Ushaidi goes from strength to strength, it seems, while Mashada closes down, which is an interesting trend path. As a Web2.0 social mash-up affair takes off, an old-school bulletin board project collapses – and for exactly the same reasons, the increase in violence in Kenya. The need for security-related information sharing has increased, leading to more support for something like Ushaida; but as the social divisions within Kenya increase discussions on the bulletin boards became more fractious and unmanageable.
What does this tell us? The virtual world isn’t resistant to real-world pressures, and it doesn’t necessarily overcome social divisions – hence the problems with the bulletin board. These pressures can be managed, but it’s no easy thing – but would Ushaidi be any less resistant to hijacking by people intent on promoting social divisions? I guess not – but people are using Ushaidi far less than bulletin boards, so it’s less of a target.
I was hoping to draw some lessons from this, but I can’t remember what they were. I like Ushaidi, though, and I think the call for a global version of Ushaidi is well worth pursuing – but raises lots of issues around what you’d actually do with it. Is it for advocacy? Security? Monitoring? I guess that these are my usual questions, since I had exactly the same feeling about BrightEarth when it started, and I’m still no further along the path of working out what my answers are.
Related posts:
Pingback: humanitarian.info » Violence 2.0: some lessons from Ushahidi
Pingback: humanitarian.info » Lights! Camera! Discussion!