What happened to the spread of Kony 2012?

Two weeks ago, the Kony 2012 campaign became a viral sensation around the globe, really capitalising on what the video itself describes as a unique moment in human history, through galvanising its audience to share the short film through Facebook and Twitter.

Overnight, news feeds became awash with a youth army ready to take up virtual arms against a Ugandan war lord that the overwhelming majority had never heard of but 24 hours previous.

Posters for the campaign:
http://yinnyang.co.uk/2012/03/kony-2012/kony-2012/

With the exponential growth in online activism that followed, all aspects of Joseph Kony, the LRA, Uganda and Invisible Children were suddenly subjects of furious debate between the social networking community; questions of the charity’s integrity came to light, alongside other information that made the bewitching film appear all too simplistic and ensnaring.

I was surprised, when raising the subject with my parents, to find that neither of them had the faintest inclination of the events in motion. Considering this point, I quickly realised that the movement had generated little interest beyond the online domain. Newspapers and news channels proffered minimal to non-existent coverage of the campaign in question. Chat programmes and daytime television barely brushed upon the issue.

Then it occurred to me that the unusual beauty of the Kony campaign was that it had incited to action young people, young adults, just as Joseph Kony himself has plucked children from their homes.

Awakening these youths to new ideas, the movement seemingly managed to take a hold of the logic of the 13-25 age population of Facebook. These users account for approximately half of all subscribers to the service and are the generation that effortlessly pivot and gravitate around ideas through peer sharing.

Revolutions worldwide this past year have been driven by young, incensed persons ready to create change; from Egypt, to Syria, from protests against University tuition fees, to London riots.

Within the first couple of minutes of the video, director Jason Russell describes this particular campaign as an ‘experiment’. Over and above the sheer number of ‘friends’ who had shared the video, this single statement made me wary of the film’s intentions. Instead of watching the following thirty minutes of footage with disbelief, I held this phrase in mind and scrutinised the methods by which the video moves to incite the emotions and lay the foundations for a mass, united uprising.

Essentially, all those who share the video prove that the correct application of social media can provide the leverage and manipulation required to garner the support of an entire cross-section of society.

However, the recent riots and violent unrest around the globe are the product of anger provoked by those whose voices that have gone unheard. The under-25 group remain largely outside of Western democracy decisions. They are not high ranking figures, not barristers, bankers, or law-makers at Westminster. For that reason, the video itself targets these types of influential peoples.

 

Yet, this creates a discord and disjunction between practice and plight. Whilst the objective to overthrow a fierce dictator (with numerous crimes against humanity to his name) is a fine goal, the dependence on the co-operation of these different groups is flawed.

The film itself highlights the difficulties in acquiring support of the American government and the cover the night campaign is further testament to the continued troubles of retaining that backing. Without the constant aid from these people in power, there can be no dedicated search for Kony.

Yet, many youngsters sharing the video appeared oblivious to this fact. They spread the film in order to feel as though they had contributed to the downfall of a dictator, without much physical campaign following.

Writing a fortnight after the initial onslaught of Kony challengers, it is difficult to see what this first stage of the campaign has achieved outside of the blogosphere of social websites. Already, the presence of the Kony 2012 activism is fading just as dramatically as it inundated accounts at the start of March.

Youngsters, eager but inexperienced in politics, feel that their work in the process has been achieved. The elder enfranchised, still counting for 50% of Facebook users and a far higher percentage of voters, remain oblivious to the fighting efforts of their online compatriots.

Supporters of Invisible Children, largely youngsters,
sleeping outside in Portland in 2006 to symbolise the
situation of children in Uganda, who gather in large groups
at night to avoid the Lord's Resistance Army.

Jon Madrigal:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr_love/137744885/

Certainly, the ‘Cover the Night’ movement on 20^th April could reverse this decline, and make Kony a public figure, but it depends on the continued support of a virtual world of campaigners. After all, Invisible Children Inc has released a campaign video on similar topical issues for almost a decade now and this is the first time that any of their films has received widespread recognition. Simply hitting the ‘share’ or ‘retweet’ buttons has rocketed the programme to ‘en vogue’ status amongst young adults, but this youth demographic continues to be one of the most volatile and shifting segments of society. Unless this group of people remain behind the Kony ideal, the whole project will collapse as a result of teenage passivity and apathy. Without spreading the idea to elder generations, there is serious threat of the cause falling-in on itself through lack of diverse support.

Twitter stands as the possible frontier by which to make or break the project. The age range with the most active users is the 35-44 group, with 25-34 year olds not too far behind. Together, these users make up 55% of the Twitter population. Whilst this certainly promotes Twitter as the domain to reach respectable, middle-class people, the most frequent users still fall in the under 24 age range.

Even with the support of some elder public figures, the active Kony demographic remains predominantly under the age of 25. Cover the Night may act to sway other social groups; however, it is likely that whilst the posters will generate some interest and attention, the middle-class workers with money may view the campaign as ‘fly-posting’, and look at the mass posters as graffiti, as defacing their town and city. With busy lives, jobs and commitments, it may take much stronger, persistent action to convince and coerce the over 25s into support. Struggling to find a way to get these people involved is a crucial stumbling block.

“Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come” opens the short film, but the idea of Kony, the experiment of Kony, already appears to have had its time. Whilst the video has received over 80 million hits globally at the time of writing, its Youtube statistics stand to reiterate that it is ‘most popular with 13-24 year olds’. In the past week, viewing of the video has comparatively ground to a halt.

The campaign is experimental because, whilst it begins as a viral, it needs to continue to manifest itself to generate a presence in the real world. The use of social media to incite revolution is not experimental so much as a proven tool for change, following Egyptian action last year. The real experiment is keeping these Western youngsters, who have never had to fight for democracy, interested and involved.

On 21^st April, still a month away, the experiment will either ultimately fail or succeed in making Kony famous by culminating in ‘Cover the Night’. However, with four weeks for support to dwindle, it is concerning that “an idea whose time has come” is being put on hold for so long.

After all, you cannot overthrow a Ugandan dictator by simply sharing a video…

Addicted to Clubs!

Dirty, stinking, overhyped clubs packed with students are the current trend amongst youngsters just having left home for the first time. However, what draws them to these small boxes where they are shepherded from bar to bar and squashed and beat against the backs of other equally miserable young adults? Could it be the overwhelming sweat? The deafening and monotonously similar beat to every song? The deal breaker of cheap alcohol on an incomprehensible scale? Together, this hellish mix are a catalyst to ephemeral transcendence. Clubs are a new breed of escapist addiction.

In the brief four hours spent partying, there is an intermittent life where the youth can forget the chronic illnesses of the world they are about to inherit.

Nowhere is this more evident than the front pages of newspapers: where the woes of X Factor contestants are splashed across the cover, whilst stories of worth and importance are to be found below page 6.

Sensationalisation of newspaper content is to the detriment of society. Once the reserve of learned persons, and later a symbol of the truths of the day, the papers are now harbingers of doom in their own right. 

Content invariably swings from Z list celebrities of Big Brother or pre-millennium dwindling fame, to the morbid and insipid reporting of global events.

Not that the focus on worldwide news is a symbol of the right direction for these papers: far too often, the stories are run without checking of fact, with rumour thrown in for good measure and with no proffer of future activity. Doom and gloom personified.

Unfortunately, the addiction to this type of throwaway news is a reflection of deeper issues with society and these trends themselves can be traced in the prioritising of paper print. Primarily, we are bombarded with the live problems of stars that may appear relevant to our miserable lives: yet since their lavish or outlandish behaviours are something only quantifiable in their own spectrums, we are left to wonder in bewilderment at how far these fame hungry few abuse their limelight and depict the moral bankruptcy of a generation.

Subsequent items will be of little value: a local event here, a trivial piece on a local person there.

Where moments of true journalism shine are in their ability to relate the stories to the modern day life of many: the daily grind, how such a feature impacts our lives, how these events could develop.

Yet, more often, reporters shy away from such a style of reporting in case any person should take offence at any inferences made in composition. Instead, it is substituted for rather more an impersonal approach, wherein events are recalled in stagnant fashion so as to appear factual, but in reality tell us little of the surrounding circumstances and reactions.

However, this epitomises a society who are more concerned about their technologies than their society; we want the details in as short a fashion as possible, without any care for the deeper underlying issues. When we continue to ignore the mounting tensions in various elements of the world, they always, inevitably, return to bite. Example in point, the recent London riots.

How does a heat wave merit front page news?

But this lifestyle is addictive: we can tune out from the main and plug into our own microcosm without having to suffer the incredulities and consequences of other people.

Nightclubs are a cry from youngsters to avoid this world. They come together to celebrate in music and alcohol, but never engage in meaningful conversation in such an establishment. In attempts to escape the very social dynamic and social wrongs that characterise their times, these teenagers only serve to emphasise how together we are in our individuality and ignorance.

Because surrounded by the flashing lights and the pumping music, it is easy to forget the details of deaths in Africa and corrupt leaders in the Middle east; the few moments in the club are your own moments of spotlight in the public eye, on the dancefloor.

"We Lost Our Way": A Media Blame Game

Current climates suggest that it would be a difficult time to join my desired profession. Already being a domain of decline since the advent of internet and the more recent economic recession, the industry has taken a huge blow of late that shows no relent. The continuing saga of the phone hacking scandal, subsequent closure of ‘The News of the World’ (one of Britain’s most widely distributed and read papers) as well as the forced withdrawal of the Murdoch BskyB takeover plans leaves a rather precarious sphere, where press is continually scrutinised for more proof of these events.

“Simply, we lost our way” read the final editorial statement from News of the World, whose last edition circulated on 10 July 2011. The sentiment is deeply interesting: whilst the actions of the paper were undoubtedly grossly misjudged in their event, the conception of such tactics is grounded in a much more logical problem: worldwide newspaper readership is declining in favour of other mediums. Simply, the paper lost its way amongst a conglomerate of internet sites affording more up-to-date stories.

Moreover, there has been established a universal scandal dichotomy. Public interest is skewed so as the vast majority want to read cutting edge stories: scandals, new information, no matter whose privacy is taken away. Originally a specialist niche of the gossip column, tabloid news now has to cater for a population who want to have hidden secrets uncovered; the resultant number of injured parties reads like a dictionary of showbiz. Now add NotW to the collateral damage, for in its mission to bring the public an ever more reliable service, it ventured to extremes that the readership secretly covets, yet was stung by the social etiquette by which we are openly governed.

As such, the public, as well as those involved at News of the World, lost their way and are equally as culpable in the continued and relentless invasion of privacy which papers are expected to carry out.

Consequently, the media domain is under a watchful eye that is all too reminiscent of a certain George Orwell novel (ironically the aforementioned author was quoted in the final edition of the News of the World). The arrests of several members of the staff team are merely scapegoat routines: in order for a prolonged change, there need be a revolution in our consumption of the news. Whilst it is all too tempting to lay full blame on figures such as former editor in chief Rebekah Brooks, a fully functioning news room works on an independent and free flowing nature: in order to achieve maximum output, not every journalist can (or should be expected to) pitch, write and have each idea checked for concrete backup. The sphere of reported news would slow to a pace not considered acceptable since the railroad revolution. 

Extended ripples have meant the withdrawal of the BskyB bid. Indeed, the event is exemplary of how fragile any industry is to a cynical nation without faith in a product. A takeover that was once considered a fundamental step in the unity of Murdoch’s media empire is now the bane of social contempt. Yet, for all the furore, the planned purchase of the group was quite the separate entity and completely unrelated to the media scandal. Ergo, public demands for scandal comes full circle, so crippling an industry that functions based on their personal whims.

However, there remain serious lessons to be learnt. The hacking and various attacks, slanders and invasions should not have been allowed to continue for such an extended period. Individual journalists should be using legitimate and trustworthy sources and methods. This is both a business of freedom of information and data protection as is conversely necessary. From the ashes of a floundering news system, may a new generation of considerate publications take care as to both print and approach. Integrity of the media and the public interest are both balanced on this sensitive issue. 

An issued statement of apology, signed by Murdoch himself, tells that “a free and open press need be a positive force in society. We need to live up to this.” However, the burden is not one of the press alone. To play a positive role, the demands of the consumer need be socially acceptable on all levels.

Don’t Believe The Hype.

Free speech in Western democracies is a given to which we all adhere: foreign dictatorships send shudders down our spines. Looking out towards these places with limits on what it is permissible to vocalise, many question how those in power are able to defend their stance and how those who are forced into these submissive positions are able to live under such limitations. Gaging how far a country’s freedom of speech is impoverished is not a difficult task: often, one only has to look towards the medias that lie within. Normally, they will be heavily state controlled and censored by government and law. Frequently, they will portray positive images of the most controversial decisions and leaders. 

Media influence however has deemed it a reflex to assume that our system of freedom is instantly superior to that of those elsewhere. There are obvious reasons for this stance. We need only consider China’s banning any reference to or any shows and literatures pertaining to time travel in May as a case of the over-zealous manner in which some prohibitions are applied. Can we imagine their version of Doctor Who? On a more serious note however, the Chinese government labelled this a bid to increase national identity and pride: “Time travel shows are irresponsible in not respecting history” it was announced and the officials continued to describe time travelling shows as “frivolous” and a way by which “to re-write history”. Fair enough, the Chinese ministers wish to create an air of solidarity in what China has achieved in the past half a century, becoming the quickest emerging superpower, but surely more of this present can be appreciated if other realities were speculated at the same time? Just a thought.

Last year, North Korea banned World Cup games from live screening. Instead, matches where the national team won were only broadcast after the event itself. In the case of defeat, past winning scores were shown in some way to negate the loss in the current competition. The aim was to keep moral high. Such extravagance in control however is tantamount to abuse and insulting populus’ intelligence. The country’s residents are going to notice that the World Cup trophy didn’t arrive in Korea… even if the government can conceal it’s Spanish destination.

Of course, these governments promote their version of events as helpful in their controlling the country: indeed, China’s seemingly exponential growth in the past few decades now has it a country amongst the top traders, it boasts the first fully functioning maglev, the largest metro system in the world, has hosted the Olympics and is predicted to soon be putting out more academic research than the USA (academia now being a new measure of world power). Therefore maybe there is something to be said for the tightly run state: it seems to have fostered in all the people a dedication to a way of life that brings greater benefits if they are more in routine. Disturbingly, it appears on the surface as a rehash of the American Dream. 

Elsewhere, the power of the media is something to be feared. When free speech developed in Rwanda for example through the use of the radio, RTLM was amongst the first stations to be independent of the government. Upon its launch, it was proclaimed that:

We have a radio here, even a peasant who wants to say something can come, and we will give him the floor. Then, other peasants will be able to hear what peasants think. Personally, I think what complicates things is that ordinary citizens have no forum where they can speak. Normally, for ordinary citizens to speak, they speak through elections and elections are impossible. So, in fact, ordinary citizens have been deprived of a say but RTLM is there, we will give them the floor.

(Gaspard Gahigi, RTLM, 19 March 1994)

For those less illuminated with the facts, the radio station then went on in the following months to incite genocide that saw the deaths of almost 1 million Tutsis. The station broadcast names and locations of ‘traitors’, described those to be killed as subhuman and the action of murder as nothing but work. The extent of the damage is still visible today: once the months of bloodshed were over, government controlled radio was all that was permitted: all media remains heavily monitored today lest such unspeakable horrors should be repeated. And what was the world doing whilst these tragedies unfolded? The Western media was more concerned with the death of Kurt Cobain and the OJ Simpson case. Two men overshadowed a nation.

Priority of reporting then comes into question. Through our own negligence, we allow medias to dictate our perceptions of the world and what happens. No area should be left unbroached. Recently, this concern has grown closer to home. Whilst I am concerned for family well-being, the late super-injunction scandal brings entire reams of freedom of speech and freedom of the press into question. If we are unable to pass comment on these smaller matters, how soon before there are limits in place on other things of grand importance? To ban any comment is to undermine the very foundations of the current system of democracy held in the Western hemisphere. Whilst extending the principle to more serious matters could appear somewhat dramatic and far-fetched, conceding a small amount of rights has often led to great swathes of rights being attacked.

Therefore, we need consider the role of government and its interrelation with the media in a 21^st century world. No doubt, technology has come to consume and dominate entire swaths of the planet with its ease of use and rapid transit of information. However in its misuse, there can be death, restraint and feeding ego of power heads of state. Moreover, a more broad perspective need be considered: restrictions elsewhere have contributed to shaping China and protecting Rwandans. Free speech in Western democracies is a given to which we all adhere: free speech in Western democracies is under attack, but is it advantageous?