Mobile Technology will Be Key In The Next Race To The White House

Barely six months into the new presidency and political strategists are already planning ahead for the 2012 elections. The 2008 elections saw technology and the Internet catapult a fairly unknown senator into the limelight  — and into the Oval Office.

“The game-changer in the Obama campaign…was that technology was not an add-on: It represented a carefully considered element of almost every critical campaign function,” says EchoDitto’s Michael Silberman.

According to an article on politicsmagazine.com, new technologies by 2012 will only serve to level the playing field, regardless of the candidate’s resources.

“The availability of low-cost video devices, video websites with social networking features and even mobile devices with one-button upload capabilities will allow voters more engagement. Campaigns will have the capacity to act or react, respond, pinpoint and address the questions that specific voters care most about.”

While sophisticated technology and innovative social media tools will be pivotal to the next elections, advanced mobile technology will probably have the most significant impact on the race to the White House.

The tech-savvy Obama team used mobile technology extensively during the 2008 elections — from iPhone applications to geo-targeted text messages — to connect with voters. However, technological advancements in mobile technology will completely revolutionize political campaigning in the future. Smart phones will get cheaper and more sophisticated. Like Moore’s law suggests: Computation gets twice as fast and half as cheap every two years. Mobile networks and platforms, too, will be more robust and cost-effective.

Mobile giving —  donations through cellphones, now restricted mainly to charitable organizations — may become an integral fundraising tool  for the next elections. Mobile phone owners may even be able to use their handsets to cast votes within the next few years.  Recruiting volunteers, organizing rallies and monitoring elections through mobile services will not be uncommon, too.

Digital content, social networks in particular, will increasingly be accessed — and distributed — through mobile devices. eMarketer forecasts that over 800 million people worldwide will be participating in a social network via their mobile phones by 2012, up from 82 million in 2007 — allowing users to actively engage with digital content.

Accessibility, speed and cost-effective mobile technology will equip the common man with tools to influence opinion — and drive change in the 2012 presidential race.

As Jonathan Spalter, Chairman of Mobile Future, puts it:

“Anyone involved in political organizing should look at the growth of mobile communication as the next Holy Grail of American and grassroots advocacy.”

Amen.

The Changing Face of War

If the ongoing conflict in Gaza is anything to go by, it’s clear that the definition of war has changed.

The battle grounds have shifted — and moved online. This time with new frontiers and shinier weapons.

Social media tools like Facebook and Twitter are increasingly being used to express political views and rally support, while Second Life is the new gathering ground to protest attacks.

Israeli human rights group Gisha chose animation to raise consciousness about the difficulties facing Gazans who remain confined to the territory.

Last year, the Israeli military started its own YouTube channel to distribute footage of precision air strikes, while the Israeli consulate in New York hosted a press conference on Twitter to respond to questions from the public about Gaza.

But tweeting, according to a blog post on Wired, is passé.

“The latest social media advance combines tools like Twitter, text messaging, and online mapping to gather up first-hand reports, straight from Gaza. The effort, from Al Jazeera Labs, just got started; the reporting is still spotty, and the technology is very much in the testing phase. But the idea is for residents of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank to send quick updates about the conflict from their computers or mobile phones, through SMS or Twitter. The results are then verified, and posted to a Microsoft Virtual Earth map.”

Technology and the Internet have completely changed the face of this rapidly evolving “war of words.”

David Saranga, the head of media relations for the Israeli consulate, in New York says:

“Since the definition of war has changed, the definition of public diplomacy has to change as well.”

Public diplomacy or propaganda? You decide.

Surfing Singapore

As a sailor’s daughter, I had often heard colorful stories about Singapore — it has one of the world’s busiest ports. It is also a major international financial hub of the Far East. A lucrative business and tourist destination, the country — slightly more than 3.5 times the size of Washington, DC — has beckoned to me on more than one occasion.

I decided to track the pulse of the country — from 9,664 miles away — and there was no better place to find it than explore its blogosphere. I used  Global Voices Online, an international blog aggregation community, as my map to this foreign world.

Reading the blogs featured on Global Voices Online, it quickly became evident that the overarching topic was the downward spiraling economy and rising unemployment numbers. Bloggers offered opinions on everything from the social impact of the financial crisis to survival tips to cope with the global downturn.

One blogger writes:

“The recession contradicts Singapore’s reputation as a “safe haven” for global investors. In recent weeks, Singapore’s economic fundamentals have been exposed to be less than solid: inflation has worsened and income gap is rising. Job losses will affect Singapore’s migrant workers.”

Another blogger talks about unemployed foreign investment bankers flocking to Singapore — and driving their salaries down.

It was evident. The economy had not spared Singapore either. In fact, it was one of the first Asian countries to be hit. Exploring the international blogosphere does serve as an effective eye opener.

Take a look at some of the most talked-about topics on Singapore’s blogosphere. The size of the words indicate the frequency with which they are mentioned.

While most of the featured blogs discussed the recession, the Singapore blogosphere also revealed some very interesting — and varied — posts. One post discusses concerns about media owners using the Copyright Act to selectively strangle and silence the Singapore blogosphere. Another blogger shares her views on how the Merlion, Singapore’s national icon, has been desecrated over the years. One particularly irked blogger writes about why Singapore cannot succeed in the Arts just yet.

Surfing the country’s internet waves was not only fascinating but extremely informative as well. I learned that Singapore was ranked the 10th most expensive city in the world and it was also credited with being the most the most wired country in the world.

There is a treasure trove of information out there and thanks to the bridge bloggers I found on my sojourn, I will definitely be tapping into the international blogosphere more often.

As for migrating to Singapore? I think I’ll wait the recession out.

Wandering Wikipedia

Well, I’ll admit it. Editing a Wikipedia entry is not my favorite job. Figuring out how to edit a Wikipedia entry was relatively easy. Making the edits was difficult. Acutely aware of not trying to offend any Wikipedia-obsessed editors who were ‘watching’ the page I was editing, I made the changes I thought were required. I was careful to provide sufficient references, cite credible sources and ensure that I was adding useful information.

Satisfied with my changes, I hit save and waited for the bloodbath to begin. As a first-time Wikipedia editor, I had been warned: the seasoned Wiki editors were ruthless.  To be fair, Wikipedia does warn you:

“If you don’t want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it.”

Five minutes later. Intact. Maybe the ‘wiki warriors’ were busy.

A few hours later. Untouched.

The next day. Miracle. It’s all still there.

Maybe they still hadn’t found my page.  Or maybe, I had managed to please the Wikipedia Gods.

Calling The Oval Office

A direct line to the Oval Office? Apparently, it’s possible.

Keeping his promise of running an open and more responsive White House, President Obama on Tuesday invited the public to use a new feature on WhiteHouse.gov called ‘Open for Questions’ to ask him economy-related questions and vote on other submitted questions.

“We’re going to take advantage of the Internet to to bring all of you to the White House to talk about the economy,” says President Obama in a video, now available on You Tube. On March 26, in a special “community-moderated online town hall,” the president will answer “some of the most popular questions.” The event will also be streamed live on on WhiteHouse.gov.

It will be interesting to watch the President and his new media team attempt to follow through on their promises of a more wired White House.

Jose Antonio Vargas of the Washington Post says: “Expect a herd of organized (and unorganized) Web users to stampede WhiteHouse.gov and make it a highly trafficked political hub over the next 48 hours.”

At the time of writing this post, 8,664 people had submitted 9,387 questions and cast 322,284 votes. The most popular question so far?

“As a student, who like so many others works full time and attends school full time, only to break even at the end of the month. What is the government doing to make higher education more affordable for lower and middle class families?

— James, Bloomington, Indiana

According to Techcrunch, the White House will use Google Moderator to determine which questions President Obama should answer on Thursday.

While the “experiment” is definitely a welcome move towards transparency and accountability, it does raise concerns about how questions will finally be selected and the possibility that this kind of voting system may allow the weakest questions to  rise to the top.

There’s no doubt, however, if used effectively, this is a great way to engage the online community.  This is an opportunity for us to ask some tough and relevant questions.

Let’s hope we get more than just old boilerplate in return.

Wikipedia: Trust But Verify?

I admit. Wikipedia is usually my first stop when I’m looking for information. The fact that its entries are often also the first result in a Google search may also have something to do with it. But let me add that it never serves as my main or only source of information. Wikipedia is an incredibly large repository of information and can help as a roadmap for any research.

I use Wikipedia more for background research and basic information than as a source or to verify facts. What I like about Wikipedia is that it sometimes leads me to a wealth of new information — and more reliable and authoritative sources.

There is definitely value in the collective knowledge, power and wisdom of the community. However, the fact that the Wikipedia entries can be edited by anyone – and is often misused by vandals and trolls – does warrant some caution. Tools like WikiTrust and Wikidashboard help in increasing transparency and evaluating the trustworthiness of entries on Wikipedia.

While the information on encyclopedias like Britannica – vetted and reviewed by industry experts – may seem more credible, Wikipedia’s strengths include timeliness and a much more comprehensive coverage.

Interestingly, in a move towards increased transparency, openness — and web traffic, Britannica, primarily a paid service, is now tapping the power of the community by letting users contribute and edit content. Wikipedia, on the other hand, is tightening the reins on its user-generated content and may introduce ‘flagged revisions‘ to ensure greater accuracy for its users. It will be interesting to watch how these changes play out in the battle between Wikipedia and Britannica.

While it is not without faults, Wikipedia enjoys immense popularity because it successfully harnesses collective intelligence.

Like James Surowiecki says in the Wisdom of Crowds:

“The idea of the wisdom of the crowds is not that a group will always give you the right answer but that on average it will consistently come up with a better answer than any individual will provide.”

First Impressions Of A Second Life

I was going to do it. I was ready to take the plunge. Hell, I could use a break from my first life.

So I did.

Meet Desdemona Breen. My virtual counterpart who timidly ventured into the ever-evolving world of Second Life, unsure of what — or who — to expect.

My first feeling in Second Life was that of complete disorientation. After crashing into random billboards, walking through other avatars, (creepy!) and running into pretty much everything that came my way, I decided to, ahem, fly.

That was fun until I got lost over the ocean. That’s when Princess Zena-lookalike  came to my rescue and offered to ‘teleport’ me. I gleefully accepted her invitation only to find myself in what I can only describe as the seedy alleys of Second Life.

Several panic attacks and three teleportations later, I was relieved to find myself on the mainland again – thanks to a very helpful Olivier (who also threw in a lesson on how to teleport myself!). I decided I was not taking any chances of getting teleported by ‘helpful’ strangers and began looking for my own destinations.

Call me a geek, but I typed in ‘Apple’ in the nifty search bar and teleported myself to the unofficial Apple Store. It was eerily similar to the real thing. I looked around at the rainbow-colored nanos, sat at the genius bar and even browsed through the mac books! It was unreal. I can see why companies might want to invest in building a presence on Second Life. It’s a cool way of letting customers browse through your products just like they might do in the real world.

Realizing — much like in my first life — that I could not afford any of the Apple products, I began exploring some of the other islands on Second Life. I searched for CNN‘s island.

Just as CNN asks its real-life audience to submit I-Reports, its Second Life counterpart encourages residents to share their own “SL I-Reports about events occurring within the virtual world.”

CNN’s in-world I-Report hub includes a news desk where CNN producers hold weekly editorial discussions, and an amphitheater for larger in-world events, such as training sessions and appearances by CNN anchors and correspondents.

It was fun to look around, sit at the the news desk, browse the kiosks and fly around the island looking for other SL I-reporters. It was all very fascinating but I didn’t really know what to do with myself. I suddenly missed those annoying online customer reps that pop up to ask if you need help. In Second Life, you’re at the mercy of strangers.

I decided I had enough of navigating the shadowy corners of the virtual world for a day. I graciously excused myself from the island and typed a polite goodbye in my ‘local chat’ window.

I doubt anyone noticed. My first life was beginning to seem a lot more appealing.

While my first experience in Second Life swung from being creepy to boring to completely overwhelming, I won’t write it off just yet.

Perhaps when I’m feeling brave enough, I might venture out again.

This time, can someone please teleport me to freebie land?

From Hits to Niches

“Route 7. Gas station near Baron Cameron. Stashed behind auto supplies. Released 10 minutes ago.”

I glance, gleefully, at the e-mail revealing the location of the hideout, making sure I had all the details before rushing out the door – and into my car.

Thirty minutes later, I have my very own copy of Harper Lee‘s ‘To Kill a Mockingbird,’ and I return home – a happy bookcrosser.

Thanks to the Internet, a group of about 750,000-odd people across 130 countries has found a way to combine their passion for books and the need for adventure in a unique way.

Bookcrossing.com is a book-sharing Web site that encourages readers to leave their finished books in a public place, log it as a release on the Web Site and track its journey around the block — or across the globe.

As I read Chris Anderson explain in The Long Tail how our economy and culture is shifting from mass markets to million of niches, I think about Bookcrossing and its small, niche community. It is a virtual lending library that would probably not exist in the the pre-web era. It got me thinking about some of my other hobbies and how much I depend on the Internet to feed my interests.

Listen to a forgotten melody? ITunes

Give away an old sofa? Freecycle

Scavenge books? Bookcrossing

Rent an obscure international film? Netflix

My choices were not always mainstream. They didn’t always hold mass appeal. And they were certainly not limited to the tight confines of a retail shelf.

It was then that I realized that without knowing it, I had been spending most of my time out on the Long Tail. In fact, I was the Long Tail.

Anderson was right.

“Unlimited selection is revealing truths about what consumers want and how they want to get it in service after service… People are going deep into the catalog, down the long, long list of available titles, far past what’s available at Blockbuster Video, Tower Records, and Barnes & Noble. And the more they find, the more they like. As they wander further from the beaten path, they discover their taste is not as mainstream as they thought (or as they had been led to believe by marketing, a lack of alternatives, and a hit-driven culture.”

Perhaps this is why Starbucks has 19,000 variations of coffee, ITunes offers nearly forty times as much selection as Wal-Mart and Amazon has forty times as many books as Borders.

Because I am uniquely me. I want alternatives. And I know where to find them.

Who controls my information?

If there was ever any doubt about whether the social web should have its own Bill of Rights, the recent Facebook fiasco certainly took care of that. After being harshly criticized for slipping in changes to their original Terms of Service, Facebook finally gave in (for now) and has reverted to its original terms.

Here’s what happened soon after Facebook altered their Terms of Service:

• Public uproar grew and the blogosphere was abuzz with users lashing out against the loss of control over their personal information.
• More than 73,000 people joined the group “People against the new terms of service,” which, along with several other user groups on Facebook, protested the new change.
• The Electronic Privacy Information Center was set to file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission about Facebook’s Terms of Service, according to PC World.

Taken aback with the online rebellion, Facebook – in an effort to dispel concerns about who owns user data –  did an about turn and reverted to its original Terms of Service late Tuesday, stating that it would come back with a “substantial revision.”

Facebook‘s CEO Mark Zuckerberg also said that this time around, “Facebook users will have a lot of input in crafting these terms.” The company also set up a group for its “Bill Of Rights,” where people will be able to provide feedback on the Terms of Service changes. While this may (temporarily) give back users their sense of control, Facebook needs to be more transparent about privacy and ownership.

It’s interesting to note that these issues of privacy, control and freedom were addressed in the Bill of Rights for the social web, created by Joseph Smarr, Marc Canter, Robert Scoble, and Michael Arrington two years ago. The document asserts that users of the social web are entitled to certain fundamental rights:

• Ownership of their own personal information
• Control of whether and how such personal information is shared with others
• Freedom to grant persistent access to their personal information to trusted external sites

While a universally accepted Bill of Rights sounds good in theory, putting it in practice is still a long shot. However, we are now seeing variations of it slowly being put into practice.

For me, the recent debacle proved two things:

1. The power of the community. This, according to Clay Shirky, is what happens  “when people are given the tools to do things together, without needing traditional organizational structures.”
2. There is no question that, now more than ever,  people are aware of their privacy and digital rights – and will not hesitate to demand those rights. The Bill of Rights may not be the solution but it definitely is a step in the right direction.

So, while it may be a little early to celebrate Facebook’s reversal to its original Terms of Service, we can be sure that should Facebook, or any social network, decide to abuse its user’s content, the community will be quick to bring them to task.

Like Michael Dortch, an independent IT analyst says: “While Facebook has the right to publish its users’ private information, you can bet that any hopes of remaining a viable business would disappear within minutes to hours after the company decided to do so without the permission of those users.”

That’s right. The people are watching. And they are not afraid to speak.

Help! Google is reading my mind…

Back in May 2007, when Google’s chief executive Eric Schmidt said “The goal is to enable Google users to be able to ask  questions such as ‘What shall I do tomorrow?’ and ‘What job shall I take?’ people freaked out. The very idea was scary.  They didn’t want Google having that kind of control over their lives.

But that got me thinking. Wasn’t this the plan all along? John Battelle had talked about it extensively only his blog, referring to is as the ‘database of intentions’ — four years before Schmidt made that statement. The collective history of Web searches, according to Battelle, was:

“a place holder for the intentions of humankind — a massive database of desires, needs, wants, and likes that can be discovered, subpoenaed, archived, tracked, and exploited to all sorts of ends. Such a beast has never before existed in the history of culture, but is almost guaranteed to grow exponentially from this day forward. This artifact can tell us extraordinary things about who we are and what we want as a culture. And it has the potential to be abused in equally extraordinary fashion.”

He had been right.

Google, slowly but steadily, had begun working on predicting the future.

So at what point did this seemingly absurd idea become something uncomfortably real?

Google had tiptoed into our lives and seamlessly integrated itself with our daily routine. Almost our confidante, we give up personal information without a thought to how it may be used in the future. Like the way we volunteer to let Google use our web histories while using iGoogle. Ever wonder how those camera ads miraculously appear on Gmail minutes after you send an e-mail to your friend announcing your intentions to to buy one?

Like David Weinberger says:“There is an inverse relationship between trust and control.” The more we trust Google with our information, the less control we have over how they decide to use it. Imagine what hungry marketers – eager for a glimpse into the consumer’s mind – will  give to glean this kind of information from Google.

“It’s the connection to marketing that turns the database of intentions from a curiosity into a real economic phenomenon.,” writes David Leonhardt in an NY Times article. And that’s where things can get ugly.

The question is: Will Google give in?

If only there was a search for that…