Campaign: A Protest Movement Against Scientology

Written by Mary on February 25, 2008 – 1:24 am -

Description of Campaign: An online community called Anonymous draws other online users into a global campaign against the controversial religion Scientology. (Note: This post is not a criticism of Scientology, merely a study of the digital means used by its critics,)

Digital Activism Tools: Youtube, Digg (social bookmarking), wikis, online forums

How These Tools are Being Used: After announcing their campaign against Scientology via an ominous YouTube video on January 21st (see below), a group of nameless hackers used open forums like the alternative news site Digg to spread their message of protest against what they see as the exploitive and untruthful practices of Scientology. Their movement is very interactive. As it is based on a wiki, new members were able to leave feedback for the original founders and the founders listened. (In particular, they cut back on the illegal harassment of Scientologists, which many would-be supporters felt was illegitimate “cyber-terrorism.”) Anonymous, whose leaders and members are unknown, experienced a great success on February 10, when 6,000 supporters participated in anti-Scientology rallies in more than 70 cities around the world.

After the break I’ll quote a long passage of excellent background and analysis from Carnegie Mellon student Dan Schultz, originally published on MediaShift Idea Lab under the title “Anonymous vs. Scientology: A Case of Digital Media.”

From Dan Schultz’s post:

The Background
I’ll try to summarize things as quickly as possible, but it’s all rather complicated so bear with me! Also keep in mind that I heard about this the same way a lot of people did - Digg, YouTube, Google, and some scattered mainstream Media coverage - so there may be holes in the story.

Around January 16th 2008 some part of a back-alley online community titled Anonymous (aptly named because it is composed only of nameless members - they have no pseudonyms, aliases, or digital identities) decided that they were frustrated with the way The Church of Scientology has handled itself as an organization. They decided to try to do something about this frustration and pulled out the digital battle drums - which I assume involved a post on their community’s site announcing the problems with Scientology and looking to see if anyone wanted to help do something about it.

On January 21st someone uploaded a video to YouTube which ominously listed Anonymous’ complaints and announced an Internet led “war” on the Church of Scientology (note the 2 million + views). Because Anonymous is anonymous I can’t even try to guess how many people were involved at this point, but apparently it was enough to cause a decent amount of online buzz.

The message was spread through various channels of the Internet - YouTube, Digg, online community forums, etc. They also got a blip or two on the mainstream media radar. The interesting part is that efforts weren’t being organized by “leaders” - they were being organized completely via anonymous individuals using a public wiki, meaning anyone could change anything (much like you see on Wikipedia).

Over the next few weeks members of Anonymous began to harass Scientology and continued to make the occasional “press release”. More importantly, though, vloggers, bloggers, and countless other individuals gave their two cents through response videos on YouTube, comments on Digg, and contributions to the blogosphere. Some supported the movement, some just felt it was going to be interesting to watch, and some condemned Anonymous as misguided “cyber-terrorists”, unscrupulous, or simply boring; however it seemed their cause was resonating with people, generating attention, and even starting to be discussed outside of the Internet.

At this point a few more Internet-focused mainstream media folks took notice and mentioned it in various segments. Known critics of the Church of Scientology like Mark Bunker also chimed in and offered advice and criticisms of the anonymous efforts. After listening to the Internet response and gaining support, the anonymous digital harassment changed to legal, more traditional methods. Someone else uploaded a video to YouTube announcing plans for international protests on February 10th.

For me these “real life” protests, where 6000+ people protested in 70+ different cities around the world, are what pushed this whole debacle from “interesting to watch” to “what can we learn from this”. This takes us to today, where another round of protests is being planned for March 15th.

One of Anonymous’ forums has a compiled list of links to local and national news coverage. I would definitely recommend watching some of the news reports if you want to learn more.

Key Success Factors
That’s the story as I’ve seen it, so the question to ask now is how did they do it? How did a fairly small group of completely anonymous individuals manage to generate several million views worth of buzz on the internet? And finally, how did they actually bridge the gap and apply that buzz into real, physical world protests? Thinking about it may help inspire thoughts about where digital media is now, where it can go, and what would improve it.

Although there were plenty of things that could have gone better, here are some components that I think had a lot to do with how Anonymous was able to bring their movement to where it is today:

  1. Community-driven issues. Anonymous was a previously established community (albeit a non-traditional one) and its members were able to identify this issue as one that they had a passion for. Compare a community issue to one that is loosely backed by otherwise unrelated individuals and you will see why this matters.
  2. Effective targeted digital communication tools. User media sites allow for quick information dissemination to exactly the type of people that Anonymous wanted reach - active members of The Internet community. Those sites let others join in by participating in the conversation, passing the word along, or simply learning more on their own/taking some sort of personal action. Public wikis and forums also helped by supporting coordination and made it possible for anyone to propose and organize action.
  3. Tacit understanding of those tools and their potential. Anonymous was familiar with the existing digital media infrastructure (Digg, YouTube, community forums, etc.) and could use it effectively to get their message out.
  4. Attention and responsiveness to community feedback. Organizers and communicators adapted and listened to their audience; feedback shaped the movement. You can see a clear shift in Anonymous’ direction in response to audience members’ comments late January. Had Anonymous simply continued on as it began (i.e. through illegal harassment), it is unlikely that the group would have gained much/any worldwide support and I definitely wouldn’t be writing this post right now.
  5. Availability of information (to enable critical analysis). There is a lot of content from all perspectives scattered around the internet, so curious parties could look into things on their own using the glories of Google. I’m sure some people may have joined in without checking other sources, but more cautious media consumers had the resources needed to develop personal opinions before getting involved.


Tags: , , ,
Posted in Campaigns, Social Bookmarking, Video, Wikis |


4 Responses to “Campaign: A Protest Movement Against Scientology”

  1. By Joe Solomon on Feb 26, 2008 | Reply

    Thanks for sharing this! Very interesting article!

  2. By Mary on Mar 18, 2008 | Reply

    Yeah, and hopefully its author, Dan Schultz, will be writing for DigiActive in the near future!

  3. By Mary on Mar 18, 2008 | Reply

    Here’s a good follow-up article on Anonymous: http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0317/p03s02-ussc.html

  4. By andrew zubriczky on Apr 23, 2008 | Reply

    Freedom of Speech or Disguised Rebellion?

    Beware of ‘religious intolerance’, ‘religious persecution’, and ‘religious fanaticism’. All can have disturbing or deadly consequences for Society and our World. There are those that can only destroy and damage anything that is good or worthwhile, faithful or hopeful. The evil they see and relentlessly fight against is mostly within their own limited view of what their World and our World should be like. Unfortunately, our World and their World will never, ever be reconciled, no matter how much ‘madness and mayhem’ they try to stir up regarding any particular religion or faith.

    I am talking about the recent rallies held against the Church of Scientology last week by a group of masked marauders calling themselves Anonymous. The masks they claim are to prevent retaliation from Scientology hardliners. Imagine that, anyone can protest anything just by speaking out against any group, religion, or even Government. It’s called Freedom of Speech. But, why should this particular group fear ‘retaliation’ so much that they would need to wear a mask, and call themselves Anonymous?

    Could it be, that it’s their way of destroying the credibility of this particular religion and their devoted adherents? They claim that Scientology splits up families and tightly controls their members, and harasses its critics. Their claims may be true; of course they are, or why else would they be out peddling and pontificating their pretentious propaganda? I am sure some people have split up because of Scientology, directly or indirectly; people change and families’ change, we know nothing lasts forever. Couples can be bitter and spiteful during any break up or divorce, regardless of their religious beliefs or practices, and, or of the particular house of prayer/wisdom they belong to. This is nothing new.

    Then why the protest, why the masks? Do they harbor a more sinister motive, an evil and uncontrollable one; or, are they just cowards cowering behind their veils of anonymity, afraid to stand up to public scrutiny and open dialogue regarding their concerns? Using a generalization of ‘Scientology hardliners’’ as a defense against your own hidden practices seems to me to be a bit ludicrous. Its obviously more hype than substance, even if there exists some truth behind their demonstrations.

    I believe this particular group is targeting the wrong religion, the wrong target. If they were so concerned about religious intolerance and religious freedoms they should be going after bigger fish than the Church of Scientology. Who controls this group of activists? How and where did they start? Why are they allowed to push their ideas on the unsuspecting general public? They seem to exist only to defame and discredit Scientology and Scientologists, and for no other reason.

    Who are these people that would tear at the delicate fabric of society, engaging people to think less of a Religion, and their devotees? Families are shattered every day by violence, wars, cancer, and even car accidents; tens of thousands of people die and are seriously injured each and every year in North America alone, because of the automobile. Who weeps for them, who rallies against their deaths and injuries? Why aren’t these people protesting real harm, real death and destruction in our society? Protest divorce, wars, fanatical fundamentalists, abortionists, anybody else, but Scientologists?

    Talk about vengeance. Why and how are these kinds of groups, these kinds of agitators allowed to exist, and attack a bona fide Religion? Freedom of Speech, of course. God bless our Freedom of Speech. They have a right to assemble and communicate their concerns, just like any other free citizen of this land. Justly or unjustly, they have a right to speak their mind. Forget the fact that what they have to say could be one-sided, biased, ambiguous, inflammatory, prejudiced, or whatever. They can say what they want and parade around like its St. Patrick’s Day, simultaneously anywhere else in the World, wherever Freedom of Speech is also recognized and supported.

    But we as a ‘free society’ and as ‘free citizens’ also have a fundamental right to know and see the truth behind their veil of cowardice. We have a right to transparency between rival factions, conflicting groups, and revengeful individuals. We as a society should demand peace between people and groups, and move away from conflict, intimidation, and retaliation tactics and strategies as a way to resolve our differences or personal problems. It doesn’t work, it never worked, and it will never work. We need resolution not retribution. We need understanding and tolerance, if we are to continue to be, a ‘free society’. I am all for Freedom of Speech, but I am also for the Truth. Ideally, we can’t have one without the other. And no one, should have to wear masks to protect their identities; at least not, in a truly free society.

Post a Comment