PDF: Anticipating Disappointment
by Brian Reich | 29 Jun 2009, 10:17am
I have arrived for the first day of the Personal Democracy Forum, arguably the premiere gathering of political nerds and transparency junkies. I am honored and excited to have been invited to attend as a Google Fellow. And yet, I still fear that I will be disappointed.
Micah Sifry began his opening by suggesting “this is probably the biggest, most diverse tech politics conference in the country” - in terms of political persuasion, gender, focus, and similar. No argument there. There are people from campaigns and nonprofits, foundations, media, government - at all levels - and more. Lots of smart people. There are also lots of friendly faces here, people I have worked with (or in some cases competed against) and of course the people whose blogs I read and tweets I follow. There are also some ‘celebrities’ here - people who are leading the coolest projects or selling the nicest tools.
But, as Micah Sifry noted, “It feels like the gathering of the tribe.” And that is exactly the problem.
I am excited about the event. I am sure to learn things, meet interesting people, and walk away with my brain full of new ideas. Still, as I settle into my seat for the morning plenary, I can’t help but already know that I will be frustrated and disappointed by this event.
Why? Here are the three reasons I expect to be disappointed:
1) All the same people. A quick look at the agenda, which includes over 130 speakers, finds a who’s who of last year’s PDF conference. And the audience, looking around, includes most of the same people who always attend this event and participate in these discussions. They represent the big political players, the savviest media folks, some activists, big name authors and bloggers, etc. PDF has always brought together some really incredible people — but most of the same people are having this conversation day after day, with each other. That’s not progress. If you pay any attention to the issues of transparency in government and participation in politics, follow the conversation that has been happening for the past few years, you’ve heard all it all before. We can do better. The real opportunity for a gathering of this kind would be to bring in new and different voices to share their ideas, and their challenges — and put their views and efforts (or lack thereof) under the microscope.
Questions: Where are the big corporations, who invest heavily in politics and devote significant resources to getting what they want/need out of government, but still do everything from the top down (and still have significant influence)? Why isn’t there are whole track devoted to local government officials who HAVEN’T launched a website, heard of Twitter or similar - so we can find out what major challenges exist and how to solve them? There are more Democrats than Republicans, by a wide margin — why aren’t there
2) More of the same conversation. There are four major tracks at PDF this year: We.gov (how people inside government are making government more transparent, participatory, and hopefully more effective), We.media (how media is being transformed and our media ecology is changing), how-to (for people looking to get skills around mobile, video, advertising and targeting, fundraising, etc), and We.think (big ideas stuff). Within the big ideas section there will be talk about whether journalism is dying, whether the internet favor the outsider (i.e. Democrats vs. Republicans - who has control), and again, how to make a government open to the people. Most of these conversations have been going on for a while, and haven’t evolved much. They aren’t new. We are talking about too much of the same stuff. There are exceptions, and I’m not trying to suggest that the issues that are on the agenda aren’t critically important — but an event like this should be focusing on more big issues, and more topics that don’t usually get the kind of attention and focus this gathering can support.
3) Looking in the wrong direction. Worse than talking about the same old things, and to the same old people is talking about the wrong things. Like most conferences, PDF has the potential for that to happen. There is too much looking back and discussing why something worked, and not enough looking forward to understand how the lessons of the past can be applied towards real success in the future. There is too much celebrating and not enough problem solving. I think its because we continue to obsess over models — figuring that if we do exactly what someone did with their organization (e.g. how Obama organized) that we can get the same outcome (e.g. get millions of people to support our work). Instead we should be establish frameworks, parameters we can operate within and apply to meeting new challenges. That’s how society works these days. There are no set patterns. There are no silver bullets. There is no one way of doing things. And increasingly, with everything changing so quickly, and new challenges emerging every day, we don’t have the luxury of spending two days at this event (or any event) looking back, and instead should be using our time to look ahead. The benefit of an event like this, with an audience this diverse and engaged, is to apply that knowledge and expertise to meeting those new challenges - as well as the challenges we haven’t thought of yet (or in the right way). I just know a gathering with this many smart people has the potential to accomplish so much, and we aren’t likely to maximize the time we have together to do that, considering the format, and everything else.
This is a great event and a worthwhile gathering. But like I said, I already know that I will be disappointed. Why? Because, at the end of the day, its just another conference. We are doing too much talking to each other. We are talking too much about the same issues that we have been talking about for too long. And we are focused too much on the work we have done, and the things we know — and not enough on the challenges that exist and how to tackle them.
I hope I’m wrong.
TAGS
: PDF09
2 comments
