Collaborative consumption – the notion that we can now share or swap anything from clothes and parking spaces to free time – is an exciting idea. But is it really the answer to rampant consumerism? In November 2008, a 34-year-old security guard called Jdimytai Damour was trampled to death at a Wal-Mart store in Valley Stream, New York, by what local papers described as an “out-of-control” mob of 2,000 “frenzied” shoppers who had queued overnight in the promise of a slash-price sale. With the crowd outside chanting, “Push the doors in”, staff climbed on to vending machines to escape the resulting stampede. Even when police later declared that the shop was closed because it was now a crime scene, angry shoppers remonstrated with officers. One yelled: “I’ve been queuing since yesterday morning.” The bargains on offer included a 50-in plasma HDTV priced at $798. Rachel Botsman , a “social innovator” who has presented her ideas at Downing Street and before Microsoft and Google executives, retells the event in her book, What’s Mine Is Yours: How Collaborative Consumption is Changing the Way We Live. “It’s a sad and chilling metaphor for our culture at large – a crowd of exhausted consumers knocking down the doors and ploughing down people simply to buy more stuff.” Botsman rails in the book against the excesses, futility and contradictions of mass consumption, but she doesn’t rehash the usual tropes of anti-consumerism. Rather, her book is a cry for us to consume “smarter” by moving away from the outdated concept of outright ownership – and the lust to own – towards one where we share, barter, rent and swap assets that include not just consumables, but also our “time and space”. The notion of “collaborative consumption” is not, she notes, new – it has been around for centuries. But the arrival of internet-enabled social networking, coupled with “geo-located” smart phones, has super-charged a concept that was already rapidly gaining primacy owing to the twin pressures of our environmental and economic crises. Echoing the Japanese concept of muda – the relentless hunt for, and eradication of, inefficiencies in any system – collaborative consumption aims to exploit previously ignored or unnoticed value in all our assets by both eliminating waste and generating demand for goods and services that are otherwise “idling”. Botsman uses the example of motoring to show where collaborative consumption already makes sense. “Cars are 90% under-utilised by their owners,” she tells me from her home in Australia. “And 70% of journeys are solo rides. So we now see car club companies such as Streetcar proving very popular in cities. In Munich, BMW now has a scheme where it lets members pay for a car by the minute rather than by the hour. And websites such as ParkatmyHouse.com are allowing people to make money from unused space outside their properties. A great example is a church in Islington, London, which was facing financial trouble. But it started renting parking space out front and it now makes £70,000 a year from doing so.” If the internet and social networking act as lubricants for collaborative consumption, then trust is the glue that binds it together. None of this would work if we didn’t have faith that the invariably anonymous person at the other end of the transaction will do what they promise; namely, pay for your goods or services, or deliver what they have advertised. “Really interesting things are happening with trust at the moment,” says Botsman. “We don’t trust centralised monopolies, but we do trust decentralised systems. So we see peer-to-peer money-lending sites such as Zopa proving popular, in stark comparison to banks. ‘Trust circles’ are being built online for things such as skill-sharing, space rental and task-running. eBay has shown us that trust-based transactions work online. The US is about 18 months ahead of the UK at the moment with all this, but sites such as TaskRabbit and Hey, Neighbor! are redefining what a neighbour is.” One of Botsman’s most radical ideas is that the rise of collaborative consumption in coming years will see the advent of “reputation banks”. In her book, she writes: “Now with the web we leave a reputation trail. With every seller we rate; spammer we flag; comment we leave; idea, comment, video or photo we post; peer we review, we leave a cumulative record of how well we collaborate and if we can be trusted.” Soon, Botsman argues, our reputation rating will be as, if not more, important than our credit rating. “It is only a matter of time before there is some form of network that aggregates your reputation capital across multiple forms of collaborative consumption. We’ll be able to perform a Google-like search to see a complete picture of how people behave and the degree to which they can be trusted, whether it’s around products they swap and trade or money they lend or borrow or land or cars they share.” Botsman’s advice for anyone considering diving into the world of collaborative consumption is to begin by drawing up an inventory of your assets. Gumtree.com estimates that the average UK home has nearly £600 worth of unused items – old gadgets, books, clothes etc – collecting dust. But Botsman says to think more laterally: consider the spare storage space you might have under the stairs or in a garage; the electric drill you could rent to neighbours; your unique skills – dog-walking, accountancy, shelf-fitting – you could hire by the hour, or exchange for someone else’s skill. Like many people, I’ve dabbled with some of these concepts before. I’ve flogged unwanted items on eBay. I’ve signed up to lift-sharing websites and joined a car club. I’ve looked into how TimeBank works. I enjoy eking out extra value from my “idling assets”, but I also hate waste so relish any opportunity to see a resource fully utilised. But critical mass seems to be just as an important an ingredient to collaborative consumption as trust and the connectivity of the internet. If there aren’t enough people “out there” offering or demanding these goods and services, then these systems quickly wither. “Yes, you’ve got to have critical mass for this to work,” says Botsman. “Not just geographical, but across subject categories.” So, to stress-test the hypothesis of collaborative consumption myself, I trialled three popular examples. Clothes ‘swishing’ Early last year, Anna Dalziel, an HR executive from Truro in Cornwall, decided to channel her “addiction” for car-boot sales and eBay into a public-spirited hobby. She approached the owners of a cafe in a converted grammar school in Redruth and asked if she could host a clothes-swapping “swish” in one of the school’s disused corridors. She now holds weekly events across west Cornwall and has attracted nearly 600 attendees. “Sometimes it can get a bit scary,” says Dalziel ominously, as I arrive clutching a bag containing a skirt my wife has sent me to swap “for something nice”. (No pressure, then.) “It’s often a case of having to sharpen your elbows if you really want something.” Swishing rules vary according to the organiser, but Dalziel operates a system whereby women (I am very much the lone male) earn a single swap credit for every item they bring with them. Some other swishes sort clothes into higher and lower value piles, with, for example, a designer label item being worth 10 credits compared to a single-credit Topshop top. To pay for the time it takes to do all this sorting, organisers charge up to £20 at the door. However, Dalziel just charges £3 to cover her costs – fuel and venue hire – and operates a strict all-items-are-equal rule. Clothing racks marked with sizes have been lined up along a corridor. Around 15 people are waiting in the adjacent cafe for “kick-off”. Dalziel says it’s normally double that, but the rain might have kept people at home. As the women stream in, I stand back. “Many women treat swishing like a clothes library,” says Dalziel, as she takes the entrance fee. “You sometimes see the same items rotating week to week. Some people come before they go on holiday just to stock up and I know some women who have swapped around 500 items over the past year. I think people find they have less commitment to an item than if they had bought it so have an attitude that they can just bring it back next week.” I finally go to the clothes racks and tentatively let my fingers walk along the hangers. I don’t know what I’m looking for and Dalziel kindly realises this so comes over and holds up some brand new bikinis. I just take one to avoid any further awkwardness. The inevitable questions from my wife about why I’ve come home with a bikini await. “Facebook has been brilliant for us,” says Dalziel. “I just announce to everyone who has signed up when the next event is and it goes from there. The most we’ve ever had is about 90 people at an event we held at Penryn which attracts lots of students. That got a bit scary, but I would say 30-40 people is the ideal number. After each swish I sort through the remaining clothes and sort a pile for the charity shop or recycling. The rest I store at home and take to the next event. Some people treat us a bit like a charity shop and then want lots of credits. But that’s not how it works, so we have a ban on things like underwear. I don’t do this to sort through women’s old bras.” I’m curious to know whether she thinks a male-orientated swish would work. “I don’t think so really. We did try a kids swish once thinking parents would like to swap toys, baby accessories and clothes. But it just didn’t take off for some reason. It was also much harder to organise and manage the stock. And I’m just not sure whether, say, a tool swap for men would work as well. I sometimes wonder whether my swishes are more about the chance to socialise than they are about the clothes. Perhaps that’s the secret?” Local swapping In my hunt for a swapping service that isn’t limited to clothes, I turn to the internet. The first I try is U-Exchange , which seems to mimic the popular TV show of my childhood, Swap Shop. I type in my location, but the results are far from encouraging. The nearest person to me is offering a football table in exchange for “SAS war books”. I’m unsure what I find less appealing: the items to be traded, or the thought of meeting up with this person. Ecomodo is a far bigger site, probably because it doesn’t limit itself to swapping, but also allows users to give or, for a fee set by the owner, rent items to anyone who might want them. Again, I type in my location. And, again, I’m disappointed. All that is returned is someone 15 miles away renting their cross-trainer for £4.34 a day. It is patently obvious that these sites work best when you live within or close to a high-density population, not in a rural setting such as my home county of Cornwall. This is borne out when I type in my old London postcode to find more than 200 items offered, ranging from a tennis racket (free) and chocolate fountain (free), through to wellies (£2.27 a day) and a lawnmower (£4.34 a day). I can easily see how this could be a fantastic – and somewhat addictive – resource. Postal swapping Botsman recommends Bookhopper , which lets users swap books much in the same way as a swish for clothes but facilitated through the post. Swaps are limited by national boundaries (to keep postal costs down) and you must offer at least 10 books before you can request one. This way there is always a fluid stock of books in the system. My wife warns me that all her books are out of bounds. She employs a strangely possessive attitude to novels, so much so that she doesn’t like to lend them “in case they bend the spine”. I find 10 books that I’m happy to never see again, but the challenge is harder than I thought. I suffer from “you never know when you might need it”, especially when it comes to non-fiction, which doesn’t exactly match the spirit of collaborative consumption. As it happens, after a week no one has requested any of my books. Adding my unwanted copy of The Da Vinci Code to the 167 Dan Brown novels already on offer has probably earned me the karma I deserve. An early lesson of collaborative consumption is that it mimics Newton’s third law of motion, namely that you tend to get out of it what you put in. Consumer affairs Recycling Social networking Leo Hickman guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …President Obama held a relatively cheap fundraiser in Florida last night, and Politico wasn’t impressed with the turnout. Obama filled around 980 seats in the 2,200-seat Adrienne Arsht Center for Performing Arts, leaving the entire top level empty. Tickets cost $44. One Democratic official downplayed the turnout: “The expectation…
Continue reading …They don’t even hide it anymore. Today’s left openly spews hate at Christians. Leading Soros-funded leftist blog Think Progress attacked Governor Rick Perry today for being Christian… Because Christians are bad people. As Perry is poised to sign the most … Continue reading → Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Gateway Pundit Discovery Date : 13/06/2011 19:58 Number of articles : 4
Continue reading …Ministry of Defence urges servicemen and women, and their families, to be careful about sharing sensitive material online During the second world war, the propaganda motto from the British government was simple enough: careless talk costs lives. Things have become a little more complicated since then, but for the Ministry of Defence, the maxim still rings true. It has implored its servicemen and women, and their families, to be careful about gossiping online, using videos on YouTube to highlight the dangers of sharing sensitive material on social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter. In one personal security film , a mother is seen receiving a Facebook message from her son, who is serving abroad in Afghanistan at a forward operating base (FOB). “Hi Mum, hope you’re well,” writes Mark. “Just posted some new pics, the tan is coming along nicely as you can see. Big day tomorrow at FOB Jackson, major V VIP stuff happening so we’re all on our best behaviour, see you soon.” Mark has obviously committed the first offence. But mum also forgets to keep, well, mum – sharing the message with all of her friends. And the consequence of such rash behaviour? She is seen on the sofa, chatting away with an armed terrorist over tea and cakes. The message in another video is equally stark. Two sailors are off for a night out on the town, messaging friends that they are just leaving their ship, and telling them which nightclub they are heading to. The friends are then joined on the dancefloor by two balaclava-wearing men, waving machine guns over their heads. “Is it just your mates who know where you have checked in?” the film asks. Both videos end with the warning: “Think before you tweet, blog, update, tag, comment, check-in, upload, text, share.” The films have received a wry reception from some viewers. One posted: “Navy personnel would have been able to use their specialist training to detect and avoid the dancing terrorists.” The MoD, though, said the underlying message is important – two more short videos are being made and should be ready by next month. It said it did not want to gag people, or stop them using social media. “There have been cases recently when people have given away details of when a ship is due home, or when a plane is about to land,” said a spokesman. “These things happen in the excitement of homecomings and are unintentional. But we don’t want to give the enemy the edge. We’re just asking servicemen and women, and their families, to be a little more circumspect when they use these sites.” Military Defence policy YouTube Facebook Twitter Social media Nick Hopkins guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Cabinet office minister Francis Maude says teachers’ decision to take industrial action is irresponsible and wrong The decision of teaching unions to join the first wave of industrial action against government cuts is “irresponsible and wrong”, Francis Maude, the cabinet office minister, has said, appealing to those planning to strike on 30 June to reconsider. The minister, who is steering government relations with the public sector unions, condemned the decision of the National Union of Teachers and the Association of Teachers and Lecturers to strike over pensions before talks with the government have concluded. He accused the unions’ leadership of acting in their own interest, rather than that of their members or the public. The strike this month is now likely to see thousands of schools in England and Wales close, with low-ranking civil servants in the Public and Commercial Services union, who work in job centres, ports and courts, poised to join the walk-out when their ballot is returned on Wednesday. That result will coincide with the publication of the latest employment statistics, including the first official picture of the job cuts in the public sector in the first three months of this year, further riling the unions. Maude told the Guardian: “We hope that no public sector workers will actually go on strike while talks continue. There is a huge amount still on the table; they will at the end still be the best available pensions, better certainly than the vast majority in the private sector. “It’s very irresponsible of unions to be asking their members, many of whom are anxious about job security anyway, to lose a day’s pay and to go on strike when these talks are ongoing … We very strongly hope that anyone who works in public service will put their own interest and the interest of those they are there to serve ahead of their union leaders.” The 30 June strike will potentially shut the majority of schools across the country. The education secretary, Michael Gove, has asked officials to look at contingency plans should rolling strike action follow in the autumn, and headteachers are being urged to keep schools open. But there is little the government can do to avoid widespread school closures. The University and College Union said its members would be joining the June strike, meaning most universities and colleges will also be affected. The National Association of Head Teachers is deciding whether to ballot this week, though that result will not come until after the end of this month. Most unions had indicated that they would hold back from striking before the talks conclude this summer. Unison, the biggest public sector union, and GMB have both now said that they will move towards a ballot, amid suggestions that the talks are now faltering. Several sources close to the pension talks said they are struggling to agree even the basic principles. Government sources describe them as “in-depth” and “at a crucial stage”. Should the talks be fruitless, rolling strike action will follow across the public sector in the autumn, on a scale likely to make June’s walk-out look mild. Lord Hutton, a former Labour minister, conducted a review of public sector pensions for the coalition, recommending raising employee contributions and the retirement age for state employees from 60 to 66 by 2020. Final-salary schemes will be scrapped and replaced by career averages. Ministers have indicated broadly that they will accept those plans, but will announce details this summer. The government says the cost of paying for teachers’ pensions is forecast to rise from around £5bn in 2005 to almost £10bn by 2015 as more staff retire and life expectancy increases. In the NUT’s ballot, 92% voted in favour of strike action, with a turnout of 40%. The ATL result was 83% in favour of a strike on a 35% turnout. The strike will affect both state and private schools. Mary Bousted, general secretary of the ATL – which is considered a moderate union and has never taken strike action before – said: “For the average member [the changes] will be £1,500 a year in increased pension contributions. At a time of a two-year pay freeze, its a 3% cut, which has nothing to do with the health of the scheme. It’s a tax on pensions to pay for the deficit.” Christine Blower, general secretary of the NUT, the largest teachers’ union, said: “It is disgraceful that the government is pressing ahead with its reforms, which will affect teachers’ pensions. The government knows that they are affordable. This is a policy which has nothing to do with economics and everything to do with politics.” Trade unions Education policy Public sector cuts Polly Curtis Jeevan Vasagar guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Most Dangerous Man in America. Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers Pentagon Papers cite misgivings on Vietnam aid Pentagon Papers finally published, 40 years on Feni_55_Crystal says: From the new CNN.com: Pentagon Papers declassified #cnn http://t.co/1Y9wBdI
Continue reading …Ever wonder why some songs are more popular than others? Director of Emory University’s Center for Neuropolicy Gregory Berns and economics research specialist Sara Moore have discovered there’s some science behind that phenomenon. Their federally-funded study, published in the June 8th issue of the Journal of Consumer Psychology, found that the strength of brain activity
Continue reading …Click here to view this media [H/t Media Matters .] Apparently Glenn Beck is planning on going out the door at Fox News with a deep, lingering slime trail behind him. He reached a new low on his show yesterday: BECK: By the way, the U.N. is also working on a small-arms treaty — which purports to fight terrorism, but if implemented, Second Amendment proponents like me believe that it will only enforce rougher licensing requirements, create more red tape, and possibly an international gun registry. As if terrorists give a flying crap about registering their gun or their machete before they kill you. This will do nothing but make it harder for you to get a gun. Why would you get a gun? [Points to picture of President Obama and adviser Cass Sunstein.] To prepare for tough times. That’s why. He then went on to explain that Sunstein and Obama were apparently destroying America’s energy infrastructure by regulating coal-fired power plants out of existence — while referencing Dan Froomkin’s HuffPo piece on Sunstein … a piece that actually is all about how Sunstein has hardly been a slash-and-burn environmental regulator. Naturally, Beck will laugh this off as just a coincidental timing thing. But given his track record, that deniability is simply no longer plausible.
Continue reading …Last week, two food-related stories dominated the press. First, the World Cancer Research Fund announced that no one should eat processed meat ever because of its incontrovertible link to colon cancer. Second, President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron made sausage the centerpiece of their photo-op during the president’s trip to the United Kingdom. The World Cancer Research Fund’s new report, the most comprehensive ever conducted on colon cancer, confirmed that both red and processed meats play a significant role in the development of colorectal cancer. The authors found that 45 percent of all colorectal cancer cases could be prevented if we ate less meat and more fruits and vegetables and made other lifestyle changes. You can’t begrudge heads of state a bit of choreographed symbolism (pour the Guinness now, please). But when obesity, heart disease, cancer and other food-related conditions are epidemics costing hundreds of billions of dollars and a great many lives, the president needs to lead, not follow. He should set an example. So far, it’s been in the opposite direction. First, it was a well-publicized motorcade to Ray’s Hell Burger in Arlington, Va., with the Vice president. Then, a repeat performance — same place, same menu — with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Five Guys burgers, meaty chili and similar junk food used as props of choice show a president who is out of touch with health. Just as the previous administration ignored the pleas of the president’s cancer panel to stop subsidizing unhealthy foods, the current one has similarly treated health and nutrition with indifference. The First Lady’s signature anti-obesity campaign — Let’s Move — is no match for the administration’s ongoing purchases of sausage, cheese, burgers and other fatty foods that are sent to schools everyday. And the U.S. Department of Agriculture continues to bow to the interests of meat lobbyists and heavily subsidize the production of meat and other unhealthful foods. It’s time for the administration to acknowledge the clear and convincing scientific evidence linking processed meat to increased cancer risk. And it’s time for action to protect our children: The president and the USDA should work to get hot dogs, bacon, pepperoni pizza and other processed meat products out of school lunches. The president should also reconsider photo-ops that promote unhealthy foods. Certainly, no political leader wants to appear aloof, and beer, burgers and sausage lend a “regular guy” image. But I don’t want a regular guy as president. My plumber, my accountant, the pharmacist are all regular guys. And none of them should be running the country, much less setting a dietary example. Most “regular guys” die of heart disease, and half will develop cancer. The fact that the Obama-Cameron photo-op served food to British soldiers doesn’t excuse the unhealthful choices. The British Prime Ministry recently reported that 57 percent of its troops are overweight or obese. Many American soldiers are in the same predicament. There is no shortage of healthful choices, as Michelle Obama and Samantha Cameron demonstrated with an agile pair of salad tongs. The sooner our leaders break the pattern of catering to the worst of health problems, the better off we’ll all be. Neal D. Barnard, M.D., is a nutrition researcher and president of the nonprofit Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.
Continue reading …