Showing posts with label Networking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Networking. Show all posts

20 April 2009

Keith Joseph : Communication on the Left Must Embrace the New Technology

Hawker sells the Revolutionary Woker at a 2003 New York anti-war protest. Photo from asparagirl's photoblog.

Newspaper Hawkers, Websites, and Plans for Revolutionary Organization

By Keith Joseph / The Rag Blog / April 20, 2009

One of the great curiosities of the revolutionary left is the newspaper hawker. At every protest, at every progressive gathering, at every radical conference they appear. Trotskyites outside (they are never invited inside -- apparently they have no manners) with insufferable papers like “The Workers Vanguard,” or “The Militant.” Inside old “new left” Maoists, and their unwitting youthful acolytes, push the latest edition of the “Revolutionary Worker” with insights from their maximum leader. To sell these papers you must be disciplined, you need guts, and a tolerance for abuse—most of the people who you try to sell the paper to refuse it. You must be prepared to hear “no.” I can explain this curiosity—the newspaper hawker and their newspaper -- because I was once a newspaper hawker myself.

The newspaper, that marvel of 19th century communication technology, which is today breathing its last gasps under the weight of an unprecedented revolution in communications technology, somehow remains the preferred vehicle for the communication of revolutionary news and analysis by all manner of Marxian sects. Why? Because in an important little essay entitled: “Where to Begin,” and in a follow up pamphlet called: “What is to be done,” V.I. Lenin said a newspaper was necessary to unite the revolutionaries and to organize the impending insurrection. Our modern revolutionaries read Lenin’s essay like a cookbook recipe -- what is to be done? Just add water. Lenin’s plan was brilliant in 1901 and we have much to learn from it, but only if we update the plan for the twenty-first century.

First and foremost newspapers are no longer cutting edge communications technology. Secondly, the new technology, most notably the internet, cannot be considered in isolation from new forms of social organization and social space it makes possible. The newspaper and the vanguard party built in the course of writing, editing, publishing, and distributing that newspaper are organizational, communicative, and cultural forms that correspond to one another, and the level of development of the productive forces. In other words, newspapers and top down vanguard parties go together –- but they are completely out-dated forms. So, while plenty of people still read newspapers, we should not use them as organizing tools. To use them today is like using a typewriter instead of word processing, or a television with rabbit ears instead of cable.

Lenin showed -- in Where to Begin? and in What is to be done? -- that political organization is built around communication technology. He insists that the newspaper is a “collective organizer.” The newspaper, according to Lenin, is supposed to do much more than report the news -- the paper is supposed to be a place for revolutionaries to communicate with one another, to explain their practice to one another, to share experiences, and resources, to debate and argue out ideas and analysis -- and in this process revolutionary unity is built, revolutionary culture is developed, revolutionary practice begins to become coordinated, and revolutionary organization is built. Most of the sects use their newspaper as self-promotion, they rarely have open discussions and certainly never discuss their practice in a serious way so that it can be critiqued and improved upon. They are more interested in maintaining their little sects as small businesses that can fund the careers of a few so-called leaders.

How can we put Lenin’s plan into effect with modern communication technology and organizational forms? Lenin called for a single newspaper to unite all the small local groups. Today we have a similar problem. We have numerous small local groups and numerous single issue organizations but no way of coordinating activity and experiences while remaining democratic and retaining bottom up structures. We need to learn to use the web as a collective organizer.

Just as the vanguard party and newspaper go together the internet and radical democracy go together. Before the internet organizational democracy was more of an ethical principle than a vital necessity. Before the internet democracy was a drag on expediency, but with the new communication technology openness and democracy are not just principles they are necessities. Openness and democracy are expedients. If we are to build the movement and organization to transform this society we need the unrestrained and self-directed energy and creativity of the majority of people.

The Obama presidential campaign pointed to the possibilities of the internet. Lincoln was a master of newspaper, FDR was the master of the radio, John Kennedy was the first to master television, and Obama was the first politician to use the internet effectively. But the internet is an inherently revolutionary technology that makes radically democratic participation possible. Obama’s campaign merely scratched the surface. We need a period of conscious experimentation with the various tools of the internet, websites, blogs, twitter, social networking sites to find ways to use the net to build revolutionary democratic organization and concerted practice.

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

04 December 2008

Obama : A Healthy Use of the Internet

The health-care mobilization taking shape before Obama even takes office will include online videos, blogs and e-mail alerts as well as traditional public forums. Already, several thousand people have posted comments on health on the Obama transition Web site.
By Ceci Connolly / December 4, 2008

Barack Obama's incoming administration has begun to draw on the high-tech organizational tools that helped get him elected to lay the groundwork for an attempt to restructure the U.S. health-care system.

Former senator Thomas A. Daschle, Obama's point person on health care, launched an effort to create political momentum yesterday in a conference call with 1,000 invited supporters culled from 10,000 who had expressed interest in health issues, promising it would be the first of many opportunities for Americans to weigh in.

The health-care mobilization taking shape before Obama even takes office will include online videos, blogs and e-mail alerts as well as traditional public forums. Already, several thousand people have posted comments on health on the Obama transition Web site.

"We'll have some exciting news about town halls, we'll have some outreach efforts in December," Daschle said during the call. And tomorrow, when he appears at a health-care summit with Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.) in Denver, Daschle said, "we'll be making some announcements there."

It is the first attempt by the Obama team to harness its vast and sophisticated grass-roots network to shape public policy. Although the president-elect is a long way from crafting actual legislation, he promised during the campaign to make the twin challenge of controlling health-care costs and expanding coverage a top priority in his first term.

Daschle, who is expected to become the next secretary of health and human services, is waging the outreach campaign by marrying old-fashioned Washington-style lobbying and cutting-edge social-networking technologies. Although he has yet to be formally nominated, he has already met with more than 100 insiders, ranging from union leaders and the seniors group AARP to hospital executives and representatives of corporate America.

"In the last three days I've exchanged three sets of e-mails with him," said Ron Pollack, executive director and vice president of the advocacy group Families USA.

The Obama team, which recruited about 13 million online supporters during the presidential campaign and announced its vice presidential selection via text message, is now moving to apply those tools to the earliest stages of governing.

"This is the beginning of the reinvention of what the presidency in the 21st century could be," said Simon Rosenberg, president of the center-left think tank NDN. "This will reinvent the relationship of the president to the American people in a way we probably haven't seen since FDR's use of radio in the 1930s."

In seeking to translate its political skills to policymaking, the incoming administration faces potential legal and political pitfalls. It is not clear, for instance, whether Obama can legally use his list of campaign supporters in the White House; the database would probably become government property. So far, the transition team has gotten around that issue by encouraging people to register on its Web site, Change.gov. Those names and e-mail addresses go into a new database, which can be tapped to generate activities such as house parties, YouTube videos and viral discussions to rally support.

Daschle's telephone call, which was not open to the news media, and his speech in Denver tomorrow provide hints as to how the new administration might tackle major health-care legislation.

"President-elect Obama believes that change really comes from the ground up, not from Washington," Salazar said in an interview. "The drumbeat for change is one which goes across every single state -- red, blue and purple. That kind of a drumbeat will be very effective in achieving the change needed on health care."

The Obama team chose to begin its high-tech grass-roots experiment on the issue of health care because "every American is feeling the pressure of high health costs and lack of quality care, and we feel it's important to engage them in the process of reform," said spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter.

It started with a simple 63-second video posted on Change.gov, in which health advisers Dora Hughes and Lauren Aronson posed the question "What worries you most about the health-care system in our country?"

That triggered 3,700 responses, from personal tales of medical hardship to complaints about "socialized medicine." The cyber-conversation was interactive, allowing individuals to reply to one another and rate responses with a thumbs up or down. The top-scoring comment, a pitch for a "paradigm shift" toward prevention, had 82 thumbs up.

The Obama technology gurus then built a "word cloud" showing the 100 most frequently used words in the responses. The cloud's biggest words -- indicating those used most -- include "insurance," "system," "people" and "need."

"The Obama administration has learned that listening may be even more important than talking, because it diffuses opposition," said Andrew Rasiej, co-founder of Personal Democracy Forum, a nonpartisan Web site focused on the intersection of politics and technology.

Obama used the same strategy during the campaign, Rasiej said. When many of his most liberal supporters became enraged that he voted in favor of a surveillance law, Obama assigned staffers to monitor and respond to comments posted on the campaign's Web site. After a sort of cyber-catharsis of complaints, the controversy died down, Rasiej observed.

"It will be a lot easier to get the American public to adopt any new health-care system if they were a part of the process of crafting it," he said.

By moving early, Daschle and Obama are also applying a central lesson learned in past failed efforts to overhaul the health system, said Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union.

"This is an opportunity to deepen the education work and build the ultimate coalition for change before it's demonized or people try to oppose it," he said.

After the first health comments poured in to the transition Web site, Aronson made a second video, this time with Daschle, seated in shirt sleeves and a tie.

"We want to make sure you understand how important those comments and your contributions are," Daschle says into the camera. "Already we've begun to follow through with some of the ideas."

Daschle praises the suggestion of creating a "Health Corps" of volunteers, modeled after President John F. Kennedy's Peace Corps.

Aronson, who was a congressional health aide to incoming White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, then recounts the story of a small businesswoman struggling to provide affordable health insurance to her workers.

Says Daschle: "When I was in the Senate, it was stories like that, probably more than all the factual information, that really moved you to want to act."

Research director Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.

Source / /Washington Post

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

27 June 2008

Netroots Nation Comes to Austin

Netroots Nation director Gina cooper.

Progressive politics meets the internet
By Sarah Lai Stirland / June 25, 2008

Gina Cooper is the director of an annual phenomenon now known as Netroots Nation.

The four-year-old annual gathering, formerly known as the YearlyKos convention, takes place this year in Austin, Texas, between July 17th and 20th.

Last year, it brought together more than 2,000 people who participate in progressive politics, and who are part of the liberal DailyKos group blogging community.

Cooper expects the same level of turnout as last year's meeting.

Last summer, the convention also commanded the attendance of all of the Democratic presidential candidates, and it received the bizarre attention of Fox News' political show host Bill O'Reilly, who blasted Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut for attending a conference put on by the "far-left."

Cooper got involved in progressive politics through her participation in the DailyKos as a blogger, as The New York Times magazine's politics writer Matt Bai has documented. Prior to being executive director of Netroots Nation, Cooper taught high school math and science.

As Morley Winograd and Michael Hais have shown in their book Millennial Makeover, the blogging community has come to be a force to be reckoned with when it comes to political campaigns, but especially in congressional races. Political bloggers shape media coverage, influence public opinion and break news.

So, it's no surprise that Cooper expects politicians of all stripes to show up again at this year's convention.

Barack Obama has been invited, and Nancy Pelosi will be there. (Republican candidates for Congress can also show up, if they want to, and they'll be feted along with their Democratic counterparts, Cooper says.)

Cooper characterizes the convention as a place where the progressive electorate comes to set its own agenda, and to consummate a "love affair" started off on the web.

This year's agenda is wide-ranging. It includes subjects that would definitely interest Wired.com's geeky readership, such as space policy.

Threat Level asked Cooper a few basic questions about the convention at the Personal Democracy Forum in New York on Tuesday. One of them was whether John McCain would be welcome in Austin, since he does have a link to the DailyKos on his campaign website, and since he's been courting progressive bloggers.

Read on to find out more.

Tell our readers a bit about what Netroots Nation is.

Netroots Nation is formerly known as the YearlyKos convention, and some people call it the bloggers' convention. But it’s really more than that. It’s the intersection of politics, technology and media on a grassroots level.

But it also includes the upper echelon of people involved in netroots politics as well, the deep thinkers, the big thinkers. It includes regular people who are also big thinkers and deep thinkers, but politics is not something they do for a living -- it’s something they do out of passion.

How do you think all these bloggers getting together helps the progressive community?

I think in many ways it, you could have a love affair over e-mail, but it’s not really anything until you get together and consummate it.

So if we want to use that sort of analogy, I think it’s the sort of thing that when people come together, then they are tied together more tightly. They feel that they have more of a community. So it seals that community, which has been built online, with personal interaction.

How many people were there last year, and how many people were there the first year?

The first year, we had around a thousand. Last year, I don’t know. We’re a really small organization doing big things. We were only one-and-a-half people [who were getting paid last year] so we never really got a final count.

But when we had the presidential debate among all the Democratic primary candidates, the room was set for 2,100, and it was standing room only.

And we expect about the same size this year.

Why did you choose Austin?

There really are a lot of reasons. One of the reasons: I think Austin has a chance of swinging blue.

So even looking back last year, we saw that there was going to be an opportunity.

But what drew us there even more was the community. They sought us. They have an amazing grassroots, netroots community. They have an amazing progressive bloggers' alliance there. It’s very tight. They were recruiting us through the blogs. They were sending us e-mails. Just progressive bloggers in Texas randomly sending us stuff.

I guess some people might have thought of this as harassment, but I thought it was lovely. I thought it was wonderful.

It was regular people who see that when you bring people together in a community, the energy electrifies them, and as a result it expands, and it grows.

So they chose us as much as we chose them.

Who are all these people who come?

Political professionals, but also more wonkish types who think about policy on a regular basis very deeply, as opposed to the rest of us in terms of our own lives.

But you bring those people together with regular people. You bring together politicians and candidates. You bring together progressive organizations.

The speakers often absorb their own expenses. We’re very co-operative. Sometimes they are the sponsors. They want to reach this audience, they’re believers in the people who are there. They’re fans of the political process. They believe the political process offers them a meaningful way to be a part of how we direct our country.

Is this a mini Democratic convention for activists, where the party people can come and plan things to motivate people all around the country?

In some ways, I would think so in terms of it being a gathering of people of like mind. But not everybody agrees at all.

And that really actually is the difference. People are able to come in with their own ideas. So for example, this year, we’re going to have self-organizing sessions. People will be able to come in with their own ideas.

There’s a lot of activity, and people are unplugged, and I love seeing that.

One of the most amazing things that you find there are that the political professionals become inspired by the audience because there’s such sincerity.

You said that Pelosi is coming, and you’ve invited Barack Obama.

Yes, and yes. Everybody’s invited really. To be honest, it’s not like we’ve recruited people. Because the politicians want to meet this audience, so it’s not like we go out and invite somebody, it’s more that it’s kind of out there and people come.

One thing that’s really special about our convention is that it’s not based around a specific constituency.

The politicians aren’t coming to pay their respects, or kiss the ring, or anything like that. They’re coming here to engage these people. The politicians want to be there but there’s no hard sell.

What about John McCain? Has he been invited? He’s got a DailyKos button on his website.

You know, we would love to see him there, but I don’t know if he knows that we exist because we’re mostly on the internet. His wife is the one who helps him with his e-mail. So if she’s a fan -- obviously somebody had to be a fan -- because somebody had to put that DailyKos button on there.

Of course, we’re love to see them there.

What about Congress? Will any members of Congress be there? Obviously Congress is a big battleground this year.

Yes, there will definitely be Congressional candidates there.

Again, I don’t necessarily track that. If they want to come, they go on the website, and register. They show up, they do their thing.

There is going to be a party, because we definitely appreciate them coming out and reaching out to us.

We’re going to have an event that will feature whatever candidate, Democrat or Republican, that would like to show up, and celebrate them for reaching out to us.

I’m not one of these people who hate Washington, D.C. In fact, one of the most-surprising things that I’ve learned in this process of putting together this convention is that there are real champions for regular people there that have made their way to the inside to influence things for the better.

Darcy Burner, (a Democratic candidate running for office in the 8th District of Washington) for example, submitted a panel. And it was a good one, so we accepted it.

But this is mostly just about getting to examine the agenda of the regular folks.

Source. / Wired

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

Only a few posts now show on a page, due to Blogger pagination changes beyond our control.

Please click on 'Older Posts' to continue reading The Rag Blog.