If they build it (right), I will use it (and likely pay for it).

There are all kinds of commercial opportunities in this as well. Let’s say you wish to create a community around your brand, services and products. There’s no reason you cannot apply the logic above (i.e., caring for the user’s needs, offering choice and user friendliness, delivering apps that have a positive/useful outcome) and also make money.

For the business people…

None of what I’m saying precedes profit. There is no reason why enterprise should be divorced from a socially meaningful mission and purpose - especially in the case of brands that cater to a more traditional, values-oriented demographic (which is increasing with the boomer generation). That’s just good business.

I really appreciate what you’re saying. And I do see where you’re coming from via the balance of critique with applause - when appropriate. As you can see from my enthusiasm for web2.0 I’m a big fan of innovation and exploration. That said, I think it’s important to pause for critical thought before embracing and endorsing - I’m not seeing nearly enough of that (questioning). Nor am I seeing the right sorts of questions getting asked (enough). Your post and question inspired ME because I felt you were asking the right questions. I only wish more people would.

My criticism of FB is based on questions around the efficacy of their models. I do not believe that new technologies merely passively reflect the truth of their creators but produce new and original systems and behaviours that nobody had anticipated (or bothered to think about.

So lets take these tools and try to reconfigure their use - with a thoughtful and mindful eye on the right outcomes. Those outcomes can include plenty of profit, too. There’s a lot of money to be made by those who choose to deliver something that users really want and need. I’d pay for it (as long as I got a good free beta’s worth out of it first!).

There are a lot of things that the web makes it easy to do (provided you have the hardware and the broadband access, neither of which is a trivial issue). It’s easy to share photos, easy to share video, getting easier to subscribe to podcasts, easy to install Facebook applications, easy to spam your friends, easy to reach out and connect with someone.

And when you look at a platform like Facebook, they’ve invested a lot of time and energy into making it easy - into reducing the friction that might keep someone from moving through the steps of an application. So have the folks at YouTube, and Flickr, and a hundred other sites that come to mind.

For those of us interested in using the web for social change, that imposes at least three key demands on us:

To make a substantial investment in the user’s experience of the kind of applications and services that encourage positive change and collaboration. We’re competing for people’s participation; when we’ve earned a little of it, we owe it to our users to waste as little of their time and energy as possible figuring out interfaces and workflows.

To learn from the experience of popular sites and applications, whether we think their impact is positive, negative or negligible. There’s always been a certain level of disdain for popular culture in some (not all!) segments of the activist left, and while I’m not suggesting people suspend their critique of the mainstream media, a whole lot of activity goes on there. To refuse to draw the lessons that activity can teach us would be an enormous waste.

To engage people where they’re participating. I was part of a discussion the other day where one person was asking for advice on posting a critique of junk media to YouTube; one of the first responses suggested YouTube is the last place you should post that kind of material, because it’s ground zero for junk culture. The commenter was joking… but in all seriousness, I can’t think of a better place to criticize YouTube than on YouTube. Instead of hoping our audience will make the trek to whatever decontaminated ground we’d like to meet them on, we’ll be a lot further ahead meeting them where they live.