Charles Leadbeater is an online evangelist. The former Financial Times journalist has moved away from politics into a world of social entrepreneurs, amateur activists and grassroots campaigners who are exploiting digital technologies to develop solutions to problems that lie outside the interests of commercial and state institutions. He believes that online tools can be used to organize and galvanize. He produced a call-to-arms in We-think: The Power of Mass Creativity, a book that documents the rise of amateur activism in a time of information revolution. His research with digital activists who work with people in some of the world’s most impoverished places shows how the Web can galvanize support from around the globe — using new applications, devices and social networks — and what needs to be in place for this to happen.
Aleks Krotoski: What exactly does a social entrepreneur do?
Charles Leadbeater: Social entrepreneurs act to attack big social challenges that have been left unaddressed by the private sector, because there’s not much money to be made or left by government because it overlooks them or doesn’t have the resources or interest to tackle them, or fails to create new ways of tackling issues such as providing clean water, inoculating babies, providing education and childcare, or collecting refuse.
Krotoski: What aspect of digital technologies facilitates social entrepreneurship?
Leadbeater: It’s watching a video of Edmund Phelps accept the Nobel prize in economics, thinking: ‘I didn’t understand that,’ looking him up, e-mailing him and having a conversation with a Nobel laureate an hour later. That’s staggering.
It’s also the simple associative link: In three clicks you can start somewhere and end up somewhere you never dreamed of, with information, perspective or insight that you’d never have found. One of the joys of the Internet is finding and reading something you think is wonderful that you’d never have found without it.
Krotoski: How often are digital tools such as the Web used by social entrepreneurs?
Leadbeater: The number using digital technology is low compared with non-digital technology. In the developing world, people often use quite basic technology. Many of the most imaginative schemes are using what we’d count as old tech. But you have to hope that in 10 years, when digital technology is all pervasive and meets both the huge need in the developing world and a body of social entrepreneurs, we will witness some flowering of social innovation to, for instance, provide education in new ways, to mobilize people to critical action in new ways, or allow poor people access to markets.
Krotoski: What needs to be in place — socially, technologically or commercially — to ensure that this future occurs?
Leadbeater: Technologically, you have to have capability and openness. If you create open technology that people can use, adapt and play with, it builds capability and they teach themselves. But if you’ve got closed systems, where all the end-user can do is to use it to download stuff, that doesn’t build capability. The significance of open systems is that they allow people to learn how to use them and to adapt them for their own uses. That is a really important connection. We’re seeing people able to mobilize forms of knowledge and take action, finding other people without needing high-cost professional networks.
One example is an HIV/AIDS activist network in Africa called Mothers to Mothers. It’s HIV-positive mothers advising other HIV-positive mothers about how to take anti-retroviral drugs and how to cope with the stigma of HIV and AIDS. In a way that will allow them to live a more normal life. It’s not terribly technology-enabled — it’s organized using mobile phones and networks — but it’s completely peer-to-peer: It’s mothers advising mothers.
It’s just one example, but it demonstrates how technology is facilitating the power of the lateral connection. The important knowledge won’t come from the professionals, but from other mothers who have had a similar experience or share a similar vantage point. That’s becoming more possible. We can get things done together — get knowledge, get advice in ways that in the past relied on very big, formal, often professional systems.
Commercially, companies will have to have an understanding of how you allow people to share stuff and make money from it. Only a small number of people will make money by completely controlling everything. Even Apple has allowed a limited amount of sharing, but I don’t think it gets the open Web. Google is an open world, but with a monstrous manipulation of advertising around search. Google will have to share revenue with content creators for the open ecology to continue to work.
Krotoski: How will the developing world create its own amateur activist culture?
Leadbeater: It’s all about access — the right tools, the right institutions, the right culture. Ten-year-olds are alike wherever you go; they just gobble this stuff up. I went to a school in a village three hours outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, 20km down a mud track. The parents of half of the kids in the school were illiterate, but I watched the kids make videos for YouTube. It’s waiting to explode, but if it arrives pre-packaged or tied up or fenced off, then you won’t get that.
Krotoski: The author Andrew Keen argues that amateur practices are detrimental to society.
Leadbeater: They could be if they become the only way to do things, completely replacing professional knowledge in places where professional knowledge is needed. But what Keen does is to paint an overly romantic picture of a nostalgic past.
You can go online now and find really thoughtful, in-depth, considered, well-informed communities around virtually any issue. If it’s your issue, there are now new ways of mobilizing knowledge that weren’t there before. There are real bodies of significant knowledge on the Web that are valuable that we haven’t done nearly enough with.
Krotoski: How can we ensure that the participants in this culture aren’t exploited by commercial organizations or governments?
Leadbeater: There’s a basic trade-off that’s still important. The first precondition for survival is to be seen to do stuff well. But this raises an issue that demands an activist consumer culture. People may be prepared to buy services from Apple and Amazon if they feel these companies do a good job, but we need to ensure that we can speak up when our content is used by other people for their profit. An activist amateur culture will constantly challenge and say, “This is mine, you’re not doing that with it.”
The second precondition is that we’ll need more effective forms of regulation to understand the Web. Regulating a television company and regulating Facebook are completely different challenges and Facebook may be our most important intermediary of information in 10 years.
Taiwan’s victory in the World Baseball Softball Confederation Premier12 championship is an historic achievement. Yet once again this achievement is marred by the indignity of the imposed moniker “Chinese Taipei.” The absurdity is compounded by the fact that none of the players are even from Taipei, and some, such as Paiwan catcher Giljegiljaw Kungkuan, are not even ethnically Chinese. The issue garnered attention around the Paris Olympics, yet fell off the agenda as Olympic memories retreated. “Chinese Taipei” persists, and the baseball championship serves as a reminder that fighting “Chinese Taipei” must be a continuous campaign, not merely resurfacing around international
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) appears to be encountering some culture shock and safety issues at its new fab in Arizona. On Nov. 7, Arizona state authorities cited TSMC for worker safety violations, fining the company US$16,131, after a man died in May. The Arizona Division of Occupational Safety and Health released its six-month investigation into the fatality and cited TSMC for failing to keep the workplace free from hazards likely to cause death or serious harm. At about the same time, the chip giant was also sued for alleged discriminatory hiring practices favoring Asians, prompting a flurry of debate on whether TSMC’s
This month, the National Health Insurance (NHI) is to implement a major policy change by eliminating the suspension-and-resumption mechanism for Taiwanese residing abroad. With more than 210,000 Taiwanese living overseas — many with greater financial means than those in Taiwan — this reform, catalyzed by a 2022 Constitutional Court ruling, underscores the importance of fairness, sustainability and shared responsibility in one of the world’s most admired public healthcare systems. Beyond legal obligations, expatriates have a compelling moral duty to contribute, recognizing their stake in a system that embodies the principle of health as a human right. The ruling declared the prior
US president-elect Donald Trump is inheriting from President Joe Biden a challenging situation for American policy in the Indo-Pacific region, with an expansionist China on the march and threatening to incorporate Taiwan, by force if necessary. US policy choices have become increasingly difficult, in part because Biden’s policy of engagement with China, including investing in personal diplomacy with President Xi Jinping (習近平), has not only yielded little but also allowed the Chinese military to gain a stronger footing in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. In Xi’s Nov. 16 Lima meeting with a diminished Biden, the Chinese strongman signaled little
RSS