Additional comments shared with BDP on the platform and a bit more..
The platform in itself is meaningless if is does not attract people who are at the same time willing to put and share content. There are already over 2
billion web sites out there so having one more does not help.
So the critical factor is to mobilize people towards the site. One of the hooks we have is the offering that “your contribution will be feeding into some
of the official processes that will inform the SG and the UN and this be a meaningful contribution.” This gives a niche vis-a-vis the other platforms that
are also working on the post215 agenda.
Our offering however needs to be a) communicated to people out there through the various networks and partners; and b) be credible enough and have
adequate backing from all relevant partners so that average stakeholders do indeed believe such claim and can trust the platform.
Web technologies in the 21st century (also called Web 2.0) are driven by users who are willing to share content and exchange ideas. The Yahoo model of the
late 1990s which had a sophisticated content strategy is dead; and the best proof of this is Facebook which claims to have 1 billion users who have
willingly decided to put their on content there for free -while the company takes all the profits!
What seems to be missing in the puzzle is a communications and PR strategy that can help use mobilize stakeholders who are WILLING to also be active
participants in the overall process. I believe we already have most of the networks to do this but not the professional messages to do so.
Needless to say, some content will need to be managed (in addition to the STATIC one). But I will like to call that meta-content. One example of this
comes from MyWorld’s 15 thematic categories which although not perfect provide guidance to stakeholders on the critical issues that need to be address
-and without forgetting that people can suggest more and perhaps narrower issues. If we think about it in this way, the 11 global thematic consultations
provide also some meta-content at least from the UN side. Probably our CSO partners will like to split the pie in different fashion. I do not know. Butn
in any event we need a mechanism to do this tand the proposed “content” group can surely do this too.
In the end, it seems to me we are on to the same but we are seeing in different sequence, I think…
[BTW, I do not want to get into the issue of end-user experience at the moment]