Hmm .. sharing social change/activist information here - gets less engagement than geeky stuff. Mentioned this on Twitter, and some think that social change activists are waiting for the geeks and early adopters to clear the path and make the mistakes - then come on in .. what do you think?
2 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 39 previous comments
- Checking it out my friend!Jul 27, 2011
- Thanks so much for having this conversation. So important to start now. If you do a post on where we should be connecting, please let me know and I'll share it.Jul 27, 2011
- There's no way I can read through the 90+ comments here and still make sense of it all, so for the passerby who may catch my comment (and you), my thoughts:
1. I think Google+ will be an interesting platform for organizing pro-social movements in the light of day. It's not for everyone, but if you want to get the outside more engaged in causes, the best thing I think one can do is get things done -- and get them done where others will see it.
2. I think the times we're in require anyone calling themselves a social activist to rethink ways in which activism takes place. It must be more than protests. I'd like to think that I and many others like me are engaging in pro-social change actively as we try and open up stoic and static organizations and their services to serve the disenfranchised and underserved among us. It takes all of us to make even a little bit of lasting change.
3. I don't think anyone should be waiting for anyone else to do something. What I hope with all the hope I have is that everyone is doing what they can, everyday, and that we're all reaching out to each other and continue to find more people to work with. Self-organization works. It is messy, and it's often difficult to see the forest for the trees, but as convergence happens, we at least start to figure out if we're even working in the right forest.
Google+ can be a broadcast network, but in many ways blogs and especially Twitter are effective for mass broadcasts and calls to action, and Facebook works very well for subscription to organized messages.
Hold fast, brothers and sisters. We may not all agree on every fine point about social change and we're not going to, but we might still find many ways to work together for greater good.Jul 27, 2011
- Jul 27, 2011
- One of the reasons I like the idea of Quora (if it would be an internal tool) is that it's essentially a structured wiki that is entirely usable to non-technical people. It would be great as a knowledge building tool for any organization
I suspect the same is true from a planning/collaboration standpoint of Google+. It is very wiki-like in the ability to edit posts, target messages to key groups. I can see pros and cons to the way circles are unsharable at this point, but the pros (in my opinion) outweigh the cons. It empowers every person to lead a campaign and self-organize.
We're trying to catch all the fish we can; not all the fish, nor all the fish we can in one fell swoop.Jul 27, 2011
- There is a definite edge that g+ has over FB: no groups = no admins. Anyway, for many activist I know (from either side of the political spectrum) this "lack of power" can be a problem. Personally I hate to be administered just as I hate to administer people, so it's fine for me. But do not expect g+ to produce the same kind of aggregation an admin based structure did.
The difference in response is something I would expect to hold on. People are generally not much responsive in g+, as they tend to "really read" what we post. So they tend to answer if they have some value to add. There is much less chatterbox around than in other media, but people do get the message, at least such seem to be the implications of the traffic, as much more traffic seems to be driven by g+ than by any other social network.Aug 1, 2011
Add a comment...