Politics”. Catalan for Politics is “PolÃtica” :)
Miquel
Miquel, that might be in part my fault too.
I rephrased it from “how Politics 2.0 can shift towards Political Spaces 2.0” to “how Politics 2.0 evolve from Politicians 2.0 towards Political Spaces 2.0” which, as you say, is what José Antonio Donaire was meaning.