An Encyclopedia of Perspectives
Antidote to media echo-chambers
and, a way to make interactive product labels
How?
By simply agreeing on definitions of topics that matter.
How?
*Anyone can make a new bubble.
*Anyone can only vote for one bubble per topic.
*The vote of reputable names (or psudonyms) gives credibility to a bubble.
*The more votes a bubble wins the bigger it gets.
How?
*Anyone can question claims a bubble makes.
*Questions get reworded so that multiple bubbles consider them good questions.
*We make collective viewpoint bubbles around shared questions, just like we did with topics.
Collective viewpoint bubbles can
Grow, Shrink, Split, Merge, and Pop
Most media speaks from an established position of authority.
This is different.
Anyone can be an author but must earn the support from reputable people and institutions
*Encourages collaboration and solidarity.
*Less to read through
*Small voices can become louder, clearer, and more popular.
*Unlike Wikipedia concensus is reached by true agreement not due to the lack of time or effort.
There is an incentive to listen because they want to retain votes.
Views with most respected experts in will look better.
If you don't agree with a bubble you dont directly atack their views other than with questions
Etiquette demands we are only constructive towards bubbles we can agree with, which may mean starting your own.
By referencing claims with questions we can see quickly see how beliefs underlying a collective viewpoint bubble differ
This way of referencing was not possible before these new media technologies allow for it.
It incentivises the finding of the best evidence and arranging it so people can understand it.
A very emperical approach
Not limited to just two sides
Each collective viewpoint bubble can arrage information about the matter in a different way and therefore can cause us to perceive it differntly. They can frame the a debate giving subtly different emphasis. They can draw attention to different evidence, use different language, differnet images and video techinques all which can cause us to percieve the same matter differently .
"They who control the frame control the game'
We all live with in bubbles anyway and they distort our view of reality. There is no escaping bubbles. However, we may recognise that there are other bubbles and recognise that our own bubble changes the way we experiance reality.
You can read more about it in how it works and then at the bottom Give us feedback. Ask questions, challenge the concept. We want to know what you think.
You will need to sign up use this facebook group.
There will be meetups happening in the Bristol area: watch Strangelabs
A story of how Marlon clarified knowledge about how plastics are damaging the ocean and raised to some practical things we can do about it.
Similar discussion platforms:
Wikipedia
Both involve collaborating on documents
Key differences:
*it allows marginal voices to fully express their views without competing over the same space with people with other views
Kialo
Both enable you to dig down deeper into a discussion and enables different users to explore and weigh up different sides of a discussion.
Key differences
*it does not limit you to two sides of a discussion (i.e for and against). You are able to suggest an unlimited amount of alternative ways of thinking about a matter.
* There is also a map of matters that the knowledge can influence, designed to act as a backbone to keep discussion effective.
Currant major ways of finding or grouping information and how BUBBLEverse differs:
Reddit
Subreddits are a way of categorising content on the internet
Key differences from these:
* The Venn web (i.e Topic map) has broader and narrower topics that fit within one another to make a network.
Multiple defined tags: e.g Stack-overflow (and Stack-exchange)
stack-exchange Lets you attach 5 tags to a question. These tags have definitions.
Key differences:
*Venn web topics are also defined, however rather than having multiple tags they combine into much less, but more lengthy worded, topics
*We highlight the difference between verb, noun and event topics.
Searching (Google, Yahoo, etc)
looks uses keywords to find content. It is not thinking about the definition of what the words mean.
Key differences
*A Venn web should be able to join content that that uses extremely different vocabulary because perhaps it was written from a very different point of view. It can even join content that has been written in a different language.
*We can exclude content that is off topic. So, then we can see how much content exists on the subject and potentially go through it methodically.
*It does not optimise the search results for you. Search engine optimisation has been accused of helping cause a media echo chamber effect (where you find views you already agree with more than those you disagree with) .
Twitter
Users can create hashtags. It is up to people to notice trendy hashtags and join in contributing to them.
Key differences
*Venn web topics should settle down and be quite stable (This is because we ought to be able to agree on matters that exist (defining them) even if we can't agree on what to think about them).
I prefer the idea of being transparent about where you are coming from. Can we ever be completely neutral? I believe everything you say manipulates another towards thinking like you.
Here an article I found also calling for transparent subjectivity in media
Read my essay looking at the social implications of emerging “new” media. Writen whilst thinking of the idea.
Would you like to feel more sure about the things you believe in? Weather it is avoiding fluoride toothpaste, choosing organic, or acting to avoid climate change. A little doubt can cause us to not deal with stuff. Instead we may make decisions based on what people around us seem to be doing rather than what the evidence points to. When we feel sure we can more easily act.
It can be tiring looking through vast amounts of conflicting knowledge. The process organises the information in a way that we can quickly get an overview of as well as dig down to the key questions that our deepest beliefs pivot around. It also tells us which evidence is the most important according to the different groups allowing us to base our views on real observations and experiences.
It may release the control that media institutions have over mass perception of what is going on. This platform would allow narratives to earn as much respect as they deserve.
Make your voice heard. Influence others. Overcome fake news. Small alternative voices can easily get lost amongst all the others. It can be hard to seperate off the daft or misleading ones. There is plenty of out right fake news and voices trying to get you to buy into the latest fad. Bubbles are the best of both the established media and the freedom for anyone to broadcast on the internet. Independent voices can explain their views, merge with agreeable others and become well respected as they gather reputable support. Creating autonomous sources of reliable information.
We can use bubbles to agree on good ways to act. Some humans will behave in different way to others, they do this based on their beliefs and values. In viewpoint bubbles we can group together with others and express what we believe is good, bad, better or worse. It can help you find others who have similar beliefs on how to behave. People are free to challenge these beliefs and explore other ones.
What people value drives sales. If enough people can agree on more ethical and wise values and encourage each other to act on them we can buy into a more ethical better run world. By creating shared values that people are aware of it creates demand for producers to provide for it. We can even begin to label products according to the views and values created in viewpoint bubbles. Many groups for instance Compassion in world farming have called for better labeling. With this we can create the authority needed to explain which products are good in a way that would be harder for corporate interest to manipulate.
“What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so.”― Mark Twain. Bubbleverse helps us to be critical of what we think we know and to inspect our views thoroughly and constantly. Which can help us avoid arrogance. We can do this without the negativity that you get in typical back-and-forth forums. Good science will be happy to continually challenge its assumptions. This is a peer review for the masses.
Once established we can go to any action topic and view top thinkers peer reviewed wisdom about what to do.
Bristol
Email: bubbleforum@gmail.com
Phone: +44 (0) 7925 139 092
Twitter: @WikiBubbles
Prototype - Facebook group
Blog - Creating collective viewpoints
Youtube channel