-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
1/36
DigitaldemocracyBuilding new
relationships withthe public anAPCC guide
Developed or
the APCC by
Catherine HoweChie Executive,
Public-i
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
2/36
2 | Digital democracy | Contents
Executive summary 3
Introduction 4
Why be digital? 6
What are people doing online? 7
How do we connect the
online and oine? 7
Conclusion 8
Understanding the channels 9
Social media or Web 2.0 9
Web 1.0 10
Traditional channels 10
The uture 12
Principles o uture engagement 13
Open by deault 13
Networked 14
Agile 14What kind o relationship
do you want with the public? 15
Communicative 15
Collaborative 15
Co-productive 16
How to be digital 17
Communicative politicians 17
Collaborative politicians 18Co-productive politicians 18
Resource and stafng requirements 18
Conclusion 19
Contents
Appendix 1 How can we create this? 20
Digital by deault 20
Open by deault 21
Networked 22
Agile 23
Appendix 2 Case studies 24
The police and bloggers working
together in Wolverhampton 24
Obama and Howard Dean 27
Community websites 28
#Riotcleanup 30
Mumsnet 31
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
3/36
3 | Digital democracy | Executive summary
Police and Crime Commissioners oer an unprecedented opportunity to develop a dierent
kind o local democracy that refects the way in which people live in the 21st Century, rather
than the 19th Century principles on which much o our local democratic practice is based.
The public is increasingly active online. With the take-up o mobile devices we are seeing
greater use o social and content-creation technologies.
There is every indication that the public wants a direct relationship with elected politicians
and that, or many people, this will be online.
A new kind o political relationship with the public is needed i we are to overcome rising
levels o voter apathy and disengagement with politics.
We propose that this relationship should be open by deault, digital by deault, networked
and agile.
Every politician should take responsibility or their digital ootprint and actively curate an
online presence.
The extent to which this is done can be described across three models: communicative,
collaborative and co-productive.
Executive summary
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
4/36
4 | Digital democracy | Introduction
The arrival o Police and Crime Commissioners oers us an unprecedented opportunity: to develop a
dierent kind o local democracy that is reective o the way people live in the 21st Century, rather
than the 19th Century principles on which much o our local democratic practice is based.
The public is increasingly active online and participating in campaigning movements such as
Avaaz1 or 38 Degrees2 and is using social media to organise community action and activities. These
range rom campaigns about parking to the guerrilla gardening and greening o urban spaces
by organisations like Incredible Edible3 in Todmorden. Levels o participation online in general
are growing in many dierent ways and the behaviours and culture o the digital world oer
opportunities to help shape a new kind o relationship between citizen and government.
This growth in participation is in contrast with the alling levels o voter turnout we have seen in
recent years.4 Indeed, the Electoral Reorm Society5 has estimated that turnout in the Police and
Crime Commissioner elections in November might be as low as 18.5%. Even i this turns out to be
pessimistic, local election turnout is languishing at no more than 35% o the electorate oering a
reasonable yardstick with which to judge the Police and Crime Commissioner elections.
Concerns over turnout prompt the question: does it matter? We believe that it does. Strong
democratic government needs a clear mandate at the ballot box and concern that this level o voter
participation does not provide this is thereore entirely legitimate. There is an argument that low
voter turnout can indicate satisaction with the status quo, but we are aware that levels o trust
in politicians are also declining; the public seems to be turning away rom politics. With a difcult
economic climate, at a time when government at all levels will need to ask more o its communities
and citizens, this should be o concern.
Modern policing is already making use o social media to interact with the public and create more
eective community relationships. The Police and Crime Commissioners will be in a position to do the
same. This paper is an opportunity to explore the evidence that suggests this new type o relationship
should be digital by deault and describes some o the ways in which the public currently interact,
not only with government, but also with other organisations, both public and private. As our society
becomes more digital and networked it is important to understand what this means, both o terms
o who is there and also in terms o who is not.
This paper outlines some o the channels that will be available or PCCs looking to democratically
engage with the public and how their use might challenge previous best practice. In doing so, we
discuss three potential models or the kinds o relationships that PCCs might have with the public.
While individual PCCs may choose dierent elements rom all three models they are nonetheless auseul way o exploring the range o options that are on oer.
Introduction
1 Avaaz is a global campaigning
movement which at time owriting has over 16m members.
Members choose which
campaigns are adopted and
crowdund the work. (www.
avaaz.org/en/)
2 Similar to Avaaz, 38 Degrees
operates only in the UK on
UK relevant issues. And they
have mobilised thousands i
not hundreds o thousands
o citizens on campaigns
(www.38degrees.org.uk)
3 Incredible Edible carry out
guerilla gardening in urban
areas (www.incredible-edible-
todmorden.co.uk)
4 This paper describes Local
and National Election Data
1918-2004: www.parliament.
uk/documents/commons/lib/
research/rp2004/rp04-061.
pd While improvements can
be seen the overall trends are
towards a reducing turnout.
The Hansard Audits o Political
Engagement also provide
valuable background data on
this topic: hansardsociety.org.
uk/blogs/parliament_and_
government/pages/audit-o-
political-engagement.aspx
5 Research rom the Electoral
Reorm Society: www.electoral-
reorm.org.uk/blog/pccs-how-
not-to-run-an-election
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
5/36
5 | Digital democracy | Introduction
Throughout this report we develop our key principles or the design o democracy in the uture:
Digital by default Digital by deault isnt just a matter o choosing to prioritise the digital
channel. We suggest a need to design democracy based on the social eects o a more digital
society.
Open by default Open practice in terms o data and inormation sharing is the bedrock both o
inormed debate and o building trust in politicians.
Networked Our digital world is highly networked we want to use these networks as part o the
democratic relationship.
Agile We do not work in a fxed context and we need to design our democracy to be able to react
quickly but methodically to change.
The PCCs have the chance to defne a new and vibrant type o elected politician that will not only
to meet the challenge o voter apathy but, more importantly, will be relevant to digitally active and
engaged citizens. It is no exaggeration to say that this frst cohort o PCCs has an unprecedented
opportunity to shape a new kind o democratic contract with the electorate, which meets the needs
o our 21st Century society. This paper is intended to provoke and challenge ideas about what this
might look like.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
6/36
6 | Digital democracy | Why be digital?
The internet and digital technologies are now very much part o the abric o our society and the
way in which we live and work. At time o writing, OFCOM estimates that 80% o the UKs adult
population has access to the internet. While this fgure continues to rise, digital exclusion remains
a signifcant issue. Evidence suggests that we are reaching a point where the elderly and the more
widely socially and fnancially excluded groups in society are unable to take advantage o the benefts
o being online.6 Nonetheless, i we are designing or even just ten years into the uture we need to
plan or a more networked, connected and digital population.
We also need to consider the impact o increased use o mobile devices OFCOM7 currently
estimates take-up o mobile phones to be at 92% o the adult population with smartphones, with
the ability to connect to the internet, accounting or more than hal o these devices. Signifcantly,
the Oxord Internet Institutes (OxII) 2011 report on Next Generation Internet Users in Britain8 showsthat users who access the internet rom mobile devices are more likely to create content, consume
content or look or inormation online - in turn, allowing them to become more active participants.
Further analysis carried out or this report by the OCSI9 provides us with this overall picture o online
activity:
Category Denition Prevalence Typical users
Non-users People who do not use
the internet
27% Retired and
unemployed
First Generation Users
(FGUs)
People who use the
internet but do not
own multiple devices
or access internet on
the move
42% Those employed
in manual skilled/
semi-skilled labour,
some students and
unemployed
Next Generation Users
(NGUs)
People who access the
internet rom multiple
locations and devices.
Specifcally, those
who use at least two
internet applications
(out o browsing the
Internet, using email,
updating a socialnetworking site, or
fnding directions on
their mobile) or ft
two or more o the
ollowing criteria: own
a tablet; a reader;
or three or more
computers
31% Some students, and
those employed
in managerial/
administrative/
proessional positions
Why be digital?
6 Martha Lane Foxs Race
Online initiative collated
much o the research on the
benefts on being online: http://
raceonline2012.org/research
7 stakeholders.ocom.org.uk/
market-data-research/market-
data/communications-market-
reports/
8 Hutton W and Blank G,
2011, Next Generation Users:The Internet in Britain www.
oii.ox.ac.uk/downloads/
index.cm?File=publications/
oxis2011_report.pd
9 The data or this section
has been collated and
analysed by the team at the
OCSI, a spin-o o the Social
Disadvantage Research Centre
at the University o Oxord.
The OCSI is a research team
which works with public and
community organisations
to improve services, turning
complex datasets into engaging
inormation and accessible
analysis or communities and
decision-makers. More details
on OCSI can be ound at
www.ocsi.co.uk
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
7/36
7 | Digital democracy | Why be digital?
The OCSIs work goes on to examine this data with respect to socio-economic groups. The table
below shows the eight groups or which we have a prevalence o internet use fgures. These are
taken rom a combination o the OxII internet surveys10 and OFCOMs Technology Tracker survey:11
Category % Non-users % First
Generation
Users
% Next
Generation
Users
Students 1% 47.5% 51.5%
Retired 63% 34% 3%
Employed in Social Class AB 13% 39% 48%
Employed in Social Class C1 13% 40% 47%
Employed in Social Class C2 13% 45% 42%
Employed in Social Class DE 13% 52% 35%
Unemployed 27% 43% 30%
All others 27%12 42% 31%
The overall picture is o growth in internet take-up and usage a direction o travel that government
and democracy need to respond to.
What are people doing online?
For many people social media is a purely social activity. We use social media to keep in touch withamily and riends or to access entertainment or news inormation. Increasingly, brands are using
social media to orm a relationship with their customers and to engage audiences in a conversation
about their products and services. Brands listen online and learn valuable acts about consumer
preerences and needs. In turn, consumers have become accustomed to being able to interact with
service providers and are now bringing the same set o expectations to their democratic relationships.
Politicians ocus is on civic and democratic interactions, broadly characterised by a desire to discuss
issues that are relevant to the local or national community. Public-i has conducted Social Media
Audits in more than ten dierent local areas in order to look or inormal civic participation and
it is clear that local communities are making use o new technologies to have the community
conversations which might previously have taken place in local pubs or post ofces. These sites
represent networks o active and engaged citizens. The ocus or politicians in the uture is how toensure they have a relationship with these networks.
The case studies inAppendix two look at some o the impacts o this inormal and civic activity in a
national as well as local context.
How do we connect the online and ofine?
Neighborhood Saety Partnerships, Neighborhood Watch, Tenants Associations and Parish Councils
are all examples o traditional oine networks that will be a vital part o PCCs engagement and
communication.
The online activity described above does not detract rom oine participation or community
activities although the last Hansard Audit did show a concerning drop in levels o volunteering.Oine networks and activity can be said to complement online activity and vice versa. However, one
o the ways to ensure a positive online/oine dynamic is to consider how some o the behavioural
qualities o the digital environment can be made to enhance oine participation. Furthermore,
10 Hutton W and Blank G,
2011, Next Generation Users:
The Internet in Britain, OxIS,
www.oii.ox.ac.uk/downloads/
index.cm?File=publications/
oxis2011_report.pd
11 Ocom, 2011, Technology
Tracker Survey data tables,
stakeholders.ocom.org.uk/
market-data-research/statistics/
12 Note these categories do
not cover all people. We have
taken the 73% internet users
rom OxIS page 9 or all people
who are not retired, students,
employed or unemployed.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
8/36
8 | Digital democracy | Why be digital?
there are many experiences and connections that cannot be recreated online and no one wants to
contemplate a relationship with the public that exists solely online. However, better use o digital can
and does strengthen oine as well as online relationships.
The technically simple act o either webcasting or live tweeting an oine meeting can both increase
the reach o the event and create a digital asset, which can be reused in other ways. Police Forces
throughout the UK are already experimenting with online community meetings and live web chats,
or example those used by Leicestershire Police in areas including Blaby, and it is reasonable that the
public will expect new PCCs to continue to experiment in this way.
The online environment is highly participative and collaborative and also tends to be more playul
than equivalent oine environments. Digital participants are now able to control their experience
to a ar greater extent than, or example, the fxed agenda o a community meeting might permit.
New orms o public meetings are being tested with great success. Formats such as the CityCamp
movement, which brings together the local community with technology experts and social innovators
to create change in their community, are eective because they pass much o the control o the
event to the participants. The CityCamp Brighton network13 has had our events now and has seen
participation rom more than 600 people in the city. These are very much oine events that take on
the characteristics o the online space.
Digital technology provides people with control over content production and distribution and gives
them a voice that can, i used eectively, reach thousands i not hundreds o thousands o people. It
is not surprising perhaps that these same people are disinclined to attend real-world meetings which
rely on a fxed agenda created by someone else. I we want to engage these digital participants in
a democratic conversation then we need to consider how to do this in a way that makes sense to
them.
Conclusion
Digital by deault can be argued or on solely the basis o the channel shit outlined above. But this
argument may be made more powerully by the social shit we are seeing, in terms o participatory
and collaborative behaviours that are developing online. It is this discussion o behaviours which we
take orward into the design section o this report.
13 This report was
commissioned by the Local
Government Association
(LGA) to look at the impact
o the CityCamp Brighton
events: www.idea.gov.uk/idk/
aio/29755205
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
9/36
9 | Digital democracy | Understanding the channels
This section provides an overview o the dierent channels available and discusses them in the
context o political communication and engagement. The strategy underpinning the use o these
channels should be based on the substance o the conversation that the politician is seeking to have
with the public. This conversation will cover the policy-making cycle with all parties able to raise
concerns or ideas, to discuss solutions and narrow these down through deliberation into a decision
which is then communicated and carried out. In an agile, networked and ever-changing environment
these processes will need to happen in parallel, not sequentially.
Social media or Web 2.0
Social media is a term that covers a range o technologies with a number o characteristics:
users can create their own content;
users are able to create networks o riends and collaborators; and
users can share their own and other peoples content.
These characteristics pass both the means o content creation and distribution into the hands o the
user, provoking a seismic shit in the way in which we communicate. We are now more than passive
consumers o content and can expect to interact with media. And it is this change that is creating a
more participatory culture online. Social media breaks down into a number o dierent categories:
Category Description Examples
Social networks Social networks are defned by users having public
profles and the ability to connect or network withother users. These sites usually have the ability or
users to provide status updates and share and discuss
content created elsewhere.
Facebook
MySpaceLinkedIn
Micro blogging Micro blogging is the simple sharing o short updates
in a public way. While Twitter is the example everyone
knows, other social media tools also include orms o
micro blogging.
Twitter
Blog platorms Blogging platorms provide simple tools or users
to create their own content - oten text based.
People blog about almost any subject, and the most
successul can develop substantial ollowings thatvalue and trust their opinion.
WordPress
Blogger
Tumblr
Photo or video
sharing
Similar to blogging platorms, photo or video sharing
sites are a way or users to share the content that they
have created. Ranging in skill and technique, these
sites oten attract niche but committed audiences.
YouTube
Vimeo
Flickr
Instagram
Online
communities
Online communities have many o the aspects o
social networks but are usually based around a
specifc topic or area o interest. Access to content
may be restricted to members and participants can
orm strong relationships within these communities.
Mumsnet
Netmums
Macmillan Online
Community
There is also another set o sites such as Pinterest14 which allows users to create an online clipboard
o interesting content that could be described as curation tools. Curation is growing in popularity
as the volume o online content grows and users learn to use their riends to point out interesting
Understanding the channels
14 Pinternest enables users
to create visual pinboards o
other peoples content
www.pinterest.com
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
10/36
10 | Digital democracy | Understanding the channels
content, rather than looking or it themselves. This phenomenon, oten called social search (search
based on the interests o your network) is embedded into search tools such as Google which will
prioritise your results based on your behaviours and the behaviours o users similar to yoursel, but is
more overtly used in curation tools such as Pinterest. This is useul to know as an eective curator o
content can have a large ollowing and can be an eective contact to help take your messages to a
wider audience.
Perhaps the most signifcant aspect o social media or PCCs will be the growth in hyperlocal
websites. Hyperlocal is passing into practitioner use in the UK airly seamlessly, with groups such
as Talk about Local, Podnosh and Networked Neighbourhoods using it to describe grassroot
communities that organise online and are ocused on a geographically defned area. The hyper in
the local comes rom the act that they tend to concentrate on areas that are considerably smallerthan any democratic decision making unit (or local newspaper patch) the exception being the
parish level. There is no technological commonality across these sites. They use dierent tools and
dierent platorms and vary between bulletin boards, to blogs to sites using more social tools. The
uniying themes are location and the idea o civic purpose and community.
The use o social media is growing rapidly and the ability to create networks and participate in
content creation is undamental to this growth. It is these qualities which we suggest are useul in
the design o democratic participation.
Web 1.0
There are many people who are still using the internet as a broadcast channel with minimal
interaction. This would include many sophisticated retail sites, some media sites and smallercommunity websites. However, social elements are working their way into many o these sites, with
user eedback and reviews now central to many retail sites, while services such as Tripadvisor15 are
based on user-generated content. In the public sector the Patient Opinion16 service enables patients
to give anonymous qualitative eedback about their experience with the NHS and similar approaches
are being trialled with the police in the orm o MyPolice.17 Each o these tools provide eedback,
not only to the provider but to the other users as well. In the context o the democratic conversation
these experience-sharing tools would be invaluable in creating a rich picture o how people eel
about their experience o police and crime in their area. In other areas, such as retail or travel, the
new business models rely on users providing eedback and sharing experiences. By building this into
the democratic process we can reect their experience o giving eedback ar more than the closed
consultation processes currently used by most areas o government.
Traditional channels
Anyone contemplating political ofce will already be aware o the traditional communication
channels, but it is worth considering the disruptive pressure that they are each acing rom digital
technologies:
15 www.tripadvisor.co.uk
16 www.patientopinion.org.uk
17 www.mypolice.org
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
11/36
11 | Digital democracy | Understanding the channels
Channel Disruption Adaption
Television Television aces two main challenges:
1 the switch to mobile devices as well as
time shited audiences (where people
watch TV on catchup services rather
than live) which challenges both the
ormat and business model o content
consumption; and
2 the growth o social media and other
interactive services put pressure on
broadcasters to incorporate more ormso participation.
The BBC has pioneered innovation in
this area with the development to the
iPlayer which can be used on a range o
digital devices. Most other broadcasters
have ollowed this model. Both news and
entertainment programmes now will have
a second screen strand where viewers
can comment on Twitter or directly on
the shows website in order to participate
and these contributions can be seen toinuence the content o the shows.
Radio As our listening devices gain the ability to
oer video as well as audio content, radio
is being challenged to meet the pressure
o this convergence.
Radio stations are becoming community
hubs and oer greater levels o
interaction via their websites.
Print Print is perhaps the most severely
disrupted channel acing many challenges
with the growth o user generated
content and more participatory orms o
media, both making it harder to reach
an audience and also making the publicless inclined to pay or content. For
local newspapers the attrition o their
advertising revenue has been disastrous
to business models. New digital
distribution technologies such as the
Kindle and tablets such as the iPad with
the advantages o speed and portability
are eating into reader share and making
expensive investments in technology
essential.
The Guardian is leading the way, in the
UK, experimenting with new ways to
consume and interact with the news.
Many publishers have experimented with
the eBook ormat prior to the launch o
the Amazon Kindle which has currentlycornered the market. Local newspaper
groups in particular are fnding it hard to
adapt to the publics changing habits o
news consumption, and this is a problem
or local democracy which has in the past
relied on the existence o an eective
local media. To some extent social media
is flling this gap with the creation o
citizen journalists and bloggers, but this
space is still developing.
Telephone While the fxed landline model is indecline mobile telephony is on a constant
rise with 92% o adults having a phone
contract at the start o 2012.18
Swapping rom landline to mobiletelephones isnt just a simple feld in
a database. The paradigm shit oers
the ability to reach individuals quickly,
discretely and directly even i they
are living in shared accommodation
and service design should reect this
opportunity.
18 Figures taken rom the
Q1 2012 OFCOM Technology
tracker
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
12/36
12 | Digital democracy | Understanding the channels
Channel Disruption Adaption
Face to
ace
The opportunity to speak, ace to ace,
with others will always have a place
in the political process, but its now
reasonable to expect that participants
will be online and active during these
encounters. This means that they have
access to inormation outside o the
meeting, can interact with people who
are not physically there and can orm
a backchannel o discussion within anevent.
There are three main adaptations that can
be made here:
1 Ensure that you are creating a digital
record o the meeting that is complete
rather than the incomplete record that
might be created by participants;
2 engage with the backchannel and make
it part o the event; and
3 open up the agenda setting and
planning o the event to ensure thatpeople are participating.
The uture
This summary touches on the mainstream digital channels today, but this landscape is constantly
changing and an essential skill or any leadership team will be the ability to horizon-scan and make
sensible inormed choices about the way in which technology and societys use o technology is
changing. For example, the growth in smartphone use makes location-based services (where the
service oers you choices based on your location) a reality that could start to see an augmented
reality in which physical spaces are enriched with an overlay o digital inormation. This may eel very
uturistic but, as the data in the last section outlines, these changes are happening rapidly.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
13/36
13 | Digital democracy | Principles o uture engagement
In writing this report we have based the approach on our basic principles as outlined in the introduction:
Digital by default Digital by deault isnt just a matter o choosing to prioritise the digital
channel. We suggest a need to design democracy based on the social eects o a more digital
society.
Open by default Open practice in terms o data and inormation sharing is the bedrock both o
inormed debate and o building trust in politicians.
Networked Our digital world is highly networked we want to use these networks as part o the
democratic relationship.
Agile We do not work in a fxed context and we need to design our democracy to be able to react
quickly but methodically to change.
The frst o these, digital by deault, was explored in detail in section two and this section seeks to
expand on the other three principles. The next section will describe what these principles might look
like in a practical sense.
Open by deault
Open by deault breaks down broadly into our areas o consideration:
Open process
Trust in process is created by being clear about what the process is. A good democratic experience is
one where you are happy that the outcome is air even i it isnt your preerred outcome. At presentmany o our decision-making processes do not eel open to the public, as they assume that the
public have access only through their representatives (and the public do not always eel connected to
politicians). We have a choice: amend the process or improve the connections between citizens and
politicians. The answer may be a combination o the two. More generally, open processes enable ar
wider participation and also build in the opportunity or creativity and innovation ar more eectively
than those that assume all the answers are held by those directly involved. Look at events like the
CityCamp movement19 to see what happens when you bring interested people together with no
agenda and some basic resources.
Open access
Open access is really about making sure that government is available to the public as are
politicians. This means taking the conversation, and the decision making process, to the places where
people are and having the debate on their terms, not at the convenience o government. It is also
about using new channels to make it possible or ar more people to connect directly to politicians.
There are some things that need a ace-to-ace conversation, but new technologies and the social
shit around the way in which they are used means that the public should insist that politicians and
government actively engage with them using these channels this is an entirely solvable problem.
Open standards
The real beneft o open source and open standards is the design signal it sends in creating an online
experience. I we want to be open by deault then we need to use open standards to build our civic
architecture.
Open mind
There is a fnal sense in which we need to consider open and ask ourselves how open we are to
new ideas. This is particularly important or politicians who, i being open, need to consider new
Principles o uture engagement
19 www.citycamp.govresh.com
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
14/36
14 | Digital democracy | Principles o uture engagement
ideas throughout the policy-making process i they wish to gain the trust o the public. This doesnt
mean agreeing with everyone, but it does mean more active listening. I we are open by deault we
have to be open to external inuences, as well as being open with our thought processes.
Networked
All politicians are networked, but their networks are oten based on hierarchical structures rather
than the networked environment that the digital world oers. In this context, leadership needs to
show slightly dierent qualities to those o a hierarchal leader which we suggest are:
The ability to create a vision, and a narrative o that vision, which is ocused enough to give
direction and is open enough to enable others to contribute to it. This vision needs to be an
ongoing and public conversation.
To be credible in setting this vision it is essential that you have knowledge o your own place
in the network and the value that you bring and that this value is evident to the rest o the
network. You cannot be a leader in a networked organisation just by dint o job title; you need a
strong place to stand and an arena in which you contribute to the overall inormation and activity
exchange o the network. The social web is at the heart a meritocracy, and the digital environment
puts emphasis on personal contribution and exchange.
At the same time as having a clear view o their own contribution the networked leader also needs
to be an eective talent spotter they need to be able to quickly fnd and ampliy activities that
contribute to the vision both within and outside their organisation.
In doing this there is a need to be transparent with respect to decisions and to be able to explainthese as being consistent with vision and values.
The single aspect that is at the same time a byproduct o the above, and perhaps the most
immediately realisable aspect o the networked leader or the PCCs, is the power that networked
leaders have to convene people and conversations that cut across organisations.
Agile
The need to consider democracy and policy making in a more agile way is driven by a number o
actors:
an increased awareness o complexity and the need to build or complexity;
an awareness o the impossibility o developing anything in isolation we exist in open, not closed,systems and no idea exists in isolation; and
where so much o our service design is digitally based we need a shit rom engineering to systems
thinking.
This adds up to a requirement or eective evidence and learning mechanisms that have to be
embedded into your systems so that you are aware o and ready to react to change as it happens,
rather than being orced to wait out a complete decision-making cycle beore reacting.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
15/36
15 | Digital democracy | What kind o relationship do you want with the public?
This paper does not suggest more direct democracy (though there is evidence o an appetite or it,
with 76% o the population wanting greater use o reerendums or decision making, according
to the latest Hansard Audit o Political Engagement). What we are proposing is a more direct
representation, where the citizen is meaningully connected to their representative and where
we have a dierent kind o relationship between citizen and politician. We suggest that this is
only possible by making extensive use o technology and, to make this possible, we propose the
integration o all o the unctions o political ofce to help orm the relationship with the public, and
that this integration is based on the principles outlined in the last chapter. This will be described in
more practical detail in the next section, but involves each o these unctions:
Communications The communications unction includes the relationship with the press and
other media as well as public inormation campaigns.
Public engagement Public engagement is considered to be the process o actively trying to
involve the public in a specifc policy process.
Consultation and research Consultation and research reers to the systematic creation o an
evidence base or policy making.
Policy making and decision making Policy making and decision making represents the
process o refning that evidence base into a set o choices that are then deliberated and ultimately
decided on by the political process.
In each case we are seeking to use these unctions to create a stronger relationship between the
politician and their electorate in a way which is meaningul and accessible or both parties. Direct
representation does not mean direct interaction with every citizen, but it should mean a direct
connection that allows or the two-way ow o inormation and opinion.
However, the scale and nature o this relationship will vary depending on the characteristics both o
the local population and o the politician. In order to help navigate the possibilities, we have created
three potential models or politicians to adopt when designing their strategy or engagement with
the public each o these can be adapted to meet the needs o each unique situation.
Communicative
Eective politicians are already highly communicative and this model is based on current best
practice. However, with respect to the use o digital technologies, certain assumptions are made:
while digital channels are used to broadcast data and comments are responded to, there is limiteduse o online discussion;
relationships with the public are ormed oine, but uture communication may be digital;
any difcult matter, be it individual case work or community engagement, is carried out ace to ace;
sampled online opinion is not part o a discussion or consultation process public opinion is
understood via ormal consultation or community engagement meetings; and
policy making research and work in progress is not discussed with the public except to state that
it is ongoing.
Collaborative
As discussed in earlier sections, one o the defning eatures o the social web and new digital
technologies is the collaborative and participatory behaviours it acilitates. The collaborative model
makes the ollowing assumptions about the politicians behaviours:
What kind o relationship do youwant with the public?
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
16/36
16 | Digital democracy | What kind o relationship do you want with the public?
social media is used both to create relationships and manage case work;
tools or active online listening are used and new items (agenda setting) are accepted or
discussion via these channels;
as part o this process the ofce and politician are aware o the online networks and opinion
shapers in their area and have cultivated constructive relationships with them as well as with the
traditional media;
the politician is open with their thinking about policy making and research, perhaps blogging
reections and ideas or even sharing their diary online so that the public can see who they are
meeting; and
the Ofce o the PCC is open by deault with respect to data and idea sharing.
Co-productive
Co-production20 is a term to describe a relationship with the public in which the citizens take an
active role not only in shaping but in delivering services. This requires a more open relationship in
which power is shared with the public. This is clearly the most challenging o the three scenarios
but reects some o the current thinking around democratic reorm, looking to tools such as
participatory budgeting or the more recent community right to buy as ways in which the public
can taken greater control over their local services. Within the policing arena, restorative justice
programmes can be said to work towards providing co-productive solutions to local crime problems.
This model assumes all o the behaviours o the collaborative model and makes the ollowing
additional assumptions:
the ofce and politician have a strong network and networked relationships with the local
community.
the policy making process is open21 and agile allowing or public scrutiny o the evidence base and
public deliberation o the choice criteria or decision making.
adoption o evidence based decision making which reects learning rom pilots and experiments in
public; and
an open agenda setting process with respect to policy making.
20 The term is well explained
in this report by Nesta:
www.nesta.org.uk/
publications/reports/assets/
eatures/the_challenge_o_
co-production
21 There is a current
dialogue on open policy
making being curated by
The Democratic Society:
www.openpolicy.demsoc.org
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
17/36
17 | Digital democracy | How to be digital
Each politician will use their own personal mix o tools and techniques based on their preerences.
Some people are very comortable with the very short and immediate back-and-orth nature o Twitter,
while others are happier with the more refective option o a blog. Those who have a more visual mind
may preer to use a photo diary or video blogging. For some politicians Facebook works well and will
be their preerred channel. What is important is that the politician understands the relative strengths
and weaknesses o each approach and is able to discern which one is most likely to suit them.
Many candidates will already have a social media presence that will need to adapt to the role o
the representative upon election. Failing to resolve the dierences between a pre-election digital
ootprint and your identity as an elected politician may leave a PCC at risk o negative scrutiny rom
opponents and the media.
Social media requires direct input: one cannot expect to be authentic online without crating
some content onesel and resource constraints will almost certainly mean that PCCs will not have
a sta that will be able to create the kind o social media profle that, or example, the No10
communications team does or the Prime Minister. It is also important to bear in mind that, while a
simple website may satisy some users, there will be a growing number who would expect a more
social experience.
A simple way to manage this could be to have a Twitter and blog site working together. The PCC
can state on his or her Twitter profle that they check their eed every morning but dont have time
to answer questions. Instead a weekly blog post can reerence the questions/issues that have come
up on Twitter. The time commitment or this could be no more than 15 minutes a day and then an
hour once a week to prepare the blog post. In return, you could have reached thousands o yourelectorate in a direct and sociable way.
This digital home should be the oundation o the digital ootprint and it should be more accurate
and engaging than press or other coverage o what the PCC is doing. The huge advantage o the
social web or politicians is this direct connection with the public without media interpretation.
The common concern is how much time this might take up. By setting boundaries on where and
when engagement can take place it will be possible to prevent the process rom becoming overly
burdensome as long as these boundaries are communicated clearly and stuck to. It may also
be sensible to consider mapping out boundaries o content in advance as this will help to clariy.
Questions to consider are:
Is it appropriate to be online in the evening? Many social media users will interact with Twitter
while watching programmes such as BBC Question Time, when there is a lively online debate.
Should PCCs mention amily and riends as part o their content? How private or social should the
content be?
Should PCCs oer commentary on national issues as well as local ones?
These boundaries will change as PCCs develop their voice online and fnd the right mix o content
and channels. The sections below describe what this might mean in practice.
Communicative politicians
All politicians have to be eective communicators, however the advent o social media and digital
technologies has helped to change what this means. The communicative politician needs to have adigital presence that will relate to both frst and second generation internet users. This is most simply
delivered using a blog which is accessible via the PCC Ofces website, with updates tweeted out via
a connected Twitter account and also via the Ofces corporate account.
How to be digital
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
18/36
18 | Digital democracy | How to be digital
While the PCCs communications team might support a PCC by monitoring interactions and drating
content, this space should belong to the politician and will need content directly in their voice to be
eective. This separation will also help to manage the distinction between their work as a politician
and the more corporate work o the Ofce.
I we are responding to the data that was presented in section two then this is the bare minimum o
participation that a politician should have in the online space.
Collaborative politicians
Collaborative politicians will have an active digital ootprint and will be using it to interact with their
electorate and beyond. Relationships will be made online with notable inuencers o opinion rom
both old and new networks, and ideas about new initiates and current thinking will be shared. Thetone will be open and conversational and will rely on open data and other initiatives implemented
by the Ofce to reinorce this. The collaborative politician may even go as ar as sharing their
diary online and being open with who they are meeting. It is likely that this will mean being active
on more than one channel - probably Twitter and one other and will usually be done rom a
smartphone on the go, rather than rom a desk.
Where possible and appropriate, the collaborative politician will answer questions in public - even
those that are raised via oine channels. By this means it will be possible to manage interactions
efciently while building a presence.
Beyond the standard social media monitoring o the communicative model, this approach requires
network analysis and an understanding o the reach o the politicians, via inuencers.Co-productive politicians
True co-production requires a dierent approach to decision making but the essence o this model
is the ambition or the citizens to have an active voice in shaping as well as making decisions. A co-
productive politician should be comortable about putting the evidence base in the public domain
and discussing it in public. They should also be adept at introducing and convening people both
online and oine with wide networks and a deep understanding o online and oine inuence.
In terms o social media the dierences between this and the collaborative model are airly minor,
although wider adoption may mean that active listening and polling tools are used in order to get
robust eedback on what the audience is saying.
Resource and stang requirements
Most o the ideas suggested in this paper should be manageable through minimal resource
requirements. However, it is not practical to expect that the PCC will have less than at least one
member o sta engaged with social media work and that this engagement should cut across
communications, engagement and policy making unctions. Technology costs can be kept low
though more sophisticated monitoring tools, or example, may require additional expenditure. Put
simply, there should be no Ofce so small that they cannot embrace the basic level o engagement,
but more sophisticated use will require sta time and expertise and this will need to be balanced
against other needs.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
19/36
19 | Digital democracy | Conclusion
The frst cohort o Police and Crime Commissioners has a unique opportunity to design a democratic
ofce that is developed with the needs o a 21st Century society in mind. This paper lays out the
evidence or this being based on our important principles: digital by deault, open by deault,
networked and agile. There are a range o ways in which these principles might be applied and each
PCC and their Ofce will be as unique as the areas that they serve.
Strong relationships with the community are at the heart o our police orces and the PCCs need to
have the same standard o deep-rooted community knowledge and engagement. However, in the
21st Century this has to take into account the social change driven by technology and think about
the needs o voters ten years in the uture..
This paper is speculative based on strong evidence and the experience and learning o many
practitioners and politicians. The actual impacts o a more networked and digital world may be very
dierent to the models proposed here, but unless our democracy is learning and evolving with the
technology and social changes then we risk a continuing widening o the gap between politicians
and the citizens they serve.
Conclusion
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
20/36
20 | Digital democracy | Appendix 1
This section describes how we might deliver some o the principles we have discussed with respect to
the spectrum o relationships described in the three proposed approaches. We have approached this
with respect to each o the our principles which have been suggested by making suggestions about
actual tactics which could be used to deliver the outcome. Each o these have been tried within local
or central government in the UK unless indicated otherwise using italics. Some tactics do appear in
more than one place i they have multiple applicabilities.
Digital by deault
Within each o the models there is a need to respond to growing numbers o people online as well
as to take advantage o the cost saving potential o technology. The table below provides examples
o the kinds o activities which could make each o the models digital by deault.
Communication Engagement Consultation Democratic
process
Communicative The website
is the primary
inormation
sharing tool with
print being used
only to reach an
audience who
cant get online.
Updates arebroadcast via
social media as
well as via the
website
Events are
either webcast
or live tweeted
and widely
disseminated
online. The social
media channels
are monitored
and questionsanswered during
ofce hours
Questionnaires
and consultation
documents are
online with oine
copies being used
only to reach an
audience who
cant get online
Minutes o
meetings and
related papers are
available online.
Meetings are
either webcast
or live tweeted
and widely
disseminatedonline
Collaborative In addition to
the website, the
Ofce and/or
politician have
active social
media accounts
and have anunderstanding
o the network
that they have
and who they are
reaching via these
means
Social media is
used not only to
share updates but
also to respond
to content rom
other participants
and to gatherinormation.
Inormation is
again gathered
online, however
this may be done
via networks and
active citizens as
well as directly
No change rom
above
Co-productive Content can
be created and
distributed by
members o the
network as wellas by the Oce
Issues are raised
by the public as
well as the Ofce
and discussed
online
Ideas are crowd
sourced online in
an unstructured
way and then
analysed publicly
Online decision
making tools,
such as with
participatory
budgeting, areused to open up
the process
Appendix 1 How can we create this?
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
21/36
21 | Digital democracy | Appendix 1
Open by deault
Being open by deault is about more than just the data. The table below shows how this could be
realised.
Communication Engagement Consultation Democratic
process
Communicative The website
provides RSS
eeds and uses
open standards so
that content canbe widely shared
and reused
Engagement
activities are held
in places like
supermarkets
and where thepublic are already
meeting
A record o
all upcoming
consultations and
decisions is shared
online
Minutes o
meetings and
related papers are
available online.
Meetings areeither webcast
or live tweeted
and widely
disseminated
online. This
inormation is
available or
sharing
Collaborative The PCC is
blogging their
current thinking
and the work that
they are doing.
Details o the
PCCs diary are
available online.
Social media
channels are
used to actively
participate in
more generallocal news
An open data
store is created
and is actively
developed
with public
participation
There is an
opportunity or
the public to
suggest items
that need urther
investigation with
a view to entering
the policy making
process. Evidence
is shared openly
online with the
public
Comments rom
the public are
encouraged
during meetings
via social media
and other
channels
Co-productive Content can
be created and
distributed by
members o the
network as well
as by the Oce
Open meeting
ormats are used
with no more
than 50% o the
agenda coming
rom the Ofce
Citizens are
able to actively
participate in
shaping the
evidence base or
decision making
Participatory
budgeting
approaches
are used or all
or part o the
budget setting
process
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
22/36
22 | Digital democracy | Appendix 1
Networked
The strength in networks is in the ties between dierent groups, and the role o connector and
convener has great power. The table below describes how this could be used in this context.
Communication Engagement Consultation Democratic
process
Communicative Social networks
are used to pass
on content which
is created or the
website
Network analysis
is used to extend
the reach and
access or
engagement work
Networks are
used to gather
responses rom
target groups
Decisions are
communicated
via relevant
networks rather
than being simplydisseminated
centrally
Collaborative Messages are
tailored to
reach specifc
networks and
these networks
are used ormally
as part o the
communication
process
Community
meetings are
planned to ocus
on preexisting
local networks
and groups
Consultations are
planned to ocus
on preexisting
local networks
and groups
Deliberations
are conducted
within networks
and then shared
with the PCC or
decision making
Co-productive Messages are
shaped in
response to active
listening to the
Ofces networks
and inuencers
The PCC convenes
meetings
o relevant
stakeholders with
respect to specifc
issues
Tasks are passed
to specic
networks or
action and
evidence
gathering
Solutions to
problems are
raised, discussed
and resolved
openly via
networked
discussion. In
many ways this is
what happened
with #riotcleanupbut without
democratic
oversight
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
23/36
23 | Digital democracy | Appendix 1
Agile
Agility is something which is oten discussed with respect to sotware development, however in this
context we are considering it with respect to the democratic relationship.
Communication Engagement Consultation Democratic
process
Communicative Press releases
are blogged
rather than being
distributed to the
media
Campaigns
are shaped to
refect specic
local priorities
and respond toeedback during
the campaign
duration
Formative
evidence is
gathered to help
shape an evidence
based to shapedecision making
Decisions are
made clearly
linked to the
evidence base
and respond tondings that have
been discovered
ater the start o
the policy making
cycle
Collaborative Content can be
rapidly uploaded
and distributed
rom multiple
areas o the
organisation whilestill adhering to
content guidelines
Campaigns are
co-created with
local networks in
order to respond
to user eedback
rapidly
Opinion is
sampled using
quick polling in
the same way as
Ipsos Mori and
similar to carryout research
Decisions are
made clearly
linked to the
evidence base
and respond to
ndings that havebeen discovered
ater the start o
the policy making
cycle
Co-productive Content can
be created and
distributed by
members o the
network as well
as by the Oce
Open meeting
ormats are used
with no more
than 50% o the
agenda coming
rom the Ofce
Citizens are
able to actively
participate in
shaping the
evidence base or
decision making
Decisions are
shaped with
active citizens
who continue
to participate
actively in the
outcome
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
24/36
24 | Digital democracy | Appendix 2
The ollowing case studies are intended to provide a more in-depth picture o inormal civic activity
online.
The police and bloggers working together in Wolverhampton
This case study was originally gathered or our blog, ollowing the riots o the summer o 2011. It
eatures the story o how Superintendent Mark Payne o the West Midlands Police and the WV11
blog, which covers the Wednesfeld area o Wolverhampton, worked together to counter rumours
that spread about violence in the city.
The WV11 blog
The WV11 blog is run by Wednesfeld residents Steph Jennings and James Clarke; its dedicated to
providing local news and inormation and, because its very well run by people who care about theirarea, it has a large, loyal ollowing both on Facebook, Twitter and through the blog.
Because James and Steph are proud Wolverhampton residents, the blog keeps an eye on whats
happening across the city, and beore the events o August 2011 already knew about Mark Payne,
himsel a prominent user o Twitter to convey his activities as a police ofcer in the city.
How it happened: below weve charted how Mark and WV11 blog used social media to inorm
people o what was happening in the city over the space o a ew days.
Monday 8 August 2011
Following riots that had taken place the weekend beore in London, there were reports o trouble
spreading to other cities in England, including nearby Birmingham. All was calm in Wolverhampton,
but Superintendent Mark Payne was already having to quell misinormation on Twitter.
At the same time, Steph rom the WV11 blog was seeing similar rumours circulating on Facebook.That evening, she and James started to update their Facebook page to set people straight:
Appendix 2 Case studies
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
25/36
25 | Digital democracy | Appendix 2
Tuesday 9 August 2011
On Tuesday morning, Mark tweeted that there was some minor damage to shops in Wolves
overnight, but this was nothing in comparison to the problems elsewhere. At midday, he tweeted:
Huge amount o resources available to quell any trouble in Wolverhampton and the West Mids.
Hope common sense prevails.
Later that day, Mark was on the ground when trouble did are up: I was in amongst the rioters fve
minutes beore it kicked o. And I was able to use Twitter to tell people what was actually happening
and what wasnt.
Steph and James relayed Marks updates regularly to their Facebook page and blog. The work they
did appears to have had an invaluable eect. Steph said: Ater a while, people were coming onto
the Facebook page and correcting what other people were saying [when they were rumours]. People
were saying things like: I think you should just listen to what the guys running the site are saying.
Wednesday 10 August 2011
On the day ollowing the trouble, both Mark and WV11 were quick to report on the atermath
both the damage to shops and the eorts to clean up the centre. Mark also made sure people knew
about what the police had done to track down the troublemakers.
WV11 posted photographs in the aternoon showing how people were out on the streets tidying
up. They took care, Steph said, to not just capture shops that were damaged, but those that were
not.
The ill-ounded rumours on Twitter and Facebook continued on the Wednesday, but claims thered
be more trouble never materialised.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
26/36
26 | Digital democracy | Appendix 2
Conclusions
Both Mark and the WV11 blog beneftted superfcially rom the riots as their work in preventing
the spread o difcult rumours lead to greatly enhanced ollower numbers or both online. But
most signifcantly, they both expressed an interest in working more closely together in the uture
demonstrating how largely inormal relationships established on the web could develop.
Mark had already been aware o the blog, but it proved how a group o interested local citizens,
working with the police, could help to stem the ow o misinormation.
It is important to point out that, while Steph and James were aware o Mark, there wasnt a close
relationship between them. Without social media, there would have been no way or these messagesto have been spread in this way.
One o the questions that will need to be discussed between the PCC and the Force is how this
kind o community dynamic will operate in a crisis situation what role will the PCC play in calming
ears and reaching out to networks? A ow i inormation will be needed and, i done correctly,
complementary networks should be in place across the Force, PCC and ofce o the PCC, which
should work smoothly together in this kind o circumstance rather than adding to conusion. The
Force can and will use social media in a crisis situation and so it is essential that the PCC is aware o
this and able to support this activity.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
27/36
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
28/36
28 | Digital democracy | Appendix 2
Community websites
Rather than attempt to tell a story, this case study is an introduction to some o the many very well
maintained and considered local online communities that have been established over the last ew
years. We look at some o the dierent orms they can take, rom websites, to blogs and other less
obvious guises. These sites exist in every area and it should be a critical part o your communications
strategy to understand rom the start what the hyperlocal activity is like in your area.
Buckshaw Village
www.buckshawvillage.com
This site was once run as a orum but has now become a blog. In common with many o the best
hyperlocals it concentrates on the same kind o civic stories that have been the domain o local
newspapers. These include crime, planning, environment and community issues. As it is a blog,
readers can comment on stories underneath and subscribe or updates to their email or to an RSS
reader. Buckshaw Village also uses the photo-sharing website, Flickr, to present pictures o the area.
Brookmans Park
www.brookmans.com/orum/
This website might not look like much but it is an example o one o the least celebrated butnonetheless most well established and popular orms o online community. Local orums can
be ound up and down the country and this example has been chosen because it is in no way
remarkable. It uses a simple content management system, allowing users to comment on and start
conversations o their own choosing. This allows residents in an area, in this case in Hertordshire, to
discuss issues o signifcance to them.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
29/36
29 | Digital democracy | Appendix 2
Hampton Peoples Network
www.hamptonpn.ning.com
The Hampton Peoples Network is set up on a Ning essentially a customisable social network.
While a lot o the content is public, you can join to take part in discussions and receive updates.
Like Buckshaw Village, it concentrates on civic content but eatures discussions that anyone who
is a member can take part in. Like a orum, its a orm o online community where commenting is
encouraged and oten conversations start with little content to begin with (unlike a blog).
The Ventnor Blog, now On the Wight
www.onthewight.com
This is an example o a hyperlocal blog that started small but in a relatively short time has become
one o the most successul and innovative local blog news sites on the web. As you can see by
browsing its content, the website looks to ulfll a similar role to that o a local newspaper with
coverage o arts, entertainment and hard news. Ventnor is someone dierent to many community
websites in that it has a commercial attitude, and its editors have worked hard to try to make it
fnancially sustainable.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
30/36
30 | Digital democracy | Appendix 2
The Worthing Page
www.acebook.com/worthingtown
While most o the celebrated community websites are on the web, the Worthing Page is an example
o a Facebook group dedicated to a town, Worthing in Sussex.
Unlike blogs and community websites, it is ocused on discussion, which in some ways makes it
more like a orum. Its administrator, Ed Crouch, set it up on his iPhone while sitting in his car and
invited his riends to join. Membership quickly grew and the page now has more than 12,000 likes.
Discussions include everything rom places to go out to the problems o dealing with dog litter on
the streets. There are also appeals or help rom residents and the occasional lively civic debate. Like
the Ventnor blog the Worthing Page has looked to attract advertising and is attempting to become
commercially sustained.
Conclusions
What bonds all these websites is their sense o community and the act that the web allows people
to fnd and exercise that sense o community in a way that is both convenient, cheap and readily
accessible almost anywhere.
Oten these sites arent run by rustrated journalists attempting to start a publishing empire but
by ordinary people who care about their community. Like Steph and James o the WV11 blog, they
want to share the stories o their community and to help to improve it. Even when these sites do
have a commercial edge, they concentrate on their community and, mostly, rely on a degree o user-
generated content to sustain interest. This means that they cant be courted or engaged in quite
as simple a way as a newspaper might.
#Riotcleanup
While the riots o the summer o 2011 are oten blamed on the power o sel organisation made
possible by digital media (in particular, Blackberry Messenger) this same orce had a remarkably
positive impact when unleashed by civic-minded Twitter users.
The BBC called Dan Thompson the Riot Cleanup ounder but his campaign, i thats what it
should be called, is probably better described as a spontaneous response to a common problem:
what to do when someone smashes up your community.
It started very simply, with Dan asking i anyone would like to help clean up ater the riots in London,
on Twitter. As others rallied to his cause someone added the hashtag #riotcleanup and then it took
o.Hundreds o people attended a clean-up in Clapham Junction, a website appeared and the eorts
o the Riotcleanup soon spread. In London the BBC reported similar eorts were launched to repair
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
31/36
31 | Digital democracy | Appendix 2
rioter damage to Ealing and Lewisham, while urther afeld, in Liverpool, a Facebook group was
established to organise volunteers.
What #riotcleanup relied on was the simplicity o the idea which allowed it to be conveyed quickly
and through many people on Twitter and its common and immediate relevance. Almost no one
living in the UK would have been able to escape the riots, as they had been aorded almost universal
coverage on television, newspaper and radio. But they had also been the result o social media with
inormation about the riots changing hands on Facebook, Twitter and elsewhere.
The speed o this mobilisation is perhaps what is most sobering or exciting. Mashable, the social
media blog, reported that in the 10 hours ollowing its setting up, the RiotCleanUp Twitter page had
just short o 50,000 ollowers.
Conclusions
Because Twitter in particular allows an idea, a date, or a link to be exchanged through many people
it can be cascaded to thousands o people very quickly as the #riotcleanup hashtag was. Twitter
allowed users to quickly decide on when and where to meet, to agree on what to bring and how to
get involved.
This incredibly quick and generally very eective mobilisation was heralded as a success but it is
interesting to note that it largely circumvented the authorities. While Boris Johnson was quick to turn
up in Clapham on the day o the clean-up, and the BBC reported that fre crews were cheered during
the event, the mass action had been put together with neither the input nor the blessing o the
people we commonly think o as being in charge at a time o crisis.
As with the WV11 example PCCs should consider what role and what connection they would have
with respect to this kind o activity in their area.
Mumsnet
As online communities go, Mumsnet is perhaps (in the UK at least) the most well known and, to
some at least, most notorious. Founded by a journalist and a television producer or ellow mums, it
has gained considerable media attention since it was launched in 2000.
It has also grown to be the most popular website or parents in the country and, thanks to its
webchats, where users o the site can post questions to guests, has hosted interviews with Prime
Minister David Cameron among a host o politicians and celebrities.
Mumsnet says its mission is to make parents lives easier It was established ollowing a disastrous
amily holiday that inspired Justine Roberts, co-ounder and chie executive, and ellow ounder
Carrie Longton to dream up a website or parents that would take on parenting issues and it does
this by allowing members the chance to communicate with each other in an environment thats
dedicated to them. In a Guardian interview, Roberts described that process as people organising
themselves to help each other, show small kindnesses and be communal.
That sense o sel organisation is very much part o the Mumsnet philosophy. As Roberts explained:
Our members are a 24/7 ocus group. I were not too sure about what path to take, we consult
with them. And they show us the way. We are conduits, not leaders. And, as the website says: We
try, as ar as possible to let the conversation ow and not to over moderate. Mumsnet is a site or
grown-ups.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
32/36
32 | Digital democracy | Appendix 2
The results have been impressive. Not only can Mumsnet claim to be the most popular website or
parents in the UK, it can boast a string o sel-help results where members have pitched in to help
each other.
Perhaps the best known is that o Riven Vincent, who told Mumsnetters that a lack o provision o
respite care meant she had decided that she must ask or her daughter to be taken into residential
care. Fellow Mumsnet members sprung to her cause, lobbying the government to take action and
prompting the site itsel to launch a campaign, asking local authorities what their provision they had
to oer respite to amilies with disabled children.
Most amously, Mumsnet members campaigned against an EastEnders storyline in which a mother
who lost her baby to cot death chooses to steal another mothers child. The campaign attracted
negative attention or the site with some accusing Mumsnet o pursuing censorship (which the
website strenuously disputes). It did, however result in a change o story rom the BBC.
Conclusions
Mumsnet declares that it has aspirations to be sustained by advertising but it has been careul
not to all oul o the views o its members, explicitly banning advertisers whose values are not in
line with its own. In act, the site is as its ounders point out run explicitly or mutual beneft.
Browsing the message boards, on which members can ask questions, invariably demonstrates that
the claims o mutual support are true and it serves an important role or many people. Its power
comes rom its members ability to work together. It is a community that hasnt perhaps had direct
representation in the media in quite such an explicit and inuential way beore - perhaps part o its
massive success.
Sites like Mumsnet are very much issue ocused but where they decide to campaign they have
extensive reach, good media connections and deep brand loyalty rom participants which is why
political party leaders ran chat sessions on Mumsnet prior to the 2010 election. These sites represent
large active networks who can be mobilised on specifc issues or example child saety and could
be a vital part o the overall communications mix or a targeted audience.
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
33/36
For your notes
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
34/36
For your notes
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
35/36
-
7/30/2019 Digital Democracy, Building New Relationships with the Public for PCCs
36/36