Here are my wishes for 2016, shared on Facebook and Twitter as home-made web memes.
I wish for a truly OPEN SOCIETY in Sri Lanka in 2016
where good ideas flow freely,
public debate is informed, wide-ranging and courteous
and there are no Sacred Cows!
Let’s make it so! The power is with each and every one of us.
On New Year’s eve, I shared this timeless quote of Mahatma Gandhi, which I felt was relevant for raging debates in Sri Lanka on what constitutes ‘our culture’ and how best to preserve it.
Mahatma Gandhi on the value of open, inclusive and multicultural societies
And here is how I rendered it into Sinhala language:
“මගේනිවසවටාසැමඅතින්පවුරුබැඳ,
එහිකවුළුසියල්ලවසාදමන්නටමාකොහෙත්මකැමතිනැහැ.
ලොවනොයෙකුත්සංස්කෘතීන්ගේආභාෂප්රවාහයන්
මනිවසේනිදහසේසංසරණයවීමමටඅවශ්යයි.
එහෙත්ඒකිසිවකින්මාපෙරළාදමන්නටනම්මාඉඩදෙන්නේනැහැ.”
Mahatma Gandhi on the value of open, inclusive and multicultural societies – translated by Nalaka Gunawardene
“The key to successful foreign policy in today’s world is networked diplomacy. Managing international crises requires mobilizing international networks of public and private actors,” says Anne-Marie Slaughter, an international lawyer and political scientist who is a former Princeton academic and ex-Director of Policy Planning at the US State Department under U.S. Secretary of StateHillary Clinton.
Diplomacy then…and now
The nature of this ‘networked diplomacy’ is still being documented and studied. Some governments are not even convinced of its value, but meanwhile, others are encouraging it perhaps as a way of ‘exploiting the inevitable’.
I am neither diplomat nor scholar, but sometimes dabble as a writer and researcher on how new media – including social media – impact our society, economy and governance. So I welcomed an opportunity to engage a group of mid-career professionals on the topic Diplomacy & Foreign Relations in the Social Media Age.
I made this presentation on 14 November 2015 as part of the Certificate Course in Creative Diplomacy, conducted by the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS) in Colombo, Sri Lanka – a think tank on international relations.
In this, I introduce and briefly explore the new kind of real-time, public diplomacy that is being ushered in with the spreading of social media. I show how diplomats and other government officials can no longer ignore this mass medium, but at the same time their traditional ways of communications need to be reoriented to suit the realities of this new information ecosystem that is informal, irreverent and fleeting.
As I spoke on the day after the ISIS terrorist attacks in France, I used (among others) the latest examples of how Gérard Araud, France’s Ambassador to the US, tweeted live as multiple terror attacks unfolded in Paris on Nov 13 night.
Real time tweeting by French Ambassador to the US while Paris attack was underway on 13 Nov 2015…More tweets from Ambassador Gérard Araud on 13 Nov 2015…
To see the bigger picture, I’ve distilled some wisdom of key researchers in this area including: Anne-Marie Slaughter, former Princeton Academic and ex-Director of Policy Planning, US State Department; Philip Seib, Professor of Journalism and Public Diplomacy, University of Southern California; and Ramesh Thakur, Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University (ANU).
I also used the case study of Indian Ministry of External Affairs using social media for crisis management when 18,000 Indian nationals were stranded in Libya in Feb – March 2011 who had to be evacuated urgently.
As Ramesh Thakur has written, it is “a useful case study in the utility of social media tools in connecting the government with people who are normally well outside their range, but who can be a useful channel to send out time-urgent critical information and to receive equally valuable information from sources on the ground.”
Dedication to a remarkable diplomat-scholar who spent a few days in the Summer of 1995 mentoring a group of youth leaders from around the world, including myself, who were brought to the UN Headquarters in New York…
I dedicated this presentation to a diplomat and scholar whose mentoring I was privileged to receive 20 years ago: Dr Harlan Cleveland (1918 – 2008) who served as US Ambassador to NATO, 1965–1969 (Johnson Administration), and earlier as US Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, 1961–1965 (Kennedy Administration).
Harlan Cleveland, among the first ‘philosophers’ of the Information Age
According to RCSS, their Course in Creative Diplomacy “provides theoretical and practical insights into the various facets of Creative Diplomacy. The course will expand participants’ understanding of the concept of diplomacy and expose them to new skills and alternative perspectives to engage with stakeholders. It is further envisioned that this post-disciplinary approach, which will be followed by the course, will explore a whole host of new mediums through which mediation, cooperation and negotiation can be carried out.”
Today, I gave the opening speech at an introductory seminar on ‘open data’ held at the Sri Lanka Press Institute, Colombo, on 15 Oct 2015.
Organised by InterNews and Transparency International Sri Lanka, the seminar explored the concepts of ‘open data’ and ‘big data’ and discussed that role civil society, media and technologists can play in advocating to government to open up its data, enabling a culture of transparency and open government.
An Open Dialogue on Open Data – 15 Oct 2015 Coloombo – L to R – Sriganesh Lokanathan, Nalaka Gunawardene, Sanjana Hattotuwa [Photo by Sam de Silva]My premise was that while the proliferation of digital tools and growth of web-based data storage (the cloud) opens up new possibilities for information generation and sharing, South Asian societies need to tackle institutional and cultural factors before democratised and digital data can really transform governance and development. Our countries must adopt more inclusive policies and practices for public sharing of scientific and other public data.
This resonates with a call by the United Nations for a ‘data revolution for development’. I cited the UN Secretary-General’s Independent Expert Advisory Group on a Data Revolution for Sustainable Development (IEAG) highlighted this in a report titled A World That Counts: Mobilising The Data Revolution for Sustainable Development (Nov 2014).
A World that Counts…
I also referred to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that were adopted by member states of the UN at a heads of state level summit in New York on 25-27 September 2015. Underpinning all 17 SDGs is an explicit recognition of the value of data for development — to better inform decisions, and to better monitor progress.
Sri Lanka’s President Maithripala Sirisena addressed the Summit, and officially committed Sri Lanka to the SDGs. I argue that implicit in that commitment is a recognition of data for development and open data policies. We now need to ask our government to introduce a government-wide policy on data collection, storage and sharing. In short, it must open up!
This was my open call to the President to open up:
Open Your Govt’s Data, Mr President! Hope you don’t give us HAL’s famous answer…
Sri Lanka has taken tentative steps towards open data. In 2013, the Open Data initiative of Government started making some official datasets freely available online. It focuses on machine-readable (well-structured and open) datasets.
I quoted from my own recent op-ed published in Daily Mirror broadsheet newspaper:
After many years of advocacy by civil society, Sri Lanka will soon adopt a law that guarantees citizens’ Right to Information (RTI). It has recently been added to the Constitution as a fundamental right.
Passing the RTI law is only a beginning — institutionalising it requires much effort, considerable funds, and continued vigilance on civil society’s part.
RTI is Coming: Are We Ready? My question to Lankan civil society and media
As champions of RTI, media and civil society must now switch roles, I said. While benefiting from RTI themselves, they can nurture the newly promised openness in every sphere, showing citizens how best to make use of it. Reorienting our public institutions to a new culture of openness and information sharing will be an essential step.
A Popular Election Meme created by Hashtag Generation, Sri Lanka
“Every citizen – including activists and academics — can play a part in shaping the future of our democracy. In this, technology is not the only key driver; what matters even more is the strategic use of our imagination and determination.
“We may not yet have all the detailed answers of our digital future, but one thing is clear. In 2015, we the people of Sri Lanka embarked on a progressive digitalization of our politics and governance.
“It is going to be a bumpy road – be forewarned — but there is no turning back.”
Since then, things have evolved further. In this essay, I look at how the Elections Commission, political parties, election candidates, civil society advocacy groups and individual cyber activists have used various social media tools and platforms in the run-up to, during and immediately after the Parliamentary Election.
“What role (if any) did social media play in the recently concluded General Election on 17 August 2015?
“Many are asking this question – and coming up with different answers. That is characteristic of the cyber realm: there is no single right answer when it comes to a multi-faceted and fast-evolving phenomenon like social media.
“Shortly after the Presidential Election of 8 January 2015 ended, I called it Sri Lanka’s first cyber election. That was based on my insights from over 20 years of watching and chronicling the gradual spread of information and communications technologies (ICTs) in Sri Lanka and the resulting rise of an information society.
“That was not the first time social media had figured in Lankan election campaigns. The trend started slowly some years ago, with a few tech-aware politicians and advertising agencies using websites, Facebook pages and twitter accounts for political outreach. However, such uses did not reach a ‘critical mass’ in the general and presidential elections held in 2010, or in the provincial and local government elections held thereafter.
“By late 2014, that changed significantly but this time the frontrunners were politically charged and digitally empowered citizens, not politicians or their support teams.”
The above is an extract from an op-ed I have just written and published in Daily Mirror broadsheet national newspaper in Sri Lanka (3 Sep 2015).
Text of my column written for Echelon monthly business magazine, Sri Lanka, August 2015 issue
Cartoon by Awantha Artigala, Sri Lanka Cartoonist of the Year 2014
Media Reforms: The Unfinished Agenda
By Nalaka Gunawardene
When I was growing up in the 1970s, Sri Lanka’s media landscape was very different. We had only one radio station (state-owned SLBC) and three newspaper houses (Lake House, Times of Ceylon and Independent Newspapers). There was no TV, and the web wasn’t even invented.
At that time, most discussions on media freedom and reforms centred around how to contain the overbearing state – which was a key publisher, as well as the sole broadcaster, dominant advertiser and media regulator, all rolled into one.
Four decades on, the state still looms large on our media landscape, but there are many more players. The number of media companies, organisations and products has steadily increased, especially after private sector participation in broadcasting was allowed in 1992.
More does not necessarily mean better, however. Media researchers and advocacy groups lament that broadcast diversification has not led to a corresponding rise in media pluralism – not just in terms of media ownership and content, but also in how the media reflects diversity of public opinion, particularly of those living on the margins of society.
As the late Tilak Jayaratne and Sarath Kellapotha, two experienced broadcasters, noted in a recent book, “There exists a huge imbalance in both media coverage and media education as regards minorities and the marginalised. This does not come as a surprise, as it is known that media in Sri Lanka, both print and broadcast, cater mainly to the elite, irrespective of racial differences.”
Media under pressure
The multi-author book, titled Embattled Media: Democracy, Governance and Reform in Sri Lanka(Sage Publications, Feb 2015), was compiled during 2012-14 by a group of researchers and activists who aspired for a freer and more responsible media. It came out just weeks after the last Presidential Election, where media freedom and reforms were a key campaigning issue.
In their preface, co-editors William Crawley, David Page and Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena say: “Media liberalisation from the 1990s onwards had extended the range of choice for viewers and listeners and created a more diverse media landscape. But the war in the north and insurrections in the south had taken their toll of media freedoms. The island had lived under a permanent state of emergency for nearly three decades. The balance of power between government, judiciary, the media and the public had been put under immense strain.”
Embattled Media – Democracy, Governance and Reform in Sri Lanka
The book, to which I have contributed a chapter on new media, traces the evolution mass media in post-colonial Sri Lanka, with focus on the relevant policies and laws, and on journalism education. It discusses how the civil war continues to cast “a long shadow” on our media. Breaking free from that legacy is one of many challenges confronting the media industry today.
Some progress has been made since the Presidential election. The new government has taken steps to end threats against media organisations and journalists, and started or resumed criminal investigations on some past atrocities. Political websites that were arbitrarily blocked from are once again accessible. Journalists who went into exile to save their lives have started returning.
On the law-making front, meanwhile, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution recognized the right to information as a fundamental right. But the long-awaited Right to Information Bill could not be adopted before Parliament’s dissolution.
Thus much more remains to be done. For this, a clear set of priorities has been identified through recent consultative processes that involved media owners, practitioners, researchers, advocacy groups and trainers. These discussions culminated with the National Summit on Media Reforms organised by the Ministry of Media, the University of Colombo, Sri Lanka Press Institute (SLPI) and International Media Support (IMS), and held in Colombo on 13 and 14 May.
We can only hope that the next Parliament, to be elected at the August 17 general election, would take up the policy and law related aspects of the media reform agenda (while the media industry and profession tackles issues like capacity building and greater professionalism, and the education system works to enhance media literacy of everyone).
Pursuing these reforms needs both political commitment and persistent advocacy efforts.
Right to Information: The new Parliament should pass, on a priority basis, the Right to Information Bill that was finalised in May 2015 with inputs from media and civil society groups.
Media Self-Regulation: The Press Council Act 5 of 1973, which created a quasi-judicial entity called the Press Council with draconian powers to punish journalists, should be abolished. Instead, the self-regulatory body established in 2003, known as the Press Complaints Commission of Sri Lanka (PCCSL), should be strengthened. Ideally its scope should expand to cover the broadcast media as well.
Law Review and Revision: Some civil and criminal laws pose various restrictions to media freedom. These include the Official Secrets Act and sedition laws (both relics of the colonial era) and the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act that has outlived the civil war. There are also needlessly rigid laws covering contempt of court and Parliamentary privileges, which don’t suit a mature democracy. All these need review and revision to bring them into line with international standards regarding freedom of expression.
Broadcast regulation: Our radio and TV industries have expanded many times during the past quarter century within an ad hoc legal framework. This has led to various anomalies and the gross mismanagement of the electromagnetic spectrum, a finite public property. Sri Lanka urgently needs a comprehensive law on broadcasting. Among other things, it should provide for an independent body to regulate broadcasting in the public interest, more equitable and efficient allocation of frequencies, and a three-tier system of broadcasting which recognises public, commercial and community broadcasters. All broadcasters – riding on the public owned airwaves — should have a legal obligation be balanced and impartial in coverage of politics and other matters of public concern.
Restructuring State Broadcasters: The three state broadcasters – the Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation (SLRC), the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC) and the Independent Television Network (ITN) – should be transformed into independent public service broadcasters. There should be legal provisions to ensure their editorial independence, and a clear mandate to serve the public (and not the political parties in office). To make them less dependent on the market, they should be given some public funding but in ways that don’t make them beholden to politicians or officials.
Reforming Lake House: Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Limited or Lake House was nationalised in 1973 to ‘broadbase’ its ownership. Instead, it has remained as a propaganda mill of successive ruling parties. Democratic governments committed to good governance should not be running newspaper houses. To redeem Lake House after more than four decades of state abuse, it needs to operate independently of government and regain editorial freedom. A public consultation should determine the most appropriate way forward and the best business model.
Preventing Censorship: No prior censorship should be imposed on the media. Where necessary, courts may review media content for their legality after publication (on an urgent basis). Laws and regulations that permit censorship should be reviewed and amended. We must revisit the Public Performance Ordinance, which empowers a state body to pre-approve all feature films and drama productions.
Blocking of Websites: Ensuring internet freedoms is far more important than setting up free public WiFi services. There should be no attempts to limit online content and social media activities contravening fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and international conventions. Restrictions on any illegal content may be imposed only through the courts (and not via unwritten orders given by the telecom regulator). There should be a public list of all websites blocked through such judicial sanction.
Privacy and Surveillance: The state should protect the privacy of all citizens. There should be strict limits to the state’s surveillance of private individuals’ and private entities’ telephone conversations, emails and other electronic communications. In exceptional situations (e.g. crime investigations), such surveillance should only be permitted with judicial oversight and according to a clear set of guidelines.
Cartoon by Awantha Artigala, Sri Lanka Cartoonist of the Year 2014
Dealing with Past Demons
While all these are forward looking steps, the media industry as a whole also needs state assistance to exorcise demons of the recent past — when against journalists and ‘censorship by murder’ reached unprecedented levels. Not a single perpetrator has been punished by law todate.
This is why media rights groups advocate an independent Commission of Inquiry should be created with a mandate and adequate powers to investigate killings and disappearances of journalists and attacks on media organisations. Ideally, it should cover the entire duration of the war, as well as the post-war years.
In this week’s Ravaya column, (in Sinhala, appearing in issue of 26 July 2015), I review how Lankan politicians and political parties are using social media in the run-up to the general election to be held on 17 August 2015.
In particular, I look at how President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe are using Facebook and Twitter (mostly to ‘broadcast’ their news and images, and hardly ever to engage citizens). I also remark on two other politicians who have shown initiative in social media use, i.e. former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and JHU leader Champika Ranawaka (both of who have held live Q&As on social media with varying degrees of engagement).
I raise questions like these: Can political parties afford to not engage 25% of Lankan population now regularly using the web? When would election campaigners – rooted in the legacy media’s practice of controlling and fine-tuning messages – come to terms with the unpredictable and sometimes unruly nature of social media?
While politicians, their campaigners and parties struggle to find their niches on social media, politically conscious citizens need to up their game too. Cyber literacy has been slower to spread than mere internet connectivity in Sri Lanka, and we need enlightened and innovative use of social media in the public interest. Every citizen, activist and advocacy group can play a part.
Can social media communications influence voting patterns?
Lasantha Ruhunage, President of Sri Lanka Working Journalists’ Association, speaks at press conference at SLPI, Colombo, 21 July 2015
Since the Presidential Election on 8 January 2015, some progress has been made with regards to freedom of expression (FOE) and media freedom in Sri Lanka.
These include: steps being taken to end threats against and pressure on media organisations and journalists; the unblocking of political websites that were arbitrarily blocked; the 19th Amendment to the Constitution recognizing the right of access to information as a fundamental right; and the government extending an open invitation to exiled journalists to return to Sri Lanka.
But much more remains to be done to improve FOE and media freedom situation in Sri Lanka, and to ensure a more conducive environment for the media. Such policy, legal and structural reforms would require the political will of all political parties in the next Parliament of Sri Lanka.
In view of this, we urge the political parties contesting in the General Election to be held on 17 August 2015 to give a firm commitment to the following specific measures for meaningful media freedom and reforms.
These are not listed in any order of priority.
Right to Information: A right to information law, which gives individuals the right to access information held by public authorities, should be adopted. The new Parliament should pass, on a priority basis, the Right to Information Bill that was finalised in May 2015 with inputs from media stakeholders.
Media Self-Regulation: The Press Council Act 5 of 1973 should be repealed, and the government-controlled Press Council should be abolished. The self-regulatory body established in 2003 by the media industry, known as the Press Complaints Commission of Sri Lanka (PCCSL), should be strengthened and ideally its scope should be expanded to cover the broadcast media as well.
Law Review and Revision: Civil and criminal laws that pose various restrictions on media freedom should be reviewed and revised to bring them into line with international standards regarding freedom of expression. Such laws include the Prevention of Terrorism Act, the Official Secrets Act, sedition laws, and the rules on contempt of court and Parliamentary privileges.
Crimes Against Journalists: An independent Commission of Inquiry should be created with a mandate and adequate powers to investigate past killings of, threats to, disappearances of and other attacks on journalists, media workers and media outlets, with a view to ensuring that those responsible are prosecuted and that appropriate compensation is paid to the victims and their families.
Broadcast Regulation: Comprehensive legislation on broadcasting should be adopted in line with international guarantees of freedom of expression. This should provide for, among other things, proper planning in relation to the frequencies allocated to broadcasting, including through the digital transition, a three-tier system of broadcasting which recognises public, commercial and community broadcasters, and obligations on broadcasters to be balanced and impartial in their coverage of politics and other matters of public concern. An independent Broadcasting Authority should be set up to regulate the entire broadcasting sector in the public interest. This regulator should ensure a fair, pluralistic and efficient broadcasting system.
Nalaka Gunawardene, Consultant to the Secretariat for Sri Lanka Media Reforms, speaks at the press conference at SLPI, Colombo, 21 July 2015
Community Broadcasting: The broadcasting regulation to be introduced should support the development of community broadcasting services owned and operated by communities through clear definitions of what constitutes a community broadcaster, a tailored licensing process, and lower fees for frequency allocation and other concessions.
Restructuring State Media: The three State broadcasters – the Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation (SLRC), the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC) and the Independent Television Network (ITN) – should be transformed into independent public service broadcasters which enjoy editorial independence, have a clear mandate to serve the public and benefit from public funding which does not compromise their independence. Measures should also be taken to ensure that Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Limited (ANCL or Lake House) can operate independently of government and enjoy editorial freedom. A public consultation should determine the most appropriate way forward.
Seetha Ranjanee, Convenor of Free Media Movement of Sri Lanka, speaks at press conference on media reforms: Sri Lanka Press Institute, Colombo. 21 July 2015
Preventing Censorship: No prior censorship should be imposed on the media. Where necessary, courts can review media content for legality after publication on an urgent basis. Laws and regulations that permit censorship – including the Public Performance Ordinance – should be reviewed and amended to bring them into line with international standards.
No Blocking Political Websites: There should be no attempts to limit online content or social media activities contravening fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and international conventions. Restrictions on illegal content may be imposed only through an independent judicial process which ensures that fundamental rights to access information and freedom of expression are not hindered.
Privacy and Surveillance: The state should respect and protect the privacy of all citizens. There should be strict limits to the state surveillance of private individuals’ and entities’ telephone conversations and electronic communications. In exceptional situations, such surveillance should only be permitted with judicial oversight and according to a clear set of guidelines.
Media Reform Agenda for Lankan Political Parties – 21 July 2015
Speech of the President Maithripala Sirisena – 14 July 2015 (in Sinhala)
Sirisena’s speech outlined his key actions and accomplishments since being elected less than 200 days ago in one of the biggest election surprises in Lankan political history. He was mildly defensive of his low-key style of governance, which includes extended periods of silence.
I’ll leave it for political scientists and activists to analyse the substance of the President’s Bastille Day speech. My concern here is why he waited this long.
If a week is a long time in politics, 10 days is close to an eon in today’s information society driven by 24/7 broadcast news and social media. An issue can evolve fast, and a person can get judged and written off in half that time.
For sure, there is a time to keep silence, and a time to speak – and the President must have had some good reasons keep mum. But in this instance, he paid a heavy price for it: he was questioned, ridiculed and maligned by many of us who had heartily cheered him only six months ago. (Full disclosure: I joined this chorus, creating several easy-to-share ‘memes’ and introducing an unkind twitter hashtag: #අයියෝසිරිසේන.)
President Maithripala Sirisena
Sri Lanka’s democratic recovery can’t afford too much of this uncertainty and distraction created by strategic presidential silences. Zen-like long pauses don’t sit well with impatient citizen expectations.
And the President himself must reconsider this strategy (if it is indeed one) — his political opponents are hyperactive in both mainstream and social media, spinning an endless array of stories that discredit him.
Until a generation ago, we used to say that a lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes. In today’s networked society, when information travels at the speed of light, fabrications and half-truths spread faster than ever.
Public trust in leaders and institutions is also being redefined. Transparent governance needs political leaders to keep talking with their citizens, ideally in ways that enrich public conversations.
President Sirisena is not the only Lankan leader who needs to catch up with this new communications reality. When a controversy erupted over how the Central Bank of Sri Lanka handled Treasury Bond issue on February 27, the government took more than two weeks to respond properly.
In a strict legalistic or technocratic sense, Wickremesinghe was probably right (as he usually is). But in the meantime, too many speculations had circulated, some questioning the new administration’s commitment to transparency and accountability. Political detractors had had a field day.
Could it have been handled differently? Should the government spokespersons have turned more defensive or even combative?
More generically, is maintaining a stoic silence until full clarity emerges realistic when governments no longer have a monopoly over information dissemination? Is it ever wise, in today’s context, to stay quiet hoping things would eventually blow away? How does this lack of engagement affect public trust in governments and governance?
These are serious questions that modern day politicians and elected officials must address. In my view, we need a President and Prime Minister who are engaged with citizens — so that we are not left guessing wildly or speculating endlessly on what is going on.
No, this is not a call for political propaganda, which has also been sidelined by the increasingly vocal social media voices and debates.
What we need is what I outlined in an open letter to President Sirisena in January: “As head of state, we expect you to strive for accuracy, balance and credibility in all communications. The last government relied so heavily on spin doctors and costly lobbyists both at home and abroad. Instead, we want you to be honest with us and the outside world. Please don’t airbrush the truth.”
Science writer Nalaka Gunawardene has been chronicling and analysing the rise of new media in Sri Lanka since the early 1990s. He is active on Twitter @NalakaG and blogs at http://nalakagunawardene.com
On 13 Feb 2015, while briefly in London, I visited BBC’s new Media Centre and recorded brief interviews with BBC Sinhala and BBC Tamil services (radio) on the role of social media during the Sri Lanka Presidential Election 2015 – the topic of my talk at University of London the previous day.
BBC Sinhala published the story online on 22 Feb 2015, along with an edited down audio track.
![An Open Dialogue on Open Data - 15 Oct 2015 Coloombo - L to R - Sriganesh Lokanathan, Nalaka Gunawardene, Sanjana Hattotuwa [Photo by Sam de Silva]](https://nalakagunawardene.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/an-open-dialogue-on-open-data-15-oct-2015-coloombo-l-to-r-sriganesh-lokanathan-nalaka-gunawardene-sanjana-hattotuwa.jpg)
Open Minds! 