Submitted by: David Crane
Describe your idea. What will you do?
It's difficult to know who to believe these days. We're aware that even august institutions like the BBC have bias and we're mistrustful of the agendas of other big media. The internet helps, in that it provides easy access to alternative points of view. However, it can also make things worse.
There are a multitude of opinions online, many of which seem plausible. We don't have enough knowledge to dismiss them completely but can't take them at face value either since we know people have a tendency to put forward only the facts that support their argument.
So who do we trust? What information do we act on?
The obvious solution is to trust no one person, but visit a variety of sites and get a rounded view. However, making sense of different opinions is hard work, time-consuming, and imprecise. We've got to read what can be long threads, work out who seems credible and hold their views in our head as we verify them elsewhere. What's worse, one side often raises a really good point you can't find an adequate answer for.
The implications of this problem are many. Indecision is the mother of inaction; if people aren't sure what information to act on then, quite simply, they don't act. But the opposite is also true. If people are convinced about an issue they are inevitably more inclined to do something about it.
Debatewise.com has been established to re-engage people with democracy by allowing them to coalesce around, and get motivated by, the issues which concern them. We work like Wikipedia does, anyone can create a debate on any subject they like and anyone can edit and strengthen that debate. We list these arguments side-by-side so allowing people to compare the two. And our voting tools allow visitors to see where the land lies and debate creators to learn how to craft a better case.
We believe in the powers of collective intelligence, partly because getting users to create these arguments makes for a very lean site but mostly because we believe the best way to get the best arguments is to allow people to collaborate. Our wiki approach also means people are presented with manageable chunks of information and not overloaded with information.
Our goal is to be the Wikipedia of debate and the first place people turn to when they want to make up their mind. We have two clear differences between other debating sites. The first is our focus on the audience rather than the debater. We believe the audience is more worthy of focus, party because no-one else does but mostly because build the audience and the debaters will come.
The other major difference is that we're a not-for-profit. We do plan to start generating revenue when we reach critical mass but will put all our profits into a pool and will allow site members to decide which good causes we support. This mechanism will further encourage involvement and create a virtuous circle of more content generating more money which generates more content.
What will the benefits be?
For individuals (ie the audience of the debate)
- Easy way to compare pros and cons of an argument
- Ability to get the information they need to make an informed decision
- More certainty about puzzling issues, greater feeling of being included, informed and involved
For debaters
- Ability to hone their arguments
- Feedback as to which arguments work
- Mechanism for getting more supporters and/or donations
- Greater understanding of opponents' arguments and what key issues need to be addressed
- Ability to collaborate with like-minded individuals
For society
- More involved and informed citizenship
- More feedback as to what people want, like and need
- More people motivated to take action
- Once we start generating revenue all kinds of good causes benefit
- Promote dialogue as a way of resolving dispute
- Provide a mechanism for politicians to consult with their constituents
Who will you target?
For debaters:
Anyone with an axe to grind or message to get across: eg activists, campaigners, politicians -- local and national, political parties, think tanks, NGOs and interest groups
For the audience of a debate
Anyone looking to make an informed decision. Which is most of us at one point or another.
Is your idea linked to a particular town or region?
We are primarily an internet enterprise and, as such, have no geographical limits. However, we want to create a real world arm of the company to teach people how to debate and what the benefits of debating are. This will be primarily based in London and the South East, though we do hope to expand nationally at a later date.
What kind of assistance would you like from others?
Feedback on the idea and help developing it in order it become more suitable for funding.
Also it is crucial we reach critical mass. Any ideas on how we can do this will be very welcome.
