Comments on: Internet, Democratization & Prosocial Change: I Could Really Use Your Help

By: Open Thinking & Digital Pedagogy » Understanding Digital Citizenship

Open Thinking & Digital Pedagogy » Understanding Digital Citizenship — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 02:39:09 +0000

[...] Facebook-like Petitions: A while back I asked a few questions about the Internet and prosocial change. I received many excellent responses (Dave Cormier’s for example) but one that has stuck in [...]

By: D'Arcy Norman

D'Arcy Norman — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 20:56:11 +0000

As pointed out by Heather and Brian, democracy is only useful or even desirable if it’s actually exercised effectively by the citizens. We have theoretical democracies here in North America, with a surprisingly high fraction of the population opting not to participate. The internet provides some of the means for every individual to participate as an effective and valued contributor and producer (not just a consumer) of media, but without some radical shifts in how people perceive media, all the technical democratic tools in the world are useless. Or worse – they’ll be picked up by only those who are comfortable with them, and we wind up with a giant echo chamber where we are all preaching to the converted while the vast majority are unaffected. In this case, it is only the perception of democracy, and not a true democracy in any real sense. Technocracy, oligarchy. The real power of the internet is that it is the first platform that offers to effectively harness anarchy – not a lack of order, but order directed at, by and for the individual.

By: Don Dietrich

Don Dietrich — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:45:44 +0000

I believe there is a huge potential for democratization via the web, and in our country at least, that there will continue to be a trend in that direction. Given that younger people are increasingly getting their information via non-traditional media (they watch newscasts and read papers less and less) there is much potential for improved information flow and hopefully, increased democracy as a result.

Forces operating against this trend include at least some attempts by commercial interests to influence and assert control over Web 2.0, especially via the insertion of advertising into such sites). Such interests have HUGE resources at their disposal and, in my pessimistic moments, I feel they are gaining the upper hand.

Still, I don’t believe commercial interests will prevail. I find hope in the fact that issues like the environment keep returning to the top of the agenda, despite all the crises that pull our attentions in other directions.

By: Classroom 2.0 with Clarence Fisher « Vero’s Weblog

Classroom 2.0 with Clarence Fisher « Vero’s Weblog — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:24:36 +0000

[...] know understand all these tools because of what my prof, Alec Couros, is teaching us in ECMP 355 at the University of [...]

By: Dean Shareski

Dean Shareski — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:09:50 +0000

This is why I resist joining into these conversations….I’m out of my league.

By: Alec

Alec — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:45:38 +0000

Stephen, as you probably guessed, the term wasn’t mine, it was one given to me to discuss. My assumption is that it means a condition where altruistic responses to human problems are normalized and that people are supporting one another for reasons other than perceived, reciprocal gain. Combined, these acts and processes serve to “create a better world” (there’s that argumentative phrase, efforts focused toward people that are marginalized and/or powerless. I’ve heard the term quite a bit lately, usually paired with social justice, another term I believe to be problematic (and it seems Dave agrees).

However, please don’t l et the semantics deter you from the conversation, Stephen. I’d really love to hear from you, even it is to only debate issues of terminology. I think you could contribute much here.

By: dave cormier

dave cormier — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:03:53 +0000

Hey Stephen,

Yeah… i wondered about that too and decided to dodge the issue because I can’t imagine an answer that anyone would be happy with. Once you begin to debate the meaning of ’social justice’ or ‘pro’ social change things are going to get bogged down.
Henry Drummond: I don’t swear for the hell of it. Language is a poor enough means of communication. We’ve got to use all the words we’ve got. Besides, there are damn few words anybody understands.

By: Stephen Downes

Stephen Downes — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:08:15 +0000

Can you say what you mean by “prosocial change”?

I understand “social change” but ‘prosocial change” seems to mean something very specific. A Google search on the term wasn’t helpful – your question and responses dominated the results.

By: Internet –> democratizing agent? tool for prosocial change? | Dave’s Educational Blog

Fri, 02 Nov 2007 03:14:57 +0000

[...] Hey folks… have spent most of my writing time the last couple of weeks trying to remember how to write an academic paper… but am back here responding to a call from the network. Alec Couros, who I’ve never had the pleasure of meeting but have spent much more time following lately, has sent out two questions to the community. [...]

By: Dean Shareski

Dean Shareski — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 02:10:07 +0000

While we’re not there yet and there are many concerns regarding a digital divide, there are many examples of it indeed leading social change. My favourite examples include:

The Water Buffalo Movie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_am82KhI-c

We are not afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com/

I think ultimately the internet while may not bring democracy at world levels since really people are people and we’ll always see good and bad but I’m more inclined as an educator to point out the positive. After all, that’s my job.