<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mobile blackouts and the poor</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cafodpolicy.wordpress.com/2011/01/28/mobile-blackouts-and-the-poor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cafodpolicy.wordpress.com/2011/01/28/mobile-blackouts-and-the-poor/</link>
	<description>Wise as serpents, gentle as doves</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 09:00:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matteo B.</title>
		<link>http://cafodpolicy.wordpress.com/2011/01/28/mobile-blackouts-and-the-poor/#comment-1274</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matteo B.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 20:35:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafodpolicy.wordpress.com/?p=352#comment-1274</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[well, it seems technology is always revolutionary. particularly ICTs as they allow people to share information. revolutionary! we notice it when it comes to breaking the silence of dictatorship (and btw, how comes media do not share the voice of people subject to dictatorships in the absence of violent revolts? maybe &quot;old media&quot; are not so keen on freedom? maybe sharing suffering condition in &quot;normal times&quot; does not sell? maybe &quot;old media&quot; just reflect the power structures of &quot;western civilisation&quot;? maybe...). anyhow, there&#039;s another interesting point in ICTs and it is about their role in connecting people at the grassroots levels. connecting local communities, entrepreneurs, social and economic actors. in brief: people in their daily activities. particularly, this attribute is very interesting if people are poor people, in places without much (if any) government service support (and therefore government control), in areas dealing with the damages of the global economy rather then the benefits. people living those particular locations, should better ask themselves: are ICTs potential enablers for local social and economic exchanges that are alternative to the main-stream capitalist model(s)? can ICT support small-scale changes and innovation, and experiments, towards a truly sustainable growth (in terms of human and social development), which is fair to people and respectful of the environment? can ICT-based infrastructures be gradually implemented from the bottom, with low investments, and therefore lower power pressures from central governments and big industries? can we start thinking in this direction, when we talk about development, instead of pushing grandiose ideas for developing countries, ideas that have clearly failed in our beloved &quot;western societies&quot;? that would be very nice, indeed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well, it seems technology is always revolutionary. particularly ICTs as they allow people to share information. revolutionary! we notice it when it comes to breaking the silence of dictatorship (and btw, how comes media do not share the voice of people subject to dictatorships in the absence of violent revolts? maybe &#8220;old media&#8221; are not so keen on freedom? maybe sharing suffering condition in &#8220;normal times&#8221; does not sell? maybe &#8220;old media&#8221; just reflect the power structures of &#8220;western civilisation&#8221;? maybe&#8230;). anyhow, there&#8217;s another interesting point in ICTs and it is about their role in connecting people at the grassroots levels. connecting local communities, entrepreneurs, social and economic actors. in brief: people in their daily activities. particularly, this attribute is very interesting if people are poor people, in places without much (if any) government service support (and therefore government control), in areas dealing with the damages of the global economy rather then the benefits. people living those particular locations, should better ask themselves: are ICTs potential enablers for local social and economic exchanges that are alternative to the main-stream capitalist model(s)? can ICT support small-scale changes and innovation, and experiments, towards a truly sustainable growth (in terms of human and social development), which is fair to people and respectful of the environment? can ICT-based infrastructures be gradually implemented from the bottom, with low investments, and therefore lower power pressures from central governments and big industries? can we start thinking in this direction, when we talk about development, instead of pushing grandiose ideas for developing countries, ideas that have clearly failed in our beloved &#8220;western societies&#8221;? that would be very nice, indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Rise of Digital Resilience &#171; Aptivate &#124; A Blog for ICT4D</title>
		<link>http://cafodpolicy.wordpress.com/2011/01/28/mobile-blackouts-and-the-poor/#comment-1273</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Rise of Digital Resilience &#171; Aptivate &#124; A Blog for ICT4D]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:55:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafodpolicy.wordpress.com/?p=352#comment-1273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] to write some thoughts about Digital Resilience for a while and reading Janet Gunter&#8217;s blog post about Mobile Blackouts and the Poor has prompted me into finally doing [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to write some thoughts about Digital Resilience for a while and reading Janet Gunter&#8217;s blog post about Mobile Blackouts and the Poor has prompted me into finally doing [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
