Full Circle Associates

The Toronto Star ran a piece by Don Tapscott, Breathing e-life into democracy, taking the upcoming "Listening to the City" F2F event to task for not doing it online. I agree with almost everything Tapscott has to say except the assumption that a fully online event would cover the territory. I don't think we have ubiquitous online interaction skills and more importantly, habits, across the diversity of a city like Toronto. The same could be said for the F2F event - there are people who won't go for lots of good reasons. On the balance, I'd bet that going online could probably increase the participation level. More importantly, it could start fostering a new practice of online participation in local issues. Here's a bit from Don's article:

It's time Toronto dumped limited, costly meetings and started online talks with its citizens, By Don Tapscott

This Sunday, Toronto City Council will host a $110,000 "Listening to Toronto" session at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre, where 1,100 residents will form small discussion groups and brainstorm about how to improve our city. Let's hope their top suggestion is that the city should never again spend the money, time and energy to host another of these events.

Today, we live in a wired world and the Listening to Toronto exercise belongs in cyberspace, where it would be far more effective. Toronto is a plugged-in city in one of the world's most plugged-in countries, and City Hall should exploit this technology to the hilt.

By moving discussions online, we would have a process that is cheaper, could involve tens of thousands more citizens, could be ongoing, and would achieve more substantive results.

To see how digital tools could bolster voter involvement, we could harness the tremendous innovation in information technology that has come to light in the past decade .

New digital tools have paved the way for profound transformations in how companies function.

He goes on to say some key things about online polling. Critical, IMO:

But there are right and wrong ways to pursue e-democracy.

Last month the city's technology committee said the city should explore online polling. "I think this is long overdue," said Councillor Jane Pitfield, a member of the e-city committee, which asked for more research on online polling. "The public needs to be engaged and I think it will help our city council and our mayor do a better job."

This would be a mistake. First, as an indicator of the public will, online polling is next to useless. Organized groups can hijack the process to do the equivalent of stuffing the ballot box. If politicians want to know the public's mood, a reputable pollster is the best choice.

Second, online polling does nothing to tap into the citizenry's knowledge and expertise. Citizen engagement isn't a matter of clicking Yes or No on an online ballot.

We deserve a system where we can discuss issues, brainstorm, raise everyone's knowledge level, and come to more informed decisions.

So, is Don over idealistic? (I hope not. I fear so.)

Rather than being skilled in belligerence and demagoguery, we would see the rise of conciliators and those who encourage public participation. They would feel comfortable and not threatened by the idea of an emboldened and active electorate.

[via Alexandra Samuels]