To steal a headline from The Independent, The UK election this May will not be decided by the power of Rupert Murdoch’s stranglehold over the British press, but by the opening up of society thanks to the free-thinking power of the internet.

Is the influential power of the old media really over? In 1997, several British tabloids and broadsheets made the switch from supporting a right-wing Conservative government to the fresh-faced, youthful New Labour led by the charismatic Tony Blair. There was an energy in the air in Britain which was spurred on by the UK Press, with daily news spins of how the Labour Party would fix all the problems in our society.

Two wars, a black hole of a deficit and many greying hairs later, Britain appears to be in a worst state than it was. But the the old media imported something in which would change the face of British Politics forever – the Television Debates.

Sceptical as we were of an American concept being tried on British shores, it had the unexpected effect of launching Britain’s third placed party right up into pole position – the Liberal Democrats, led by the youthful Nick Clegg was sprung directly into the spotlight as he wiped out the other two larger parties in the first debate. But what are the elements which pushed “Cleggmania”? Was it the old media flexing their influential claws into the British mindset?

Not quite.

ITV, who broadcast the first debate, also had a panel of 5,000 Tweeters who’s opinions were gauged during the 90 minute face-off. Some may argue that younger people (especially of the “net generation”) are more liberally inclined, and this may produce skewed results, but nevertheless, 5,000 people is a much bigger sample than most polls that are carried out during election season.

Other websites, such as Channel 4 and the Guardian, also incorporated in Tweets using the #leadersdebate hashtag into their website as a feed, which would keep readers updated on what real people think about the debate and the parties, in real time. On top of that, UK Facebook users were greeted with messages to make sure they were registered to vote, as well as countless status updates relating to the election. So what does all this lead to?

The fact that it’s the most interesting and unpredictable election in living memory lays not just in the hands of Nick Clegg, but also in the power of social media. When public opinion sharply fell into the camp of the Liberal Democrats, it was immediately reflected on social media websites – status updates on Twitter and Facebook, videos on Youtube, images on Flickr and Google Trends showed the number of searches on “Nick Clegg” rose several times over what it was.

But directly after the debate, the Liberal Democrats only saw their lead in the polls jump by a few points. It was over the following weekend when their numbers would see the sharp rise. It’s essentially the “Friend Factor” – when people you know are talking about the debate, and they hype up Nick Clegg’s performance, you find yourself agreeing and then you’re praising him to other people. Done over social networks, this effect reaches many more people in a way that the old media has never quite nailed down.

In the days following the first debate, the right-wing press “conspired” to run several articles to smear Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats. Perhaps in the age of old media, this may have worked and his reputation would have subsided. Instead, social media rallied against the Conservative press and their smear campaign, a result of which Nick Clegg has retained the boost given to him by his debate performance.

As a tool, I’ve not really seen social media implemented to great effect by the British political parties in the way Obama’s campaign did during the US election. Although Youtube and Facebook teamed up to hold a Digital Debate, the parties have failed to engage the online audience and rally their support – and sticking a Facebook/Twitter link on your party’s webpage doesn’t count. As for virtual worlds? Squat all. That’s hardly surprising though – in the largest virtual platform – Second Life – the UK userbase barely amounts to 70,000 active users. That’s about enough to win one seat in the House of Commons – and that’s not really worth the time and money investment.

So it seems that though social media is engaging the electorate in the race for 10 Downing Street, the political parties have yet to embrace social media.

Lead Image Credit: Nick Hider

The trusty old BBC Micro! Image Credit - Barney Livingston.

When I was a tender young age, my Primary School was one of the first in the area to get a machine called a “computer”. It was a BBC Micro, which had a screen, a keyboard which needed a mallet to operate, and a box next to it in which you’d insert “Floppy Discs”.

We’d be allowed to use this brand spanking new computer in pairs for half an hour during the week, and me and my friend eagerly awaited our chance to jump on and try out this revolutionary new gizmo.

When the magic day came, it was almost the end of school week. Nevertheless, we entered a 5.5″ inch black floppy disc into the shiny drive, and entertained ourselves on a game called Martello Tower – a game which uses lateral thinking skills and maths in an educational but fun format. As our half hour drew to a close, my friend scampered off to get our school bags from the cloakroom whilst I tried out the BBC Micro’s word processor.

Unfortunately, nobody had told me I needed to shut the computer down before going home. On reaching school the next Monday, I was frogmarched to the Headmistresses’ room who showed me the clear screenburnt imprint where some smart soul had typed in “HELLO MY NAME IS PRAD” and then wandered off home. Screensavers wouldn’t be invented for another few years.

Despite this clear warning sign that Prad and computers don’t mix, I still harboured a deep fascination for their potential. It was clear to me that the computer was far more interesting than my teachers – the computer had games, made funny bleep sounds and still showed your name when you turned it off (although I quickly learnt not to make that mistake again).

The games we had in school were clearly educational, but they had a clear objective built into them – in the case of Martello Tower, you had to solve several numerical and logic puzzles in order to be able to escape the Tower. You find yourself heavily involved, and you must complete the game – nothing else matters. You need to know how it ends!

And then, one day, it ends.

There’s a feeling of great pride and achievement. “Yes! I did it!” And then you come crashing back down to earth as you realise “Ummm.. yay me?” and total how many hours of your life you just wasted and won’t ever get back.

Or weeks, in the case of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. Games shouldn’t tell you how long you spend playing them – that’s just depressing.

Grand Theft Auto 4: Mindless Gameplay has its place.

That feeling of getting hooked, and constantly trying to reach the upper echelons and making it to the conclusion is what keeps gamers playing their favourite games.

So how much education can you fit in a game before it loses that addictive “must..complete..now” feeling? Can you be learning and still stay up 48 hours straight to make it to the final boss?

As with other forms of entertainment – movies, books and.. well, music too – you have two types: mindless and thoughtful.

The mindless doesn’t require much thinking power – it’s just there. Like Mr Bean walking into a lamppost or 50 Cent talking about his ho’s. It’s simple, silly and we get a cheap sense of enjoyment.

The thoughtful creates enjoyment by making people a little bit more special for having understood seemingly more complex concepts. You don’t just pick up a gun and start shooting up some random gang. You spend a few hours making links with the gang, working your way onto the inside and gaining their trust, finding out their resources and assets, before leaving a tonne of C4 explosive in their headquarters and taking off with their guns.

People like to be made to feel smart, and games have that ability as they allow for the interactive element. However, the pattern is evolving that the thought process needs to start off basic and become more intense as the player progresses. People quickly tire of the simple “click and win” games, as numerous “popular fads” over the years have shown.  Facebook’s Farmville application is such a fad which will be dead within a few years, as people start to get bored of its mind-numbing gameplay.

Games such as World of Warcraft, however, will be around for the long term for the range of skills they require. Team building, analytical thinking, the ability to multitask and solve problems under duress are all key skills that many employers would value, and serve well in daily life.

Dr Kawashimas Brain Training has been one of the most popular educational titles in recent years.

And who says such games need to be subtle about being educational? The Nintendo DS’s Dr Kawashimas Brain Training game gained huge popularity on its release, selling over 18 million copies around the world.

On the whole though, educational games don’t make much money in the games industry. Instead, gaming manufacturers are finding it much more profitable to market such games directly to the education sector.

Doug Lowenstein, president of the Entertainment Software Association, said there will soon be 75 million Americans who are 10 to 30 years old — an age bracket that grew up on video games. “Common sense tells us that a medium so basic to the lives of these ‘millennials’ has potential beyond the living room. We would be crazy not to seek ways to exploit interactive games to teach our children.”

With the growth of computers and the internet, the current and future generation will be in tune with technology right from childhood. This is bound to affect how they learn, and through interactive digital media, we can measure what they learn, how much they learn and how they learn. The key markets are those which will teach the mandatory National Curriculum to school children using innovative and new methods, in the same way as a BBC Micro taught me about triangle numbers.

But interactive digital media will also be able to educate right up to university level, as well as allow the students to contribute their own ideas. Combine this with the social media aspect, and you have a platform where users can work together to learn, solve problems and develop key skills.

Of vital importance for any such platform developer is the ability to be able to keep up with not just changes in educational curriculum, but also the constant changes and evolution of technology.

Technology is the future, and education is the key. Can the two be combined? Of course. Interactive games will redefine the way children are taught – and as it stands, it’s a market for the taking.

—

This is an article written for Heritage Key’s The Ancient World in London blogger’s challenge – “Sex, Guns and Education?”.

The impact of social media has revolutionised the way the world connects, and thinks. It has bought the concept of democracy and free-thinking to parts of the world where it was not seen before. But it also changes the power game, and how warfare is played out in the modern world.

In 2006, a web phenomenon was born in the shape of Twitter. Despite a character limit of 140 per message, it has taken the world over by storm. It represented the ultimate in the “me me me” facade that the web was rapidly becoming, many thanks to the glitzy, blingtard Myspace phenomenon which would soon die out.

The power of Twitter would soon become evident. The growth of this social media platform would never have taken off in the way it had were it not for the advances in mobile technology, which would allow users to access the internet from the palm of their hand. You’re essentially always connected, and Twitter allowed anybody to tell everybody what they were thinking, doing and contemplating.

But the past year has shown the true power of what Twitter can deliver. In June 2009, in the aftermath of the Iranian election, the people took to the streets amid allegations of fraud and rigging. The government took immediate action, and shut down media reporting within the country, hence cutting off the most powerful tools to the people – news and communication.

But the growth of social media was something the government were not prepared for. In the space of a week, over 2 million tweets were sent out of Iran by over half a million users, informing the world of what was really happening inside the locked down nation. Real news, from real people who were living the events as they happened. The rules of the game had changed forever, and autocratic governments no longer hold the grip they once did over media and information.

The Haitian earthquake in the past month was one of the largest crises in recent times. In previous international emergencies, the news of how to donate would be shared through traditional media – newspapers, television and radio. The gathering of donations would be a slower process, and money would be accumulated over days as the news would filter out of the devastated areas.

The Haiti earthquake changed this. The process was two-fold; the initial move by charities were to set up a quick and convenient method to be able to donate money – through a mobile phone. An essential device in this modern world, for many people it is difficult to imagine life without a phone to hand. Many people are connected through phone plans or contracts, and think nothing of how much they use their phone.. until the bill comes, anyways.

The charities took advantage of this method and developed a new method by which to donate money to disaster relief funds. By allowing people to text a word to an easy to remember number, they could quickly accumulate amounts from people who want a quick and easy way to “do something to help”. Text “DONATE” to a five digit number, and you can send $10 to help a country which has just seen a huge catastrophe.

The second part of this process was played by social media. Within minutes and hours of the charities announcing their quick method of donating money, the message was spread across the world. Not through the old, traditional media, but by Twitter and Facebook.

Users would post a message on either service and share the news of how to donate with people who were their friends or followed them.

On Twitter, followers would then click the “ReTweet” button, which would then send the same message to their own followers. On Facebook, the message would appear in people’s news feeds, who would then pass the message onto their own friends through status updates. It’s basically a positive version of the Ponzi “Pyramid” scheme, in that news is shared on an exponential scale.

This allowed the news to be shared to a much larger number of people, in a much more direct way than before, and allowed people to donate through an easy method, in an affordable amount.

Social media has revolutionised the way the world connects and interacts, and by to connecting to each other, we are connecting to the wider world. Think of it as six degrees of separation – we’re all constantly sharing information. It’s only a matter of time before that information reaches us. By doing it online, we’re making the process quicker, more efficient and getting our news direct from the sources.

An interesting comment on New World Notes got me thinking about an issue that the BBC didn’t have to deal with 20 years ago. The BBC is funded by a license fee which is mandatory for any UK household which owns a television – this fee is then used by the BBC to create content. In the past, there would not have been such an issue with the TV programmes that the BBC  produced being distributed internationally without their permission, but in the modern internet age, they are seeing their content being uploaded to various video sharing websites without their permission.

The BBC produces TV programming solely for the British audience, and chooses to export some of the more popular series such as Top Gear and Doctor Who to an international audience. Through charging the UK population, and by selling the rights to the programmes it produces to the international community, the BBC is an organisation which is funded by the British people, for the British people. Flatly put, that means if you’re outside the United Kingdom, you don’t really get the right to say that you should be allowed to view BBC content unless you decide to move to the UK and pay the license fee. In fact, feel free to do just that as more money means better programmes.

That’s actually more of the moral argument though – you don’t get what you don’t pay for. The actual reason BBC content isn’t available outside the United Kingdom is because the BBC holds rights to distribute content within the UK. That’s regardless of being a license fee payer – so if you paid your fee, and then decided to be a jammy dogder and ran off to sunny Spain, then you lose the rights to watch BBC One in the evenings. Tough luck.

But wait? What about the BBC World Service? They broadcast radio to the world – so surely it’s inconsistent for them to broadcast one thing for free, but not TV programmes?

That question is flawed. The World Service (which doesn’t broadcast in the UK, except digitally) is funded not by the license fee payer, but by the UK Government (UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office), as a way of promoting Britain to the world. It’s basically a way of making you people come to London, see the Queen, take your photo next to a red telephone box and shoplift at Harrods, then getting out before your teeth rot and your accent turns twenty shades of posh.

Well, what about the BBC website? That’s an international website!

Yes it is. In fact, it’s one of the leading Global sources of news and information, as well as one of the most trusted. What you may not realise is that there are actually two versions of it. There’s a version for the International community, and then there’s a version for the UK. The difference? One has adverts, and one doesn’t.. can you guess which goes with which?!

The International version of the BBC website carries adverts so the British license fee payer doesn’t have to subsidise the cost of providing the website to the international community, and because we pay for the BBC, we don’t see adverts. It’s pretty much as simple as that.

Personally, I’m glad that the BBC doesn’t distribute content outside the UK on the BBC iPlayer. It’d be stupid to do so when Brits are paying for the content, to distribute it out for free. Likewise, American TV shows on Hulu are restricted to America only. The argument was made that the US networks are commercially funded corporations, whereas the BBC is a publicly funded one, so it is obliged to give the content out for free.

And I agree – it is obliged to give it out to free. To the public who is funding it.

I’m hoping this blogpost clears up a few things about how the BBC works, and why content is restricted to the UK only. When I shared the original subject topic with a work colleague, he suggested his reply to international community would be a simple, if ineloquent, two word reply.

We need information. The human thirst for knowledge has never stopped growing as we feed our desire to learn and understand.

The last few years has changed how we get our information. Printed media could only provide the news for the previous day until radio broadcasts updated us every morning and evening. The advent of 24 hour television gave us rolling news broadcasts as we tune into BBC News 24 and CNN. The internet bought it to a head as a host of websites update by the second to bring the very latest in breaking news. And then came the dawn of mobile internet – news in your palm, whenever you want it.

But that’s not the change I refer to, as news on your phone was always an inevitable step. It’s where that news is now coming from.

My news no longer reaches me first from Reuters or the BBC. It comes from you.  And me. Well, us. We are using tools such as Twitter to bring in the very latest going ons around the globe and working together as a community to keep the world updated on what’s happening. If there’s news, there are people there to report it – and with access to cellular technology, it’s only a matter of seconds before groups of people are tweeting what’s happening and it spreads across the world. Trending topics then serve to highlight the biggest stories, and it is here where the advent of news now reaches us fastest. We are the new journalists.

Our desire to be constantly in the know means that we always want to be connected. It won’t be long before lost-phone-withdrawal is a medically recognised syndrome, mark my words.

But in the scheme of mobile communication to keep in touch with the world, there are only a handful of social sites which we seem to use. Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Flickr and Wikipedia form the bulk of activity that we access on the move. Each one serves a specific function – Keeping in touch with friends, watching videos, updating our status, sharing photographs and finding out information.

So is there any need to access the metaverse on the move? Particularly if we already keep contact with our friends through micro-blogging platforms such as Plurk and Twitter?

The recent launch of Apple’s iPad has raised the question of being able to log into Second Life on the move. But the reality is, is there any need to? When on the move, we are seeking or sharing information. Second Life is a platform which is predominantly used as entertainment or content creation. It serves a very different market to the already popular methods of social media, and I don’t see a real need for it to be accessible in the palm of my hand.

Have a great Holiday Season, everyone!

Diwali, for those of you who don’t know, is the Festival of Lights for those who adhere to Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism and Buddhism. It celebrates, in Hinduism, the return home of the god Rama after 14 years, who was welcomed with rows of alight lamps.

The essence of the festival is the same across all the religions though – it’s a celebration of Ātman – an innermost light which is pure and infinite. It’s like your individual soul, as opposed to the physical body that you occupy. It’s what allows us to love and show compassion. Even in Second Life, it manifests itself behind all the pixels and mesh – it’s behind every (non-bot) avatar.

I want to take the occasion to thank everyone over the past year for friendships and for lighting my path, without whom I wouldn’t be a fraction of who I’d be. And to look forward to the future, and whatever it may hold.

Wishing you a Happy Diwali, and a Prosperous New Year.

I saw Surrogates recently, which stars Bruce Willis as an FBI agent in a world where people minimise risk to themselves by living their life through an artificial being which is an idealised representation of who they want to be.

Sound familiar at all?

The whole idea seems rather far fetched, even if we are living an artificially created life through Second Life. Or is it?

A decade ago, a Spanish university conducted experiments which concentrated around the neurophilosophical theory of “body swap illusion”. It looked at how you could project your own body experiences from another being, believing that you are experiencing the same sensations as they would be.

The team recently took the study a step further and demonstrated the same theory will apply to virtual reality situations. The participants in the experiment responded as if the virtual limb was their own, and their mind had incorporated the virtual into the reality.

So it’s entirely possible that in the near future, we’ll be able to experience the sensations of the virtual world. But experience alone doesn’t mean the world can be replaced by immersive avatars. You’d need an artificial presence yourself too, and try as you may, your gorgeous avatar’s not leaving the grid anytime soon.

But the solution could well already be here – AnyBots in California are a company which produces telepresence robots. A robot which can give you eyes and ears when you’re in a remote location. It’s pretty functional, allowing you to move around, interact with objects and perform tasks (like washing up!).

The concept means you can be in two places at once with more ability to interact with your environment than through more conventional methods.

Combine the two methods I’ve looked at, and you have a functional, artificial being which you can control remotely, and experience the sensations that it experiences. Although, that robot isn’t very human looking..

Introducing the Actroid. It replicates human breathing, blinking and speaking functions, whilst looking humanoid. Uncanny Valley, maybe, but we’ve come to accept the premise of prim feet.

Combine all three technologies, and you suddenly realise that the concept of Surrogates is actually only around the corner.

And then you get into all the different types of issues that the film brings up. Drastic decreases in crime and a world of idealised-aesthetic beings. But also a complete breakdown in social skills, an awareness that the person you’re speaking to may not be who they look like they are, and.. well, pretty much all the other issues we see in daily life in Second Life.

That’s assuming we’d want to live life through an immersive avatar. Simple question – if Second Life could be real, would you want it to be?

A Tasar Collar sold on XStreet SL

A story like this really just writes its own title.

Taser International Inc. have filed a suit against Linden Lab, XStreetSL and the former owners of XSL, VirtuaTrade. Taser are the biggest producers of stun guns, of course, and it seems they’re unhappy about those residents who are infringing their trademark in SL.

It’s interesting to note however, that Taser are going straight to Linden Lab with this legal action, specifically naming Philip Rosendale, Mark Kingdon and John Zdanowski (who’s actually left LL now – nothing like jumping off the ship and getting caught on the anchor, eh?). They’ve not filed against John Doe avatars, but instead are applying pressure on Linden Lab, presumably to put pressure on them to stop the trademark violations in world.

In particular, Taser Inc. are unhappy that the Taser brand is being used in.. wait for it.. sex products! Unsuprisingly, the Taser Collar by Oni Horan (pictured above) has now been removed from XStreet SL.

This raises the question, are Linden Lab responsible for us and our actions? When circumstances like these occur, finding those directly responsible are harder to deal with in terms of First Life (FL) information, not to mention proving that they are the guilty party. So the result is that Linden Lab will have to take action and remove the offending items themselves, and clean up the mess we’re making.

And then what happens? Will Linden Lab enforce stricter guidelines on what can be created and prevent the use of FL copyrights? Do residents who use RL brands to sell wares in Second Life suddenly find their accounts disabled?

I can understand Taser’s desire to hold onto their trademark – I’ve met SL residents who have thought FL brands are operating in SL, when in fact they’re more often than not just cheap rip offs. And it seems few FL corporations want their brand associated with Second Life anymore.

One of the fundamental elements of that is around IP rights. It is really, really important that people who create great content are able to enjoy it and protect it and that was one of the things that Philip put in place and has underpinned the economy as we know it today.

One of the interesting challenges that we face is that, as Second Life becomes much more international and about 60% of our Residents now are outside of the US, we have a whole set of diverse values, beliefs, and even laws that we have to take into consideration.

Nevertheless, we believe in individuality, we prize creativity, and we are going to do everything we can to keep Second Life as open and free flowing as it has always been.

~M Linden, SL5B Opening Speech

That was almost a year ago now, and it seems that there is a lot of work that needs to be done to clarify to residents as to what they can and can’t do with regards to in world content.

There are brands, trademarks and even entire designs that are ripped directly from real world designers and corporations, and it seems the time is nearing for Linden Lab to take decisive action on these.

Truth be told, it’s because I’m finding it harder to sustain regular writing. It takes a lot of work to post an article daily, and to maintain being amusing/informative/insightful (pick none).

So for the past month or two, I’ve gone periods of days, and even weeks when I’ve not been able to post articles, engage is social media or even to log into Second Life.

Why?

That blessed curse known as Real Life of course. There’s been a major change in my real world circumstances, which I’m now feeling ready to divulge.

The first one is that in the real world I am actually female – I’m a twenty something rocker chick who loves salads and ice creams, but not together. It’s something that has been very difficult to keep under the wraps, and over the past couple of years, I’ve enjoyed playing a male avatar. When I first joined SL, I based my avatar on a guy who’s picture I found on Facebook, and proceeded to *borrow* the pics to maintain my cover.

Why did I do this? Well I never realised the advantages of being a male in Second Life – there are certainly several advantages to playing the opposite sex, including the different sorts of attention you garner. I could never bring myself to get a freenis though – that much is true!

The biggest challenges were when I was asked to start DJing about 2 years ago, and I had to claim my microphone was broken/I’d chewed on the mic by accident and it was distorting my voice. In reality, I was just using voice manipulation software, which I’d not managed to perfect yet and was making me sound rather odd.

People often ask me how I do everything I do – well us women have the knack of being able to multitask! You just don’t expect it from a guy av..!

So the real world circumstance that has been affecting my time recently? Well I’m expecting my first baby, and aside of all the moodswings and need to run to the bathroom and then nap all the time, I’m just finding that I’m doing a lot more in FL to prepare for the arrival of the baby.

I don’t know the gender yet, but I’m due to give birth on 31st June, and I can’t wait! Until then, and for a while after, I doubt I’ll be back to regular blogging, hence the hiring of new and talented writers to continue Metaversally Speaking to be the edgy, funny blog you’ve all come to love!

I guess there’s nowhere else for me to run after coming clean about this, but I hope y’all don’t think any different about me – I’m still Prad Prathivi

POST-SCRIPT: Yes, it was an April Fool’s Gag – I’m fully male in the First Life as well as Second, although many may question my masculinity! Also, I’d never get any work done if I had a pair of breasts of play with..