39 Comments on Britain thinks – or does it?

martin Robinson on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 6:38 pm


Lol – now that is funny!

Julian Dobson on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 6:46 pm


If Britain Thinks is thinking, then, in the immortal words of Ian Hislop, I’m a banana. This campaign is asking for reactions, not reflections. And the challenges it poses aren’t exactly challenging. I can’t see much more to it that a PR stunt for the advertising industry.

Dan Thompson on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 6:58 pm


Here’s the answer – it’s a guerilla marketing stunt for the ad industry itself:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jan/06/outdoor-advertising-career-women-billboards

mas on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 7:01 pm


nothing to get excited about – there’s plenty of debate style sites although most I’ve seen before have been US sites

A quick check on the domain name shows the site is owned by a Stephen Devlin of Every Colour Ltd in Cornwall

Gordon Rae on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 7:04 pm


BritainThinks is a fake. It’s a bit of ‘astroturfing’ that has been set up for the Outdoor Advertising Association to prove that people respond to outdoor advertising. They’re not going to do anything participative, that’s just the con. Check the T&C’s and you’ll find it’s an ad agency.

Dan Thompson on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 7:21 pm


i suspect that’s a dummy registrant, to hide the real owner – can’t find ‘Every Colour Ltd’ and that address seems to be the studio of a Ms G Cox.

Joe Nutt on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 9:17 pm


Which all reminds me of the most powerful thing I have ever seen on a classroom wall. The Art teacher who owned it had one simple set of rules written up there which went like this: “Before you speak ask yourself is it a) necessary b) kind or c) true?”

Indy on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 10:29 pm


I’d agree that quality online debate is hard to find and the best instances that I know of really occur in groups of people whose basic, axiomatic beliefs about “how the world works” are not too divergent.

Of course, the evidence all around us in my lifetime is that online or offline, a clash of axioms underlies an awful lot of real debates and it’s largely impervious to evidence.

The most recent example of course is the financial crisis, where the debates between “saltwater” and “freshwater” economists (two groups dedicated to an academic process which is in theory far more rigorous, evidence centred and than you can expect from an online community of lay people) does not seem to change many minds, despite shocking and compelling new evidence generated by the crisis.

Fab 5: Monday 11 January 2010 | The Young Fabians Blog on Mon, 11th Jan 2010 10:50 pm


[...] Matthew Taylor, Chief Executive of the RSA, on whether or not Britain Thinks. [...]

Ian on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 6:25 am


I did the domain name check as well and then Companies House – not a whole lot more illuminating!

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/944f1902c8baffa137575f2856f16bf9/compdetails

matthew taylor on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 8:45 am


Uh uh – it turns out the whole thing is an advertising stunt.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jan/04/billboard-provocations-outdoor-advertising

I guess I fell for it. Not sure how other people who did too will feel

mas on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 9:03 am


haha – guess they’ve proved a point there!

Livy on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 9:38 am


Anybody ever read the lunatic ramblings that pass for discussion on BBC Have Your Say? Or even better, the comment section underneath certain videos on Youtube.com. Some people have way too much time and indeed hatred, on their hands.

We were talking about this over dinner the other night, (in typical North London style, chardonnay at the ready) and the consensus was that people who vent their spleen online, pronouncing on issues and making vain pretensions to knowledge they don’t have, are likely to be people who find it hard to be heard in every day life.

Which is why we should be thankful forums like this exist, otherwise we’d have many many more nutters making (shouting) random conversation on the bus.

Not like any of us, though…

mas on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 10:00 am


in some parts of the country that’s normal behaviour (randomly talking on buses I mean!)

Some years ago we set up an online network to recruit young volunteers – it was surprising how often those who were very active (and vocal) online were the oposite face to face – I guess that can be seen as good and bad though depending on what you’re after

Livy on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 10:23 am


I know, I lived in Brizzle for a few years and was initially shocked at how friendly and helpful people are to complete strangers, and that the bus chatter does indeed go on among mentally well balanced individuals.

Growing up in London I’ve been conditioned to be colder in public places. Whenever randoms approach approach me it invariably means I’m either about to get robbed, spun a web of lies by a junkie looking for £3.74 for a train ticket home, or at the very best be subject to a shake-down by some pretty blonde chugger who believes that taking about African poverty will ignite my sense of middle class guilt….just enough to make me sign over my bank details to a complete stranger standing in the street.

Stephen Devlin on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 11:21 am


Britainthinks.com is not a stunt. It was started by four individuals of which I am one.

The OAA were looking for a case study to demonstrate the effectiveness of outdoor advertising. We presented our idea to them and they liked it. It had the key requirements that they were looking for; It was a new brand, it was online and it was a commercial venture.

We realise that it could be a lot better. We had a very short time frame to get it up and running and we are now trying to decide how best to keep going, improve the way the site works and the way we engage with our users.

In my day job I am freelance consultant in the media industry and Every Colour Ltd is my trading company. No mystery

Any other questions or ideas to help us improve britainthinks.com please let me know.

matthew taylor on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 2:28 pm


Well Stephen, as a matter of fact I have lots of ideas. For example, how about expressing the issues as ‘yes’ ‘no’ choices and then using ratings systems to identify the best 5 or 10 one sentence arguments for and against the proposition and the best one minutes video clip for and against. This way if someone wants to get a feel for a debate they can visit the site to get in a snapshot what seem to be the best of both sides. It will still be a an opinion rather than a deliberative site but at least it will be filtered and ranked opinion

Susmita on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 2:51 pm


genius!

Livy on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 3:02 pm


How about some quality control.

One lady commenting on “Who runs Britain: MPs or the media?” (which is admittedly a very good question) concludes her contribution to the issue with, “…and that’s why I’ve never bought a paper in my life”

Other than that, not sure I have much to add. Apart from the fact that most of us aren’t allowed to watch videos at work (many companies disable soundcards in computers or don’t provide speakers for this reason). I have to wait for my lunchbreak and bring in my own headphones to watch youtube vids.

Personally? I prefer opinion pieces in written form. Otherwise it’s a bit like being exposed to some of the shockingly ill-informed comments or inane questions asked by audience members on BBC Questiontime.

matthew taylor on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 3:29 pm


Yes, Livy but if you can rank them then the most useful opinions should come out top.

PS Have you seen that we have responded to your point about an edit button – see, I do listen

Davina Kirwan on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 3:46 pm


I can’t help thinking that my idea which is currently in development by my not-for-profit and has been since Sept 2009 – due to launch this month was ripped off! My free e-democracy tool works in a much more refined and useful way – but unfortunately will not have the money behind it for fancy advertising. May I ask, Stephen, where you got this idea from? Considering my project is for social rather than commercial gain and was going to be the first to market. I did discuss my brief with various media consultants around the country (!). Then, woe betide me, I see an ad: Educashun isn’t working – discuss (1 nation 60 million opinions)! But hey – there is no copyright on an idea, right??? I will avoid using the specific terms of the product – as copyright isn’t cheap, either.
Thanks to everyone for their comments – it’s useful to see we are on the right track.

Matthew – when you have a moment, I would be greatful for some more of your input.

Kindest,

Davina Kirwan
Founding Director, Citizen Society

Livy on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 3:47 pm


Indeed, but isn’t it quicker to speedily scan written commentary for adept analysis than it is to sit, wait, and load up a bunch of youtube videos to watch?

Actually I’m not sure, it is true that some people are more visually minded and take in more that way.

Livy

PS I have seen the upgraded features – I believe I may have shown my appreciation for said buttons in another post. But cheers MT Allows me to correct my grammar and appear slightly more lucid than a 14 year old girl. To be honest I’m always surprised that you take the time to read through all our ramblings.

Stephen Devlin on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 6:24 pm


Matthew thanks for your ideas. We did originally want to have contrasting views on each topic but had to drop functionality to make our go live date. I agree that this would definitely make the site more interesting and useful. If you don’t mind I will drop you a line directly to discuss.

We were initially keen to try video as the main medium because we all felt that the anonymity of the net often disrupts intelligent debate. You can get people expressing extreme views and bullying who would not do this if they were on camera. However – we are struggling to get people to upload! So we may go back to a more forum centric approach.

Davina – I can assure you that the idea was original, but there definitely seems to be a popular consensus at the moment that the British public need to re-engage with public debate and I guess we are all hearing and feeling that through the ether!

mas on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 6:48 pm


why do people need to upload? there’s no shortage of places to upload videos (and quite obviously no guarantee of intelligent debate by those that use them!)

I do think ‘getting your voice heard’ suggests getting it heard by those that matter and I’m curious about how you’ll achieve that.

rhian on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 8:27 pm


i just checked it out and to me it looks like a cross between youtube and the bbc or yahoo message boards…
ah well i’m not complaining: another place where i can rant to my hearts content for the sake of it for 5 mins till it gets swallowed up in cyberland.. all of these sites are just somewhere to waste a few hours whilst those in power do what they’re going to do anyway… We have our little black x once every 4 years, what are we complaining about…!

Gordon Rae on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 8:35 pm


Thanks to Steven Devlin for showing up here and having his say, but really, if you believe BritainThinks is the genuine article, you have had the wool pulled over your eyes. I have seen articles in The Times, The Guardian, Media Week and on Brand Republic all of which say that BritainThinks was created by Garry Lace and Robert Campbell of the Beta agency, for the OAA. The purpose was to show that billboard ads could drive consumers to log on to websites. It’s astroturfing, pure and simple, an attempt to create fake grassroots for a pupose that isn’t openly admitted. Unfortunately, the campaign hasn’t gone well, mainly due to the very poor quality of the copywriting, which seemed to think that the key was to be “provocative”. I notice that someone from the OAA has now said he regrets approving the campaign.

Stephen Devlin on Tue, 12th Jan 2010 8:54 pm


Gordon.

Garry and Robert are two of the four people who founded this business. The other two are myself and James Anderson The OAA has no ownership of Britainthinks. Neither James nor I even work in advertising.

Unfortunately – the OAA put out a press release on the first day of the launch which very much gave the impression that this was a stunt. Journalists as they often do have been regurgitating press releases.

It is not a stunt and it is not a conspiracy. You might not think it is very good – but that is another thing….

Sue B on Wed, 13th Jan 2010 2:18 pm


Interesting post and obvious generating interest. Perhaps Mr Devlin is right about the general feeling that people aren’t connected or want their feelings heard etc. And of course there is an election coming up. So all the tricks come out with all those willing to do the dirty work.

Mr Devlin – Your ideas, as you rightly point out are ill thought through, ineffective and lacking any credibility. The fact you rushed the site out to coincide with your ‘clients’ needs says a great deal about your independence. Everything about the project lacks substance and quality which makes me think it is heavily influenced by advertising think and culture.

Ms Kerwin – You appear to claim ownership of the idea of people having their say online. Having looked through your website, twitter etc. you appear to have a heavy journalistic and political thrust and background. The two most untrusted sectors of the ‘disengaged’. Again this background is apparent in your approach of flirting with ad and Pr agencies, claiming ownership for your Ltd company and having ignored the basics. Yes its timely for a journalist studying politics to launch such an initiative in election year, talking with the national media consultants and worried they beat you to market with a crappy version (sorry Delvin but to think BritainThinks took 4 of you!!!). No, its neither innovative, original or a commercial venture with any legs.

Am sure this won’t be the last of politically motivated tit bit sites designed to last until the election.

Paul Clarke on Thu, 14th Jan 2010 12:09 am


Stephen – whatever the origins of this campaign, I fear it does a disservice to genuine public engagement, and I have set out why in more detail here:

http://paulclarke.com/honestlyreal/2010/01/britain-thinks-or-does-it/

(I freely admit to the crime of unoriginality in arriving – independently – at the same post title as Matthew’s)

1 nation. 60 million opinions « Redjotter on Thu, 14th Jan 2010 10:19 am


[...] as Matthew Taylor points out “BritainThinks doesn’t encourage its participants to ask themselves whether [...]

Here’s where to stick it | The Editorial on Fri, 15th Jan 2010 10:32 am


[...] might also enjoy this post on Matthew Taylor’s blog. There’s some interesting debate in the comments to which one [...]

Davina Kirwan on Mon, 18th Jan 2010 9:34 am


Sue B,

Thank you for your comments. And yes – I am a qualified journalist studying politics. And the upcoming election is the climate that inspired the idea – but I am also a social entrepreneur – and I am funding all of the above myself – without any input from other organisations – and I will not make any financial profit from this work.

The whole point of Citizen Society and the oPob is to connect the politically disengaged with politics – this is where my background and training are advantages – not disadvantages. Within my masters degree, I am focussing heavily on opinion research – and especially different types of public opinion. As I am sure you can imagine – public opinion – and indeed opinion polls – are often used as as a tool by those in power to dictate a political/public agenda; pollsters, politicians and the media decide what the important questions are and put these questions to the public who then respond with varying degrees of understanding as their basis. Public opinion is then expessed as a percentage – the sum of a sample of individual opinions. This form of mass opinion is what the oPob is trying to move away from.

When you say flirting with ad and pr agencies, in my defence, I am merely exploring the best and most cost effective ways to let the public know anout the oPob – in order to do that, I had to explain my brief to media consultants.

I appreciate your cynicism as all opinions are valid. But this site will be there long after all the other titbits have tittered away.

I hope you take another look when the site is launched.

Kindest

Davina Kirwan
Founding Director of Citizen Society and the oPob. (Online Public Opinion Bank)

Davina Kirwan on Mon, 18th Jan 2010 9:44 am


Further to Sue B.

I would be really grateful for an outline of ithe basics you feel I have ignored. After all, the more input – the better the Bank will be.

Sincerely,

DAVINA

Sue B on Mon, 18th Jan 2010 10:03 pm


Davina,

Already you are shifting your focus to a new initiative, previously unmentioned, but you have installed yourself director of that too. Congrats.

So as the new self appointed social entrepreneur and UK’s social researcher for the disengaged, could you explain to me:

Your experience and achievements in social or cultural research? (online and offline)
Your experience and success with various research techniques and approaches or projects?
Your achievements and proposed approach in engaging sceptical, disengaged and disinterested groups?
Links to previous journalistic pieces/ projects where you have given those without a voice a voice? (ITN news or Trev Mc Donald show not count)
Your basic understanding of what the barriers and reasons for mistrusting politics, politicians and journalists actually are? and how you plan to overcome
If you are being 100% altruistic why do you care if someone else had the idea, why do continually bring everything back to you, your idea, your plan, your website, your without partners or financial backing (except from yourself)? Also why do you then conclude with ‘its good to see WE are on the right track’?

I haven’t even scratched the surface with the basics but I’m sure there is enough for you to chew on. I will say that whilst the concept is noble and the application of it important – disingenuous ego’s can often cause more trouble than they realise. For further points related to this see the post by Paul Clarke – he seems to talk from experience, explains some of the points i allude to in more detail and doesn’t appear to be half as naive as a politically ambitious journalist might be.

sincerely

sue b

founding director of ‘The Disengaged Speeked’
chairwomen – ‘ Weakest Link got Stronger’ (WlgoS)
Runner/ founding editor – CitizensShapeBook ”online”

ps: I am an ex banker now estate agent but fingers crossed x

Davina Kirwan on Thu, 21st Jan 2010 11:21 am


Sue,

Thank you for your response. It’s unfortunate that I have given you the impression that I have this massive ego. That was – the ideas came to me at stupid o clock in the morning during September of last year – and since then I have run with it.

I say ‘WE’ because I have since been joined by a volunteer webb designer, a volunteer graphics artist and hopefully shortly others with relevant skills.

It’s funny you mention ITV News and Tonight with Trev – because althought this project is in no way affiliated with them – I have been a staff journo with ITV News for the last 4 years and my previous job was on Tonight with Sir Trev – he is a nice bloke! (were you saying this doesn’t count?)

Although I am studying public opinion / market research – I don’t profess in any way to be an expert. The best thing in these situations is to employ an expert – which I am also in the process of doing. I say ‘I’ quite a lot but that is primarily only because I am inclined to initiate what I hope will be a highly collaborative project. And ‘I’ (again!) in no way restrict support or input.

Engaging the disengaged, all people who have adopted this task will agree – is a challenge yet to to be cracked. But there’s no harm in trying. I haven’t actually decided yet – the Citizen Society approach to this – but when I do, I will make it known.

All of the things you have asked for are not prerequisites to embarking on a project for social good. And public distrust is evident in almost evey medium we engage with on a daily basis. I am in no way interested in digressing from the project at hand – creating an online space for real public opinion in its entirety.

I can’t really glean whether your closing comment is sarcasm or not – but if it’s not, I am currently looking for non-executive directors. Drop me a line if you are interested and you can make sure all your concerns are addressed.

Davina (without all the title crap).

Sue B on Mon, 25th Jan 2010 3:29 pm


Hi Davina,

I suppose I do believe its useful to have an idea of ‘how you are going to represent the voice of the disengaged’ , prior to offering the service. Without that then i would perhaps expect some previous experience in delivering this kind of project. Failing that also I would then expect you had expertise and experience in your partners. Perhaps at a more simplistic level you do have immediate and real access to large disengaged groups who you could inspire and mobilise to your website?

Maybe we should agree to disagree on pre-requisites to a credible project. I asked about your understanding of the ‘disenaged’ because it presumably is the basis for what your vision is about (titles and ad slogans aside ) So again i think a viewpoint on why the disengaged are disengaged is both relevant and the foundation for a solution? I’m guessing they are not disengaged because there isn’t a place on the internet to state their opinion. Some people may choose to be disengaged because they know their opinion doesn’t influence those in power.

Did I miss the ITN or Sir Trev report on the rich and powerful, about the networks of secret societies, about media ownership and independence, the impact of advertising, tax spending and priorities, civil rights and defence or even the new leadership offered by Common Purpose? http://www.commonpurpose.org.uk/

Maybe a journalistic piece on how common purpose could influence whether the disengaged get a voice or get lead by self appointed ‘leaders’? is more in your sphere of expertise and exploring where barriers to empowering communities actually lie.

that is my associate director advice

Best
Sue

missive » Blog Archive » Where to stick it on Fri, 5th Feb 2010 9:34 pm


[...] might also enjoy this post on Matthew Taylor’s blog. There’s some interesting debate in the comments to which one [...]

DOmedia - Outdoor Advertising on Wed, 17th Mar 2010 6:48 pm


Only time will tell on whether this will be a success or not.

Where to stick it | Caroline Crampton on Wed, 30th Jun 2010 11:58 am


[...] might also enjoy this post on Matthew Taylor’s blog. There’s some interesting debate in the comments to which one of the [...]

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!