This weekend I have been very upset about Baby P. As a mum, I struggle to understand how anyone can fail to protect and cherish your own child. A child’s love of its mother is unconditional. A child is powerless. A child just wants to be loved, sheltered and protected. A lot of mums feel overwhelmed by the sadness of this story, it seemed to be the biggest topic on the social-networks last weekend.

One group on Facebook (with over 5000 members) used it’s collective investigative power to expose the identities of the mum and ‘carers’ of Baby P. Another group which was less investigativly inclined was entitled entitled “Death is too good for [the mother's name], torture the bitch that killed Baby P.”   Instinctively I felt that this was deserved retribution.  But then I wondered how this could be a good thing.

Do Facebook vigilantes or any other social network have the right or power to bring justice to those who ‘deserve’ it? Is it a case of mob rule or just desserts being served? Is this the downside to a democritisation of media?

Most Facebook groups focus on the benign and trivial: I was amused to see a group who want John Sergeant be their granddad. This is Britain at its eccentric best.  A disrespect for the rules of “Strictly Come Dancing” may be a bit of harmless fun, but what happens when Facebook communities start to openly challenge the rule of law?

The role of social networks has changed. No longer are they restricted to being a ‘social utility’ connecting friends for a big night out. Facebook’s users are a collection of single-issue political-parties, each akin to the gun or knife-control lobbying groups.

Once upon a time, you needed to be in position of power to make things happen. Now, you and me can make a change for better or worse simply by asserting opinions online – on anything we believe passionately about.  Whether its to bring back Laura back to the X Factor or or to send a virtual lynch-mob after the villain of the moment. Social networks are proving themselves as serious enabling tools that put power into groups who were once considered to disparate, too obscure or too apathetic to become involved with a political process.

But are we witnessing technology enabling democracy at its best?

 

 

The New York Times reported this week that the number of women studying computer sciences has fallen. 28% of all undergraduate degrees in computer science went to women in 2001. However by 2004-5 women only gained 22% of the degrees. This number is even lower at elite institutions like the MIT where only 12% of the degrees go to women. And according to this article, many computer science departments now report that women make up 10% of the newest entrants. This is in stark contrast to 25 years ago when – as the author claims – women made up up to 50% of computing classes.

Interestingly enough the article quotes figures stating the number of women in science and engineering has increased to 51% in 2004-5 up from 39% in 1984-85. Why is it that the numbers of women in science and engineering are rising while those in computing are not?

I found this very surprising because computing has changed significantly in recent years. Particularly the advent of Web 2.0 seems to attract more women to the internet in general and to working on Web 2.0 technologies in particular. The Fast Company magazine was celebrating women in Web 2.0 just this week.

 

However Web 2.0 might have little to do with what computer science is all about. The number of female web designers is sizeable but web design is by most tech specialists not seen as real programming and – as the article points out – it pays much less than software engineering.

 

Reasons for the lack of women in computing have been discussed widely. It includes that computers are seen as toys for boys, the constant questioning of women’s ability to engage with technology and the geeky and nerdy image of computing – to name but few. With more women using technology to get things done and technology becoming more intuitive and humane, one could have thought that the image of computing is changing.

 

Maybe women are voting with their feet against the way computing is portrayed and taught and instead chose to engage with technology on their own terms. Like with technology design, women might want different computing courses or a different marketing of computer courses. It might be time to explore why computing was a more interesting choice for women 25 years ago than it is today despite of the fact that computing is now omnipresent.

 

According to the US polls, women are the most important and difficult voter to win over. Not only are they in the majority (53%), they are more likely to be undecided in the run up to the election. Recent events show that Obama has been successful with women, particularly young women (Senator Obama won 35 percent of women, while Senator Clinton won 30 percent).

Why is women are drawn to Obama in a way they are not drawn to McCain or Hilary Clinton? What is that Obama has that is appealing to women that McCain does not have?

Obama has already been voted marketer of the year by Time magazine. His “organising idea” is focused on a clear and consistent message: Change. And he delivers it in an inspirational way through the media women use (youtube, blogs, facebook etc). But more fundamentally, the reason Obama is successful is because he focuses on what women care about.

Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, states:

“Women see themselves as more economically vulnerable than men, more likely recipients of the social safety net at some point in their lives, and they see a larger role for government.”

As a working mum of two, I often find myself cooking the tea, washing up, shoving in some washing, on the phone paying a bill and doing the shopping online- all at the same time. Its me, not my husband, who thinks about the cost of food and energy going up. Its me who thinks about how to cut back this Christmas on presents. And its me who thinks that we should eat in rather than get a take out.

With women as the Chief Household Officer, Obama is making a relevant connection that brands could learn from. With Oprah behind him, Obama appears to be a ladies man.