DigiActive.org

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

Digital Activism in Iran: Beyond the Headlines

clockwise from top-left: Gholamhossein Karbaschi’s Twitter page, the reformist web site Ghalam News, YouTube video of a nurses’ protest taken by a citizen journalist, Mir Hossein Mousavi’s Facebook page, toolbar from Kalamhe, another reformist site

Background:  Protests against Iran’s presidential election results continue despite the warning of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday.  However, Iranian reformist candidates Mir Hussein Mousavi and Mehdi Karoub and their supporters have few communications options. They have no access to national TV, radio, or newspapers, which are under state control.   Text messaging is being blocked and web sites are filtered.  How are they able to organize a huge protest movement?

While the mainstream media has focused on the role of Twitter and decentralized organizing, the real picture of digital activism in Iran is more complex.  Protests are organized centrally by the campaigns of reformist candidates and then that information is disseminated both online and off.  The role of citizens with regard to social media is as citizen journalists, using YouTube and Twitter to report on what is happening, rather than to organize the protests.  Since this activity is intended for an international audience (and is in English) it is no wonder that this use of social media is more visible to a Western audience than the online tactics actually being used to organize the protests.

Tools: web sites, Facebook, Twitter, mouth-to-ear networks

How these tools are being used:  With regard to the post-election protests, decisions are made centrally by Mousavi and Karoubi and their campaigns. When they take their decisions they communicate them in different ways. First, they publish them on their websites, for example Kalamhe and Ghalam news.  Web 1.0 (as well as totally offline communication methods) are just as important as Web 2.0 (social media), though the latter is receiving for more attention.

Second, the reformist leaders use social networking systems to communicate these message. On Saturday Mir Hussein Mousavi’s Facebook published the news that demonstration will be held today. Mousavi has more than 65,000 supporters in his Facebook group and every message can reach this army of people directly.  Supporters were also asked to pass the message to others, implying that the leaders are deliberately making use of their supporters’ online and offline personal networks.   One of the main ways to organize the demonstrations  is person-to-person communication or talking with friends and neighbors… the mouth-to-ear method.  It still works and no government can shut it down.  (Maybe Iranian leaders imagine a divine power can prevent this form of communication as it did in the election.)

Third, as has already been noted (and overemphasized) in the mainstream media,  Twitter is being used.  However, the dynamic is different than has been previously reported.  Gholamhossein Karbaschi, a top adviser to Karoubi, communicates about his activity on his Twitter account (@gkarbaschi, in Farsi).  This is one of the only instances where Twitter is actually being used to organize protest inside Iran and again, this is centralized organization coming from the campaign of a reformist candidate.  An indication of the centralized nature of Twitter for organizing in Iran: @gkarbaschi has over 4,700 followers but is not following the feeds of any other users.  He is using social media to broadcast to a domestic audience, not to interact.

As has also been noted, people in Iran are using Twitter as an important broadcast (rather than organizing) tool to report events, slogans, and minute by minute protest movement. In this way, Twitter has turned a local struggle into a national and  international one.  A scene of a girl murdered by security forces is one dramatic example of news reported on Twitter.  As many reporters and interested observers around the world have learned, it also allows an international audience to follow the event in real time.

Finally, Iranian citizens upload films from around country on YouTube to show demonstrations, protest movements and reformists’ messages.  International mainstream media are using these citizen videos in their Iran coverage.  This combination of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0, central organization and decentralized dissemination shows the flexibility of these tools and the true complexity of the use of digital activism in Iran.

“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 »

Genocide Intervention Network: “Have a Hand In Stopping Genocide”

Description & Background:
Genocide Intervention Network (GI-NET) co- founded in 2004 by Mark
Hanis, and Andrew Sniderman, aims to empower individuals and
communities with the tools necessary to prevent and stop genocide.
What began with a focus in the genocide in Darfur has evolved into
combating global genocide. The genocide in Darfur has claimed 400,000
lives and displaced over 2,500,000 people. More than one hundred
people continue to die each day; five thousand die every month. As a
result of failure in the U.S government and international community to
prevent and stop global genocide, the Genocide Intervention Network
mobilizes a permanent anti-genocide constituency that lobbies our
leaders and policy makers for substantial action, and creates
incentive for those officials who fail to act. The organization
believes that if given the tools (many of which are digital tools),
all citizens of the global community can become daily activists in the
anti-genocide movement.

The Genocide Intervention network strives to turn the oath of “Never
Again” that millions swore to after the Holocaust took place in World
War II into a global reality. The organization’s members envision a
world in which the global civil society is willing and able to protect
civilians from genocide and mass atrocities. In the past, the United
States and the international community have failed to effectively
prevent and stop global genocide because of a lack of political will
in our elected officials and among our citizens. using innovative
tools on the GI-Website and programs provide citizens with the
resources to educate, organize, and advocate in their communities. By
investing heavily in individuals to be vocal local leaders on their
campuses and in their communities, GI-NET provides hands-on
opportunities and tools to make genocide prevention a domestic
political issue.

Empowering people belonging to the GI-NET movement with the tools
necessary, GI-NET provides a Genocide Monitor for all of the areas of
concern spanning the globe such as Darfur, Sri Lanka, Burma, Iraq,
Somalia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic,
and Chad

Digital Tools: Blog, Facebook, Twitter, toll-free hotline, digital scorecard PDF flyer downloads, Email, Website

What they Do:
Relying on various campaigns and programs, by urging all interested to
become outspoken involved anti-genocide activists, the Genocide
Intervention Network has become a key non-profit player and critical
voice in implementing Genocide Policy and urging change by educating &
advocating on behalf of the anti-genocide movement. pressuring
legislators, and policy makers using Darfurscores.org, a website
launched , “calling on cogress to stop genocide,” holding legislators
in congress accountable by scoring them based on their policy efforts
in Darfur. Every legislator has a profile with a visible record and
can be directly contacted. On Durfurscores GI-NET is also lobbying to
Implement a Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, a checklist for
acting against genocide. Both GI-NET and Darfurscores websites urge
individuals to contact the president, legislators, or a local
newspaper and to support $50 million for Darfur in the 2009
Supplemental Appropriations Bill . The Organization also began

the Sudan Divestment Task Force (SDTF):
authorized by the U.S government to focus efforts on the most
problematic and risk prone companies in Sudan, maximizing effects on
Sudanese government and minimizing potential harm to Sudanese
civilians and investment returns. Probono consultation is provided.

The genocide intervention network also created the first ever genocide
hotline that connects callers directly to their legislators and has
had visible impact on leglistaors wanting to improve their darfurscore
cards. Genocide Intervention Network is currently exploring the role
ofNET’s campaigns, content, and action alerts can be delivered
toDarfur from Day One, or Genocide Prevention Month have succeeded in
getting various individuals involved in the cause and raised funds to
send over some of the equipment and aid necessary in Darfur and other
affected regions. The organization strives to Recruit, guide, empower
and support indivudals providing ways to become educated and eventual
representative activists on the ground, aiding regions ridden with
genocide.

STAND:Students Taking Action Now Darfur
the student led division of the Genocide Intervention network is a large
to the events and on-the-ground mobilazation that takes place in over
850 schools and 25 countries worldwide- raising awareness.
Seemingly, Everything needed to take immediate action to STOP GENOCIDE
is directly provided by the efforts of this non-profit organization:
resources, contacts, information, blog information, divestment, and
“how to” for becoming an educator and advocate on behalf of the
anti-genocide movement. We now have to not just belong to the
successful movement but actually stop genocide in the coming future.

Impact:

Through lobbying and pressure on policy makers, GI NET succeeded in
getting President Bush and congress to declare the situation in Darfur
to be a Genocide in 2004.

Genocides globally are continuing but GI-NET is striving to catalyze a
paradigm shift in how global citizens, policy makers, and key leaders
view genocide. The commitment to end genocide continues relentlessly
as GI-Net relies on all of its tools to ensure the anti-genocide
movement has a Global critical voice dedicated to implementing change.
No matter your constituencies, or profession or age, there is a way
for GI-NET to transform interested individual into an on-the-ground
activist. Any of the digital tools, and collaboration initiatives, are
available for anyone to utilize- the depth and success of the
organizations outreach initiatives has been outstanding.

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

Campaign: InSTEDD’s Mekong Collaboration Program for Early Detection and Early Response

Description and Background: In 2006, Dr. Larry Brilliant won the TED Prize and called for the development of a technological system that would stop the threat of pandemics and catastrophes. Renowned for his work in the successful, worldwide eradication of smallpox, Dr. Brilliant emphasized the game-changing purpose of this system – early detection and early response.  As such, he declared his TED wish, “I wish that you would help build a global system to detect each new disease or disaster as quickly as it emerges or occurs.”  From this prize and wish emerged InSTEDD (Innovative Support To Emergency Diseases and Disasters), originally titled “International Networked System for Total Early Disease Detection.”  Shortly after TED, Larry Page and Sergey Brin (Google’s founders) appointed Dr. Brilliant the head of Google.org, the organization’s philanthropic arm.

With funding from Google.org, the Rockefeller Foundation, and others, InSTEDD began its social, technological mission with CEO Eric Rasmussen (a former U.S. Navy chief doctor for disaster response in the Pacific), Dr. Dennis Israelski as the Vice President of Global Health, and Eduardo Jezierski as the Vice President of Engineering.  Along with Chief Technology Office Robert Kirkpatrick, Chief Operating Officer Judith Kleinberg, and several other full-time team members, InSTEDD operates very much like a classic startup in which everyone wears many different hats (click here for bios).  In addition to the executive team, InSTEDD has over a dozen dedicated team members on the ground in their Mekong Collaboration Program (MCP).  This program focuses on rapid detection and rapid response in the Mekong Basin of Southeast Asia – Cambodia, Thailand, Lao PDR, Vietnam, Myanmar, and the Yunan province of China – and has been stationed in Phnom Penh, Cambodia since 2008. In the region, InSTEDD partners with the Mekong Basin Disease Surveillance Network (MBDS), a collaboration network of the six countries’ local governments and Ministries of Health that work to improve cross-border disease information sharing.  Not only does InSTEDD work closely with MBDS, but the organization also established a field-based Innovation Lab (iLab) in Phonm Penh in August 2008.  By empowering young Cambodian developers to design technological solutions based on their local expertise and understanding, InSTEDD works to maintain a creative, organic environment in which sustainable innovation can thrive.

Digital Tools Being Developed: GeoChat, Mesh4X, Evolve (tools that incorporate Twitter, RSS feeds, Facebook, SMS text messages, and so on, as applicable)

How These Tools Are Being Designed and Used: As Ed Jezierski explained to me in our Skype interview, GeoChat helps people in the field to share and report data with each other as well as with those at headquarters, amplifying the amount of information flowing between health workers; Mesh4X coordinates this information by synchronizing between various organizations’ virtual databases; Evolve functions as a place to curate the collective information and subsequently analyze it for conclusions.  For more details about InSTEDD’s approach, tools, and impact, read more after the jump.

Read more »

7 Marathons, 7 Continents, 7 Weeks: Campaign for AIDS Orphans

Background: Hope Runs is a non-profit NGO based in East Africa that uses education, athletics, and social entrepreneurship to empower AIDS orphans. When founders Claire Williams and Lara Vogel were travelling through Kenya in 2006, they came across the Tumaini Children’s Center, an orphanage that houses over 170 children. They were immediately impressed by the strong commitment the center had to building a haven for the children- most of them AIDS orphans- to live in.

Both avid runners and bloggers, Williams and Vogel decided to start a non-profit in which they could educate the children in many ways, especially the thrill of running. They set up marathons within the community and athletic education programs within orphanages. They created a blog  in order to teach the orphans technological skills and get their voices heard. They also started an online video series, which highlighted the children’s lives. This program led to a computer class for the kids, further advancing their digital education. The class, in turn, developed into “Tomorrow’s Leaders,” a business and social entrepreneurship training program for Kenyan high school graduates. While the program is still being developed, Hope Runs is currently working with the UCLA Anderson School of Business to launch it at a Kenyan orphanage shortly.

As stated on the website, “with its ability to show personal progress, to prove the effectiveness of goal-setting and discipline, and to improve these children’s health, running has proven an amazing tool to teach these children motivational and disciplinary lessons that can apply to every aspect of their life.” These children are just a few of the estimated 53 million children in sub-Saharan Africa who have lost one or both parents to AIDS. This is why Hope Runs created the 777 Challenge. Hope Runs works to empower this entire generation to enable them the prosperous future they deserve. All proceeds from the 777 Challenge’s fundraising will go to assisting Hope Runs in their efforts.

Campaign Description: The Hope Runs 777 challenge is a fundraising effort that literally spans the globe. It involves a team of volunteer runners who plan to run 7 marathons on 7 continents in 7 weeks starting in January 2010. The goal of this challenge is to raise money and awareness of the plight of AIDS orphans in sub-Saharan Africa. As of now, the team consists of 30 members from all around the world, who will raise more than $26,000 each (in addition to travel expenses) for Hope Runs. This venture, if accomplished, will break 5 Guinness World Records, including Natasha Peters, the youngest woman to complete 7 marathons in 7 continents.  Peters is an 18-year-old student from  Canada, and she is one of a few team members to write about her experiences on her blog, www.tasharuns.wordpress.com. DigiActive had a chance to ask her a few questions:

Gaby: How did you hear about the organization and get involved in the 777 challenge?

Natasha: I read about Hope Runs in Runners World a couple of years ago and was really interested because I thought it was such an innovative and transformative model, and I have followed what the organization does ever since.  This year, I wanted to fundraise in conjunction with doing the Ottawa marathon and was talking to Lara and Claire at Hope Runs about this and then got more information on the 777.  It was at that point that I became transfixed with the idea of combining my passions of travel, cultures, running, and contributing to the world community.  Hence, I applied to the 777 and the rest is history.

Gaby: Did you ever think about how running could make such an impact on other peoples’ lives the way it will with the 777 challenge?

Natasha: One of my favorite quotes is “Don’t ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive, and go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive.” by Howard Thurman.  I am a true believer that everyone has something unique to offer and that change and impact can come in the most surprising of ways.  Therefore, I definitely have always thought that a lasting and powerful impact can come from running, or anything else for that matter, and am really excited to be a part of that!

Gaby: Why do you think an event such as the 777 challenge is a good tool in activism and advocacy? What do you think it can it teach other activists who want to make a difference in the world?

Natasha: For me, running is a particularly good tool for advocacy because it both pushes me to my limit and demonstrates the lengths I’m willing to go to for a cause, inspiring others to become involved as well; it also makes me come alive because it is one of my favorite activities. Running is what I love, therefore, I am able to put so much more into what I do because I love it.  If a large amount of passion and dedication is put into something, it will be so much more powerful than just trying to fit into someone else’s mold that does not inspire you.  The first step in successful activism is to show your own dedication and passion, thus, the 777 challenge is a perfect way to make an impact.

Gaby: 7 marathons in 7 weeks on 7 continents sounds exciting, but for someone like me (who is not exactly “fit”) also a bit terrifying! How are you preparing yourself physically for such an adventure?

Natasha: I get this question a lot! Firstly, training; secondly, not getting injured.  I will be running the Ottawa marathon coming up soon and have (more or less) followed pre-established marathon training plans to train for that (a long run every week, weekly base mileage, some cross training, speed training, etc).  I will be more or less maintaining that fitness while expanding on endurance and speed for the next months and will do some fall racing to keep in shape.

Gaby: Of all 7 continents, which are you most excited to run in?

Natasha: Antartica! (but really, all will be adventures)!

Gaby: How does the fundraising aspect of the challenge work? Do you raise all the travel expenses on your own? How are you accomplishing this?

Natasha: Yes, I need to fundraise for the trip itself, and also my goal is $42,200 CAD for Hope Runs as well.  I am asking for personal and corporate donations, as well as hosting several events to fundraise.

Gaby: What you and your team members are doing is truly inspiring. What can others do to help you all accomplish your goal?

Natasha: Spread the word! And donate: http://tasharuns.wordpress.com/donate/

Digital Tools Being Used: Blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube

How These Tools Are Being Used: So far, three 777 team members have blogs that raise awareness for the campaign. The team member blogs are all well organized and provide a lot of insight into what the runners are trying to accomplish. The blogs are also used to raise money, as each member is responsible for raising at least $26,000 and an additional $14,000 for travel costs.

Hope Runs has two blogs: the first is www.TumainiKids.blogspot.com in which the children from Hope Runs’ partner orphanages write their own posts. It possibly one of the first blogs on the Internet written by orphans and vulnerable children.  The blog is used both to raise awareness of the millions of orphaned children in sub-Saharan Africa, and to educate the children in grassroots digital activism. It has generated a lot of comments and support. Because it is, most likely, the only blog of its kind, it is refreshing to see the children’s technological education come to fruition. The other blog, http://runningonhope.blogspot.com, written by founder Claire Williams, consists of posts about the organization and the challenge. Hope Runs also has a channel on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/user/trippingonwords) that is used to create the online video series.

Some members have used Facebook groups that explain the campaign and encourage others to help them raise money. Team members organize fundraising events and post the information on the page. Most groups have substantial membership and discussion. Julianne Chai, a team member from California has 95 followers on two blogs and almost 3,000 followers on twitter. She has been using these tools to raise the money she needs.

Success and Impact: The 777 challenge has not officially started yet, and will only be completed in March 2010. While Hope Runs and the 777 team members use many digital tools in their efforts to raise awareness and fundraise, it is difficult to determine how successful the campaign is until the challenge commences in January. Only then can we determine whether or not sufficient funds were raised. However, it is assumed that if someone is able to raise enough money, then the awareness raised in the process is a significant amount, as well.

The fundraising aspect seems extremely difficult to accomplish. Hope Runs acknowledges this on the website:

“Raising both funding and awareness for the cause of these children, the 777 Challenge represents a sacrifice, dedication and commitment by the team that many have said is impossible. But we hear that word a lot.People also say these kids’ beating the odds to have healthy, productive lives is impossible. We simply consider that untrue. And so 777 is going to show everyone–including our kids–exactly how far commitment and perseverance can take you.”

If the challenge is completed successfully, an estimated total of $780,000 will go to educating thousands of children with extracurricular activities as well as the vocational skills they require to better their futures.

Image: Hoperuns.org

NYU Student Protests: A Digital Occupation

Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/emry/3297069286/

Background: On February 18, 2009, a group of NYU students calling themselves Take Back NYU (TBNYU) barricaded themselves inside the university’s Kimmel Center for Student Life cafeteria, the Kimmel MarketPlace. Armed with laptops and wireless internet connections, the group published a list of 12 demands, including disclosure of the university’s operating budget, assurance of fair labor practices for all NYU employees, the creation of a Socially Responsible Finance Committee, tuition stabilization, scholarships for Palestinian students and free public access to Bobst library.

 The occupation continued the next day and into the night, with administrators reluctant to remove protesters by force and unwilling to negotiate with students behind the barricade. During the day on Wednesday, February 19, students stormed the building, entering the barricade to take part in the protest. Late Thursday night and early Friday morning the scene outside the building, where numerous supporters, critics and police officers had gathered, erupted into a riot. One NYU public safety officer was injured and taken to St. Vincent’s hospital in an ambulance. Numerous students reported that pepper spray had been used on them, although this was unconfirmed by the police.

 By Friday afternoon, the remaining students in Kimmel had been escorted from the building; all 18 were suspended. None of their demands were met.

 Technology: Why was the Kimmel occupation different from other student protests? TBNYU entered the student center knowing they would have full internet access, and they took advantage of that. The event was advertised as a “study breakdown” on TBNYU’s blog. Once the protesters barricaded themselves inside the cafeteria, they published their demands and wrote entries about the scene within the barricade, all of which could be accessed on their web site. TBNYU also recorded the events on Twitter, offered a live streaming broadcast, so people outside could actually talk to those inside Kimmel, and posted photos. Additionally, members of TBNYU had tipped off NYULocal, a blog that covers NYU news, and the site responded by installing a reporter in the Kimmel MarketPlace. The reporter, Charlie Eisenhood, liveblogged the events from the inside for over 30 hours. Meanwhile, Washington Square News (WSN), NYU’s newspaper, blogged about the occupation, the scene outside and the administration response, updating posts continuously over the three-day period. Between TBNYU’s coverage and the NYULocal and WSN blogs, the Kimmel occupation was one of the most comprehensively addressed student protests in recent years.

 Impacts:

1.     Take Back NYU was able to garner greater numbers of followers, who either stood in solidarity or actually entered the MarketPlace. For instance, Anna Mullen, an NYU sophomore, heard about the protest on Take Back NYU’s blog and decided to join the occupation. She was one of the 18 suspended on Friday, along with other individuals who were not part of the original planning for the event.

2.     The widespread coverage on blogging sites and campus media outlets certainly most likely encouraged administrators to use caution when removing the protesters from the building. NYU was extremely hesitant to involve the NYPD, and did not take significant action to remove the students until the Market Place had been occupied for nearly two full days.

3.     The sit-in attracted national and international attention. The New York Times reported on the occupation, Noam Chomsky sent TBNYU a letter of solidarity, and New York City Councilman Charles Barron came to the NYU campus to speak in support of the students as they were escorted from the building February 20.

4.     Incorrect information about the situation in Kimmel reached a large number of people. WSN originally reported incorrectly that an individual’s arm was broken in the riot outside the Kimmel Center, leading many to believe that injuries and violence were more grave than was actually true.

5.     Things did get violent. Discussions on NYULocal and WSN chat forums became heated, and a large number of individuals stood outside Kimmel because they had read about or watched portions of the occupation on the internet. These same individuals were involved in the riot that ensued early Friday morning.

6.     The administration was easily able to sap much of the movement’s power simply by removing a connection to technology. TBNYU was relying on NYU’s wireless internet service. Friday morning protesters reported that electrical outlets in Kimmel were not working. Commentators speculated the administration hoped to render the students’ laptops useless, severing their connection with the outside world. Several hours later, the protesters exited the building.

Campaign: ‘Stop the Canadian Seal Slaughter’

Description: There has been a lot of talk about the recent ban by the European Union on Canadian seal products, such as fur coats and certain vitamins. The ban came in light of pressure from constituents on the European governments to take a stand against the annual hunting of seals in Canada in which an average of 300,000 seals are slaughtered for commercial use, and in which seals are brutally clubbed until they die. Many animal rights groups who rallied behind the European Parliament bill are calling for the Canadian government to outlaw the hunt as well, including one of the largest animal rights organizations, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) . PETA has discussed the seal slaughter as early as over two years ago, but has since stepped up its campaign, to educate people on the slaughter and to encourage people to put pressure on the Canadian government.

Digital Tools Being Used: Blog, Video, Facebook, Email, E-Petition

What Did They Do: As mentioned, PETA began a campaign against the Canadian seal slaughter years ago, and started an e-petition right after Anna Nicole’s death in her memory. Since then, they have continually blogged about the issue, and once Canada was decided as the country of choice for the Olympics, leapt at the opportunity to really make the problem global. There is a facebook group, as well as an e-petition, to get people to e-mail and mail letters to the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee to put pressure on the Canadian government directly. The pre-written letter is available in a few different languages as well, strengthening the global threads PETA is trying to sew.

As far as getting the message out to people, PETA has also reached out to groups who may not be so inclined to look at their website and see their e-petition. They have created an e-card for the public to send out to their friends and family through e-mail, and offer code to embed the card into a blog. Other, more creative methods have also been used, including a demonstration on the Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game (MMORPG) World of Warcraft , in which members from PETA organized as the evil faction in the game, Horde, and went around the game killing seals. The event took place on one server of the game, but it had the whole community talking.

Impact: The World of Warcraft stunt certainly got the attention of a lot of gamers, and at the very least brought the subject to a demographic not necessarily known for their animal rights activism. It would seem as though their campaign on the whole must have been at the very least mildly successful as well, for the EU ban came after years of education campaigns run by PETA. The impact of the new direction of the campaign directly towards the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee has not yet been disclosed, and numbers for the e-petition signatures and for the amount of times the e-card has been sent out were not available. It is expected that the issue will gain a fair amount of support, however, given the immense support in Europe demonstrated by the ban, and by the fact that even other countries are calling the slaughter “inhumane.”

Case Study: The Report Card on Vote Report India Version 1.0

The 2009 Indian Lok Sabha elections have come to an end and so has version 1.0 of Vote Report India.

We have had our successes and failures and I have talked about some of them before.

I think we did a lot of things well –

- We were able to get the website up within a week, thank to some great work by the Ushahidi and eMoksha teams.

- We were able to build a number of important relationship, with civil society organizations (like Jaago Re/ One Billion Voters, National Network for India, Liberty Institute, Citizens for Justice and Peace, and Women’s Political Forum), traditional media organizations (like Al Jazeera) and new media organizations (like Global Voices, Indipepal, Desipundit, BlogAdda, NGO Post and Digital Democracy). In fact, our partnerships page looks like a literal who’s who of the important players working on the Indian elections.

- We were able to generate a lot of buzz for Vote Report India, on blogs, on Twitter, and in mainstream media within a very short time.

- We have been able to build a vibrant Vote Report India community that has been active in supporting us on both the technical and outreach side.

Here are some things that have not gone well –

- We haven’t been able to establish a relationship with any big Indian media organizations on one hand, and National election Watch and the Election Commission on the other hand, in spite of some serious discussions.

- We haven’t been able to integrate the Swift functionality into Vote Report India (aggregating feeds from multiple sources and crowdsourcing the tagging etc.) on our original timelines.

- We haven’t been able to get users to submit reports in large numbers. We have a little more than 200 reports in the system, which isn’t bad. However, we would have needed many more reports to capture the complexity of the 2009 Indian elections.

- The voter turnout in all four phases has been low, putting a question mark on the effectiveness of all digital civil society campaigns like Vote Report India.

Here are some lessons from Vote Report India version 1.0 –

- It’s still difficult to build a grassroots movement in India exclusively on the internet. Even online campaigns need to be supported by mainstream media for reach and SMS for the feedback loop. We had SMS, but we didn’t have the resources to advertise on mainstream media.

- In a country like India, which has a free and noisy news eco-system, transparency initiatives like Vote Report India need to not only get original reports from users but also aggregate reports from mainstream media.

- Transparency, in terms of availability of information in a usable format, is not a big enough incentive for Indian users. Users expected Vote Report India to closeloop the issues and give them feedback, and we were not set up to do that.

On the whole, I think that we did quite well, given our time and resource constraints.

Our biggest achievement, I think, was being able to build a vibrant community around Vote Report India and we are grateful to all the people who contributed to the project.

As I said, this was only version 1.0 of Vote Report India. We will take a short break and then relaunch Vote Report India as a platform to crowd-source the performance monitoring of our elected members of parliament, using the Ushahidi/ Swift engines. We will move the present homepage to 2009.votereport.in and start new pages like 2014.votereport.in for new elections, including local assembly elections.

Selvam and I, along with the other members of the core team, will continue to devote a substantial part of our time to Vote Report India. We are looking to expand our team, so do write to us at votereportindia@gmail.com, if you would like to become involved in a significant way.

Cross-posted at Gauravonomics, my blog on social media and social change.