Wednesday, 24 March 2010

Practicalities of local online

Here's a handy and timely post on Talk About Local, starting a discussion about those awkward issues that can afflict local websites. Like anonymity (although the slight irony that contributions to the TAL blog are still, msyteriously, anonymous seems to have been overlooked); the ‘we’re too small’ problem; and the ‘we’re too big’ problem. Among the wisdom shared:

  • when people are talking to you about their burning passion, ask them to write, take photos or videos about it. Most people don’t just write in when you ask them but they are happy to share their interests...
  • make your methods of contributing as simple as you possibly can... Never mind snazzy technology, give them a beer mat to write on...
  • don’t forget to ask people for help in really simple ways, don’t assume they know and just aren’t helping. People love to help, especially if helping takes the most minimal amounts of time...
  • keep in touch with small traders. They know everything that is going on and generally a bit of time to tell it to regular customers.
24 Mar 2010 12:43:04 | Information and communication, networked neighbourhoods

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Lending and sharing 'in a moderately uncheesy way' Here's Streetbank, a site to support lending and sharing at neighbourhood level. All power to their elbows - it's a niche that the local websites haven't been big on, as far as I'm aware, based on the reflection that because we don't know our neighbours so well, we have more stuff than we need and don't lend and share when we might. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, it won't be the first time, but I think while neighbourhood sites encourage recycling, 'going to a good home', local trader recommendations etc and of course local social connections generally, few have got down to the nitty-gritty of instrumental reciprocity. Thanks to Chris Gittins at Streets Alive for the headsup.
PREVIOUS POST
Street reps, empowerment and statistics When I ask the street reps I've been working with, do they feel they are able to influence decisions affecting their area, there is a bit of pondering but definitely no evidence put forward. A little probing confirms that they feel they can influence action - getting some rubbish cleared or maybe dealing with a flagrant drug-drop - but not decisions about how services are run or resources targeted. These are active citizens who feel relatively powerless, partly because of their low visibility and in many cases the need to remain anonymous. For example, none of the group I was working with the other night would go to court and testify against another resident. If we ask 'what would it take to overcome this and raise their profile?' the answer obviates the purpose: it would be a peaceful, ordered neighbourhood where people showed respect for one another, and street reps were (in their terms) unnecessary. Still, thousands of practice agencies want evidence that government investment is leading to citizens feeling more empowered. That's what the empowerment indicator (NI4) is for, and there's a lot to be said for it. NI4 tells us the proportion of people who feel they can influence decisions affecting their local area. But it's causing a bit of head-scratching. For example, Inspire-East recently published an absorbing (if cunningly-hidden) report on behaviour in relation to NI4, but confused a few of us right at the start of their exec summary with this: 'measured through the 2008 Place Survey... in the East of England, as nationally, 29% of respondents agree they feel they can influence decisions that affect their local area... the Citizenship Survey shows that in 2008, nationally 39% of people agree they feel they can influence decisions affecting their local area.' If you go to page 8 of the report, you get a sort-of explanation. They're different kinds of survey. But still, a 10% discrepency doesn't seem trivial. The next survey could ask, do you feel disempowered by statistics? At the same time, the National Empowerment Partnership has published a document which seems to have very similar intentions to the Inspire-East report, attempting to explain 'what drives feelings of influence?' I've only read the summary, but it's told me some significant things. For instance, that among people who have been civically involved in the past 12 months, some 56% say they cannot influence decisions. This would include the street reps I've been talking to. Being involved, as the report says, 'is no guarantee that people will feel they can influence decisions' - indeed, feeling informed is a stronger driver of sense of influence than is actual involvement in decision-making. The street reps go to meetings, and tell me they feel listened to, and that it's good to have the chance to give your opinions. But as the NEP report suggests, it could be that through the process of getting involved, people can gain greater insight into what they are not able to influence.

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments