Dialog or Conflict: Social Media and the Next Century

No one argues much today that the invention of the printing press was a wonderful thing for humanity. We could suddenly share ideas which turned into better human rights, forms of democracy and a more civil society. Eventually. Then along came the telephone and radio. A new revolution. What followed was one of the bloodiest centuries globally. Today, conflict is declining all over the world…although somedays that may seem a bit unreal.

Use of the Internet and other “Liberation Technologies” such as social media, mobile phones and such, have aided the tranisition of ideas and opinions into political action. Both positive and negative. The Orange Revolution of the Ukraine used SMS messaging via mobiles to organize. Two years later Belarus shut down the mobile networks to prevent such a revolution. The intense protests of the Iranian elections in 2009, although democracy seems to have failed so far.

The online newspaper Malaysiakini has arguably lead to increased democracy and improved human rights in Malaysia. Certainly it has tread where no other traditional newspaper can in Malaysia. China recently battled with Google and in ways, subtly continues to do so. Reports out of Pakistan indicate that Taliban leadership has “gone quiet” in Social Media channels and are resorting to human transfer of messages; although a recent Twitter battle between the State Department & a Taliban spokesperson suggests otherwise.

Personally, I rather hope that these “Liberation Technologies” such as social media tools and the devices that enable their operation, lead to greater democracy worldwide. In fragile nations however, we are increasingly seeing a fragmentation between Elites and the lower classes. Yet both are using social media services. Then we bring in the diaspora and their interconnections between the “home country” and their new “host country” and influence over foreign policies of the host country.

These interactions mean more information reaching the hands of the citizens, being shaped by citizens and communicated into the larger populace, even where Internet access is limited. That foments ideas and then change. Such change in fragile nations is rarely conducted (successful or not) without conflict. Anecdotal y, I suspect we may see less chance of global conflict than before, but an increase in more localized or regional conflict in fragile nations. It is not only Elites that are accessing these Liberation Technologies, but the common citizen. And some governments are becoming clever at using these tools to counter those who want democracy.

International relations have always been complex. With social technologies, they are going to become ever more complex. The relationship between governments, civil society, industry and global organizations is changing. Social technologies and the Internet is about human ideas, it is where ideas get developed and evolve. Now ideas and ideologies can evolve faster. Groups can form, disband and fracture faster and easier than ever before. Our research suggests the views and predictions of thinkers like George Friedman have not accounted for these Liberation Technologies – that may be their Black Swan to what does end up happening.

There is no easy answer and no clear path to the future or to what will or won’t happen. The only sure thing; social medias will result in fundamental shifts in international relations. Lets hope that dialogue reins and the values of democracy prosper.

Twitter Wins & Google+ Loses on Libya & Major News

As the rebels in Libya pushed into Tripoli and the endgame was in play, the news and commentary went full throttle. On Twitter. Not so much on Google+, the new social network from Google that many pundits have said threatened Twitter, and I was one of them. Until a major story like Libya’s rebels succeeding broke and within a few hours it was clear that Google+ had missed the mark. We provide insights to clients in the international aid, peace operations and development world when crises like these happen, a number asked us through long day yesterday if they’d be better off using Google+, sadly we had to say “stick with Twitter for now.”

As we ran an analysis on the mentions between Twitter and Google+ we found there was one mention on Google+ for every 20 “tweets” on Twitter over a three hour period. There was little debate or discussion on the issue to be found on Google+ while there was significant re-tweeting and snippet discussions on Twitter. It’s much easier to assess a stream on Twitter to determine whats happening and whats hot. But lets also be practical about this – Twitter has been in the market for far longer than Google+, by years. There is also an entire eco-system of apps and services behind Twitter that cover sentiment analysis, influence scores, trending topics, heat mapping and geolocation and so on. Such apps are still very nascent for Google+ as it is still in its infancy.

But what became apparent is that Google+ is extremely good at enabling tight controls of social groups and information within those groups. But unless you have a slew of journalists or media types in your circles and your paying very close attention to your full stream, you’ll likely miss major news stories unless someone in your circle brings it up, and given the “noise” we note in the stream (as have others.) The other problem is the ability to search. Twitter doesn’t do search well either, but it’s still better than Google+.

Our conclusion from comparing the two services is that if Twitter does one thing very well, it is provide a good flow of information on what is happening around the world and down to local news (keep in mind you should be following at least 100 people, news services among them, to gain this benefit). Something Google+ is weak at, but as Google works on it, I suspect they’ll figure something out. We like where Google+ is going in our company, but when it comes to keeping your finger on the pulse of the Web and the world…well, Twitter is the warp and woof of the Internet still.