Social innovation has been, within any society, for ages something questionable and, by all means, a bridge over troubled water of already established canons of thinking and acting, regardless of the society and ideological system.
We all know that social interaction is a basic of every society and, especially, when we have “innovation”, that means that we would like to change an already existing way of acting and, of course, thinking. It is a difficult, very difficult job.
But, new technologies have done something within this field that could not have been done with any other means whatsoever. Namely, within the field of communication, sociology and psychology, through the interaction of technology, changes happens almost every day, which we can compare with the previous times of “slow motion” when we are talking about the implementation of any kind of social innovation, with the help of new technologies.
For example, today everybody, thanks to social networks, can be journalist – create, comment and improve his/her own skills within a certain field, and what is the most important – without mediators (journalists).
So, what does it mean to have all this social innovation? The answer is, as usual, if we are capable to see it, very simple and visible. This will be developed further within this chapter, through further more methodologically developed remarks: There is a presence of brand new life within the life, thanks to social networks and on the basis of that, social innovation within the mentioned fields develops and interacts with each other.
Content, creativity, execution, and the analysis of the “tools of social innovation” provides us with the possibility to be focused on concrete actions based on the development of the mentioned.
If you call something “social” that means:
a) It is part of the society;
b) It belongs to the society;
c) It is influenced by the society;
d) It influences the society.
The existence of every human being relies on other human beings. No man is an island (John Donnne, 1624). Social innovations within communication will help better understanding and improve the quality of adequate cohabitation.
Social innovation is the presumption of social development, but only if it is based on a methodological approach focused on the needs of post-modern society, focused on direct democracy.
Social media as a social innovation driver and vice versa with the focus on research and training of assumed presumptions is dedicated to the development of learning based on direct interaction.
Social media is the best possible existing tool for the interaction between everybody for everybody – the common good is here to stay. But, it is not just enough to create innovation – the issue is how to implement it, having in mind social, political and communication environment of the focuses region and/or world?
Entertainment and social good. How it works together within interaction of social media and social innovation?
New technological challenges and the perception of the policy makers. Do we have a toll for the manipulation (social media) of the society or the toll for the development of the sustainable society?
Capitalism as contradictio in adiecto of the implementation of social innovation through social media! Pro at contra.
Social media and policy makers within the process of social innovations.
Social media for the social innovation in transfer of knowledge. Potentials and barriers.
Using social media to support social innovation – crowd sourcing; open innovation; the wisdom and creativity of people outside your own workforce…
The impact of social media on intercultural social innovations – cultural differences influence communications, behavior and values.
Social media, social needs and social innovations – governance: operations, strategy and policy.
Social media and social innovations
There is a presence of brand new life within the life, thanks to social networks and on the basis of that, social innovation within the mentioned fields develops and interacts with each other.
Sometimes social innovation, within the scientific field of explanation, has been put under the economic development using the sign of equivalence between material wealth and quality achieved within the social development. This leads us towards a famous joke that came out from the mouth from someone once upon a time from Balkan area: “In average, we all live good eating cabbage rolls – just someone eat cabbage and other ones meat.” Extremely huge number of the population in each country in transition (although, as well in a majority of developed countries) is unsatisfied with their lives or under the big pressure of different kind of media propaganda have lost its orientation in space or just, simply saying, conciliated with current way of living. So, social innovation is becoming to be, today, a coincidence and they is product of, in the first place, party programs and dissatisfactions of masses.
But, the control of thoughts (David Hume, 1711-1776) is the presumption of the creation of any authority on power. And how social media can reflect possibilities of the communication within social networks on World Wide Web when we focus on social innovations? Do we have social media that exists as a possible alternative to the modern dictatorship of democracy though something else but endless highway of the absolute democracy (Erich From, 1941)?
Questions rise and the social innovations through social media, having within it communications above all, will help to have us become subjects instead of objects of social reality. Namely, that myself (Sabahudin Hadžialić, 1997), as the person who participate within the process of communication, become active subject and creator of the final information (read: innovation), which is, at its end, not that any more but final product of interaction of equal subjects. To stop being objects there is a need for more than just will itself. And that “something” is not just “the knowledge” about the subject of interaction – that “something” is interaction of equal subjects1. To stop being objects we need more than just the will itself. That “more” is not just “knowledge” about the subject of interaction that “more” is equality of interaction within the creation of the vision of “Global village”. Where that “village” will be suitable place for the match (or game) of ideas and where the game of ideas will be presumption of the creation of another, one more, quality. Because, of the communication itself.
Twenty years (2017) after having written that paragraph the visibility of the social innovation within social media might lean on the above statement. How? In general, social innovation must be something which will help development of the society within its core – communication itself. Social media is an ideal place for it because the equality within it already exists – all depend who and how it is used and for which purposes. Social innovation should be the game of ideas of equal interaction of different subject using the special life within the life that exists in the virtual world of new technologies.
Life within the life2 is the part of social innovation. Methodologically, the aim is to define involvement of social media within social innovation having in mind the following:
a) Within the explanation “and/or” possibility that social media inherently is the source for the implementation of social innovations;
b) Within the establishment of the fact as well as most sincere idea for the improvement of human kind existence when it can become own contradiction through “big data” with the goal of manipulative stream of the events that, utterly, leads towards the control of thoughts and acts;
c) Within the goal of discovering of hidden agenda within using the information for the purposes of social innovations that are collected from social media, being analyzed and manipulated by the side of the ruling structures with the orientation towards the controlling of the possible future actions of their own citizens (NASA);
d) Within the goal of every day facing with “bombarding” with redundant and needless flash information that are conditioning certain reactions with the goal of manipulation of our conscience towards direction of assumed premeditations in model and status of something that is called social media as presumption of total and/or frantic (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/vico/) conscience which is talking to us, through social media, about end of history we might know.
e) Within the goal of finding solutions which might be, in certain way, become the use of social media for the purposes of social innovations, in modern Agora (Ancient Greek central spot), create possibility of mutual awareness with the goal of benefit of one to all and all for one. No matter what it sounds utopist within the space and time where manipulation is the subject of all kinds of awareness that we know, even if we are talking about new kid in the block: social innovation.
To able to use social media in proper way within social innovation process we have to take into the account that social media are: cheapest and/or mostly free form of interaction; accessibility – everybody can be involved within social innovation through social media networks – previously it was reserved only for the organizations well equipped with equipment and personnel.
So, these are the basic advantages of social media comparing with other media when we are focused on social innovation: First – Social implies conversation. Second – Central office for Information (www.coi.gov.uk) from the United Kingdom defines “social media” as the title that is in use for online technologies that are in use for sharing of the opinions and information, promote discussion and build of the relationships, promote discussion and build relationships and contacts.
Services of social media and tools includes combination of technology, telecommunication and certain social interactions which suits social innovation in excellent way, also having in mind that can use different formats, i.e. articles, photos, video and audio recordings. On other side of the world, in Australia Capital Territory Government, there are Social media Guidelines (http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/open_government/engage/social_media_policy) which states the following: “Social media is umbrella term covering websites, mobile technology, applications or tools that enable active and participatory publishing and interaction between individuals over the internet.”
Social media can be characterized by: building relationship; user participation; user-generated
content; collaboration; multi-directional conversations and accessible and scalable publishing.
1. Social media are different from traditional forms of communication as we have the case with newspapers, television and film.
Low cost – everybody has an access to Internet.3 Accessibility – tools are simple for use. Provision- everybody can use things which has been, up to date, reserved for the organization well equipped with equipment and personnel.
Use of the word “social” imply conversation and that is an exit for the real outcomes (properly reached) of social innovation based or hearing and listening of the “crowd” (in positive meaning – for having more thoughts about the same issue) for having a proper, democratically shape, conclusions focusing on the improvement of social environment. After all, social innovation is development of positive society values and not retrograde building of traditional values linked with any kind of exclusivity.
2. Death of control – mega trend in rise: Until now and establishment of social media networks we had age of control when big organization and companies had monopole on massive communications and have been used for the controlling and dissemination of information and today we are faced, through the use of social media-social networks, with the fact that anybody educated (with internet connection) can be the one man band for any kind of above mentioned4 with low cost (https://wikileaks.org/ and https://edwardsnowden.com/). That means very difficult control by official government of any kind, and can only have just certain influence on something like that.
3. Less “Gate keepers” – mega trend on rise: Before, within the communication of “one to many” had “gate keepers” within one-way informing which can be shaped towards the way gate keeper would like to do so. Social innovation through social media does not allow that. Because, today we have “many to many” communication without “gate keepers” (http://www.glas-javnosti.rs/node/61544/print). with less leaning on media (http://www.davidicke.com/ or here http://disinfo.com) and more on direct source of information within the task of social innovation – as well as one on each other. Here, even, we go with the new styles of communication, “beyond” the media to able to achieve the complexity of interactive model.
4. Fragmentation – mega trend on rise: Before, we were receiving, within the communication, information about social innovation from the few centralized channels, In today’s new reality in front of us is the big cloud interaction which has covered horizon of one sided communication – conversation within social media has taken place wherever participants are shaping up their opinions: blogs, social media, YouTube. In this way is separated the one who makes possible exchange of information from the content, as well as platform where it is realized from the content itself.
Today we have to underline most important part of social innovation, when we are talking about social media being deeply involved within it:
a) Knowledge sharing, To be able to rethink and rebuild the way we all deal with social problems, citizens should be engaged as catalysts for social change – whether as clients, community members, or fellow entrepreneurs. It is possible, through social media, to build citizen’s capacity for self-organization and for community problem-solving and helping of growing of the most exceptional providers.
b) Network building (Ashton Kutcher and Kevin Rose, 2009),
c) Mobilizing community for cause (Paula Ellis, 2006):,
d) Creation of community cloud,
e) Wisdom of the crowd as presumption of success.
Social media can be used for producing opportunities for creative construction of a new model of citizen participation within social innovation process. Before we had World wide Web as distribution channel for so call of pushing out of the information where the Internet pages were static E-bulletins and WWW was utilitarian and people were pretty neutral in regards the Internet. Today, however, if we consider WWW as community through social media networks, where people, depending of the age, race, gender and/or level of the education spent the most of the time on the interactive social networks, we come to different conclusion: In front of us is, instead of “pushing” the “pulling out of the information” based on interaction, communication, comment, wishes, remarks…Social WWW is informal, virtually inspirational and emotional.
The advantages of social media for the purpose of social innovation is quick and thoughtful approach to get support, seeking for the feedback for original thoughts, after development of social innovation and, finally, organizational and practical development of earlier established goals within social innovation.
Why is social media so important for social innovation process? One example (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iQLkt5CG8) from Department of Justice (Victoria, Australia) is good for quotation: „Four out of five persons use social media networks. Email communication decreases and communication through social media increases: 20% of our time online we spend on social media networks and that means that almost all of employees using social media networks: we have to know how to use those media in a safe way: “the line between personal and professional life is muddy“ – we carry our home to work and bring our personal life to work: so, to be able to help each other – there is politics for the use of social media – to protect you and your department where are you working.“ (http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/utility/social+media/social+media+policy).
Let us take, for example, elections within the countries in transition. We are participated as constituents within the moment of hope, for a moment we have believed that our vote assumes possibility of proper living and working, creation of values out from which depend the benefit of us all. But, how to make influence, through own participation, on the creation of presumptions which will be targeting creation of civil society where everybody will communicate with everybody for the aim of benefit of the society as the whole?
Within the goal of finding a solution that will, in modern Agora, in suitable, social innovation way, become the use of social media, as well as create the preconditions to, avoiding manipulation, create the mutual communicative interaction with the goal for the benefit of all for one and one for all. As much as that sound utopian within the area and time where manipulation is the subject of all kinds of innovation we are aware of.
I know that I do not know nothing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing) as simple and deep thought in the same time gives us possibility to use social media and develop social innovation through the spin of interaction with everybody, learning more and more, and, of course, knowing more. By all means, through expressing own knowledge within dialogue debate and, in the same time, to improve own knowledge with new postulate of democratic thought.
Because, Voltaire’s: “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it“…might be the real presumption for the creation of democratic social innovation within countries of transition, with the help of social media networks.
How? Namely, prior to the appearance social media and social networks public was present within restaurants, coffee shops, theatres, stadiums and other shapes of immediate appearances and has never been (Only if it has been connected through open sources of immediate contact between politicians and/or constituencies) present in every day of political happenings (Noam Chomsky, 2015).
I am convinced that journalists, supported through implemented knowledge of the ways how to scientifically use (and, positively, of course abuse) mutual benefits of the interaction between social media and social innovation, the creators of Public opinion, might be modus vivendi of immediate participations of the citizens.
Namely, within the countries, of transition – especially, we have, through media, dummy of
different opinions, and in the same time, within “strictly controlled media” by the side of
corporations, tajcoons and/or certain groups (read: political parties and/or institutions) that
makes 80 % of media around the World does not have big differences and in that way present
the wish of the majority on power (http://www.eurasiareview.com/15012016-world-of-globalsin-spin-as-conditio-sine-qua-non essay/) within the certain countries having a task of its own
to present mass of already established opinions to the individual and by doing that to liberate
individual recipient of the presumption to create his/her own opinion (his/her vision of the
Sometimes, I wonder about “not controlled” media within developed countries and how to judge the difference between controlling the media by the political parties and/or capital. What about the ethics and morality out of that? Through social innovation and social media we might be able to introduce “citizens control” or at least “citizens advice“ within mentioned, having social media for the social innovation, within the goal of unifying of diversities that are targeting common good. In this way the possibilities have been made that so call little man gets out from the mew in Which he/she has been put without his/her own will, and to try, with his/her own participation, to create presumptions for something like that.
Multi identities ( http://www.diogenpro.com/introspicere_sabahudinhadzialic.html ) of the world carry an adequate presumption for something like that. Having in mind the way of positive thinking, politics would denude its own libido and become available to the public and in the same time to make possible that public can do, through the control, the influence on final bringing of decisions of importance of living of all of us. I am saying “control” as the presumption of honest ruling, so not to fool ourselves, there will always being rulers and the ruled ones. But, the goal is to have that more and more painless for us, the people who elect and vote an who does not want to be manipulated with daily-politics by the side of politicians of any kind regardless if they are “left”, “right” and/or “center” option. Free public, expressed through the participation of citizens in the control over the bringing of decisions from which depends their everyday life within the small community such as municipality, with a help by the side for the purposes of social innovation as mediators of immediate participation of the citizens and control of the government is heading towards the sentence said by the side of Prof. Dr Davor Rodin (1990): “Free public is not device of imposition of believes but the media of its creation”.
Self-involvement of the citizens within certain sources of information – groups established by the side of authorized services/departments of the municipality on social media networks is two-way communication within social innovation interaction process where individual, within the group on certain area-municipality, city, parliament, district, region, state, will have, on daily basis, possibility to, through using capability of involvement within immediate communication, ensure information on the basis of which he/she can make conclusions that will lead him/her towards making of decisions connected with personal determination in regards certain issues. Doing that he/she will be able, also, to make an influence on further processes of the improvement of concrete municipal departments through the Shaping up of mixed (gender sensitive- nationality- age- education) independent group which will be “online connection” between “rulers” and “ruled ones”.
Mentioned is, as social innovation, one of many possible frameworks for discussion because through free and democratic elections is created presumptions of the constituencies on the future representative of the authorities whom we have elected. Citizens can, through already established communication channels, satisfy basic wishes for democracy since Agora in ancient Greece. Main question is why we are representing concrete example within the paper? Simply, because, only through concrete example of practice we can justify theory. Who will implement that? Maybe it might be the serious democratic country. Is there any? Having in mind, in the same time, democratically shaped WWW and targeting the positive variances within social media networks.
- Web is more comprehensive than all other media
- Web unify possibilities of the whole traditional media
- Web is more flexible than other media
That is why social media networks are, as the product of the Web, idealistic shape for social innovation in a way where it will become interactive decision-making process within all planned activities.
Regardless if we are talking about social, economic, political or any other human kind issue. Main presumption of quality implementation of social innovation is discussion within the interaction implementation process, discussion in which will be involved all interested parties and for that are the best – social media.
Let’s stay for a while within this issue of social innovation in democratically shaped municipal environment and underline the words of France Vreg (1991): “Political authority that does not recognize critical reasoning of the public did not yet cross threshold of democratic civilization. Political authority that does now allow media critics, control and alternative, is exposed to entropy, because it gives up on self-reflection, endanger its survival and development…” Paradigm, due to his opinion of participative-democratic model of mass communication, should be based on the following presumption: access of the citizens and social groups to the means of communications, publishing of their opinions, stands, interests and aspirations. All of this has been written on 1991 when social media networks has not become yet common social good in the World.
If we call everything mentioned “Informative centers” we can simply underline that this kind of connection/interaction of social media and social innovation is more than just an example – it is “must do” for all who would like to become real democratic society within its core.
Why? Because, why not establish circle within the circle, the match which will be based on the game of ideas, discussion, debate, but also the control of what is going on within the realization of living of me as human unit, after all? Erich Fromm (1980) within the book “Beyond the Chains of Illusion: my encounter with Marx and Freud“ underlined: “That social unconsciousness comes out from an idea of repressive character of the society and it is related to that specific part of human experience to whom given society does not allow to reach the consciousness, and that is the part of humanity within the human which has been alienated from him by the society, social unconsciousness is socially repressed part of the universal psyche.”
Herbert Marcuse5 wrote that only liberation of repressed and mortified impulses can jar established system of needs within individuals and for the demands of freedom can create physiological and psychological environment. Conclusion is simple…it glitters from social media networks within positive social responsibility. Collective detection of individuals, through existed local referendums, assembly of the citizens, etc. within the Laws related to local and wider management of the authority, is something that expel and individual, because it is possible always to find somebody who dominates within Assembly of citizens and manipulates with referendums. Only through immediate participations of individuals, social innovation of this kind can make certain progress even when we are thinking about essentiality as such. In other words, using of immediate contacts with municipal services/departments through social media, anywhere in the World we will make step forward for the return from general to particular and it decrease possibility for any kind of manipulation and citizens can focus towards national romanticism6 as one of the basic presumption of civil society. But “civil” in a sense that anarchy could be prevented with existence of alternative strong enough in “position” and as well as in “opposition” to avoid everything to outgrow into Spiritus nonsense which will be negation of itself instead to become Vox Populi.
The goal should be creation of free, democratic and society ready for dialogic discussions about all subjects and exactly because of that – social media, within the shapes of possible participations of citizens within social innovation processes, might be able to become paradigm of possible democratic communication processes in the future7.
For the purposes of the future benefits of:
- Sustainable economic and social reference models
- Alternative of social innovation, as sensible concrete models, to some of government- led institutional frameworks
- Use of social media as the socio-technical platform for empowering individuals and groups to develop concrete and improved issues of the society
- Use of the technology of Social media in a way that will promote sustainable society through social innovation
- As much as it can be done – through social media – enable valuable social innovation initiatives
- Promoting of the research and development of social media technological platforms that will be most suitable for demands and needs of social innovation
- Social innovators awareness and training programs which will increase their ability to use social media for their ultimate goal of sharing, adjusting and implementing new benefits of the new social innovation ventures
Social networks have emerged as a critical factor in information dissemination, search, marketing and influence discovery.
Social media and social innovation are together within the following two World-changing social innovations:
- The Open University – many models of distance learning that have opened education across the World
- E-government issues8 – that increases individual, as well as, group social awareness in regards advantages of improvement of E-communication for the benefit of the whole society in general
Full transparency in decision-making is, and has to be, ultimate goal of any social innovation process through social media (http://diem25.org/). The development of media is not merely an addition but a social innovation. New media allow new practices and relationships to evolve that would overburden existing social, cultural, legal, political or economic institutions. By all means, social innovation is extremely prominent on the European policy agenda. Although, in the same time, within the sky of European possible future discoveries have been developed, in February 2016, a possible new “cloud of social innovation” mixed with economic, social, politics new hopes for the possible “new deal” for United Europe. Namely, DiEm25 underlines: “The European Union will be democratized. Or it will disintegrate!”
So, does this put under the question all possible social innovations already established within the United Europe? Might be. Why? Let us just quote this from Manifesto of DiEM25: “For all their concerns with global competitiveness, migration and terrorism, only one prospect truly terrifies the Powers of Europe: Democracy! They speak in democracy’s name but only to deny, exorcise and suppress it in practice. They seek to co-opt, evade, corrupt, mystify, usurp and manipulate democracy in order to break its energy and arrest its possibilities.
For rule by Europe’s peoples, government by the demos, is the shared nightmare of
- The Brussels bureaucracy (and its more than 10,000 lobbyists)
- Its hit-squad inspectorates and the Troika they formed together with unelected ‘technocrats’
from other international and European institutions
- The powerful Eurogroup that has no standing in law or treaty
- Bailed out bankers, fund managers and resurgent oligarchies perpetually contemptuous of the multitudes and their organised expression
- Political parties appealing to liberalism, democracy, freedom and solidarity to betray their most basic principles when in government
- Governments that fuel cruel inequality by implementing self-defeating austerity
- Media moguls who have turned fear-mongering into an art form, and a magnificent source of power and profit
- Corporations in cahoots with secretive public agencies investing in the same fear to promote secrecy and a culture of surveillance that bend public opinion to their will.“..end of quote (http://diem25.org/assets/documents/diem25_english_long.pdf)
How these have any of connection with social media and social innovation? Really huge one! All of the following to be done is needed to have new social media technology to be used: IMMEDIATELY: Full transparency in decision-making.
- EU Council, Ecofin, FTT and Eurogroup Meetings to be live-streamed
- Minutes of European Central Bank governing council meetings to be published a few weeks after the meetings have taken place
- All documents pertinent to crucial negotiations (e.g. trade-TTIP, ‘bailout’ loans, Britain’s status) affecting every facet of European citizens’ future to be uploaded on the web
- A compulsory register for lobbyists that includes their clients’ names, their remuneration, and a record of meetings with officials (both elected and unelected)“…end of quote (http://diem25.org/assets/documents/diem25_english_long.pdf).
But, the critical question is whether and how social media can help facilitate innovations to bridge seemingly insuperable abysm that divide goals from the implementers of possible social innovations and target groups wishes and expectations. Arthur W.B. (2009) argues that the difference if on of degree of change, not of kind. All innovation is recombination of older elements: novelty is never total, nor is system change. Just exactly within the media. New media does not destroy old media, but exists as recombination of older elements (in this case of traditional media) within new technology. The capacity of any society to create of steady flow of social innovations depends on a huge amount of presumptions even to be able to link and interact, in proper way, of social media and social innovation. How is that?
Knowledge (of the whole involved within the process of interaction, but a knowledge of consensuality and not a knowledge of differences we already knows – Chinese proverb: “The human who can beat others is strong, but human who can beat oneself is – powerful” is the most important one)
Joint interest (never impose the interest, but always impose a dialogue to achieve best outcomes, through social media, of social innovations)
Social media networks have two very important ties that they are consists of: strong ties or “bonding” relationships and weak ties, known as “bridging” relationship (http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/).
Altogether, studies about the role of networks are not just strengthen insights provided by resilience theory (2011: http://www.vanbreda.org/adrian/resilience/resilience1.pdf) but also complementary to it. Networks (esp. Social media) are more than once underlined for their effectiveness and efficiency in transmitting information, ideas, norms, or practices. Although, there is one possible dead end at least, it looks like that for me, using methodology of analogy, because a lot of social scientists rely on diffusion theory (http://www.indiana.edu/~t581qual/Assignments/Diffusion_of_Innovations.pdf) for the explanation of transmission of innovations via social media networks. Namely, diffusion theory provides only a limited understanding of how and why innovations are able to go from “one to many” (http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art5/.)
Although, for the future stays a lot of open questions how further to spread social innovations through social media networks. How is that? Simple – existence of the water will not provide water to everybody, isn’t it? There should be presence of animation by inventors and institutional entrepreneurs. When it has been done, the social media networks become a very strong source for connection, dissemination and adequate feedback. There is another, very important, sensitive issue as well. It is very difficult to control social media, regardless how skilled individuals are involved as a starting point of social innovation dissemination.
So, where is the solution? Within the society as the whole, having in mind that manipulation should be replaced with transparency and responsibility of each step of social innovation process through social media. Why? The one word is the answer – it creates TRUST. Creation of transparency and responsibility is both, direct and indirect creation of the most important issues for the proper existence of society – TRUST in the existence system. Is that utopia or possibility? Ask most developed society such as Island, Norway, Denmark and/or Finland. State/country is (whatever we say in regards the issue that our society is most democratic ones) here as manipulator to satisfy its own need, not the need of the citizens. Check out under the issue of post-modern Europe and re-building of national exclusivity of states such Hungary, France and Belgium where right-wing parties rises as grass after the rain (afraid of immigrants) and blaming foreign people, who came to work and live in their countries, for all bad things within society of their own. That reminds me on Luddite back in XIX century (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite ), who protested against newly developed labour-economizing technologies, primarily between 1811 and 1816. In XIX century the guilty ones were machines – in XXI the people, the ones with the same red blood under the skin, but different nation. Author of this chapter usually says: “Nation is the part of history. We just need to wait until the end of history.“ If they (Francis Fukuyama, among others) stated that History came to its end, than what about the nations?
Social media, through new, digital, technology is a tool to support and/or enable social innovation. When we say “support” it is meant that a specific social innovation is taking place anyway but that is, in some way or another, significantly improved by deploying Information and Communication Technology. Again, by “enable” it is meant to imply that a certain social innovation would not happen without Information and Communication Technology. In the same time it could lead us to completely new types of social innovation appearing. So, here we are talking about new approaches within the definition of social innovation and it is again “new approach” to meet social needs. Again, as mentioned before, it is not assumed that digitals tools will be used necessarily by final users and beneficiaries, but such tools are used in significant ways by one or more actors within the value of chain, to support or enable social innovation. Digital tools are used together alongside with traditional tools and approaches.
Social media and social innovation scaling cycle goes, sometimes, as typical scenario for the network effect plays out, also like this:
- Early phase “small world” network: most social innovations seem to start through the efforts of small group of carriers with an idea which is then launched, often after some testing and piloting (http://www.tepsie.eu/) within a limited area and amongst a limited number of actors and beneficiaries.
- Main phase – “scale free” network: once established and achieving success and impact, most social innovations starts to get noticed elsewhere, by other target groups, localities and sectors and amongst other actors, whether or not this is deliberate and conscious attempt to disseminate and scale.
- Late phase: once the innovation has been spread and disseminated, the late phase tends to open up a number of different possible trajectories.
Also, new social technologies, as the next generation of Social innovation exist that can make,
for example, your websites and mobile apps just as engaging, which include
Social login; Real-time conversation; Refer- a-friend; Social Aggregation and Curation; Social Fabric; Data Visualization and Real-time Web Platform.
Futurist Jim Carroll (https://www.jimcarroll.com/) has stated that there will be more innovation in the next twelve years than there was in the last hundred.
The most important for connecting people, ideas and resources, within the field of the use of digital technology, are the intermediaries. Namely, those are the social networks which will connect people, ideas and resources for the social innovations, through social media and interacting with them. Of course, within Social media and Social innovations the most important intermediaries are the people, depending on their wishes and capabilities to do the change and to be a change – for the benefit of the society as the whole.
The conclusion is not difficult: Just need to follow the benefits of the entire society and that will satisfy the needs for each individual per se, on a long term. Social media and Social Innovation is two way street because innovating a society through the social media and vice versa is never-ending story. For the better future of us all. In general. And in particular.
Paper was presented on 13.6.2017 – XIII International Scientific On-line (for the first time On-line) Conference “Knowledge-Media-Education”, at Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Poland – titled : “Social media and social innovation” – Chairman of the Conference dr.hab. Dorota Siemieniecka; Members of The Scientific Committee are from USA, Poland, Lithuania, Italy, England and Bosnia and Herzegovina: S.H.: http://sabihadzi.weebly.com/poland-13062017.html .
Adjusted for Eurasia Review. Why? Because that might be the light at the end of tunnel for the World as Global Sin. If we all adjust ourselves properly.
1. Arthur W.B. (2009). The nature of technology: what it is and how it evolves. New York: Free Press.
2. Democracy in Europe Movement: http://diem25.org/
3. Desouza K. C., & Smmith K. L. (2014). Big Data for Social Innovation. Retrieved from:http://ssir.org/articles/entry/big_data_for_social_innovation
4. Duquette D. A. (2016). Hegel: SocialandPoliticalThought. Retreived from: http://www.iep.utm.edu/hegelsoc/
6. Fromm E. (1941). Escape from Freedom. New York: Farrar &Rinehart.
7. Gaist T. (2013). NSA Using Metadata to Compile „Social Network Diagrams“ on Americans. Retrieved from: http://www.globalresearch.ca/nsa-using-metadata-to-compile-social-network-diagrams-on-americans/5352168
8. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, No 81, pg. 1287-1303.
9. Hadžialić S. (2007), Communicate instead devour, BH JOURNALIST, Bosnia and Herzegovina, No. 6, p. 32.
10. Lerman, K., Ghosh R. (2010). Information Contagion: an Empirical study of the Spread of News on Digg and Twitter Social Networks. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM). Retrieved from: http://www.icwsm.org/2010/
11. Lijphart A. A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms & Performance in Thirty-six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
12. Machiedo M. (2013). INTERVIEW. Vijenac, No. 508-509, pg. 4-6.
13. MG Siegler (2009). Celebrities + Twitter + A GoodCause = A RetweetExplosionTomorrow?, Posted Apr 24, 2009. Retrieved from: http://techcrunch.com/2009/04/24/celebrities-twitter-a-good-cause-a-retweet-explosion-tomorrow/
14. Mulgan, G., Tucker S., Ali R., Sanders B. (2007). Social Innovation. What it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. Said Business School, Skoll Center for Social Entrepreneurship, Working Paper, Oxford.
15. Newman L., Dale, A. (2005). Network structure, diversity, and proactive resilience building: a response to Tomkins and Adger. Ecology and Society, Vol. 10, No. 1. Retrieved from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/
16. Osmančević E. (2009). Democratic way of WWW communication. Sarajevo: Friedrich-Hebert_Stiffung.
17. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Shuster.
18. Rodin D. (1990). Beyond the free and censored press. In Conference proceedings “Journalism within the function of development”, Vinkovci: Novost.
19. Slaughter, A. M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton, New York: Princeton University Press.
20. Vreg F. (1991). Democratic communication, Publishing house FON Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
1 Author wrote this seven years before appearance of Facebook as social media network.
2 ome of the early social media on WWW are: TheGlobe.com (1995), Geocities (1994) i Tripod.com (1995- (author S.H. had between 1997 and 2009 a WWW page on Tripod.com: http://sabahudinh.tripod.com and transfer, as of 2010, on: http://sabihadzi.weebly.com ) where the users have shared information on personal pages and had free tools for editing of the pages and web area. In late nineteen’s of the last century, user profiles had become center of social networks (https://www.facebook.com/sabahudin.hadzialic and/or http://www.linkedin.com/pub/dir/Sabahudin/Hadzialici/ilihttps://twitter.com/sabi1960 ) where it has been mad e possible for the users to search for friends or other users with similar interests. That generation of social media networks has begun withSixDegrees.com 1997, after which arrived Makeout club 2000, Friendster 2002, MySpace and Linkedin2003.g., Flickr 2004.g., Facebook 2004.g., Twiter 2006.g. , Pinterest 2010, Instagram 2012.g. and, of course, today and here, in front of us, we have new options of never ending options of social communication: http://idesh.net/tech-i-web/10-novih-drustvenih-mreza-kojima-vrijedi-dati-sansu/#
3 Even in libraries, public gatherings-coffee shops, restaurants, i.e…there is no need even to have computer today, because we have 3G and 4G networks for mobile telephones, IPods, Tablets…WIFI is anywhere and everywhere. Encircle the biggest size of population – That is why is excellent for focusing, testing, getting feedbacks and creation of proper social innovation with possible and true analyze of the outcomes.
4 Example – just one – DIOGEN pro culture magazine led by this author since 2009: http://www.diogenpro.com where you have coverage of the whole world (art, culture, but also, science and education) by one or most two persons where you have written, audio, video coverage. There are a lot more examples worldwide as well.
5 Herbert Marcuse (1898 – 1979) was a German-American philosopher, sociologist, and political theorist.
6 Liberté, égalité, fraternité
7 A quote from esteemed statesmen in Swedish history Axel Oxenstierna (1853- 1654): Annescis, mi fili, quantillaprudentia mundus regatur. Translation: Do you not know, my son, with how little sense the world is run?
8 Author of this chapter was participating as Official correspondent of Euraia Review (USA) at Global E-Government forum in Astana, Kazakhstan, October 2014, organized by UN Department of Social and Econimic Affairs and Kazahkstan Government: http://www.diogenpro.com/e_government_forum_astana_kazakhstan_2014.html: „Through these networking events among nations, using information to the benefit of all instead of the abusing of a few, through the creation of Government for all based on real democratic means that came from Agora centuries ago, but this time with the most fluctuating means of communication: social networks. The name is ‘social,’ and the social is the society that makes Government efficient and responsible, eo ipso communication networking within E-Government through the use, not abuse, of social networks that serve to help. Whom? All of us, regardless if we are sitting in the comfortable Minister’s Chair or selling the tickets in the suburban bus. How? Via the exchange of information, dissemination of methodologically based conclusions, analysis of expectations and, finally, even, changes in ultimate decisions. Democracy should mean the acceptance of alternative thoughts, if they are used properly.“ – SabahudinHadžialić