Comments on: Web 2.0 Really for the Poor? http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/ Participatory Web for Development - Web collaboratif pour le développement Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:22:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Sarah Bel http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-158 Sarah Bel Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:57:13 +0000 http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-158 I think You tube, daily motion and other websites might be interesting Media in the near future for those who work with video for development. They are a powerful alternative to traditional broadcast dissemination (expensive, dedicated to entertainment, very much centralized and controlled). The question is really how do we make Agriculture popular/ visible on these sites. There is no comparison between the latest video from Madonna (thousands of hits) and the latest videos I have uploaded on You tube (check for instance http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQfEsLVXQv0) a few hundreds at the very best. In terms of technical data, you just need a compressed file. I believe that if we give farmers the possibility to create their own content and share it online with other rural communities, these women (seeing the results)will get very interested. I've heard about an interesting project using vlogging (short video done with a picture camera and posted on you tube) and if I'm correct we'll know more about it during the conference. The question is also: should we have a RuralDevelopmentvideo platform where to post such a content? I think You tube, daily motion and other websites might be interesting Media in the near future for those who work with video for development. They are a powerful alternative to traditional broadcast dissemination (expensive, dedicated to entertainment, very much centralized and controlled).
The question is really how do we make Agriculture popular/ visible on these sites. There is no comparison between the latest video from Madonna (thousands of hits) and the latest videos I have uploaded on You tube (check for instance http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQfEsLVXQv0) a few hundreds at the very best.
In terms of technical data, you just need a compressed file.
I believe that if we give farmers the possibility to create their own content and share it online with other rural communities, these women (seeing the results)will get very interested.
I’ve heard about an interesting project using vlogging (short video done with a picture camera and posted on you tube) and if I’m correct we’ll know more about it during the conference.
The question is also: should we have a RuralDevelopmentvideo platform where to post such a content?

]]> By: Irakli Nadareishvili http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-157 Irakli Nadareishvili Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:12:58 +0000 http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-157 The title is catchy, alas misleading. What are the "Web 2.0 Tools?". What is the essence of Web 2.0? Is it YouTube vidoes, really? Actually - no. YouTube is just one example. The real, revolutionary change from "Web 1.0" to "2.0" is the direction of communication. In the "old web" publisher was pushing content down to the audience, treating the audience as consumers, faceless statistics that you can visualize in traffic numbers. The great thing in the new web is that the communication is two-way, now. There is not necessarily a "central", almighty publisher. The community around the 2.0 websites are both the creator and the consumers of the information. In this regard, Web 2.0 is, indeed, the most beneficial for the developing countries where people more diverse opinions and greater need to share the grassroots information. The title is catchy, alas misleading. What are the “Web 2.0 Tools?”. What is the essence of Web 2.0? Is it YouTube vidoes, really? Actually - no. YouTube is just one example. The real, revolutionary change from
“Web 1.0″ to “2.0″ is the direction of communication.

In the “old web” publisher was pushing content down to the audience, treating the audience as consumers, faceless statistics that you can visualize in traffic numbers.

The great thing in the new web is that the communication is two-way, now. There is not necessarily a “central”, almighty publisher. The community around the 2.0 websites are both the creator and the consumers of the information.

In this regard, Web 2.0 is, indeed, the most beneficial for the developing countries where people more diverse opinions and greater need to share the grassroots information.

]]> By: Tim http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-155 Tim Mon, 27 Aug 2007 14:36:35 +0000 http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-155 It is true that most of the so-called Web2.0 applications handle multimedia files that are in most cases just too big for the use of low bandwidths. An alternative for e-learning videos may be shockwave movies - but they request an appropriate handling with the software to produce them (as well as sizes of these files can be big, too). What may also be of interest is the way of distributing web-content via digital radio broadcast (DAB/DRM), what would be a one-way, receiving only possibility - one would also need the necessary equipment. Anyway the problem of impatience while working with computers is always given, but I would say that - if one is not handling big multimedia files - web2.0 tools like wikis and blogs should be in general useful to participate even with connections with low bandwidths. Best regards It is true that most of the so-called Web2.0 applications handle multimedia files that are in most cases just too big for the use of low bandwidths. An alternative for e-learning videos may be shockwave movies - but they request an appropriate handling with the software to produce them (as well as sizes of these files can be big, too). What may also be of interest is the way of distributing web-content via digital radio broadcast (DAB/DRM), what would be a one-way, receiving only possibility - one would also need the necessary equipment.

Anyway the problem of impatience while working with computers is always given, but I would say that - if one is not handling big multimedia files - web2.0 tools like wikis and blogs should be in general useful to participate even with connections with low bandwidths.

Best regards

]]> By: koin http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-48 koin Thu, 05 Jul 2007 04:09:52 +0000 http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-48 I agree with Eddie regarding barriers to the use of internet and low bandwidth especially in developing countries in the Pacific region where most rural communities do not have access to the internet and computers!!!. these are poor communities that still live in subsistence living, they grow their food, fish in the rivers and sells surplus to pay school fees and book for education. However the idea of doing a video like images that can be downloaded and then shown to the rural dwellers would be one useful idea. But for your information, I am just learning this Web2.0 myself and hope I can get more information and understanding on its applications. cheers I agree with Eddie regarding barriers to the use of internet and low bandwidth especially in developing countries in the Pacific region where most rural communities do not have access to the internet and computers!!!. these are poor communities that still live in subsistence living, they grow their food, fish in the rivers and sells surplus to pay school fees and book for education.

However the idea of doing a video like images that can be downloaded and then shown to the rural dwellers would be one useful idea.
But for your information, I am just learning this Web2.0 myself and hope I can get more information and understanding on its applications.

cheers

]]> By: Fabian http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-35 Fabian Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:12:55 +0000 http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-35 Je suis tout a fait d'accord avec l'idée générale de cet article. L'outil web2.0 est un outil, qui pour ma part, peut considérablement aider les paysans dans leurs pratiques agricoles. Grâce à cet outil, de nombreuses vidéos sur les bonnes pratiques agricoles peuvent être diffusées et regardées par un large public. Cependant, le problème de la bande passante et de l'accès à Internet pour certaines communautés ruales restent un frein à cet outil et il faudrait trouver un moyen pour y faire face. Maintenant quelle solution trouver, je ne sais pas! Tout ce que je sais c'est qu'en matière de radio certaines alternatives ont déjà été trouvées pour permettre aux ruraux l'accès à certains programmes radios agricoles: il s'agit de la radio par satellite. Bien sûr je ne pense pas qu'une telle alternative soit applicable à Internet mais je pense qu'avant d'énumérer les bienfaits du web2.0 pour les communautés rurales il faudrait d'abord s'assurer qu'elles puissent y avoir accès...Mais ce n'est que mon opinion. Je suis tout a fait d’accord avec l’idée générale de cet article. L’outil web2.0 est un outil, qui pour ma part, peut considérablement aider les paysans dans leurs pratiques agricoles. Grâce à cet outil, de nombreuses vidéos sur les bonnes pratiques agricoles peuvent être diffusées et regardées par un large public. Cependant, le problème de la bande passante et de l’accès à Internet pour certaines communautés ruales restent un frein à cet outil et il faudrait trouver un moyen pour y faire face. Maintenant quelle solution trouver, je ne sais pas! Tout ce que je sais c’est qu’en matière de radio certaines alternatives ont déjà été trouvées pour permettre aux ruraux l’accès à certains programmes radios agricoles: il s’agit de la radio par satellite. Bien sûr je ne pense pas qu’une telle alternative soit applicable à Internet mais je pense qu’avant d’énumérer les bienfaits du web2.0 pour les communautés rurales il faudrait d’abord s’assurer qu’elles puissent y avoir accès…Mais ce n’est que mon opinion.

]]> By: Web2forDev Conference | White African http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-21 Web2forDev Conference | White African Sun, 24 Jun 2007 12:12:27 +0000 http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-21 [...] it would probably be a good place to start. Their blog also has some interesting discussions around Web 2.0 and poverty and the challenges of Web 2.0 in [...] […] it would probably be a good place to start. Their blog also has some interesting discussions around Web 2.0 and poverty and the challenges of Web 2.0 in […]

]]> By: Michel Monette http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-11 Michel Monette Sun, 17 Jun 2007 20:09:21 +0000 http://blog.web2fordev.net/2007/06/15/web-20-really-for-the-poor/#comment-11 "It will be interesting to use Web 2.0 tools to capture these videos for a wider dissemination. Let me confess that we have not tried that yet." What about Youtube ? The videos must be less big (some software could do the job). Create a channel on Youtube so that we too can see the videos. Maybe also peer to peer could help. See <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUHf_kOUM74">Angelina Jolie & Jeffrey Sachs</a>. “It will be interesting to use Web 2.0 tools to capture these videos for a wider dissemination. Let me confess that we have not tried that yet.”

What about Youtube ? The videos must be less big (some software could do the job). Create a channel on Youtube so that we too can see the videos. Maybe also peer to peer could help.

See Angelina Jolie & Jeffrey Sachs.

]]>