Is the Internet really a game changer?

I realize the irony of putting this topic out for discussion online, but that's kinda the point of this one.

I've spent three of the past six weekends at various provincial AGM's - for ArtsLink NB, the Union of NB Municipalities, and Music NB weekend. At home, normally I'm on the organizational side of events, so it's been interesting to be a fly-on-the-wall at these meetings.

A few observations:

1. It's increasingly important to speak both English and French or at least have a decent working knowledge of both official languages.  Especially in the cultural sector, because the Acadian community is so organized and we in Anglo NB have much to learn from them.

2. The biggest challenges to our successes in NB - regardless of industry - are geography and communication.  It's extremely difficult to keep people in the loop, even with today's social networks and communication technology, in a province where people are so spread out.

Add to that the fact that most people go about their day-to-day routines trying to block out excess information in our media-saturated environment, and the result is that people who have common economic or organizational interests are frequently isolated from each other.

3. On the other hand, finding information is easier than ever, for people who go looking.  This means that challenging official narratives and information - shale gas being an important case in point - is being done more frequently.

At these events, I am often the only person from rural western New Brunswick. Sometimes I find people from the cities have a tendency to explain things to me that I am already aware of, because I read it online.  I read a lot online, mostly because I am too endlessly fascinated by how the world works to quit.

Sometimes I would like to tell these people that "we have the same Internet in Woodstock."

This leads me to wonder: is the internet really a game changer?  ie. Will having access to lots of information really help people in rural areas and small towns be more self-sufficient, better citizens, and create thriving centers of cultural and economic innovation?

Or is it the old maxim "it's not what you know, it's who you know" still true?

I have to admit, I feel like meeting two or three good new contacts accomplishes a lot more than being alone in a room, reading a screen.

I can see how people want to share information and work together, and the internet does facilitate those kinds of collaborations.  However, I don't think it can ever replace the social ties and weak social capital that come from random encounters with colleagues (I met someone I'd been trying to meet in an elevator at one of the conferences - finally) or being in the same room when a major announcement is made.

Does the internet help us build communities based on common interests?  Or does it just isolate us more?

Problem solvers wanted

We all have problems.  Sometimes, big problems.  And in my short 18 months on the Woodstock Town Council, I have noticed that we hear from people mostly when they have a problem.

Being an elected representative is pretty interesting, but you start to grow a thick skin, because you become a bit of a magnet for angry people.

I can identify with the 'angry person' camp, but now that I have a small role to play in local decision-making, I see how raw anger is really only the first stage in solving a problem.

It's a natural way for people to get motivated to speak up that something is wrong, but being angry on its own does very little to correct the situation and often serves to demoralize the other people involved.

Today I spent about five hours in various meetings related to how to improve Woodstock's downtown.  It was very heartening, despite the challenges that exist.  I find it really heartening to be in an environment where local people can speak frankly about problems that they see, with the goal of moving towards collective action and possible solutions.  If local people don't take responsibility for solving local problems, do we really think that higher levels of government can do a better job?  I have my doubts.

I wish our society had better methods of collective problem solving, and that we could value the process of getting together to improve things for the common good. We should encourage our young people to learn and practice good problem-solving skills.

It's not easy, solving real-life problems.  Most of the time, solutions can't simply be purchased, they have to be tailored to fit the particular local circumstances at hand.  This requires creativity, compromise, putting aside one's biases and learning to listen to other viewpoints.

The five hours I spent today are a fraction of the real time it's going to take to make a significant impact on the issues in downtown Woodstock.  But it's a reminder that change occurs when real people have a shared interest and are willing to set aside their differences and work together on something that matters to them.

Too often we forget that, and take our metaphorical toys and "go home" because we do not feel able to be part of a constructive proccess.  It's tempting to say screw it, but in the end, we all lose.  Anything worth having, is worth speaking up for, and is worth solving a few problems along the way.