This discussion thread focuses primarily on the use of more mainstream social networking tools, such as: Facebook and Twitter. How do activists take and use these tools in ways that cut through the clutter to reach new audiences with their messages? Can we find ways to flip the tools and use them in new and unique ways that benefit those working in human rights beyond raising awareness -- in areas such as on-the-ground organizing, self-care, creative fundraising, monitoring and evaluation, safety, etc. Below are a few questions to frame the discussion and provide a starting point for discussion.
- What is the role of social networking in human rights advocacy?
- How do organizations get their network to move beyond “clicktivism”? How do you engage social audiences to take action and maintain involvement in meaningful ways?
- How are social networking tools currently being used in human rights advocacy in unique or innovative ways?
- Case studies/stories of success using traditional social networking tools in unique ways. Wht have you done or have seen being done that caught your attention?
I witnessed the action as a supportive outsider; one of the things that struck me was the amount of organizing that happened on Facebook. Family, friends and activists created Facebook groups for each of the slain men and invited many community members to those groups, raising cruicial awarness across many communities in San Francisco. Early and sustained Facebook organizing set the stage for large-scale activist participation in key events before, during and after the hunger strike. Facebook organizing allowed groups with no official affiliation to quickly rally together.
Art also played a key role in the online activism.
Here are some key news stories and links to the Facebook groups involved in the action:
"How killings, racist texts, and a 66-year-old grandmother took down San Francisco’s police chief"
"Bay Area artist’s portraits serve as backdrop to Black Lives Matter movement"
LOVE & JUSTICE 4 MARIO WOODS, 26, killed by SF Bayview Police, 12-2-15
JUSTICE 4 Luis Demetrio Gongora Pat, killed by SFPD 4-7-16
Adriel - Thank you for sharing this great example.
I was particularly struck by the article "How killings, racist texts, and a 66-year-old grandmother took down San Francisco’s police chief" which highlighted the connection between on-the-ground tactical actions and their use of social media to amplify of those actions to achieve at least one of their desired demands - resignation of the police chief.
The on-the-ground tactical actions that provided information on key
Can you share more about how they were able to leverage the social media to mobilize the community?
Nancy, this is really one for the history books, and I hope some students will consider deep analysis of the tactics used here. The struggle is very much ongoing, too. What I noted was extensive use of Facebook - the strikers and their supporters would post on their own profiles and, more importantly, I think, in supportive groups, updates and specific calls to action with time and place for events. They also consistently used the #frisco5 hashtag on Twitter. Facebook posts would include needs (bring water, other supplies) and they also used video such as a short clip of a standoff with the mayor when he tried to upstage a march on City Hall by showing up unannounced the day before with an offer to talk. The mayor literally used a photo of himself and two aides facing off with five empty chairs to illustrate that the strikers refused to meet - however, their videos were widely distributed as well. The day before the chief resigned, the mainstream media floated an anonymous poll indicated he had strong support - so this really was a case where activists had to use their own social media channels to counter establishment accounts in the press.
"Antipolice activists won’t take ‘yes’ for an answer"
Adriel,
I agree - I think this is a really great campaign. I found the article that you linked to especially interesting because it "accused" those involved of not being able to accept victory. The resignation of the police chief was the significant and visible victory being sought. I was impressed that the hunger strikers were demanding implementation. Other significant demands have been initially discussed but the key is they have not been implemented. In addition, policy and structure changes will need to be monitored for actual implementation.
How will the public know what actually becomes policy as the Police Officers Association is against this, and how will these reforms be monitored?
A ballot initiative will require significant organizing, it can be a good way to continue to mobilize the community but it requires a different kind of sustainability to make this a reality.
The dismissal of those they found involved was a good initial step, however, a policy for immediate dismissal of any future similar behavior remains to be implemented and will need to be monitored.
The hunger strikers and the community mobilization in support of them were able to show their collective force - their demand and implementation of the police chief's resignatation - lays the foundation for accountability in these other areas as well.
Your comment on the use of social media to counter establishment press was also very telling and worth noting for advocates as they launch their human rights advocacy campaigns, "The day before the chief resigned, the mainstream media floated an anonymous poll indicated he had strong support - so this really was a case where activists had to use their own social media channels to counter establishment accounts in the press."
This got me thinking about how organizations are expanding their media engagement to use social media to GAIN access to establishment media. Do people have some good examples? And as you were noting, additional examples where social media is playing a critical role in countering establishment media reporting that is not a reflection of the real situations in local communities?
@Adriel @Nancy
I think this idea of social media as a tool for promoting counternarratives is critically important. Many of the most powerful social media moments of the last few years (#BlackLivesMatter, #SayHerName, #IllRideWithYou, #IfTheyGunnedMeDown, #OscarsSoWhite, etc.) have taken off because they gave voice to a population or perspective that wasn't getting play in the mainstream media.
This is something that a lot of organizations fundamentally misunderstand about the difference between social media and traditional broadcast media. The NYTimes or 60 Minutes will do a piece on your organization's work and issues if they are topical, factual etc., but you can only get ordinary people to share your message in large numbers on social if they feel that your message is underrepresented and that their help is needed for it to get heard.
I don't see a lot of organizations doing this well. All the hastags I mentioned above were grassroots movements--not a campaign of an established advocacy group. Do you think there are fundamental barriers to organizations leveraging the counternarrative phenomenon to build movements?
--Julien
A thought-provoking campaign I recently came across was put together for the Dutch ALS Foundation by an agency called Publicis. You can see the video below that describes the campaign. What they did was work with individuals with ALS 3 years before the campign launch to record stories and messages. Upon the individuals death, they posted the messages to the deceased individuals social media feeds (among other outlets) to raise awareness about the horrific nature of the disease. The foundation saw a sharp rise in donations following the campaign. I thought that this was a dramatic use of social media, that helped to cut through the clutter and grab people's attention.
Hey folks,
Lots has been written about the role of Twitter in the Arab Spring. By reaching extensive saturation, platforms like Twitter have allowed ordinary people to connect and build power through information sharing. But many of these platforms have spotty privacy records (Facebook moreso than Twitter) and have been used at times by authoritarian regimes to identify and crack down on dissidents.
In an ideal world, alternatives with stronger privacy safeguards could be created (see the thread about Telegram as an alternative to WhatsApp), but I wonder if that's actually possible. For example, Twitter could serve as a go-to information source for what was going on on the ground during the 2011 Egyptian Revolution because there were enough people using the platform that there was usually someone present during an arrest, beating, etc. to capture and relay it even when professional reporters were absent--could a privacy-oriented alternative garner the necessary adoption to hold this power?
To the point--are we stuck with having to use the most popular platforms, even when they're problematic from a human rights standpoint?
Great question, Julien:
The way I think about this is that there is (frequently) a lot of heat around, and attention paid to, the issues we're working on in corportate online platforms like Facebook and Twitter. This means there is an opportunity to listen--to pay attention to--a broader issue network speaking about your issue. I believe that organizations and movements have a responsibility to listen deeply, continuously, and broadly to supporters. Find ways to amplify and support those voices. Be stronger together. A total divestment from social media platforms risks ignoring nascent, diffuse, and nontraditional perspectives on your issue.
At the same time as these platforms provide an opportunity to pay attention, we can not own 'land' there. The owners of those social media platforms have chosen to build an apparent commons that increasingly functions as an emotional stripmining operation. The raw, natural material of our emotions (our hunger to be seen, to be recognized, to belong to a family and to a community, to be acknowledged, to interact, to be in the moment, to be aware of the opportunities and dangers around us) is absolutely being refined into commodity products by these social media platforms. Because I believe that emotional stripmining is nor 'nutritious' for incividuals, commnuities or society more broadly, I carefully weigh what I 'build' on this false commons. When you can, think of building temporary mobile structures (campaigns like circus tents, campaigns like houseboats) on social media platforms, rather than building a high rise tower of a campaign whose foundation is inextricably tied to 'land' you can never own.
Finally, because the broader human rights community has a unique perspective on how technology can have negative impacts on, for example, marginalized populations, I believe that we together have a responsibility to continuously voice potential implications of feature changes, terms of use, etc. Sharing the individual stories of negative impacts is one way to do this necessary work.
That's an interesting take, Rachel. While I share your discomfort with this "emotional stripmining", the fact that these companies have monetized such basic impulses is exactly why they've been able to saturate the world in just a decade and why they mean millions of people at risk of persecution are just a click away from organizations trying to support them. Don't take that as an endorsement, just noting that it's a double-edged sword.
I also like your framework of focusing on these mainstream platforms as listening tools and would add a couple points:
Rachel,
Thank you for sharing this perspective on these mainstream social media platforms and your comment to carefully what you "build" because they are not stable "structures", and they are "land" you can never own.
A great example of this is the Pink Chaddi campaign (see video). "Chaddi" is a child's name for underwear and also a slang word for right-wing hardlier. The campaign became a response to a violent attack on women in Mangalore, a city in Karnataka state in India by a self-appointed right-wing "moral" police group, the SRS. The SRS was threatening further such violent incidents in Karnataka state. Nisha Susan and some of her friends in India formed a Facebook group, the Consortium of Pub-going, Loose and Forward Women, in 2009 and launched the Pink Chaddi campaign. Nisha writes in this article, "One day, the campaign had 500 members; a week later, it had 30,000. A 75-year-old woman from Delhi sent us panties. A Bollywood lyricist wrote a poem in honour of the rose-coloured chaddi. Amul, India's best-known brand of butter, put up a billboard featuring a pink chaddi. More than 2,000 chaddis arrived at the SRS office." More information about the campaign and impact can be read through this article by Shreya Sanghani. She shares about her own experience of participating in the campaign.
Networking tools like FB and Whatsapp have been credited for the successfull turnout in Bersih rallies organized in Malaysia and globally demanding electoral reforms (covered in https://www.newtactics.org/tactic/using-mass-protests-publicize-issues-a...). Mainstream media is and has always been pro-government, therefore any news that is not favourable had previously no opportunity to be made known and disseminated to the public. Dissemination of news and information through FB and Whatsapp has caused an explosion of activism among the Malaysian public at large.