Jonathan Zittrain is a Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, is a co-founder of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society and served as its first executive director from 1997-2000.

Zittrain's research includes digital property, privacy, and speech, and the role played by private "middlepeople" in Internet architecture. He has a strong interest in creative, useful, and unobtrusive ways to deploy technology in the classroom. He has wriiten a book  The Future of the Internet- And How to Stop It.

Education: Harvard Law School, J.D.; Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government, M.P.A.; Yale University, B.S. Cognitive Science and Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Drawing on data from summer 2008, I will compare top U.S. political blogs on the left and right. The comparison shows significant cross-ideological variations. Sites on the left adopt different, and more participatory technical platforms; comprise significantly fewer sole-authored sites; include user blogs; maintain more fluid boundaries between secondary and primary content; include longer narrative and discussion posts; and (among the top half of the blogs in our sample) more often use blogs as platforms for mobilization. The news producer/consumer relationship is more attenuated  on the left wing of the political blogosphere than the right. The practices of the left are more consistent with the prediction that the networked public sphere offers new pathways for discursive participation by a wider array of individuals; meanwhile, the practices of the right suggest that a small group of elites may retain more exclusive agenda-setting authority online. The cross-ideological divergence indicates that the Internet can equally be adopted to undermine or to replicate the traditional distinction between the production and consumption of political information. Moreover, the findings imply that the prevailing techniques of domain-based link analysis used to study the political blogosphere are misleading. These findings have significant implications for the study of prosumption and for the mechanisms by which the networked public sphere may or may not alter democratic participation relative to the mass mediated public sphere. 

Yochai Benkler is the Berkman Professor of Entrepreneurial Legal Studies at Harvard, and faculty co-director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Before joining the faculty at Harvard Law School, he was Joseph M. Field '55 Professor of Law at Yale. He writes about the Internet and the emergence of networked economy and society, as well as the organization of infrastructure, such as wireless communications. In the 1990s he played a role in characterizing the centrality of information commons to innovation, information production, and freedom in both its autonomy and democracy senses. In the 2000s, he worked more on the sources and economic and political significance of radically decentralized individual action and collaboration in the production of information, knowledge and culture. His work traverses a wide range of disciplines and sectors, and is taught in a variety of professional schools and academic departments. In real world applications, his work has been widely discussed in both the business sector and civil society.

In medicine, transportation, commerce and entertainment, and countless other fields, technology has transformed our lives and provided immense value for millions.

Yet despite all of these revolutionary advances, it has yet to have a similar impact to radically improve the workings of public policy. This situation is especially unfortunate given the fiscal, economic, and social challenges facing our democracy and those around the world. If there's ever a time where politics could use some creative solutions, it's now.

This seminar will highlight some of the legal, political, and social barriers preventing disruptive innovation from taking hold in the public policy sphere, as well as ways to remove these barriers. Drawing on sources ranging from theoretical physics and constitutional law to popular culture, the seminar will provide unique and practical perspectives on how technology can help democracies around the world evolve.

The seminar will offer provocative insights, thought-provoking discussions, and practical tools to help our society can facilitate the evolution of better political, economic, and social institutions.

Matt Harrison graduated from the University of Miami with a Bachelor of Business Administration in Political Science and from the University of Southern California with a joint law degree and Master of Public Policy. Matt founded Prometheus in 2003 and serves as the Institute's President. As the driving force behind the creative and strategic vision of Prometheus, Matt identified and recruited a talented team of engineers, designers and contributors. He was the brainchild behind the DIY Democracy iPhone app, has authored over 200 articles, publications and other features for Prometheus, has been a guest on several talk radio shows and has been quoted in the Orange County Register and Chicago Tribune.

txteagle is Boston-based company that enables mobile phone subscribers in the developing world to earn airtime by completing simple work. We have now integrated our compensation platform within the billing systems of over 220 mobile operators - providing 2.1 billion mobile phone subscribers with the ability for moderate economic empowerment. While originally focused on text-based tasks from the outsourcing industry, we have recently come to appreciate our distributed workforce as much more than a source of cheaper labor for the data-entry industry. Instead of simply facilitating labor arbitrage, we are now focused on leveraging a particular population's unique insights and local knowledge. Today our workforce provides services that could never be outsourced - services that require on-the-ground knowledge and insight. The scope of these types of services is rapidly expanding - ranging from conducting a 50-country survey commissioned by the United Nations, to helping a massive consumer goods corporation grow their sanitary pad distribution and marketing channels into rural markets, to localizing software for a major search engine, to verifying local businesses for the World Bank, to responding to surveys for international market and investment research firms, to conducting compensated awareness and engagement campaigns for many large, international brands.

The underlying value of our workforce comes from their unique community, their culture, their neighborhood, their social network, and their knowledge of the place where they live. We are excited to be continually discovering new ways to demonstrate this unique value they can provide to the rest of the world.

Nathan Eagle is the CEO of txteagle Inc. He holds faculty appointments at the MIT Media Laboratory and Northeastern University, and is an Omidyar Fellow at the Santa Fe Institute. His research involves engineering computational tools, designed to explore how the petabytes of data generated about human movements, financial transactions, and communication patterns can be used for social good. He holds a BS and two MS degrees from Stanford's School of Engineering; his PhD from the MIT Media Laboratory on Reality Mining was declared one of the '10 technologies most likely to change the way we live' by the MIT Technology Review. Recently, he was named one of the world's top mobile phone developers by Nokia and also elected to the TR35. His academic work has been featured in Science, Nature and PNAS, as well as in the mainstream press.

The Muslims of South Asia made the transition to modern economic life more slowly than the region’s Hindus. In the first half of the twentieth century, they were relatively less likely to use large-scale and long-living economic organizations, and less likely to serve on corporate boards. Providing evidence, this paper also explores the institutional roots of the difference in communal trajectories. Whereas Hindu inheritance practices favored capital accumulation within families and the preservation of family fortunes across generations, the Islamic inheritance system, which the British helped to enforce, tended to fragment family wealth. The family trusts (waqfs) that Muslims used to preserve assets across generations hindered capital pooling among families, and they were ill-suited to profit-seeking business. Whereas Hindus generally pooled capital within durable joint family enterprises, Muslims tended to use ephemeral Islamic partnerships. Hindu family businesses facilitated the transition to modern corporate life by imparting skills useful in large and durable organizations.

Timur Kuran is Professor of Economics and Political Science, and Gorter Family Professor of Islamic Studies at Duke University. His research focuses on social change, including the evolution of preferences and institutions. He has just completed a book, The Long Divergence (Princeton University Press, forthcoming 2010), on the role that Islam played in the economic rise of the Middle East and, subsequently, in the institutional stagnation that accompanied the region's slip into a state of underdevelopment. Some of the archival work on which this book was based will be published, also in 2010, as a ten-volume bi-lingual set entitled Kadı Sicilleri. Among Kuran's earlier publications are Private Truths,(Harvard University Press, Işığında 17. Yüzyıl İstanbul'unda Ekonomik Yaşam / Economic Life in Seventeenth-Century Istanbul, as Reflected in Court Registers Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification 1995) and Islam and Mammon: The Economic Predicaments of Islamism (Princeton University Press, 2004), each translated into several languages, including Turkish.

Link to paper:  http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1656038

The abrupt fall of an authoritarian regime often surprises the world with apparent suddenness.  Given the right moment of opportunity, skillfully applied pressure can prove a thuggish regime surprisingly brittle. However, these moments are prepared through a long struggle for democratic rights within a closed society. Technology can help create these openings, organize activists, document abuses and share information in the moment that the eyes of the world are watching.

Being prepared to seize the day requires more than tech, though: activists and citizens are most effective in political groups, using good organizing approaches. International development organizations, funders, academics, tech companies and others can help, but must consider the entire terrain - political, human, social and technical - in their efforts because liberation technology can land people in jail - or worse. Savvy authoritarians have inherent advantages in this "cat-and-mouse" game. 

This talk addresses the role of technology in fragile democracies and closed societies from NDI's perspective as implementers of democracy strengthening programs.

Chris Spence is Chief Technology Officer at the National Democratic Institute. In this capacity he manages NDI's work in employing the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to promote and strengthen democracy around the world through NDI programs, and has done so since 1996.  Mr. Spence was the first staff person to specialize in ICTs for democratic development at NDI, and during his tenure with NDI has overseen ICT programs in dozens of countries around the world in all of NDI's program areas and positioned the Institute as a leader in the use of ICTs in democratic development. Areas of specialization include ICT and e-governance projects, including working with legislatures, local government, election monitoring, political parties and civil society organizations in developing countries and emerging democracies.

Mr. Spence brings to NDI a combination of information technology and international relations expertise. He started his technology career in 1986 in Silicon Valley with positions in several companies including Oracle Corporation, Netscape Communications and Triad Systems.