tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-281027888150444008.post1483627410177237574..comments2023-10-31T04:47:03.037-07:00Comments on SIS640 Manic: “A Space for Confrontation between Opposing Communication Paradigms”Eli1985http://www.blogger.com/profile/01220593037080970869noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-281027888150444008.post-50903400828135622552009-09-28T15:36:09.200-07:002009-09-28T15:36:09.200-07:00Tessa, I think the World Summit on the Information...Tessa, I think the World Summit on the Information Society suffered from the same problem that affects a lot of UN events -- it was ultimately undermined by some of its most positive characteristics. It was inclusive (good) and unweildy (bad). It was bureaucratic in the sense of being large and focused and specialized (good) and it was bureaucratic in the sense of being inefficient and slightly uncoordinated (bad). It addressed a wide range of topics (good) but failed to reach consensus on specific aspects of governance (bad). For the record, if anybody's looking for a fabulous parody of UN inaction, I'd recommend this link from last week's Daily Show: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-24-2009/international-house-of-fruitcakes<br /><br />Ultimately, I think civil society is subject to many of these same problems, but in the Raboy piece, at least, it seems as though there are a few more networking options available, perhaps because of its nongovernmental status. <br /><br />At the end of the day, existing technologies have dramatically opened up modes of communication for individuals and groups around the world, creating forums (fora?) for them to voice their opinions and magnifying their influence on shaping the "public sphere." I don't know that I'd go as far as to call the WSIS a failure, but I do agree with you and Raboy that modern civil society has an increasingly influential role in communicating and influencing the global agenda.Laura McGinnishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08988777156047163046noreply@blogger.com