DigiActive.org

Guide to Twitter for Activism… en Español

Written by DigiActive Team on September 2, 2009 – 7:21 am -

We are very excited to announce the translation of the DigiActive Guide to Twitter for Activism in Spanish, our first Spanish content on this site. You can download a PDF version by clicking the image below.  (You can also download the original English version here.)  We are so grateful to our (anonymous) team of volunteer translators for making this new version possible.

Haz clic para descargar

A Note for Translators: The guide is published under a Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution license and we welcome other translations by individuals and organizations who will release their version under the same conditions. To receive a copy of the guide in an editable format, please e-mail Contact AT DigiActive DOT org.

Tags: español, twitter activism
Posted in Guides & Resources | 1 Comment »

Party Politics: Twittering towards Palin 2012?

Written by Tiby Kantrowitz on July 19, 2009 – 12:29 pm -

Following former American vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s announcement that she would resign as governor of Alaska, Palin-related sites have strongly increased in traffic and membership. Amid speculations about her reasons for resigning in the middle of her term of office, and a vagueness about her future plans on her main site, supporters advance Palin as a candidate for the 2012 presidential elections.

Tools: Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, Ning groups, blogs, Wordpress

How the tools are being used:

Palin-related digital outreach stretches back to Republican Presidential candidate John McCain choosing her as his running mate in the 2008 election. Since then, online tools have been used to communicate messages more directly to supporters, to acquire funds for both her political action committee (PAC) and for her legal defense fund, and to shape the beginnings of a movement towards advancing her for candidacy for the Presidency.

With over 442 updates and over 102,000 followers (increasing even at time of press), Palin’s Twitter usage (via Twitterberry and the web) and style mirrors the strategic rhetoric of her speech as voiced in her resignation announcement. Recent tweets promise

“I’ll stay in touch w/whomever wants via personal twtr site;launch July 26;in meantime it’s pleasure to update interested folks on State biz!” and

“elected is replaceable;Ak WILL progress! + side benefit=10 dys til less politically correct twitters fly frm my fingertps outside State site.”

Her current handle, “AKGOVSarahPalin,” whose profile links to the Alaskan state government website, will be retired once she steps down. As part of a movement-building strategy, using Twitter builds community by creating a feeling of immediacy and fostering a sense of insider knowledge. This contributes towards preparing the way for whatever steps she chooses to take next.

Through social networks such as Team Sarah (almost 72,000 members) and blogs like Conservatives4Palin the movement has increased membership and raised funds in actions such as a week-long WebaThon carried out in June to raise money for the Sarah Palin Legal Defense Fund.

Palin and her team created The Alaska Fund Trust to help allay legal expenses incurred defending herself from a series of ethics charges. While legal defense funds are nothing new, Palin’s fund differs from those of other political candidates in having an online presence. The fund’s site lists PDFs of legal documents on six other political defense funds for comparison. Whatever their other similarities or differences, none of the others had the backing of an online presence or community. Putting all activities online makes it easier for other online groups to organize activities in support of them.

For example, Conservatives4Palin.com’s attempt to raise the entire $500,000 requested by the defense fund was also its first attempt at grassroots political fundraising. Daily updates on the main site, viral video that attracted some news attention, emails and blog-postings, along with some limited support from well-known radio personalities who posted links, all helped to create momentum for the week-long effort. The campaign successfully increased traffic to the Conservatives4Palin site, leading to a high of over 495,000 pageviews for June, ’09 and nearly doubled the number of site visits from the previous month.

However, the site was ultimately unsuccessful in raising the full amount. The comments section mentions raising $109,620 over six days. Ultimately, lack of coordination with other prominent and well-organized sites such as Team Sarah, was cited in the comments section as one reason for not raising more money. Attention expected from prominent supportive journalists either did not come or arrived too late.”

With so many different Palin-related social networks, blogs, and websites, as well as conversations about Palin on other conservative sites, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, formerly the Sarah Palin Internet Coalition, was established “to facilitate communication and coordinate efforts between the many Internet-based groups that support Sarah Palin.” Currently, the site has 17 groups, most of which are dedicated to Internet communications strategies, but only one group has seen traffic within the last month.

Members are highly interactive, and Team Sarah has a specific group whose mission is to post immediate greetings on new members pages in an effort to retain membership and encourage participation. Currently, the social network has 71,870 members and 764 groups on its network, of which the featured 30 groups show activity within the last two weeks.

Some groups post discrete actions members can perform online, such as making donations, signing petitions, or offering videos or banners that they can watch or post on their personal sites. Forums post information on the latest online as well as offline activities such as rallies, parties and marches.

Analysis:

According to one Pew Internet & American Life Report, during the election cycle Obama supporters had a higher level of engagement in online digital media. Following the election, however, recognizing that difference groups in support of Palin are experimenting with ways of communicating about the issues. In contrast, as recently as a February post announcing the GOP Tech Summit, commenters on the Republican Party’s site expressed their dissatisfaction with the site’s failure to provide information on important political issues.

At the same time that Democrats were ultimately more successful in using digital tools for advocacy McCain supporters were more likely to use the Internet in general. Now however, when people search for political information online they look for opinions and views similar to their own, rather than alternative or challenging ones.

This provides Palin supporters with a clear opportunity to begin their efforts early, with a limited message, i.e. one person, rather than an entire party and to be able to stay relatively on message while refining their methodology in the process. This contrasts sharply versus the efforts of the Republican Party, which must promote a multitude of messages while battling the digital activism learning curve.

Based upon an exploration of the different groups and the activity within them, the nascent Palin campaign is quickly accelerating in confidence and skill at using digital media. Its offline strength has been its ability to reach people individually, and on an emotional level. Online, it seeks to do the same. Certainly, as a non-organized group without a real platform, the Palin campaign is freer than the Republican Party to make mistakes. However, because of its lack of organization it is also gaining valuable experience in how to build traction online. As it gets closer to 2012 this could make a vital distinction in who becomes the next President of the United States, not just who becomes the leading Conservative voice.

Tags: 2012, elections, Palin, twitter activism, USA
Posted in Americas, Blogs, Social Networks, Tactics, Tools | 2 Comments »

The Green Meme: is Switching your Twitter Icon Activism?

Written by Alexandra Frizzell on July 10, 2009 – 6:53 pm -

Background: Does turning your twitter avatar green make you into an activist?  Does it constitute an effective protest against the suppression of rights of civilians in Iran?  On June 17th, 2009 many Twitter users began turning their avatars green. This was their way of showing solidarity with those Iranians protesting the questionable election results which returned the incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to power.  Some Twitter users uploaded solid green squares in place of their avatars; another 230,000 used the website (http://helpiranelection.com/) created by @arikfr to tweet their support and either turn their icons a shade of green or to add a green ribbon to their picture. This trend spread like wildfire and soon most of my followers were riding this wave.

Tools: Twitter, external web site

How These Tools are Used: After seeing pictures of protestors in Iran wearing green, many Twitter users began to manually change their Twitter pictures. This individual process was then streamlined by the self proclaimed “creative geek” Arik (@arikfr ) in creating his website. He had seen what people were doing, liked it and so “decided to simplify the process to allow it to reach [a] wider audience.” This worked, as my twitter stream was soon filled with the simple message “Show support for #iranelection add green overlay to your Twitter avatar with 1-click – http://helpiranelection.com/”. From twitter juggernauts like @garyvee to smaller scale users; the green icon fad had permeated twitter.

Analysis: Recently there has been much discussion around the phenomenon of average people participating, or attempting to participate in online activism. Mary Joyce, cofounder of this web site, was recently quoted in the Washington Post article stating that the ease of creating or joining a cause online sadly resulted in only “a maximum of 5 percent [who] are going to take action”. This problem is mirrored on Twitter as members can feel as though they’ve done their moral duty by expressing their anger at the situation by turning their icons green. To many, they feel like that is enough, they are spreading the word and showing solidarity. But how many of them donated even $1 to help organizations in Iran? Now THAT would have helped. Other skeptics of this movement, such as Martin Bryant, made their frustration with these activities clear as well.

The real question stems from the implications of digital activism. Digital activism is a progressive way of tackling the injustices in the world, but is the internet making it too easy for the average person to feel like he/she has sufficiently participated and so relieving them from any feeling that they should do more? Were people using the green meme to try and convey what humane and politically active people they were whether or not there was any truth to it? The last thing we need as a culture is another easy way out of hard work. I would have preferred to see a system where to turn your icon green a $20 donation was required. While it is not a lot, it would have resulted in only the truly concerned tweeters participating.

During the protests in Iran Twitter was very useful as a communication device with the western world. The concept of the “citizen journalist” was extremely important as all information coming out of Iran came from the people. The New York Times writer Noam Cohen noted that “Twitter is a tool and thus difficult to censor”. Retweeted updates and pictures from Iran became my main news source on the situation and I know that I wasn’t alone. There were many inaccuracies, but social tools gave the American people the coverage that wasn’t available anywhere else.

In the past month, Twitter has proven that it is far more than a narcissistic platform. As seen when the hashtag #CNNfail was used to criticize CNN for their coverage of the election in Iran. The trending topic gained so much support that it provoked a written and spoken apology from the network. When the New York Times profiled Twitter as a company they acknowledged its ability to “disseminate information in the face of a press crackdown” during the Iranian election.

I contacted some Twitter users who still had green avatars to pose the question: “Why did you change your avatar green?”

Daniel @dwplanit

“A few reasons: I am strongly for populist democratic uprisings; it was easy; there isn’t much more I can do to support democracy in Iran…Another effect the avatar changes might have is simply encouraging Iranians to continue to fight for democracy. And that could be a positive side effect.”

Alejandro @successfool

“Because I want to use my twitter id/following to attract attention to the cause.”

Jimmy @loyaleagle

“I figured it would show solidarity among tweeps and might even help in some small way (though now I’m a little sick of it).”

Tee @TeeMonster

“When I found out about the “elected” government shutting down Social Media outlets, I was outraged. I turned the avatar green to show my support for the opposition and also as a statement for freedom of information. If Iran wants to be taken seriously as a nation, they need to realize that information cannot be blocked. Not in this age.”

Gina @gminks

“To me it was more about getting the word out, drawing attention. I don’t really think that is activism. But then again, I knew there was nothing I could do to change things in Iran.”

Arik @arikfr

“The idea of the campaign was to make it easy for people to show support and to raise awareness to the issue. To date over 230,000 people used the application to add green overlay/ribbon to their avatar, which means that most of Twitter users (if not all of them) have noticed it.”

Impact: I have mixed feelings about how quickly the fad of green avatars spread. It can be interpreted as honorable how fast Twitter became a seemingly outraged activist community or disheartening that our culture is happy to click a link to change their picture but nothing more. How can we modify what is expected of would-be online activists to engage them in making a concrete difference?

Tags: Iran, twitter activism
Posted in Microblogging, Mid-East & N. Africa, Mobile Phones, Skepticism, Tactics | 18 Comments »

Action of “Omission” to Protest Chinese Censorship

Written by Mary Joyce on June 25, 2009 – 3:45 pm -

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

Tags: censorship, china, Green Dam, twitter activism
Posted in Action Alerts, Asia | 1 Comment »

What Neda Means: Citizen Media Frames the Protests

Written by Mary Joyce on June 24, 2009 – 12:39 am -

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.

Tags: facebook activism, Iran, Neda Agha Soltan, twitter activism, youtube
Posted in Mid-East & N. Africa, Video | 2 Comments »

Iranian Elections, Information Sharing and Twitter

Written by Kate Brodock on June 19, 2009 – 2:46 pm -

Earlier this week, amidst travel and trying really hard to work, I followed the events of what was happening in Iran post-election.  I followed it all on Twitter.

There are many comments I could make on the events, but I wanted to highlight something that will be important for how information and participation happens in the months and years to come.

The fact is, we are all becoming a larger part of the information dissemination mechanisms that were once reserved for formal media channels.  DigiActive has reported many instances of citizen journalism, on-the-ground reporting and information gathering, but now we’re talking about the addition of a process of broader dissemination.

We’re “regular” people, we have the information coming to us, and it’s our choice to pass it on or not.  The reason I  read hardly a single newspaper article on the topic all day was because I was getting my information handed to me by people from Boston, Europe, Iran… everywhere.  Regular people.  I got all the relevant links I needed from those 140-character posts.

The fact is, we are all now part of the information dissemination mechanism now.  When I reported on the Moldovan protests in April, I noted that part of the process that we were seeing was not necessarily just that the protesters were using social media tools to get their message out, but that the resulting international furvor that erupted was fueled by other people who were not on the ground.  Not even in the country.

This time around, we saw this same process magnified immensely.  A message from Mousavi highlights how important this process was not only in what was said – One Person = One Broadcaster – but also in the the resulting relay-like speed that the message reached the world.

Mousavi recognized the the power of this information stream.  Clay Shirky alluded to it in his Q&A with TED on the topic, and colleague Gaurav Mishra highlighted it in his analysis of the events as well.

No one was told to do anything with the information coming out of Iran, or had any explicit instructions to do so.  The messages could have remained dead in the water.  But we were all engaged by what was happening, we were interacting with other people through discussion, and we genuinely wanted to participate by adding to the conversation, spreading the information and learning more about the situation.

The fact that people had real-time, important information in their hands that they could “touch and feel,” and their ability to actively join in the conversation and the spread of vital information made momentary journalists out of us all.  And it will continue to do so more and more in the future.

Tags: citizen journalism, digital media, elections, Iran, Moldova, twitter activism
Posted in Events | 4 Comments »

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

Written by Mary Joyce on June 15, 2009 – 6:24 pm -

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 »

Tags: elections, facebook activism, Iran, twitter activism, where is my vote
Posted in Campaigns, Mid-East & N. Africa, Social Networks | 16 Comments »

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

Written by Mary Joyce on June 10, 2009 – 1:35 am -

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

Tags: no2conass, philippines, twitter activism
Posted in Action Alerts, Asia, Mobile Phones | No Comments »

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

Written by Nina on May 17, 2009 – 2:07 pm -

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 »

Tags: Cambodia, Evolve, facebook activism, GeoChat, InSTEDD, Lao PDR, Mekong Basin, Mekong Basin Disease Surveillance Network, Mekong Collaboration Program, Mesh4X, RSS feeds, Thailand, twitter activism
Posted in Asia, Campaigns, Microblogging, Mobile Phones, Orgs & People | 1 Comment »

NYU Student Protests: A Digital Occupation

Written by Arielle on May 15, 2009 – 4:03 pm -

 

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.

Tags: blogging, NYU, NYULocal, Student protest, TBNYU, twitter activism, WSN
Posted in Americas, Campaigns, Tactics | No Comments »