Looking back, jumping forward. A cybersocial retrospective
By Joan Mayans, President of Observatorio para la CiberSociedad
The Observatory for Cybersociety Conferences have marked the evolution of my professional life. Now, after some months working in the shadows and thinking more than acting, finally, we are launching another edition, the fourth one. Getting it off the ground. Knocking it overboard. With renewed passion, a mixture of ambitious objectives of continuity, and very good intentions towards change and reinvention. We are re-imagining the congress of the cybersociety. We want to break it free of inertia. We want to open it and twist it. Turn it upside down and think it again. We have a contracongressional committee. We want to take advantage of the dynamic, innovative and participatory partnership of the Citilab. We want to protect the core to stretch its wings. And first, we propose a game. A collective game which will be the first module of the congress. From now on, we won't be able to stop. I want to write a few lines to start looking back and to jump forward. Trying to re-write the evolution and history that we have behind us, drawing a parallel story about what was the cyber-society during this decade.
In 2002 was difficult to explain to someone that the things that were going on in cyberspace and the Internet were more social and cultural than technological, so we invented a first edition of the congress entitled "Culture and Politics in Cyberspace ". Then, we didn't call it "first edition", we just had the idea of a new hybrid that could really make the most of the possibilities of digital interaction, and that would exceed the tested models of typical "digital" conferences. We thought much more about simulating a virtual congress than adding digital tools to it. We emulate it. The congressional metaphor was the first level of discourse. Most of the people who worked then were linked to the academy, and were the first ones surprised of the success of the event. I remember when we where pushing it forward with the hardcore of the partnership and the first linkages with Jose Luis Orihuela, Roberto Balaguer, Djamel Toudert, Heidi Figueroa and Ramon Alcoberro ... That congress, organized from a room at Poble Sec, where 700 people participated, was the beginning of a saga. And, above all, this congress served to make noise, to advance a particular public perception, that the Internet was a real and meaningful social, cultural and political phenomenon. Now, this statement sounds repetitive and assumed, but it was one of the aims of the congress: Turning the Internet in to a subject of debate on political, economic, social and cultural development. Deflating it. I hope that we helped in this direction with our two cents...
The 2004 edition was the one about the dimensional change of the activity. The experience of 2002 was useful to provide a tested methodology and to define areas for improvement. The rhythm of work, range of equipment, related persons and, above all, the task of developing a digital environment to the extent that the event allowed us to make an international call that exceeded 4000 participants. At that time, the approach also was extending its scope, wondering "Towards what knowledge society are we going?" We almost left the apologetic emphasis on a socio-centric look at the ICT theme and we decided to challenge the model, the concept of knowledge society in use. The context, with an Internet that barely broke the skin to a more participatory model, where users were gaining control and ownership, was especially significant. On the one hand, governments and political parties, and on the other, multinationals and large traditional companies where trying to capitalize on the concept of "knowledge society", some just to follow the direction of prevailing winds, and others to make a profit out of it. Both of these groups were acting through a vertical model, searching for control of a theoretical hegemony over reality. However, the cybersociety replied, breaking the vertical model, flattening itself, becoming entangled, multiplying by thousands the number of players. The "knowledge society" that we discovered at the conference was very different from the one produced by the mainstream speeches, campaigns and serials. Over time, we have added the tag "2.0", which now makes it much more serious, a true paradigm shift.
Two years later, in 2006, with a working methodology further patterned and solid, we stood in front of a whooping and revolutionised cybersociety, one that had taken over at all levels much of the contradictions and the positions that made ICT a dynamic social space and provocative. The paradigm "2.0" was in full expansion in our environment and posed a great dilemma (and still does) around what the Internet means to society, as it broke with the previous models, breaking the old continuity blocks that seemed to move in the periphery. The whole society was finding ways to digitalise itself, and in this process, contradictions and opportunities were drawing new scenes for a wider public. The equation "Open Knowledge, Free Society" was one way of expressing this dilemma, perhaps one of the most controversial. Internet, ICT and knowledge technologies, by its very technical and ideological configuration, make possible a different way of understanding knowledge. From its creation, to its distribution and its consumption, Internet knowledge can be open, collaborative and cooperative. The implications of this for society in all its dimensions and ramifications (literature, business, culture, politics, music, entertainment, social relationships, and so on endlessly), propose a new model, a new paradigm of society. More free? This was one of the possible readings. The debate is wide open. The paradigm shift that we noticed in this third edition was not technological or cybersocial, but for society as a whole. More than a change on the Internet, we speculated a new model of society.
Two years and little have passed since that big debate, an umbrella for many more debates. We have written and debated a lot and, depending on how we evaluate the global economic crisis (and systemic?) it seems possible to see everything destroyed, all our attention and efforts absorbed, both intellectual and practical. Precisely for this reason, I think it's a good time to think bravely and provocatively. It's a good time to look beyond this enormous smoke around us, that turns us negative and disenchanted. What could be on the other side of this gap will depend largely on our capacity to imagine and propose that future. Thus, even more than ever, it is appropriate to rethink and debate the cyber-society in which we are already living. Where the patterns, structures and behaviours in the world have already changed. Where we will be acting either as co-creators or consumers. Because this crisis, as big and black as we want to draw it, is the latest crisis in the post-industrial world, the giant with feet of clay (financial and constructionist) of the old economy. From the Observatory for CyberSociety we propose an exercise of intellectual generosity, a collective look forward, half playful and half foresight, give us clues, suspicions and insights about cybersociety in the immediate future. Shall we play?
Adaptación del texto original
The Observatory for Cybersociety Conferences have marked the evolution of my professional life. Now, after some months working in the shadows and thinking more than acting, finally, we are launching another edition, the fourth one. Getting it off the ground. Knocking it overboard. With renewed passion, a mixture of ambitious objectives of continuity, and very good intentions towards change and reinvention. We are re-imagining the congress of the cybersociety. We want to break it free of inertia. We want to open it and twist it. Turn it upside down and think it again. We have a contracongressional committee. We want to take advantage of the dynamic, innovative and participatory partnership of the Citilab. We want to protect the core to stretch its wings. And first, we propose a game. A collective game which will be the first module of the congress. From now on, we won't be able to stop. I want to write a few lines to start looking back and to jump forward. Trying to re-write the evolution and history that we have behind us, drawing a parallel story about what was the cyber-society during this decade.
In 2002 was difficult to explain to someone that the things that were going on in cyberspace and the Internet were more social and cultural than technological, so we invented a first edition of the congress entitled "Culture and Politics in Cyberspace ". Then, we didn't call it "first edition", we just had the idea of a new hybrid that could really make the most of the possibilities of digital interaction, and that would exceed the tested models of typical "digital" conferences. We thought much more about simulating a virtual congress than adding digital tools to it. We emulate it. The congressional metaphor was the first level of discourse. Most of the people who worked then were linked to the academy, and were the first ones surprised of the success of the event. I remember when we where pushing it forward with the hardcore of the partnership and the first linkages with Jose Luis Orihuela, Roberto Balaguer, Djamel Toudert, Heidi Figueroa and Ramon Alcoberro ... That congress, organized from a room at Poble Sec, where 700 people participated, was the beginning of a saga. And, above all, this congress served to make noise, to advance a particular public perception, that the Internet was a real and meaningful social, cultural and political phenomenon. Now, this statement sounds repetitive and assumed, but it was one of the aims of the congress: Turning the Internet in to a subject of debate on political, economic, social and cultural development. Deflating it. I hope that we helped in this direction with our two cents...
The 2004 edition was the one about the dimensional change of the activity. The experience of 2002 was useful to provide a tested methodology and to define areas for improvement. The rhythm of work, range of equipment, related persons and, above all, the task of developing a digital environment to the extent that the event allowed us to make an international call that exceeded 4000 participants. At that time, the approach also was extending its scope, wondering "Towards what knowledge society are we going?" We almost left the apologetic emphasis on a socio-centric look at the ICT theme and we decided to challenge the model, the concept of knowledge society in use. The context, with an Internet that barely broke the skin to a more participatory model, where users were gaining control and ownership, was especially significant. On the one hand, governments and political parties, and on the other, multinationals and large traditional companies where trying to capitalize on the concept of "knowledge society", some just to follow the direction of prevailing winds, and others to make a profit out of it. Both of these groups were acting through a vertical model, searching for control of a theoretical hegemony over reality. However, the cybersociety replied, breaking the vertical model, flattening itself, becoming entangled, multiplying by thousands the number of players. The "knowledge society" that we discovered at the conference was very different from the one produced by the mainstream speeches, campaigns and serials. Over time, we have added the tag "2.0", which now makes it much more serious, a true paradigm shift.
Two years later, in 2006, with a working methodology further patterned and solid, we stood in front of a whooping and revolutionised cybersociety, one that had taken over at all levels much of the contradictions and the positions that made ICT a dynamic social space and provocative. The paradigm "2.0" was in full expansion in our environment and posed a great dilemma (and still does) around what the Internet means to society, as it broke with the previous models, breaking the old continuity blocks that seemed to move in the periphery. The whole society was finding ways to digitalise itself, and in this process, contradictions and opportunities were drawing new scenes for a wider public. The equation "Open Knowledge, Free Society" was one way of expressing this dilemma, perhaps one of the most controversial. Internet, ICT and knowledge technologies, by its very technical and ideological configuration, make possible a different way of understanding knowledge. From its creation, to its distribution and its consumption, Internet knowledge can be open, collaborative and cooperative. The implications of this for society in all its dimensions and ramifications (literature, business, culture, politics, music, entertainment, social relationships, and so on endlessly), propose a new model, a new paradigm of society. More free? This was one of the possible readings. The debate is wide open. The paradigm shift that we noticed in this third edition was not technological or cybersocial, but for society as a whole. More than a change on the Internet, we speculated a new model of society.
Two years and little have passed since that big debate, an umbrella for many more debates. We have written and debated a lot and, depending on how we evaluate the global economic crisis (and systemic?) it seems possible to see everything destroyed, all our attention and efforts absorbed, both intellectual and practical. Precisely for this reason, I think it's a good time to think bravely and provocatively. It's a good time to look beyond this enormous smoke around us, that turns us negative and disenchanted. What could be on the other side of this gap will depend largely on our capacity to imagine and propose that future. Thus, even more than ever, it is appropriate to rethink and debate the cyber-society in which we are already living. Where the patterns, structures and behaviours in the world have already changed. Where we will be acting either as co-creators or consumers. Because this crisis, as big and black as we want to draw it, is the latest crisis in the post-industrial world, the giant with feet of clay (financial and constructionist) of the old economy. From the Observatory for CyberSociety we propose an exercise of intellectual generosity, a collective look forward, half playful and half foresight, give us clues, suspicions and insights about cybersociety in the immediate future. Shall we play?
Adaptación del texto original
- efore the discussion of communications (12-29 of November) we have prepared a series of online workshops that will be published progressively.
Do you want to take part in it?
