DigiActive.org

Power & the Network: 3 Mechanisms & 1 Caveat

The central question of digital activism is whether and how the digital network will redistribute political power.  It is not a new idea that networks challenge the foundations of the world’s current centralized and hierarchical power structure (see work by Mark Pesce and Yochai Benkler, among others).  What I’d like to lay out here is the process by which the network poses that challenge, the mechanics of the power shift.  Here are the 3 mechanisms, and 1 important caveat.

1. The network allows for multiple sources of information and interpretation, which creates multiple possible realities.
2. Reinterpretations of interest can result from exposure to these multiple realities.
3. When people reinterpret their interest the network also allows near-free mass broadcast and collaboration, which allows people to act collectively on behalf of their new interests.
4. But…the network does not tell people which action would be most effective, leading to passionate yet often ineffectual responses that challenge but do not significantly change the existing power system.

These points are explained in greater detail below.

1. Multiple sources of information = multiple realities.

It is practically a cliche now to say that citizen-generated media like blogs, Twitter, and cell phone video, challenge the political status quo.  Think of Twitter-assisted protests in Moldova, cell phone video captured in Iran, and China’s impressive efforts to censor and spin blog content.   These examples are deliberately mixed between examples of citizens disseminating objective information (an un-doctored image, recounting of an event) and subjective interpretation (whether a policy is good or bad, the implications of the event).

Both information and interpretation can be dangerous to a repressive regime because they create multiple perspectives and thus multiple realities.  In one reality, disseminated through state-sponsored propaganda and spin, a government may be powerful yet beneficent.  In another reality, propagated by bloggers and tweeters, the government is dictatorial and abusive.

According to the “three faces of power” framework of British political scientist Steven Lukes,  institutions exercise power at three levels: the level of decision-making (policies that are voted on or otherwise debated, like gay marriage in 2009), the level of non-decision-making (policies that cannot be publicly debated because of stigma or social sanction, like gay marriage in 1979), and the level of ideology (policies that are not debated because citizens are unaware of – or oppose – a policy that would be beneficial, like gay marriage in 1879).

Citizen-generated information and interpretation, which the network disseminates, operate at the level of ideology.  New information causes citizens to see authority figures or social practices in news ways.  New interpretations cause citizen to re-evaluate information they were previously aware of, changing “corruption is a part of life” to “corruption is an injustice I should resist” or “people are mostly free in my country” to “the government frequently commits human rights violations.”

2. Reinterpretation of  interests

This new information and interpretation can make people reinterpret their own interests within the political system.  For example, when the woman who once thought corruption was an unchangeable part of life now sees it as an injustice to resist, she may cease to be complicit with corrupt officials by not paying bribes  or at least no longer align herself with their interests by turning a blind eye.  A man who once saw his country as basically free and is now aware of human rights violations by his government may join an opposition group or may simply act with greater scepticism about the governments actions.  He now sees his own interests as being different – or even in conflict with – the interests of the government.

3.  Collective action

So far, we have really only addressed the network characteristics of Web 1.0, the readable web: citizens receives new information through the network and, in response, reinterpret their own interests with relation to the power structure.   However, we are now in the age of Web 2.0, the read-write web.  People not only consume content online, they create it, and not only at the level of isolated content like uploading a video or writing a blog post. The global middle class is in many instances tethered to the Internet and other networked devices, like cell phones and smart phones.  They are exchanging content with friends, colleagues, and strangers every day through IM, SMS, email, and status updates on social networks.

It is this intensity of communication, of constant yet small-scale content creation and response, that allows for massive collaboration.  In analyzing the network with regard to collective action, we should thus not focus on citizen-generated content.  This is only the beginning of a much more interesting chain of content and response that allows collective action to form: an active blog thread becomes a call to action, a Twitter hash-tag moves from observation to planning.

4. Action occurs, but is often ineffective.

So actions occur: short-lived outdoor protest movements, like those in Moldova, Burma, and Iran, strikes like the one in Egypt, and sometimes even vandalism, like the recent unrest in Greece.  After these spurts of activity, nothing really changes.  The power structure carries on more or less the same.  Citizens are now disillusioned with that power structure but see their action as ineffectual, and fall back into patterns of acquiescence, which is indistinguishable from consent with the status quo.    The power structure has certainly been weakened because citizens no longer align their own interests with those of the power structure, but that does not mean the structure will shift.  It will likely only become more violent and oppressive due to fear of its own citizens.  This violence, of course, results in further acquiescence.

The network provides the motivation and means for political action, but not the answer as to what that action should be.   This is no coincidence.  Information on how to change the existing power structure is deliberately hidden from citizens by the power structure itself, particularly in authoritarian societies.  Thus, even citizens who want to change the system fall back onto hackneyed and often ineffectual actions: protest rallies, sign-waving, petitions.

Read more »

Campaign: Bangladeshis microblog the elections to ensure transparency

On 29 December 2008, Bangladesh held its 9th Parliamentary elections, but this time there was a new twist.

Global Voices reported that Software company Somewhere In would offer to the citizens of Bangladesh a set of internet and mobile tools that allowed for quick and easy dissemination of election news. Their motives were simple: offer a public forum where people can get real-time information and, more importantly, hold the government accountable.  In part of its open statement to the government, Somewhere In states:

“tomorrow, any update from any blogger has the potential to reach the whole world.

this time, for the first time in your political history, bloggers are watching you.”

On election day, people were urged to use either the internet or SMS message to report events of the day to the New Age website, which also provided direct synching with an interactive map.  The following tools were offered:

“bloggers share quick news to the election microblog
- just login and type from web or sms to 5455: ! your message

bloggers can sms directly to an interactive map
- send sms to 5455: ! your message @location regarding their district

bloggers can analyse and share political stories on the election blog

bloggers can share the latest microblogs through nearly any blog“

The results, continually updated, are displayed on the sites homepage, along with numerous blog posts with various information.

Importance: This joint business/citizen initiative is a big move towards increased transparency of a country that has, in recent years, topped the list of highest corruption rates in Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (It was ranked most corrupt in 2005 and has slowly moved to number 147 in 2008) and has been under interim government (and military) rule for two years.

The full impact of the initiative is yet to be seen, however, its collaborative and public nature is sure to raise a few heads within the country and around the world.  We at Digiactive hope to see its effectiveness carried through and perhaps duplicated elsewhere.

Related articles by Zemanta

• EU Corruption Perceptions Index 2008
• Bangladeshi corruption scandal after 122 workers paid to fix toilet
• Democracy’s Return: Bangladesh Prepares to Vote
• Bangladesh set to hold 1st election in 7 years

Campaign: Online Anticorruption Movement in Azerbaijan

Description of Campaign: In 2004, a group of students in Azerbaijan decided to create a new web resource to speak up against corruption in the education sector. At Azerbaijani universities, it is not uncommon for students to buy grades and for the admissions process to be influenced by connections over competence

Digital Activism Tools: Website, petition, digital photographs, discussion board.

How These Tools are Being Used : On the web site, www.rushvedeyox.de (which translates to “say no to corruption” and has since been taken down), an online petition section served to collect petitions and submit to government officials on behalf of students. Within few weeks, thousands of students signed the petition. A section of the website included information about negative effects of bribery for students, for their future careers.

“For the sake of Azerbaijan’s future, say NO to corruption”

Read more »

Digitally Active Org: Mjaft!

Web site: www.mjaft.org

What was it?: The Mjaft! Movement’s primary vision is to achieve a well-governed Albania with active citizens, strong communities and a positive image in the world. Mjaft means “enough” in Albania and is a reflection of the frustration of the founders who returned from university in the US and Western Europe and were shocked at the corruption, poverty, crime and failing public services in their country.

Where is it?: Tirana, Albania

Tools: MMS (multimedia messaging service), cell phones, web site

Read more »