A recent ruling by the Liverpool Standards Committee has made it official. We have more than one life.
A couple of weeks ago, a decision was made not to take action against Sharon Green for posting a picture of a class of disabled children, giving them the names of Labour's cabinet, because of a ruling in Ken Livingstone's favour that gave politicians a right to behave disgracefully as long as they are not acting in an "official capacity".
All fine and dandy - don't agree with it, but do understand it.
However, I think Liverpool's Standard Board have gotten their interpretation wrong. Because the infraction was on Facebook.
Ken Livingstone called a journalist a nazi. At one definitive point in time. It passed. It was not said again. Ken Livingstone had the opportunity to say it again. He could have got up in the morning, poured a bowl of cornflakes, picked up his phone and called him a nazi. But he didn't.
We are able to investigate that single moment of time - evaluate context and Ken Livingstone's status at that point and make a judgement about that action.
Sharon Green's disgraceful picture was on her Facebook for three months. For the infinite points in time over three months it was visible. Understanding new media is also to understand time and the neverending nature of it. Think of it as being hit by a ball. Having a ball thrown at you once is bad enough - setting up a machine to throw an infinite amount of balls in your general direction so that you can walk into them is much worse.
Her defence against the accusations were that the offence was not made in her official capacity as a councillor, which leads me to two counter-defences:
Firstly, at some point during those three months she was acting in her official capacity. The moment she walked into a council building or handed out a card, or delivered a leaflet with her name on she was acting in an official capacity. And in my mind even if she was a million miles from the nearest computer, then the photograph was instantly in breach of the standards code at that moment in time.
Secondly, is the entirely reasonable view that we cannot have two lives at once. Apparently, because the Facebook profile does not belong to Councillor Sharon Green the disgraceful behaviour doesn't count. Sharon Green is therefore not the same person as Councillor Sharon Green on Facebook. Unless she has two different facebook accounts (and I still don't consider that valid) then it is simply not valid to believe the public or anyone else will make that distinction.
Would an employer overlook a inflammatory racist rant on the radio, just because you weren't in work at the time? Or, another way, how does the public know when the official councillor starts and ends? The truth is they don't. and neither should the standards board.
Sunday, 27 February 2011
Tuesday, 22 February 2011
#Liverpool - Highlight a problem and automatically tell your council....
For most of my life political career, since joining the Labour Party in 1995, I've had the engagement of people in the political process as a personal passion. Working for the Labour Party during the Wirral South By-election, we had a youth mobilisation campaign targeted at first-time voters, that I believe was the most sophisticated used before (and since) without overt political party politicking.
Third party websites are now possible, where the information can be automatically passed on to the council. Anything is possible - graffiti reporting tools - anti-social behaviour...the opportunities are endless.
When I became chair of the British Youth Council I toured the country arguing for youth participation and encouraging young people to engage. (I even opposed the UK Youth Parliament because it meant only one person would be elected and take part, rather than the youth council model which teaches every participant to represent themselves).
I went freelance 18 months ago in order to free up time to write a book, Everything every adult should know about politics, because everywhere I worked I met people who thought what I did was magical or secret, like there was dark art to speaking to your local councillor or MP. In business the first thing I ask is whether the company has spoken to the local MP or councillor and it is often no. We have built a society that is so unknowledgable about how our country is run that citizens are not even aware that they can engage their local representatives. And, frankly, I think we are all poorer for it.
I also believe local politics are going to be key to this - the great frontier of our new engaged society. Public Affairs companies are beginning to twig, even though the loss of regional development agencies has set out-of-london decision making back by years. But people are also beginning to realise there is a new reality shaping and in the time-honoured-fashion of only realising what you've got until its gone, they are appreciating the importance of local structures.
Sometimes I'm proud of being able to be non-political in favour of encouraging people to participate whatever their persuasion. I think it takes a strong sense of duty to be able to challenge people to step out of their routine and think for themselves about how they feel on a particular topic. I'm proud that I have beliefs, but I'm more proud that I can help others find theirs. and I relish the opportunity to use as any tool possible to do that.
Twitter and Facebook are also important, but can be dangerously insular, cliquey and self-referential. I believe this is why so many new groups start up, because the social investment required to enter an existing one is so great. Only those that have done well, like mumsnet, show an affinity for low barriers of entry.
That is the real recipe for success. Activists want to be able to defend or promote a change in their life, without devoting the rest of their life to it.
There is huge amount of potential in the likes of www.theyworkforyou.com in connecting people with small g government and working for an MP, I already see the impact such sites have had. But the development of new tools to focus on geographical connections, harness issue-based reporting, build local coalitions around issues, topics and problems can unleash a powerful force of human endeavour. Local authorities should embrace such change, because of the money they can save.
Walking home from work the other day I noticed a house alarm going off, which had been blaring since the morning. "who do you call?" I thought to myself. The Police is over indulgence (if not bad value for money) and I remembered a New York experiment where local government introduced a non-emergency emergency number. Brilliant, I thought - except for a population as small as Liverpool's it probably doesn't make economic sense. But with the web anything is possible....
Walking home from work the other day I noticed a house alarm going off, which had been blaring since the morning. "who do you call?" I thought to myself. The Police is over indulgence (if not bad value for money) and I remembered a New York experiment where local government introduced a non-emergency emergency number. Brilliant, I thought - except for a population as small as Liverpool's it probably doesn't make economic sense. But with the web anything is possible....
When I became chair of the British Youth Council I toured the country arguing for youth participation and encouraging young people to engage. (I even opposed the UK Youth Parliament because it meant only one person would be elected and take part, rather than the youth council model which teaches every participant to represent themselves).
I went freelance 18 months ago in order to free up time to write a book, Everything every adult should know about politics, because everywhere I worked I met people who thought what I did was magical or secret, like there was dark art to speaking to your local councillor or MP. In business the first thing I ask is whether the company has spoken to the local MP or councillor and it is often no. We have built a society that is so unknowledgable about how our country is run that citizens are not even aware that they can engage their local representatives. And, frankly, I think we are all poorer for it.
I also believe local politics are going to be key to this - the great frontier of our new engaged society. Public Affairs companies are beginning to twig, even though the loss of regional development agencies has set out-of-london decision making back by years. But people are also beginning to realise there is a new reality shaping and in the time-honoured-fashion of only realising what you've got until its gone, they are appreciating the importance of local structures.
Sometimes I'm proud of being able to be non-political in favour of encouraging people to participate whatever their persuasion. I think it takes a strong sense of duty to be able to challenge people to step out of their routine and think for themselves about how they feel on a particular topic. I'm proud that I have beliefs, but I'm more proud that I can help others find theirs. and I relish the opportunity to use as any tool possible to do that.
Twitter and Facebook are also important, but can be dangerously insular, cliquey and self-referential. I believe this is why so many new groups start up, because the social investment required to enter an existing one is so great. Only those that have done well, like mumsnet, show an affinity for low barriers of entry.
That is the real recipe for success. Activists want to be able to defend or promote a change in their life, without devoting the rest of their life to it.
Tuesday, 8 February 2011
The future of the Lib Dems?
In conversation with a marketing student and Lib Dem member the other day we discussed their membership's obvious problem with a leadership which seems completely oblivious to the crash course the party is headed on.
While we talked and touched upon the challenge coalition parties have in Europe it occurred to me that their problem is not entirely a problem of the now - their misfortunes could have been written in stone months and months ago.
Of course I'm not in any way justifying the actions of Nick Clegg and the other Lib Dems in government, but from a marketing perspective there is a very simple problem of brand identification which is in danger of completely annhilating the party and the hard work of thousands of members and councillors who are about to pay the penalty for having to face the electorate and do exactly that - justify their existence.
As our discussion continued we touched on the Lib Dems fundamental problem - they can't take credit for whatever good they have brought to the coalition (if any). They have a fundamental brand identification problem.
During the General Election (when they presumably assumed they weren't going to win), the Liberal Democrats campaigned as an equal against the other two political parties. With the benefit of hindsight, its clear they should have chosen a completely different path.
Let's just pretend that the Liberal Democrats had only campaigned on issues of economic growth - their manifesto had been full of ideas and decisions about the economic priorities of our country.
For a start, the coalition might actually have a plan for growth.... but also any ideas that did surface would be identified as Liberal Democrat ideas.
The size of the rightward swing of the government has subsumed the efforts of a small party to locate itself in the centre. Depending on the left-right spectrum as a means to define your party in coalition politics is quite frankly, so last year.....
Instead, the Liberal Democrats need to learn a distinctive voice - not just to be the 'other' voice - and in doing so accept that they are not one of the larger political parties but an influencer, a powerful additive. In marketing terms, they are the mixer people add to their drink of choice.
In making this change, the political landscape in Britain may be changed forever. Oh, wait, it's too late - that might have happened already..........
While we talked and touched upon the challenge coalition parties have in Europe it occurred to me that their problem is not entirely a problem of the now - their misfortunes could have been written in stone months and months ago.
Of course I'm not in any way justifying the actions of Nick Clegg and the other Lib Dems in government, but from a marketing perspective there is a very simple problem of brand identification which is in danger of completely annhilating the party and the hard work of thousands of members and councillors who are about to pay the penalty for having to face the electorate and do exactly that - justify their existence.
As our discussion continued we touched on the Lib Dems fundamental problem - they can't take credit for whatever good they have brought to the coalition (if any). They have a fundamental brand identification problem.
During the General Election (when they presumably assumed they weren't going to win), the Liberal Democrats campaigned as an equal against the other two political parties. With the benefit of hindsight, its clear they should have chosen a completely different path.
Let's just pretend that the Liberal Democrats had only campaigned on issues of economic growth - their manifesto had been full of ideas and decisions about the economic priorities of our country.
For a start, the coalition might actually have a plan for growth.... but also any ideas that did surface would be identified as Liberal Democrat ideas.
The size of the rightward swing of the government has subsumed the efforts of a small party to locate itself in the centre. Depending on the left-right spectrum as a means to define your party in coalition politics is quite frankly, so last year.....
Instead, the Liberal Democrats need to learn a distinctive voice - not just to be the 'other' voice - and in doing so accept that they are not one of the larger political parties but an influencer, a powerful additive. In marketing terms, they are the mixer people add to their drink of choice.
In making this change, the political landscape in Britain may be changed forever. Oh, wait, it's too late - that might have happened already..........
Wednesday, 3 November 2010
THE BELL TOLLS FOR CIVILIZATION
I know I'm given to the occasional hyperbole, but today I learnt that we are well and truly buggered. Britain will not be the same again. Today I learnt that the government has cut ALL arts and humanity funding for universities from 2012. And the cap imposed means that the University of Manchester, for example, can't afford to continue teaching humanities courses because there isn't enough money to cover the costs.
Modernity was caused by the establishment of social sciences - the intellectual and cultural movements - allowing us to better understand each other and our history. We learn politics and history because it helps us avoid conflict in the future. We learn geography and geology to understand how we impact the land around us. Psychology helps us to understand ourselves and tackle mental health.
Instead, by very definition, the state will only pay for the education of people because it is connected to science and industry. Learning for learning's sake, for the sake of knowledge and understanding has been deleted from our society. Only the wealthy will be able to afford to become educated social workers. Our TV, film, computer games industries are buggered because there will be no-one around to teach anyone about beauty.
I always knew the Conservatives thought less people should go to university, but will achieve it by cynically closing almost half of university courses. Going to university will no longer be the norm. I know the rise in Tuition Fees will grab the headlines, but in three years we will wish we focussed on the real damage done behind the headlines. Heck, even the VC of Oxford is angry. and if the dean of the pinnacle of privilege is angry, then something is seriously wrong!
Modernity was caused by the establishment of social sciences - the intellectual and cultural movements - allowing us to better understand each other and our history. We learn politics and history because it helps us avoid conflict in the future. We learn geography and geology to understand how we impact the land around us. Psychology helps us to understand ourselves and tackle mental health.
Instead, by very definition, the state will only pay for the education of people because it is connected to science and industry. Learning for learning's sake, for the sake of knowledge and understanding has been deleted from our society. Only the wealthy will be able to afford to become educated social workers. Our TV, film, computer games industries are buggered because there will be no-one around to teach anyone about beauty.
I always knew the Conservatives thought less people should go to university, but will achieve it by cynically closing almost half of university courses. Going to university will no longer be the norm. I know the rise in Tuition Fees will grab the headlines, but in three years we will wish we focussed on the real damage done behind the headlines. Heck, even the VC of Oxford is angry. and if the dean of the pinnacle of privilege is angry, then something is seriously wrong!
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
This is the last night of our generation
Tomorrow, Everything Changes.
Tomorrow will be the final proof that a new generation of decision-makers are in charge, and that an entirely different generation has to adapt to the lonely land of frustration of opposition.
Tomorrow will be proof that opposition isn't worth it.
Tomorrow we will be reminded of our sacrifices. The struggle of our internal conflict between how we might wish the world to be and what we know we are capable of making it into. The energy we placed into believing that we could win the argument because people believed our argument. We delivered leaflets and speeches, oiled the machinery of politics with our commitment and passion. Made friends. Made enemies. Made lives with loved ones, while a shared experience enveloped us.
It was the shared experience of being part of something important but, crucially, also something that could make changes, make decisions - say something and make it happen. And we did it all with a sense of responsibility.
And tomorrow we will be cruelly reminded that responsibility lies with someone else.
We told them tomorrow would come. We told them that there was an insidious under belly to the Conservatives. That they were pretending to be reasonable, fronted by a reasonable guy - but the reason they claimed so many times to have had "a clause 4 moment" was because they never actually challenged and changed themselves in the same way we had.
Ideologies mean competing non-compatible ideas. That's why tomorrow everything will change. Institutions, assumptions, traditions - all torn down in the name of the new ideology. Tomorrow we have to start again.
Validity of public services - start again
Value of higher education to the wider populace - start again
Value of helping your neighbour because they are poorer than you - start again
Value of investing in our communities and localities - start again
The country will pay the price of this new ideology - 250,000 jobs. 250,000 people will know the pain of unemployment, insecurity, broken marriages and mortgage foreclosure.
Tomorrow consensus leaves us. Tomorrow we will enter a new world, and we must learn to win the argument again. The task seems horrendous and momentous, intimidating even. But we must. We have a responsibility.
SH
Tomorrow will be the final proof that a new generation of decision-makers are in charge, and that an entirely different generation has to adapt to the lonely land of frustration of opposition.
Tomorrow will be proof that opposition isn't worth it.
Tomorrow we will be reminded of our sacrifices. The struggle of our internal conflict between how we might wish the world to be and what we know we are capable of making it into. The energy we placed into believing that we could win the argument because people believed our argument. We delivered leaflets and speeches, oiled the machinery of politics with our commitment and passion. Made friends. Made enemies. Made lives with loved ones, while a shared experience enveloped us.
It was the shared experience of being part of something important but, crucially, also something that could make changes, make decisions - say something and make it happen. And we did it all with a sense of responsibility.
And tomorrow we will be cruelly reminded that responsibility lies with someone else.
We told them tomorrow would come. We told them that there was an insidious under belly to the Conservatives. That they were pretending to be reasonable, fronted by a reasonable guy - but the reason they claimed so many times to have had "a clause 4 moment" was because they never actually challenged and changed themselves in the same way we had.
Today I was told by a trade union official that the people have forgotten how to demonstrate. I think they have forgotten how to vote.
Our generation believed we had triangulated out conflict, triangulated in cohesion and consensus. Blair and Clinton seemed to be the end of ideological headbutting. Then came Bush, now Cameron - and the result? Demonstrations and millions of people who regret the way they voted.
They bought into the consensus; that we are all of-the-centre; that no-one in a position of power would introduce massive change just for ideological reasons.
Ideologies mean competing non-compatible ideas. That's why tomorrow everything will change. Institutions, assumptions, traditions - all torn down in the name of the new ideology. Tomorrow we have to start again.
Validity of public services - start again
Value of higher education to the wider populace - start again
Value of helping your neighbour because they are poorer than you - start again
Value of investing in our communities and localities - start again
The country will pay the price of this new ideology - 250,000 jobs. 250,000 people will know the pain of unemployment, insecurity, broken marriages and mortgage foreclosure.
Tomorrow consensus leaves us. Tomorrow we will enter a new world, and we must learn to win the argument again. The task seems horrendous and momentous, intimidating even. But we must. We have a responsibility.
SH
Tuesday, 7 September 2010
Life. Better.
I am moved to finally talk about Better Off Ted - an amazing sitcom airing on FX. It's set inside a massive global US coporation - Veridian Dynamics - that half the time doesn't know what it's doing.
It's already been cancelled in the States, but if you have the time, it is definitely worth watching the first two series.
Quote:
"The company loves its money. If they could, they'd go to strip clubs and throw naked women at money."
And this second video is definitely NOT Safe For Work
It's already been cancelled in the States, but if you have the time, it is definitely worth watching the first two series.
Quote:
"The company loves its money. If they could, they'd go to strip clubs and throw naked women at money."
And this second video is definitely NOT Safe For Work
Wednesday, 19 May 2010
A lesson in futility
Listening to radio4 today and the news comes on.....
9:01 - impressed by Cleggs proposals for reform, including the ability to petition against laws that infringe my civil liberties
9:02 - decide to petition against Theresa May's new law to allow the police to take me directly to court, for infringing my civil liberties.
SH
Wednesday, 20 January 2010
Good, good, news!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8469648.stm
>>Corporate Disclaimer<<
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
**********************************************************************
Monday, 18 January 2010
Was indepence worth 21.6 billion dollars?
The history of Haiti is interesting and a fact I discovered today is
mind blowing when you consider the disaster and the costs of sending
aid.
Haiti, a French colony, was only granted independence as long as the
new country recompensed their colonial masters for the loss of
plantations and slaves.
It took them over a hundred years to achieve and the value of what
they repaid (which included the interest, natch) was, at 2004 prices,
$21,685,135,571.
And for the record - the cruise ships >>should<< have operated
normally (as per their contract) and arrived at the island. Haiti has
suffered a terrible tragedy - don't wish their economy away as well
out of some petty left-wing sense of envy-politics.
SH
Social Mobility takes centre stage
My god Ed Balls is getting better - a fine interview on the Politics Show yesterday, when he got onto the topic of today's social mobility announcements.
It's a very welcome development that Gordon Brown and Alan Milburn can come together to discuss this topic, because I think Milburn's research last year, went a long way to describing the problem of how quality well paid jobs are increasingly being filled by those from privileged backgrounds, and the more typical working class weren't working their way into them.
On this, I think Ed Balls missed the trick against Suchet. Suchet's point was that Social Mobility has hardly moved after 13 years of a Labour Government.
But in truth, these things take generations before you even know if you are making progress.
To be able to measure whether more working class people are successful lawyers, requires at least 4-6 years while they go through education (and only because Labour have put half of all 18 year olds into uni at all) and then we have to watch them struggle through early years of work.
Aspiration is, of course, still a huge issue about whether an individual decides to apply themselves to making it in the professions, and we still have work to do on that level and with mentors.
But it did occur to me that David Cameron's claim to be 'brazenly elitist' in his new plans for teachers, will encourage more upper class kids to become teachers, opening up opportunity in the other professions.
No, I don't believe it will happen either…
SH
>>Corporate Disclaimer<<
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
**********************************************************************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)