DigiActive.org

Action of “Omission” to Protest Chinese Censorship

What: To protest the implementation of the Green Dam Youth Escort filtering program on all computers sold in China, the blogger Ai Wei Wei is asking Chinese  users to boycott the Internet on July 1st, 2009.

When: July 1st is the date on which Green Dam much come pre-installed (or on an attached disk) for all new Chinese computers.

Where: People’s Republic of China

Why: To protest Green Dam in particular and Chinese censorship in general.

Who: We previously wrote about Ai Weiwei’s largely successful effort to collect the names of the children killed in the Sichuan earthquake last year.  He is also a well-known artist, who helped design the Olympic “Bird’s Nest” stadium in Beijing.

How: Via Twitter, Ai asked people to “Stop any online activities, including working, reading, chatting, blogging, gaming and mailing.  Don’t explain your behavior.”  The interesting aspect of this protest is that Ai is trying to create a political action which does not entail risk to participants.  By asking people not to acknowledge they are taking part in a boycott, Ai hopes to protect them from persecution by Chinese authorities.

It is hard to claim innocence when taking part in a political actions of “commission,” even one that is apparently innocent.  (In Belarus in 2006, for example, young people were arrested for assembling to eat ice cream.)  However, an action of “omission” puts the government in a more complicated position.  After all, not using the Internet isn’t criminal.  It will be interesting to see how many people participate in the action and whether or not the action of omission becomes a new strategy in digital activism.

Hat-tip: Stan Schroeder on Mashable

Image Source: Daily News

What Neda Means: Citizen Media Frames the Protests

From left: a paining of Neda made by annebot, videos of Neda’s murder on YouTube,
an altered profile image on Twitter shifts the “where’s my vote?” meme

Background:  In his post on Saturday, DigiActive correspondent Hamid Tehrani referred in passing to “a scene of a girl murdered by security forces.”  A few days later and we all know who she was - Neda Agha Soltan, a 26-year-old killed en route to a protest in Tehran.  Only in this age, where every citizen with a cell phone can became a journalist and broadcaster is the story of Neda possible.

Tools: The story of Neda’s rise to prominence and powerful symbolism is a story of citizen media: from the cell phone cameras that recorded her death (video here - it is graphic), to the blogger who posted her story on the citizen journalism site NewsVine, to the Twitter conversation around the hashtag #Neda, and the Wikipedia entry that recorded the details of her murder in detail.   Finally her story reached the mainstream media: CNN, The New York Times, and Iranian television.

Analysis:  This is the story of Neda’s transformation from a person into a symbol.  But what does this story mean?  In particular, what does it mean for digital activism? Usually when we think of the use of digital technology for activism we think of communication tools which facilitate mass collective action: SMS, Facebook groups, listservs.  Yet the idea of Neda, though it may have inspired rage, sadness, and a commitment to continue protes, was not what we traditionally think of as digital activism.

Neda didn’t organize a protest but she helped to firmly re-frame the post-election protests in Iran.  The frame, or narrative, which the Iranian government was pushing was that the protests were caused by Western meddling and that the protesters were terrorists.   By making Neda the symbol of the opposition - a beautiful and unarmed young woman, previously apolitical - the new frame has moved firmly to those in the streets: the protesters are innocent idealists.  The government is murdering its people without cause.  Neda is not a terrorist.  She is a martyr (or so the Times story framed it).  And the practical effect of this re-framing on protests in Iran?  A renewed commitment to go out in the street every day, an ideal that Neda will not have died in vain.

Lessons:  What are the lessons for activists who wish to use citizen media to frame a public issue?  First, the media should be clear and emotional.  Neda’s video - the most spreadable form of media about her sotry - was raw and visceral.  Without understanding the words of the men trying to help her or knowing much of the story it was possible to empathize with her and feel the pain of her injustice.  It was international.

Second, push the media out on multiple platforms.  It is unclear where the video was first uploaded, though there are now several versions on YouTube.   The story was also pushed out through Newsvine, a news site accessible to ordinary citizens, and through Twitter.   Third, your goal should be to get into the mainstream media.  This is still where the majority of eyes are.  Email your content to media sources, but only if this will not put you in danger.  Finally, make is personal.  We understand news through human stories.  In America, we came to saw the corruption of our economic crisis through the crooked financier of Bernie Madoff.   Heroes too personify a struggle.

Citizen Media & the Iranian Protests: Exhibit A

One the big stories with regard to digital activism in Iran has been the use of citizen media to disseminate information about the protests (see references here, here, and here).  The picture above, from the front page of today’s New York Times is putatively an image of the daughter of reformist cleric Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, but could just as easily be an illustration of the new media environment: no less than eight cell phones and digital cameras (red circles) are recording the event the New York Times reporter was photographing.  (For a large version of the photo, click here.) It’s old print media and new digital citizen media juxtaposed in a single image.

image source: New York Times

“Where is My Vote?”: Iranian Expats Organize Online

UPDATE: I’ve changed the title of this post to reflect the fact that it is Iranian expats who are using Facebook for organizing.  I have not seen evidence of the tool being used effectively to organize within the country.

Background: On June 14th , Iranian expatriates and supporters around the world protested the results of an election in which President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad claimed a statistically unlikely landslide victory over challenger Mir-Hossein Mousavi. The new slogan became “where is my vote?” as protesters asked why the votes of Mousavi supporters had not been counted. The campaign, which I will describe below, has both centralized and decentralized elements and has succeeded so far in organizing worldwide protest.

The question is, will this structure allow for the sustained campaigning necessary to overturn the vote? In the language of Gaurav Mishra’s 4 C’s of Social Media, this campaign has achieved Content creation and Collaboration on collective action, but will it be able to create a Community which will sustain longterm action once the Iranian election is gone from the headlines?

Tools: Facebook, Twitter, stand-alone web sites, citizen media sites

How these tools are being used: This campaign began before Election Day.  Setade Ma (meaning “our campaign”), a site launched at the end of May, encouraged voting in the upcoming election. The central action associated with this campaign was worldwide simultaneous demonstrations on May 31st (similar to those that occurred on the 14th). At the May 31st demonstrations, participants around the world were asked to hold banners saying “we vote” and then to submit those photos to the central site, similar to the geographically-dispersed take-a-photo tactic used in the US for the Step it Up campaign against global warning and in Morocco for the Help Erraji campaign. (It is not clear how people outside Iran were actually going to vote in the election, unless Iran has an effective system of absentee ballots, but the goal seemed to be to create a mass movement in favor of voting.)  Showing awareness of the ability of social media to spread a campaign, the site also linked to its own Facebook group, Twitter stream, and a page on Balitarin, a community website that helps its users find links of interest on the Iranian Internet.

This previous organizing proved crucial in helping activists to organize worldwide protests only two days after the election on June 14th.  The Setade Ma Twitter stream did not end up being particularly useful, amassing only 125 followers (and excellent graphic design).  However, the Setade Ma Facebook group proved key. After the election it was transformed into the largest “where is my vote?” Facebook group and was used to organize the London, Los Angeles, New York, and Washington DC protest on June 14th.

The Facebook group organized by the Sedate Ma activists ended up being only one of the many Facebook groups (see right) created using the “where is my vote” (WiMV) meme and logo. There are dynamics of both centralization and decentralization at work here. There are 24 WiMV groups on Facebook and the Sedate Ma group is by far the largest with 3,000 members at this time. The other groups are smaller, with a few hundred to less than 10 members. This is not necessarily a weakness. Facebook allows groups to only message 5,000 members at a time, so Facebook groups can only be used for effective communication at low volume.

Some organizers, who may or may not be associated with Setade Ma, created a stand-alone web site, whereismyvote.org, to direct potential supporters to Facebook groups organizing protests in Toronto, Vancouver, Paris, Boston, and Winnipeg. It is generally a good idea to create a stand-along site to mirror and centralize information on the frustratingly decentralized Facebook (as recommended in DigiActive’s Facebook Guide). However, only three of the five links point to the pages indicated. In the flurry of event creation, centralized control seemed to have been difficult.

Another interesting Facebook action was the campaign to change your profile picture to the green WiMV icon (also at right). This meme appears to have been started by a smaller WiMV Facebook group and the profile action seems to have been that group’s  main purpose. The only information in the description section of the group is “If you voted for Mousavi change your profile picture to / WHERE IS MY VOTE? image / Join this group and invite your friends to do the same. lets make facebook green”.  (Green is the symbolic color of Islam and Iran.)  Changing profile pictures really leverages the network effects of Facebook. When one person changes their profile image that change is pushed out to all that person’s friends via the friend feed. Ideally, the following exchanges occur:

Finally, the organizers attempted to promote their events through citizen media sites, which have a wider audience than a Facebook group but are more accessible to activists than the mainstream media.  For example, A supporter posted a photo and links about the San Francisco protest on the site Now Public, which collects and distributes news from unconventional sources by letting citizen journalists upload their own stories.

Outcome: Based on the photos and video uploaded by WiMV supporters, it appears that international protests on June 14th occurred in San Francisco (USA), London (UK) , Dallas (USA), Paris (France), Dubai (UAE), Melbourne (Australia), Köln (Germany), Atlanta (USA), Washington DC (USA), Los Angeles (USA), Winnipeg (Canada), Boston (USA), and Toronto (Canada). At somes protests dozens were present, at others over 100.  (You can see a selection of images from the protests after the jump.)

It was certainly a successful example of fast, free, international collective action. The question is, where will the movement go r from here and will it be able to transform current enthusiasm and ad hoc organizing into an organizational structure with the stamina to continue a longer campaign?

Analysis: The WiMV campaign followed a decentralized structure that is common to digital activism campaigns built around high-profile issues.  However, was this decentralization a good thing for the cause? On the positive side, it is likely that more events were organized because people who became aware of the WiMV/June 14th meme could create their own Facebook page to organize an event in their area and invite their friends and contacts. This seems to be the case with the WiMV Melbourne, Dubai, and Atlanta groups. (Other local pages were created but they did not seems to organize protests.) In another benefit of localization, the very active Paris group created their own profile icon in French: “ou est leur vote?” (where is their vote?) and their own Blogspot blog, which acted as a stand-alone site to centralize information about their protest.

Unfortunately, the negatives of decentralization seem to be more substantial than the positives. The first reason is misinformation.  While the “official” DC protest was meant to take place at the Iranian Interests Section, someone posted on the wall of another group that the DC protest should be on the lawn of the White House.  Second, many of the groups were “identity” groups rather than “action” groups. People joined them to identify with the cause of free and fair elections in Iran, but no protests were organized within those groups.  People who potentially could have been recruited to attend a protest fell into the “dead zone” of inactive group.

The most serious concern with regard to decentralization is its implications for sustainability.  Supporters are spread across a miriad number of event groups on Facebook, which was effective enough for this first action, but how will these supporters be contacted for future actions that are not organized at the local level? (Also, what about people who attended the protests but are not members of the Facebook group?  Was their contact info collected?)

For true coordination beyond a high-attention meme, centralization is necessay and WiMV’s current structure on Facebook does not lend itself the the sustainable community which is most likely to lead to future collaboration and action. After the the explosion of activity for June 14th, people interested in continued action will need to come together into a single leadership team and then start reaching out to the group founders in an effort to get everyone on the same listserv and in the same group.  It will not be a fun or easy process but it will be necessary to create a sustainabile community for this issue.

Protest photos after the jump…

Read more »

Images for Advocacy: Green Dam Girl

Green Dam Girl: “That unhealthy information is so gross; I’m a girl worth 40 million”
Mud Grass Horse: “I’m just an alpaca.”  (source: Danwei)

Background: Using pop culture references in an advocacy campaign is an effective way to get non-activists involved.  It’s also a way to subtly push a political agenda in a country where overt political messages are censored or where posting or passing on political messages can endanger the activist.

Because of the Chinese government’s limitations on freedom of speech and persecution of dissidents, Chinese activists have become masters of satire and symbolism.  The image above is a prime example of their techniques.  Originally published by Chinese blogger Hecaitou, this drawing uses on the visual language of Japanese anime while bringing together some of the greatest hits in Chinese political satire: behold…Green Dam Girl.

Tool:  satiric images spread online

How it’s being used: Green Dam Girl is a cartoon avatar for Green Dam, a piece of self-censoring software which will be mandatory on all computers sold in China starting July 1.  She’s also holding a rabbit, which is the software’s logo.  (Read a review of the software from the OpenNet Initiative.)  On her cap is an image of the river crab, a homonym for the word “harmony” in Chinese and a dig at the Chinese government which calls censorship harmonization.  (Read more on river crab from China expert Rebecca MacKinnon.)   Green Dam Girl is carrying a bucket of paint (or maybe soy sauce) to cover up all the filth on the Internet.

Finally, the animal she has chained up is an infamous mud grass horse.  Another great Chinese homonym, mud grass horse sounds just like “f— your mother” in Chinese and is another dig at censors.  A few months ago there was a group of very funny and popular videos with children singing ever so innocently about the exploits of mud grass horse… and sounding completely filthy!  (Read more about mud grass horse here.)   Of course, mud grass horse has been chained up because he’s part of the Internet filth that Green Dam Girl has been sent to destroy, but he says he’s been falsely accused - he’s just an alpaca!

Lessons:  1) Funny travels further than Angry, especially to engage an audience of non-activists.  (The Free Kareem campaign also uses cartoons to get their message across.)

2) Symbols and language tricks are a great way to get around censors and mock them at the same time.

3) Digital activism campaigns need the skills of people who do not have digital skills.  Someone who is good at drawing can help a campaign create great a poster, graphic, or logo and then all you need is a scanner to get it online.

Action Alert: Filipino Activists vs. the Cha-Cha bill

Background:  No, the cha-cha is not a dance move. The Philippine House of Representatives is planning to adopt House Resolution No. 1109, a bill that would allow it to convene as a constituent assembly and amend the Constitution (or, change the charter).   The measure is quite unpopular with Philippine citizens.  According to a statement made by a group of business associations, “The question all Filipinos should ask is: For whose interest was this action taken? Certainly not the Filipino people’s, as there is no widespread clamor to amend the Constitution, especially now that we are less than a year away from a presidential election.”  Activists are not only going to the street to protest but groups like the Computer Professionals Union (CPU) are also asking supporters to take action online using Twitter.

What:  Here’s how Twitter users can show their opposition to changing the Filipino constitution, and solidarity with Filipino activists on the ground in Manila:

1. Tweet a message of opposition using the hashtag #no2conass
2. CPU has developed a tool that posts tweets from SMS messages sent to +639071134503.  CPU invites everyone to send SMS messages to this number and they will repost them as tweets.SMS messages should have <no2conass><space><message> format.

When: Wednesday, June 10th

Why: To oppose amendments to the Filipino constitution which are not supported by the Filipino people.

image credit: filipinovoices.com

Chinese campaign reports quake victims

Background: On May 12, 2008, an earthquake measuring 8.0 on the Richter scale shook China’s Sichuan province, killing at least 68,000 people. Among the stories of grief and outrage that emerged afterwards was the large number of schools destroyed by the earthquake and the children that died within them. Unlike surrounding buildings, many of which survived, the schools were particularly vulnerable because of shoddy workmanship. These “tofu-dregs schoolhouses,” a result of corruption that siphoned off construction money, meant that the buildings which should have been the more earthquake resistant were in fact the least. Despite outrage, there was little official response from the Chinese government.

Shortly after the quake, prominent Chinese artist and blogger Ai Weiwei visited the quake site and blogged about what he saw, particularly parents who had lost their child. As a result of these posts, readers of his blog volunteered to help him create a list of all the children who had died.

Tools: blogs, citizen journalists crowd-sourcing data collection offline

Crowd-sourcing + self-publishing : On December 15, 2008 Ai formally announced a campaign to collect the names of all children who had died in the quake before the one-year anniversary on in May 2009. Volunteers went out to the towns and villages affected and interviewed school officials and the parents of children who were killed. On his blog, Ai recorded both the results of the investigation and the stories of how it was carried out. In one poignant anecdote, a volunteer is stone-walled when seeking the names of deceased students from an elementary school principal. “We just are trying to find the truth!,” says the volunteer, frustrated. “The government has already announced the truth,” replies the principal. (This anecdote was translated by China Digital Times, an excellent resource for information about this campaign.)

Censored: In April and May, as the quake anniversary approached, the administrator of Ai’s blog began deleting his posts on the project. Two actions were taken to combat this censorship. First, the list was moved to a server outside of China. Also, according to Professor Xiao Qiang, other bloggers began to mirror the censored data on their own sites, in order to discourage the take-downs.

Result: The campaign succeeded in collecting and publishing the names of 7,605 students who had been killed. In addition, the Chinese government finally released its own list of 5,205 names shortly before the anniversary deadline, probably a result of pressure from Ai’s grassroots movement.

Implications: The most critical element of this campaign is the synergy between online and offline efforts. For every blog post or new name added to the list, there was the work of a volunteer (many of whom were detained) heading out into the towns of Sichuan with a camera and notepad. Without Ai’s blog, which acted as an alternative information channel, the names of the students could not have been published. But the digital element was only part of the campaign - the final step, in fact. Social media can simplify many of the tasks of activism (in the time it takes to call one person you can email thousands), but campaigns in which activists use the internet as an excuse to sit back in their armchairs are unlikely to succeed.

image source: wikimedia

Tool: push out your content with widgets

Tool: the widget

Tool Description: A widget is a piece of HTML code that can be embedded into a blog or web site to display content from another source. For example, the widget on the left, from the American site http://jobs.change.org, pulls content about recent social change job postings from the Change.org database and displays them on this page. Other widgets which work in the same way include event count-down clocks and DigiActive’s comment and Twitter feeds, which you’ll find on our left and right-hand toolbars.

Activist Application: As activists, we are often looking to bring useful content to our web sites in order to attract readers or to push out content we have created to other platforms so we can get as many “eyes” on that content as possible. According Danny Moldovan of Jobs for Change, “Our goal is to spark a nationwide movement toward careers in the common good.” Their methods for achieving this goal is to bring together lots of these jobs in a single place (their site) and then send job-seekers to that site.  If they can push out these job posting to other sites and blogs through their “featured jobs” widget, that means that  more people will find  those positions.

Ease of Use: Embedding a widget is quite easy.  If you have a blog, you just create a new box on one of your tool bars, copy and paste the HTML of whatever widget you want to add to your site into that box, and then save your changes.   The widget will appear on your toolbar next time you load your site.

Creating your own widget is also easier than it once was, thanks to free online services.  The  Free Kareem campaign, for example, created a Free Kareem widget of news update on Kareem’s imprisonment using the free application WidgetBox.com.

Hat-tip: Danny Moldovan

Gregory Sholette: the Dark Matter of Digital Activism

source: gregorysholette.com

Gregory Sholette is a New York-based artist, writer, and founding member of the artists’ collectives Political Art Documentation/ Distribution and REPOhistory, as well as co-editor of “The Interventionists: A Users Manual for the Creative Disruption of Everyday Life” (MassMoCA/MIT Press, 2004, 2006) with Nato Thompson.

He is currently working on a book about the political economy of the art world and his concept of creative “dark matter”, a theory which states that culture is increasingly being produced by ordinary people rather than experts and paid producers.  In this interview we delve into the implications for dark matter for digital activism, which in its own way seeks to create a new political culture through the creation of digital campaigns by grassroots activists.

Mary: In a short essay in the book A Guide to Democracy in America, you write that “ever more accessible technology for manufacturing, documenting, distributing, as well as pilfering images and information” has created a cultural landscape where “one can hardly escape an encounter with this heterogeneous production.”  You posit that, even though its content is most often apolitical (a YouTube video of a “dramatic hamster“, for instance), this production is closer in spirit to that of politically-engaged activists. What makes this massive creative output political?

Greg : Because it is generated for its own sake ––for the sake of expression, opinion, desire, even collective resistance–– such “bottom-up” cultural production embodies a potential form of opposition to the disciplinary mechanisms of the capitalist market. This may sound more than a little romantic, but its not. Generating, retooling, distributing, and recycling images, artwork, information, free software, all of this activity reveals an impulse that is directly opposite the kinds of enclosing and privatizing mechanisms necessary to capitalism from its inception.

Read more »

a chat with Change the Web Director Joe Solomon

Note: An earlier draft of this interview was published about a week ago. This draft, which has been reviewed by Joe, is a better reflection on his opinions on the subjects presented.

Last week I had the pleasure of talking to my friend & colleague Joe Solomon, Director of the Social Actions’ Cange the Web Challenge. The Challenge asked web developers to create innovative tools to help people find and share online actions in the Social Actions database, with $10,000 in prize money on offer. (Winners were just announced!).

Joe and I had a chance to discuss the challenge’s finalists, trends, and online activism in general. Here are the highlights:

Mary: What digital activism trends did you notice in the applications that were submitted?

Joe: Well, we saw a change in what it means to create a mash-up. In an old-school mash-up you put data together and hoped people would come. As activists we want to expose data, but we also want to reach more people who will find that data. We’re concerned with outreach. We saw a number of developers pushing the boundaries of “meeting people where they are” online. A number of apps bridged ways to take action on sites and platforms we visit and use all the time, like WordPress, Twitter & Facebook, Firefox, OpenSocial, the iPhone, as well as widgets and tools that can work on any website. Also, the Sunlight Foundation had their App Contest at around the same time (they just announced their winners) and if you check out their apps you’ll see a similar trend.

Mary: I know it’s hard to single out one among the excellent finalists, but could you tell us about any projects that surprised you or that might indicate new possibilities in digital activism?

Joe: First, a disclaimer: I’m not a judge of the contest so my opinion doesn’t have an impact on the winners.  One app I like though is the “Take Action” button, literally a button a site owner can put on their site, which visitors can click to receive information on actions based on the content of that site. I like this app because it has the potential to transform any website into a platform for social change. However there are a number of other awesome apps. Really, it’s kinda crazy, we were blown away by the innovation! You can check out an overview of the 40+ apps that draw on Social Actions’s database here. Most are open-source, too!

I think we’re also at an exciting point in time where opportunities to take action online are becoming more engaging. We’re moving from signing online petitions as being one of the main e-advocacy tools of choice to inviting people to share expert advice & research, collaborate in real time, and micro-volunteer as new modes of online activism. It’s not just about the method of delivery. We need more relevant and effective online actions that lead to off-line impact. And I think as this space evolves, the apps that promote these actions will become ever-more engaging and ultimately more successful.

Mary: Other than by building new applications, what are some ways that digital activists can “change the web”?

Joe: Re-purposing the tools we’re already using like Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook - and using these to promote issues and engage supporters are great ways to remix the web for change.
image source: Joe Solomon