(Published in Business Mirror under the Mirror Image column, March 15, 2011)
A few hours after the horrific tsunami in Japan, people all over the world flooded Facebook and Twitter with entries trying to communicate to loved ones affected by the catastrophe. Many postings expressed prayers and concern, along with news about friends and relatives in Japan.
The social-networking sites also became an invaluable source of information among relatives of Japan migrants on immediate news and real- time updates about the situation and emergency warnings.
Corollary to these, a number of Facebook causes have helped raise huge sums of money for Japan’s tsunami victims. The American National Red Cross, through Facebook Causes, has so far helped raise $75,825, donated by 1,770 people aided by 3,757 promoters. The Northern Japan Earthquake Relief Fund, on the other hand, has so far raised $21,611, through 2,104 members through Facebook Causes.
In stark contrast, abject indifference and utmost ignorance deluged social-networking sites, although not significant in number, with such comments as “But that what happens when you bomb the Pearl Harbor… karma” and “Thinking of all the poor animals in Japan. It’s only Mother Nature reminding the people of Japan who’s boss. Treating animals like s**t will come back to you.”
These only show how much the social-networking sites and the Internet, in general, have democratized the flow of diverse information and opinions. The democratization of information makes it possible for ideas, knowledge, opinions and cultural diversity to be accessible anywhere, anytime and to everybody.
For example, the upheavals in Egypt were attributed to instigations in Facebook. A Newsweek report said that 43,000 people had signed up in one of the protesters’ Facebook page, inviting people to take to the streets and show protest, leading to a series of protests and the eventual ousting of Hosni Mubarak. The 17 million Internet users in Egypt, or 20 percent of the population, have led to the growth of access to blogging and social-networking sites. There are already 5 million Facebook users in the country.
But despite this, Facebook sites adorning Mubarak, such as “Support Hosni Mubarak” and “We Love Egypt Support Mubarak,” garnered only 90 and 25 “likes,” respectively. This leads us to another feature of information democratization, that is, it’s achieved by giving everybody a say in what’s important but, at the same time,
aggregating the results.
This aggregation of information and opinion form the concept of “Wisdom of Crowds,” as described in the seminal book of James Surowiecki, which argues that an aggregated information results in a decision that is better than any single member of the group.
The Internet has the capability to aggregate common theme, information and ideas. Google search results are based on page-rank system that iterates so that some votes and searches coming from more important pages count more than other votes. Vote casting in social- networking sites have the ability to consolidate opinions on certain causes and issues.
This is why some governments are putting a clamp on the Internet to preclude the growth of malcontent views. Arab news channels are reporting that Libya has blocked access to the Internet to quell the horrific aggressions against Qaddafi. China has blocked the word “Egypt” in searches of Web pages, an ostensible sign that the country’s government is concerned about the impact of protests in the Middle East.
But for how long can other governments put a stop on information democratization. At the height of the protests in Egypt when Internet access was cut off by the government, Google launched a special service that allowed people in Egypt to send Twitter messages by dialing a phone number and leaving a voicemail.
People find ways.
==============
Reynaldo C. Lugtu Jr. teaches management and marketing courses in the MBA Program of De La Salle University Graduate School of Business. He may be e-mailed at rlugtu2002@yahoo.com or visit his blog at http://rlugtu.blogspot.com.
A few hours after the horrific tsunami in Japan, people all over the world flooded Facebook and Twitter with entries trying to communicate to loved ones affected by the catastrophe. Many postings expressed prayers and concern, along with news about friends and relatives in Japan.
The social-networking sites also became an invaluable source of information among relatives of Japan migrants on immediate news and real- time updates about the situation and emergency warnings.
Corollary to these, a number of Facebook causes have helped raise huge sums of money for Japan’s tsunami victims. The American National Red Cross, through Facebook Causes, has so far helped raise $75,825, donated by 1,770 people aided by 3,757 promoters. The Northern Japan Earthquake Relief Fund, on the other hand, has so far raised $21,611, through 2,104 members through Facebook Causes.
In stark contrast, abject indifference and utmost ignorance deluged social-networking sites, although not significant in number, with such comments as “But that what happens when you bomb the Pearl Harbor… karma” and “Thinking of all the poor animals in Japan. It’s only Mother Nature reminding the people of Japan who’s boss. Treating animals like s**t will come back to you.”
These only show how much the social-networking sites and the Internet, in general, have democratized the flow of diverse information and opinions. The democratization of information makes it possible for ideas, knowledge, opinions and cultural diversity to be accessible anywhere, anytime and to everybody.
For example, the upheavals in Egypt were attributed to instigations in Facebook. A Newsweek report said that 43,000 people had signed up in one of the protesters’ Facebook page, inviting people to take to the streets and show protest, leading to a series of protests and the eventual ousting of Hosni Mubarak. The 17 million Internet users in Egypt, or 20 percent of the population, have led to the growth of access to blogging and social-networking sites. There are already 5 million Facebook users in the country.
But despite this, Facebook sites adorning Mubarak, such as “Support Hosni Mubarak” and “We Love Egypt Support Mubarak,” garnered only 90 and 25 “likes,” respectively. This leads us to another feature of information democratization, that is, it’s achieved by giving everybody a say in what’s important but, at the same time,
aggregating the results.
This aggregation of information and opinion form the concept of “Wisdom of Crowds,” as described in the seminal book of James Surowiecki, which argues that an aggregated information results in a decision that is better than any single member of the group.
The Internet has the capability to aggregate common theme, information and ideas. Google search results are based on page-rank system that iterates so that some votes and searches coming from more important pages count more than other votes. Vote casting in social- networking sites have the ability to consolidate opinions on certain causes and issues.
This is why some governments are putting a clamp on the Internet to preclude the growth of malcontent views. Arab news channels are reporting that Libya has blocked access to the Internet to quell the horrific aggressions against Qaddafi. China has blocked the word “Egypt” in searches of Web pages, an ostensible sign that the country’s government is concerned about the impact of protests in the Middle East.
But for how long can other governments put a stop on information democratization. At the height of the protests in Egypt when Internet access was cut off by the government, Google launched a special service that allowed people in Egypt to send Twitter messages by dialing a phone number and leaving a voicemail.
People find ways.
==============
Reynaldo C. Lugtu Jr. teaches management and marketing courses in the MBA Program of De La Salle University Graduate School of Business. He may be e-mailed at rlugtu2002@yahoo.com or visit his blog at http://rlugtu.blogspot.com.
Comments