passing that message to ISF
To read after the previous 2 entries.
I thought that I should pass on my thoughts on this to the volunteers of ISF. It’s weird - because it calls into question everything that we’re doing- and that’s not necessarily something you want to do in a volunteer organization. But I think it’s important enough and that we have a pretty good answer to that challenge.
I’ve always been concerned that ISF could be doing more harm than good. We’re having a big effect by bringing technology into public places (which have the least amount of technology - compared to home and work/school). And this effect isn’t only a good one. How do we make sure that ISF is supporting community more than it is weakening it?
This is one of the reason’s I try to make sure that ISF works with academics - to be self-critical about the work that we do. My thought is if we are having negative effects by bringing technology into public spaces we had better be doing it for a good reason and we should be making sure that they way in which we do it empowers people more than it enslaves them.
I think that we are trying to do that. And Wifidog as social software and the HAL projects are the best examples of that. We aren’t just bringing technology in “as is”. We are shaping it and changing the orientation of the technology before we bring it to our communities. We are using it to promote local interaction and emergent / alternative culture through partnerships like CHOQ. So I think we’re doing good stuff - but we should be aware of this larger issue.
I’ve written more on this if you’re interested (warning - academic-speak ;-)
http://mtl3p.ilesansfil.org/blog/archives/2006/04/05/worried_about_the_effect_of_isf.html
and
http://ideant.typepad.com/ideant/2006/02/in_defense_of_t.html
It’s funny - even Benoit - who I’ve worked so closely with over the last 2 years - didn’t know that I made it an unofficial policy for ISF to work with academics. Yes, because they are legitimizing forces, but just as importantly they help us be self-critical about the work that we do.
I had to spend a lot of time recruiting to find a Phd student to reseach us. I knocked on all the doors of all the communication profs at concordia and mcgill. Finally I found Leslie that was willing to talk to me. Through Leslie I was able to meet Alison and I tried to convince her that ISF (only 5 months after it’s inception) was worth studying. We got lucky That effort paid off in that we’ve gotten to have Alison spend time over the last 2 years helping us take a different view of what we’re doing at ISF and how we do it.
Update: Steph reminds me that LabCMO is also studying ISF along with other techno groups around Montreal. And I’m really glad that they are.
April 5th, 2006 at 7:52 am
I would like to say that the LabCMO is also studying the case of ISF (currently through the eyes of Alison) along with some other groups in Montréal, deeply involved with technology empowerment. This might be less visible, but it a research that has been going on for the last two years.
If we are lucky enough, we plan to continue this research in the following years through the study of more or less what you often call the “open movement”.
I guess some critics will get out of this :-)
April 5th, 2006 at 9:25 am
Fixed - i updated the post to reflect this.
Do you have a suggestion for a better term to use (re: open movement)? Cuz the one we got kinda sucks.