Posts Tagged ‘Filter’

Ignorant, stupid, disinterested? The Web will help you stay that way

May 30th, 2011 by Daniel Young | No Comments | Filed in Politics, Public Relations, Social media, Technology

The average web site gathers 64 pieces of information about you and then shapes your future experience according to the topics, interests and biases that it believes appeal to you. In this video, Eli Pariser talks about his book, The Filter Bubble, in which he takes issue with the way that google, Yahoo!, Huff Post, Facebook and other online news sides and social networks help us stay stupid, ignorant and disinterested. Pariser has also featured as a TED speaker.

I doubt that most consumers of digital media are even aware of this phenomenon. The political implications are massive.

It has significant implications for the PR and marketing industries. My first thought is that it steers marketers to advertising, which would add up given that this is the primary revenue stream for the sites in question.

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/11898

Tags: , , , ,

Social Media Monitoring is Extreme Says Coalition Communications Minister

April 5th, 2009 by Daniel Young | 2 Comments | Filed in Politics, Social media

Government plans to monitor social media in Australia are a ‘waste of tax payers’ money, according to the Nick Minchin, the Opposition communications spokesperson.

Huh? What’s the point of social media if no-ones listening?

Blogs, forums and other forms of social media provide Government with access to a large amount of public feedback and sentiment. Of course they should be monitored. They provide a litmus test of public opinion. The Government needs to invest in the ‘comprehensive digital monitoring service(s) for print and electronic media’ in order to do this.

One would like to think that advisors and Ministers are listening to online conversation as this enables them to shape legislation and details to respond to the needs of the community.

Or perhaps the Government wants to monitor in order to identify sources of opposition and stiffle dissent.

Social media is driving community, media and our institutions through a transition. Governments are more than happy to use social media during election campaigns to gain power.

The real question should be: What are the Government’s objectives for social media monitoring? One can’t help but be a little cynical in the context of the Federal Government’s Internet Filter.

K-Rudd’s online activity has declined signficantly since coming into power.

The future of social media will be bright as long as Governments and corporations recognise the value of online discussions and the insights they provide rather than seeking to control or place limits on what can and cannot be discussed online. The conversations are occuring (and have always occurred) – heavy handed Governments will drive the online discussion underground (in a digital sense) which is the worst possible outcome.

I see nothing wrong with monitoring per se. It’s essential.

There are numerous free and paid tools out there for managing and monitoring social media. We use Radian6, which is by the best tool that I’ve come across (and I’ve seen quite a few).

Do you think the Government’s Internet Filter will filter out dissenting and opposing voices in addition to the pornographic and illegal content (its stated aim)?

This post takes issue with the not very popular Senator Conroy’s seemingly contradictory statements on the issue of social media monitoring. Conroy and K-Rudd will be announcing the winner of the NBN tender next week.

Here’s a snapshot of social media discussions that may be of interest to Minister Minchin:

nick-minchin44 nick-minchin12

nick-minchin31

Tags: , , , , , , , ,