"France succumbed to Twitter" - this is today's headline in one of the most popular French newspaper "Le Parisien". Two million French are using Twitter as of today. This number is nothing compared to the true success of Facebook on the French soil. Half (!) of the population in France are using the biggest social network in the world.
The success of social media in France is undoubted. In addition to the global networks, like Twitter and Facebook, there are other networks that have rather French or European flavor and are also quite popular, to mention Daily Motion (a version of Youtube) for exchanging videos, or Viadeo (a version of LinkedIn) that is used for professional purposes.
The boom of the social media is being felt especially strong in the last few month, due to an extraordinary event that happened in Mai: the arrest of the president of IMF, Dominique Strauss-Kahn. The French media was reporting about this event in an obsessive way, only reflecting the shock that struck the public and the political class in France. But what was of particular importance in the aspect of social media is that the first to report about the event was a french student who tweeted the information on his personal account.
The sudden explosion of interest for Twitter was unprecedented. All major newspapers provided Twitter's user guide, as if inviting their readers to follow the reports about the DSK affair on Twitter. Needless to say, most of the French journalists covering this affair in New York were tweeting about it on their personal accounts! This trend, however, was not met with much enthusiasm on the part of the traditional media. Some of them, like TV channel Canal+ asked their correspondents to stop tweeting.
The Web 2.0 revolution is in full swing in France. But what about Gov 2.0 of the French Government? It's true that many politicians opened Facebook and Twitter accounts. The President of the Republic, Nicolas Sarkozy, has the bigger number of fans on his Facebook page than any other European leader. And even Martin Aubry from the Socialist Party, his probable rival in the next elections, who was quoted saying: "Facebook et Twitter, j'ai horreur de ca" (Facebook and Twitter, I'am horrified by it), recently opened her Twitter account.
However all these examples don't change the reality. One of the French experts of social media whom I met recently, put it this way: "There is no Gov 2.0 in France. It's still Gov 1.0". Unfortunately, the french ministries (with some rare exceptions), state and public employees, representatives of local government still haven't discovered Gov 2.0 - the idea that the modern government could - and even should - use the social media to improve its services and to have direct dialogue with citizens. The idea that social media could be incorporated into the functioning of the government is far from being explored and conceptualized. One of the rare examples is the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs that opened an official Twitter account. However, I've never seen french diplomats tweeting for professional purposes.
This difference in a mindset was felt during the last G-8 summit in May, that was hold in France, the current president of the Club. The French presidency invited to the forum the most important players of social media, among them Marc Zuckerberg and Eric Schmidt. While the French President highlighted in his speech the need of more control of the governments over the Internet, his invitees tended to stress the dangers of the excessive regulation, and repeated their conviction that Internet can be regulated by itself.
I think that the states can have some limited role in regulation of the Internet or social media. However, what is more important is that Governments will play its role not as a regulator, but as an active participant in the social media. Governments should be present there and conduct direct dialogue with their citizens. The time of one-way communication is over: the governments must join Web 2.0. This idea is called Gov 2.0. If it doesn't sound well in French, we can think about better translation.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
“It’s hard to understand, but Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is heading full force into his own collapse, and that of his Authority, in September”, wrote an Israeli commentator Guy Bechor a few days ago.
It’s one thing to make declarations; it’s another thing to bring to their implementation. It’s one thing to use strong expressions like “Israel will face diplomatic tsunami in September”. However in reality, the vote in the UN, if it will happen (with strong emphasis on “if”), could hardly be described even as an “aftershock”. Rather it will prove to be void of any significance, like most of the communication spins promoted by Palestinian Authority and their supporters in the media.
We don’t have to be prophets in order to understand why this outcome of the UN bid is almost inevitable. We just have to be good listeners.
Let’s first listen to somebody who probably has better understanding than the average person, why the unilateral declaration in the UN is useless and counterproductive. Person whom the President of the Palestinian Authority Abbas wants to keep as his Prime Minister -the acting Prime Minister Salam Fayad. In an interview to the AP on June 28, asked what would change on the ground after the UN recognition, he said: “Nothing, unless Israel is part of that consensus”. Fayad also warned against raising false expectations among the Palestinians.
He is, of course, right. Once the Palestinians will see their expectations unanswered, the situation can get out of control. Israel, no doubt, will be the target of this frustration – but also the Palestinian authority. Because PA and its leaders will be blamed for this failure, and Hamas will have another chance to strengthen its influence in the West Bank. This scenario would be hardly welcomed by the population of the West Bank, after 3 years of economic growth and improved conditions of life. They don’t want to see the green flags of Hamas waving over Ramallah and Bethlehem.
In the Israeli-Palestinian equation there are of course much more players. Let’s listen to our neighbor from East. Here is what said senior Jordanian official to the UAE-based Al-Bayan newspaper: "Jordan’s top national interests will be in danger if the Palestinian Authority declares statehood unilaterally – especially in everything related to the issue of refugees, water, Jerusalem, and the borders".
And of course it’s not only Jordan who is very skeptical about the new Palestinian initiative. We also hear voices from the Persian Golf, like the one of Abdallah al-Hadlaq in the Koweiti newspaper Al Watan: “All those who hope for real peace in the region must reject these reckless unilateral Palestinian moves that block the negotiation process. The Palestinians must be made to understand that the only way to a permanent peace
treaty will be through direct talks”.
Palestinian strategy of unilateral recognition won’t work. United States, Germany, Italy, Holland and other European countries already stated that they will not support it. We are sure that France and Great Britain will follow the same path. The position of Russia and China are still not clear, despite the spin the Palestinians are trying to make.
All these strong expressions like “diplomatic tsunami” or diplomatic isolation of Israel are no more than spin whose goal is to pressure Israel. A political tsunami did happened in the Middle East – it started last December in Tunisia, made its way to Egypt, and nowadays takes place in Syria. However, the UN vote on Palestinian State in September won’t even make an “aftershock”. It would be just another vote in UN that will change nothing. Mahmoud Abbas went to the other part of the world to get recognition for his state. He forgot that the distance from Ramallah to Jerusalem is less than 20 kilometers, and that the two-state solution is a way to solve our conflict, not to perpetuate it.