Private v. Public

Continuing the Conversation from the social media discussions in Slovenia….

One of our round table participants held that one of the core values of blogging is its openness for everyone to take part, to add their comments, to disagree or disagree, to share ideas. That gives blogging and social media its vibrancy and energy and it is through open conversations without centralised control that fresh ideas emerge, freedom is embraced and exercised and democratic principles are lived out in the flesh.

Is there a place for private blogs or private networks? Can an online space that is public and open to all in some situations restrict one’s freedom to express oneself fully and truly? Some possibilities come to mind:

• a forum where bloggers who have experienced cyberharrassment might want to share and support each other.

• a business network where financially sensitive information needs to be discussed

• a network where business leaders may wish to network freely with each other - be able to disagree, argue, debate etc without what they discuss being open to misinterpretation to those not within their industry

I’m sure you can think of other examples as well.

It can be very valuable for victims of trauma to speak openly about their experiences without feeling judged or put down by others. Public spaces on the web can be uncivil and unruly, jostling spaces, just like any street or the subway in rush hour. A safe space for such discussions would need to be private.

Similarly, with any other matter that is sensitive whether financial, personal or in business, private networks may be the only way that social media can be used effectively.

Debate, discussion, disagreement and argument in are all part of the process of negotiation or coming to a decision or consensus in the Western democracies. Sometimes there are disagreements between people on the same team or same Board or the same committee while they work out their ideas and before they come to a firm conclusion. It may be that where social media is used to facilitate this process, it needs to be private between the relevant people so as not to have the process hampered by those who are not meant to be involved in that process. It also may not be appropriate for these people who are playing on the same team to be seen by their stakeholders in the process of the disagreement if that is going to be misinterpreted as a problem in the leadership and cause unnecessary instability within the corporation or their market - when in fact it is merely a process of interrogating an issue that will ultimately be resolved.

I find this issue a challenging and very interesting one. I agree whole-heartedly with my colleague who upholds the value of openness and lack of controls on the blogosphere as a whole. And yet, I find that there are circumstances when in fact you can only have openness within a ring-fenced “safe” area.

What do you think?

~~~~~~~~

Photo: thanks to Aaron Jacobs on flickr.com

Note: ZenGuide is updated Mondays and Thursdays

prjslv