Why not let social media run the country?

 
Twitter home page

Related Stories

Why bother having elections and votes in Parliament, when you can find out what the people want in real time, 24 hours a day, on social media?

No-one is seriously suggesting that the keys to Downing Street should be handed over to Facebook users. Or that the prime minister should be replaced by a Twitter feed, however tempting that might seem to some.

But the weird, and slightly scary, fact is that after years of overly-optimistic predictions about e-democracy, social media is now so freely available and widespread that it would probably work. In theory.

"Technologically it is now possible. We could function as a direct democracy," Labour MP Kevin Brennan told a Hansard Society event at Westminster.

"The cost of obtaining people's views on a range of different subjects is miniscule compared to any other time in history, unless you go back to ancient Greece when you just gathered in the market place and you could have a direct vote on things."

But, argued the shadow education minister, it would be a truly terrible idea.

Lightning over Westminster Is Westminster ready for a social media revolution?

"Ultimately someone has got to take a decision. How comfortable would we be with a decision on capital punishment taken via a TV debate and a vote on Twitter?

"We have indirect democracy for a reason. When does crowdsourcing become mob rule?"

The whole point of representative democracy, of the kind practised for centuries at Westminster and in most Western democracies, is that it acts as a brake on "wild and irrational decisions", he reasoned.

Irrational mob

But could social media be harnessed by politicians in a more modest way to help them form better policies?

The experts assembled by the Hansard Society, in a windowless conference room in an obscure corner of the Parliamentary estate, were divided on this one.

Britain Thinks polling chief Deborah Mattinson thought politicians should take advantage of the vast ocean of vaguely political chat sloshing around on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and the rest. It might give them a better handle on what voters are feeling about their decisions (social media is particularly good at gauging emotion, the panel agreed).

Just as long as they don't start mistaking it for public opinion.

"Social media is not a giant focus group and we shouldn't confuse it with that, we shouldn't think it is the same," Ms Mattinson told the event.

Start Quote

Social media is not a giant focus group and we shouldn't confuse it with that”

End Quote Deborah Mattinson Britain Thinks

Social media users are entirely self-selecting and although there are millions of them, spanning many age and income groups, they do not include everybody and there is no reliable way of checking their authenticity. They could be posing as other people or not expressing their true opinion.

They also have a habit of behaving like an irrational mob, "shutting down debate quite aggressively", argued Gordon Brown's former polling guru, and many of them only communicate with narrow groups of like-minded people.

Then there is the question of how to cut through the crushing banality of most tweets (MPs are some of the worst offenders here, the panel agreed).

The answer might be a piece of software, WeGov, being developed by computer scientists at Southampton University, with help from the Hansard Society and EU funding.

Privacy concerns

There are dozens of "sentiment analysis" programmes on the market that allow companies to monitor what people are saying about their products on social media.

Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan: Social media MP of the Year in 2010

But Wegov, which is in the final stages of development, claims to be the first one specifically designed for politicians, enabling them to monitor debate, filter out the background "noise" and zoom in on what people are saying about them and their policies in a particular geographical area.

Paul Walland, one of the computer scientists behind the software, told the event that politicians would even be able to break into conversations to defend policies or pose questions.

But although Mr Walland insisted WeGov will only check publicly available sources, there are serious privacy concerns.

"There is a feeling of creepiness, I think, that people get when people realise that their conversations are being mined, processed and spat out the other end for delectation of politicians for making policy," said Kevin Brennan.

Perhaps, suggested Deborah Mattinson and Nick Pickles, of Big Brother Watch, politicians should ask people first before listening in on their online conversations.

So, setting aside all the hype and conjecture, are there any examples of social media actually being used to shape government policy?

Bold experiments

When the coalition was formed, it launched a series of bold experiments in crowdsourcing laws and throwing open government data to public scrutiny. It also reformatted Labour's e-petition scheme, allowing it to trigger debates in Parliament.

How much of this has filtered through to actually policy is hard to say. Critics would say very little.

But Nick Jones, deputy director of digital communications at Downing Street, insists that the revolution is still on track.

Asked to come up with an example, he points to the Red Tape Challenge, which has received more than 28,000 comments since it was launched by the prime minister last year and which has a "social media element".

More than 150 pieces of legislation identified by the public as unnecessary have been so far been scrapped.

Not one to set the pulse racing, Mr Jones conceded, but a sign, perhaps, that social media could be on its way to being a part of the everyday fabric of government.

 

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 327.

    The problem with using social media is that the most heards voices are most passaionate about their views - just because X many folk say this, that or the other it does not mean the majority of the country share those views.

    Indeed, it's often quite the oppostie - society as a whole is less extreme than the baying mob.....

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 326.

    90% of respondents (below) are missing the point; the article purports to be about our leadership considering the use of social media to better engage with the electorate (aka 'the mob'); the underlying message is one of attempting to fix what we all know is a system well past its 'use by date' and their own acknowledgement that this is the case, hence the term 'indirect democracy' (above).

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 325.

    This has to be one of the worst idea's ever posted on the internet.

    In fact whoever decided to create this topic should be sacked, they probably spend 5% of their time working and 95% of thier time on facebook and twitter.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 324.

    Anyone care to tell me what Twitter is? ;-) I'm sure not everyone has access to the internet, so would this idea not preclude many who could contribute. Also as prisoners will be able to vote, would it mean my money spent on providing them with Twitter access, when I don't use the format?

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 323.

    Yes. We could function as a direct democracy using Twitter. We would vote for decreased taxation. Then we would vote for increased government spending. Then we would wonder why the system collapsed.
    Democracy can't micromanage each decision in isolation. We need to choose a coherent strategy. It is the role of the elected government to present, implement and adapt that strategy.

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 322.

    Something needs to change in our Government system.
    I think a system which takes us to war against our will, ignores real issues like the NHS to bail our corrupt banks. On and on
    How many people even bother to vote anymore?
    Given that - I can't see Twitter or anything like it being a realistic alternative at this time.
    I ache for the day when MP are gone forever, so sick of their crap and lies.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 321.

    The fact is , its easy to criticise , its much harder to rule and make choices which arent popular. Life shouldnt be a 24/7 popularity contest . We cannot be subject to peoples whims , poor judgements, lack of understanding on the depth of a subject . We cannot allow peoples opinions to be formed on the back of bias in the media . If i hear the phrase ' social media ' again i will shoot someone

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 320.

    Anyone who reads the comments on bbc news pages can see the kind of people who voice political opinion via such means are often very polarised in their views. I don't tweet or facebook or any of that, however I do agree the www could be used more to garner a flavour of public opinion, particularly over future proposals and policy e.g. transport planning (but the nimbys would still be loudest).

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 319.

    You can't rely on the big three parties, all we get is hot air, over the years they've done more harm than good.

    How folks was taken in by Cameron's transparency all the while he was wining and dining for cash.... how Brown and Blair spent and borrowed.... as for Clegg forget it!

    We do need change, a very big change but I'm afraid Twitter is not the answer.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 318.

    Why not have PM's question time etc on a forum lol!
    Mr Moderator...Mr Moderator!

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 317.

    OMG! The very thought of using the likes of Twitter etc. is very scary. Just think how the computers could be hacked and sites 'bought' by crimminals. At least the MP's and the PM are very honest and up-right and beyound being corrupted!
    Mmmmhehe LOL!

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 316.

    Until we can ensure some real level of security the idea of using something like twatter to make decisions that would affect us all is frightening.

    As someone has already mentioned ... people are easily bought ... and even more willing to be company shills.

    Best to stay as we are, at least we have the illusion of democracy.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 315.

    i think the tradition is great even though u dont always get the best outcome . doing things differently on social sites may well be beneficial but also ridiculous. i think that doing things on twitter isnt a step into the technological age but another idea to be lazy

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 314.

    Why not? Because all it takes is some crims with PCs and the whole country can be hijacked......

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 313.

    Tweeter rule, more like twitter's rule

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 312.

    what exactly would be the difference? some rich selfish idiots running the country,a country for the most part full of idiots trying to run itself. not much as far as I can see.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 311.

    I'm in favour of more decentralised governance, and at a more local level ....perhaps... social media could play a role. At a national level, I doubt it.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 310.

    So after evolving away from mob rule, we are now devolving back to it? ;-)

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 309.

    We will end up this way eventually, we simply have to question...are we ready, yet? I find that doubtful, however a huge calamity as a result may just be what's needed to change peoples attitudes, force them to be more engaged and show consideration to the topics. Birds don't learn to fly by sitting in the nest their whole lives.

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 308.

    Democracy really is the worst form of Government except for all the others.
    We are screwed .

 

Page 1 of 17

 

More Politics stories

RSS

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.