How many of the individuals in Foreign Policy (FP) Magazine’s “Power List” engage in the fray of public discourse via @Twitter?

Just recently @FP_magazine published an article cataloguing their view of the “The 500 most influential people on the planet.” (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/04/29/the_500_most_powerful_people_in_the_world)

The individuals Included in @FP_magazine’s list span a broad spectrum of human society from religious leaders and drug kingpins to corporate CEO’s, NGO directors, heads of government and government ministers.

After looking at the list, I wondered how many of those individuals (and the organizations they represent) are engaging in the rough and tumble fray that is the public discourse on @Twitter.

To that end, I have constructed a ‘rough’ Twitter Directory of the list published by @FP_magazine. This directory contains both the ‘Personal Twitter Accounts’ of the individuals in FP’s list as well as Twitter accounts associated with the organizations they represent, their ‘Institutional Twitter Accounts.’

LINK to the Twitter Directory of @FP_magazine’s ‘500 Most Influential People’

LINK to the #LIST of ‘Personal Twitter Accounts’ hosted at @VITweeple: https://twitter.com/VITweeple/the-fp-power-list/members

About 25% (123/500) of the individuals contained in FP’s ‘Power Map’ have at least one Personal Twitter Account. Some of the government leaders in FP’s list have multiple accounts supporting multilingual Twitter Feeds.

Of  the Personal Twitter Accounts, ~62% (78/123) are @Verified. It should be noted a few accounts included in the directory are either out-of-date or of questionable authenticity, but were included for the sake of completeness.

Additionally, ~302 of the individuals in FP Magazine’s ‘Power List’ (~60%) are also associated with (or supported by) at least one Institutional Twitter Account(s).  Approximately 182 out of the 302 of  the Institutional Twitter Accounts (~60%) are @Verified.

Whether the individuals themselves are actually doing tweeting via their respective ‘Personal Twitter Accounts’ or whether support staff are actually doing the tweeting clearly depends upon the management style of the individual. I leave that for you to decide.

Does Being Part of the “Social Media Scene” Lead to Effective Discourse?

As we all know, electronic Social Media permit a larger swathe of the public (We The Tweeple) to directly, dynamically and rapidly communicate with our representatives in government, with both for- and non-profit organizations, with media outlets, and with one another across cultures, countries and geography.

It is often suggested that our new connectivity (or hyper-connectivity, if you will) afforded to us by electronic Social Media will also lead to a fundamental restructuring of the institutions that represent our interests in society as a whole. Moreover, it is being suggested these New Social Media, such as Twitter, are a vehicle by which we will effect more transparent and responsive governments, organizations and institutions; ones more capable of fulfilling our collective needs than has previously been possible since the rise of the modern bureaucracy.

How will we measure effective, meaningful engagement and outcomes?

It is one thing to note ‘who’s on Twitter’ and to count numbers of clicks and followers and @replies and so on. And it is quite another to determine whether we are actually using electronic Social Media to communicate more effectively, efficiently and constructively with one another. That is, in ways that result in practical, tangible solutions to the challenges we all face.

Second, there is a sharp difference between being part of the “Social Media Scene” by signing up to Twitter (and other Social Media) and actually engaging in effective and meaningful dialogue with one another, regardless of the medium at hand. For example, do the influential individuals among FP’s ‘Power List’ view electronic Social Media as just another outlet to promote and promulgate their own ideas and products? Or are they actually listening? And if they are listening, are we saying anything worth hearing? Or perhaps our respective representatives will find themselves too overwhelmed by this new tsunami of commentary and input. Perhaps the communication explosion will only add clutter and not clarity.

Will our use of and engagement on the New Social Media actually lead to more streamlined, effective institutions? Will it result in tangible, practical changes in government policy and programs to our benefit? Will we together in eConsultation with one another and those in power develop new strategies to combat crime and hunger and make more efficient use of limited resources?

Will we move towards more ‘civil,’ thoughtful public dialogue? Or will we merely end up -more shrilly perhaps- reinforcing old, rigid patterns of communication and behavior that lead to stagnation and deadlock in the public sphere? Do electronic Social Media, in and of themselves, create some space for us to refine how we communicate -to be more diplomatic and deferential with one another, or does the increased exposure they facilitate only amplify and reinforce stale opinions and stereotypes?

Will more of us, or at least enough of us, use electronic Social Media altruistically? Or will too many of us use it as an implement to harm and undermine fellow citizens? Surely any tool is only as useful or as destructive as we choose to make it. To wit, in my Twitter Timeline I see so many amazing citizen diplomats broadcasting warnings of impending destruction –tornadoes, storms and the like-, share links to assistance and support, humor, compassion and encouragement with one another. I watch as government representatives post a tremendous amount of useful information for their citizenry, make meetings available by video and livestream, and create new opportunities for broader citizen engagement through Twitter Town Halls. Yet, sadly, I also see individuals and groups abusing their heightened impact and publicity on electronic Social Media to inflame tensions, incite violence and hurl insults.

I personally don’t see that electronic Social Media have  in and of themselves some magical property that will transform human society. Rather, I think the essential thing is how we choose to use this bright shiny new toy now at our disposal.

For example, I recently got the following tweet in my Timeline: “‏@Liberationtech4 Jun Study Suggests Computers Don’t Improve Academic Performance http://blogs.kqed.org/mindshift/2013/06/why-computers-alone-wont-move-the-needle/ … #ICT4E #EduTech #EdTech #eLearning #Education”

To which I replied: “‏@PicoBee4 Jun @Liberationtech Very interesting.So, how one actually uses any given tool like chalk AND computers might be the important thing.”

We are at very the beginning of a new global ‘re-awakening’ to one another I think. And only time will tell if we come out all the better or the worse for it. Whatever happens, it truly still is _as it always has been_ up to all of us and each of us.

Kind regards and best wishes,

@Picobee/@VItweeple