The use of the Internet for activism has been widely discussed in the past few years. A few years ago, I watched The Constant Gardener, a movie in which the Internet became the primary tool with which the activist characters fought for their rights.

Over the past yearI have been working with the Berkman Center to develop an online learning program entitled, Copyright for Librarians. Among the course’s main objectives, we intended to provide as much information on copyright in order to inform librarians from over fifty different countries on various copyright issues and how it was being dealt with around the world. Among our goals, we aimed to equip librarian activists with the necessary toolswith which to assist their countries in formulating better copyright policies.

So for this purpose, the Internet has been effective: It allows us to raise our voices, to mobilize the masses, and to propel change on a global scale.

It almost seems too easy. However, thinking of the Internet as an inclusive tool, that allows everyone, with absolutely no barriers, to voice their opinions, might be too good to be true.

Not long ago, a blogger named Zhou Shuguang was barred from leaving China, as an innitiative of national security. According to Wikipedia, “Zhou advocates further reform in China and as a result travels around the country documenting cases of injustice” that are uploaded in his blog, and hosted on US’s servers. This would be an example of how the use of Internet can be used, especially by governments, to work in opposition to activists.

What worries me is that as digital natives, we are always shown that the Internet works as a safe and strong tool for people to work as activists. But the Internet is also a massive tool for classifying people around the world, associating us with our digital dossiers. . So to what extent is activism on the Internet a positive thing and when does it start to become a dangerous trap for activists?

At the same time that the Internet opens possibilities for us to be heard, are we really heading a more democratic world in which people have the right to be voiced? Wouldn’t the Internet work the same way as any other mass media devices, as filtering tools controlled by governments?

– andré valle

In the background of the shock and horror of the Mumbai attacks was another story about the rise of citizen journalism over mainstream media. We now have access to an array of tools to not only consume information but disseminate it ourselves. The media in India was criticized for its lackluster coverage of the Mumbai attacks. But are these problems that can be compensated for by citizen journalism?

Twitter was probably the biggest player in this discussion, so far as to merit rumors of the Indian government asking people to stop tweeting potentially sensitive information (Times Online). It seems like these rumors, despite having made it into the mainstream media, are probably unsubstantiated. The fact that the rumors were started on Twitter, got picked up by the mainstream media, and then debunked on a blog is an interesting feedback loop that illuminates how mainstream media and citizen journalism can interact with each other.

What made Twitter so prominent was its ability to immediately disseminate information, live and from-the-ground. And customized streams based on hash tags (#mumbai) or location (near:Mumbai) made it easy to find the information. Confused of Calcutta has an excellent post rounding up some of the best articles on Twitter and the Mumbai attacks. There’s also an interesting discussion that sprang up in the comments. Mayank Dhingra writes:

While following the #mumbai I realized that how big an echo chamber had it become, every third-forth update was a copy of a previous one(Noise). Similarly there were lots of rumors of sorts. Its particularly difficult to filter out the real and important news in participatory media and as some suggested its time we have an ethics guide for “citizen journalism”.

Joanne McNeil at Tomorrow Museum expresses a similar sentiment and suggests that mainstream media deserves more credit:

Like most of you with access to a television/computer Wednesday afternoon, I was glued to the news. But soon, #Mumbai was crowded with far too cut+pastes to be of much relevance (unless one was searching by location.) It’s like how everyone will join a Facebook group for a good cause — it takes 5 seconds to “retweet” breaking news. Then, there was the bizarre back and forth over whether the Indian government was asking for people to stop tweeting “sensitive information.” If anything impressed me that night, it was the network evening news, who appeared to be the first to put it all in context.

Another thing that is striking is the immediacy but overwhelming nature of all this information. As Alexander Wolfe notes in Wolfe’s Den Blog , the #mumbai tweets from the days of the attack are buried into archives hundreds of pages back. The sheer volume of information makes it, at this point, unsearchable to everyone except the most patient of researchers.

All this focus on Twitter in the role of citizen journalism obscures the fact that Twitter isn’t actually built as a breaking news source. As a listening tool, it’s almost the perfect tool for surveying the opinions of a many people at once, but this aggregation 140 character tweets has its limits. It can’t put into context all of the complex issues surrounding a terrorist attack of this nature. (Though to be fair, confusion was generally the rule for everyone including the mainstream media.) Dina Mehta’s from-the-ground commentary on Mumbai attacks hits the nail on the head on why Twitter was so important for this event, though not necessarily for its ability to disseminate information.

If we want to look toward great examples of citizen journalism, how about this Google Maps mash-up of locations attacked, populated with photostreams and the latest news updates. This Wired blog post also points toward the constantly updated Wikipedia page and Vinu’s Flickr photostream. Global Voices special coverage page is also a fantastic resource for perspectives on major global events from around the world. So citizen journalism does play a vital role in the future of news and Digital Natives themselves will certainly have a role to play.

-Sarah Zhang

As my last assignment for a class on the Brazilian Policies of Education, I worked on a project with five other colleagues which sought to investigate how Brazil’s Internet and technology policies were being applied in real life.

As our research method, each of us spent 20 hours inside schools serving different social classes. These included: three public schools, an elite private school, and a school for the deaf. Through our conversations with students, professors, and technologists, we observed how well equipped these schools were, which in turn helped us to better understand the extent to which kids from differing social classes had access to digital technologies. Our finding were very interesting. Before starting to work on the study, we hypothesized that relative to private schools, public schools would lack basic technology equipment. However, we we were proven wrong. Although the private schools’ equipment was of a better quality and more up to date, all the schools had technology resources to work with, from computers to the Internet.

Another interesting finding was that although schools generally had the same equipement, it was the lack of trained personnel which created a participation gap between students. While private schools had well-staffed technology centers with trained professionals, the public schools had their computers locked in rooms, whcih neither students nor professors could access, because they did not know how to use them.

Given our findings, I strongly believe that workshops must be implemented to train educators not only on how to use technology, but how to teach it to their students. I have also begun to think more seriously about online learning, especially here in Brazil where there is a large participation gap between classes. Although I hail my university’s efforts to invite more students by alotting 6,000 spots by creating Distance Learning, how can we implement this new program (Online Learning) when the digital divide is still just a pervasive problem? What are some efficient methods for tackling the technology participation gap in schools?

– andré valle

This week, we are delighted to publish a guest post from Gaby David, a PhD candidate from the Lhivic (Laboratory for Contemporary Visual History) at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales in Paris. — Diana Kimball, DN Intern

Barack Obama’s presidential victory is captivating. Not only because of his personal charm, but also because of the force of hope he inspires. Being the first black president will definitely place him and his family in a special and touching place in history.

Let’s take a look at the two photographs. The first photo is from the Nov 1960 elections, when JFK was elected president. In the second one we see the democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama and his family, on election night in Chicago, on November 4, 2008 (David Katz/Obama for America). Between the photos there are 48 years, the distance between president #35 and president #44. Differences are evident: black and white versus color film, family presence, the absence of children from one and the centrality of children to the other; the light of day versus the light of lamps.

However, in both photographs we imagine the out-of-frame object: the television! Moving images and screens have always held a hypnotic fascination…but, one of the biggest differences is that now we can see the television, and therefore know what the photographed people, in this case Obama, his family and close circle were watching at the moment the photographs were taken.

(Worth noting: in the second photograph, both Obama and the person standing are holding their cellphones.)

Each campaign has its particularities: JFK’s in 1960, Barack Obama’s in 2008. But out of all those particularities, one stands apart: the role the Internet played in this latest election. Barack Obama not only had and still has his website, both in English and Spanish, and his own YouTube channel, but also his own Facebook group and Flickr photo stream, where we can even discover with which camera these pictures were shot. The Obama presence was also on Myspace, Digg, Twitter, Eventful, LinkedIn, BlackPlanet, Faithbase, Eons, Glee, MiGente, MyBatanga, and AsianAve. To take just one example, by 11/24/08 the “Yes We Can” YouTube video had already been viewed 2,106,176 times. These various social networking and media sites served as proof of authenticity and transparency for anyone willing to connect with his campaign.

Of course, the established media channels (CNN, Fox, newspapers, etc.) did their own pertinent press coverage. But most of all, it was personal blogs and sites which contributed to this enormous flow of daily information that kept us glued to an interactive net.

Analyzing the Election Through Camphone-Video Broadcasts

Since my research at the Lhivic Lab at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales—the only Visual Studies department in Paris, and one of the best in Europe—focuses on the place of camphones in daily lives, I wanted to investigate the role that camphones played in individual voting experiences and how somebody like me, physically far from the States could follow the Election Day through the web and through “normal” people. It’s worth then looking at a few examples.

On Qik, some of the uploaded videos posted live, so that I—along with any other interested party—could watch big things happen live, and on the “small scale” intimated by the camphone.

Being able to share these anonymous people’s moments, and their feelings towards such an important day, has been both emotional and strange.

http://qik.com/video/521922

Two friends are driving in the rainy Election Day. The driver, Rhett, tells his mate and the blogosphere about his voting experience. Why had he decided to go for early voting? What happened with his son? He tells us about how he was explaining to his boy about the process of democracy and privacy. Then both, Rhett and his friend, discuss how they are going to watch or follow “the event.” His friend says he is going to watch the election results on Twitter: ‘cause “opinions are in real time!” Rhett replies: “well, not watching it, you are just seeing the feed come in…”

(Actually, this is intriguing: do we read or do we watch a text that is on a screen?)

They continue talking about how Rhett’s family used to watch the results together; a family tradition, the same as Obama’s photo stream shows. Rhett will also tune in and stay up late with his family and see the interactive map turn red or blue.

From this short video we get to know a lot of information:
– where and when the video was shot,
– what the weather was like,
– how both friends feel about Election Day,
– that one of them is married and has a four and a half year old son, etc.

At last, they are so much into the sharing and the mediation of their experience that they forget to take the highway exit they were supposed to.

Another special topic of this election was the lines. People were really surprised about the quantity of people that showed up to vote. So, many of the videos show and inform us about the waiting time or the “queue stats.” For example, Robert Stevens shows that “now” there is no one.

http://qik.com/video/523265

Roddykat also shares with us this waiting “dead moment” and turns it into an imaging production moment. There is no real intention, he does not master the outcome, but that does not really matter. It is uploaded live, and by 11/24/2008 it had 37 views. It is more than probable that Roddykat himself did not see his own camphone video before uploading it; he was just queuing and sent it to his Qik account.

http://qik.com/video/521961

We see images switch from horizontal to vertical: a particular and specific characteristic seen in many camphone videos. It is as though the linearity of both the shooting and the viewing are no longer that important.

From Roddykat’s Qik page there is a link to his website. From his site a link to his Twitter.
On November 4th at exactly 5:49 A.M. Roddykat’s twitter is a link towards his twitterpic page. Once again, as though we were detectives, we get to know he is almost there in the voting booth.

With something like the feeling of a suspense film, this very special moment of Roddykat’s life is being shared and broadcasted live….

First it’s “the wait for the polls to open”

then it’s “Inside now”

then “View from inside out”

and, at last, “Almost there”:

In the last photograph we see a close up of the back of the head of the person who was standing before him. The queue line disappears into a contrasted white.

At the end, we realize: whether through Twitter or Qik, every method that Roddykat used to publish his in-the-moment experiences was mediated by a camphone.

Some Final Conclusions

As with almost all Qik videos, here the chosen videos are only shot; there is no post-editing. Today, camphones are used not only as voice transmitters but also as tools for sharing images. As O. Daisuke and M. Ito said years ago, “camera phones are changing the definition of what is picture-worthy,” and as Kindberg et al. also say: “A camera phone’s value might not lie in sending images but in using the captured images for other activities.”

http://qik.com/video/526162

References

• Borsch, Steve, “Lessons From Our First “Social Media” President”, Minnesota Innovation in Internet & Web Technology, November 5th, 2008, http://minnov8.com/2008/11/05/social-media-pres/

• Daisuke, Okabe and Ito, Mizuko, “Camera phones changing the definition of picture-worthy”, Japan Media Review, 29th August, 2003, http://www.ojr.org/japan/wireless/1062208524.php

• Kindberg et al, “The Ubiquitous Camera: An In-Depth Study of Camera Phone Use”, Pervasive Computing, 2nd April 2005, http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1056962

• http://www.flickr.com/photos/barackobamadotcom/

• Mclaughlin, Rhett, “untitled”, November 4th, 2008, camphone video, 6:05 minutes, http://qik.com/video/521922
• Stevens, Robert, “#votreport #10009”, November 4th, 2008, camphone video, 17 seconds, http://qik.com/video/523265
• Rodney L, “Election day 09’”, November 4th, 2008, camphone video, 35 seconds, http://qik.com/video/521961
• theuptake, “Exited Obama Supporters in Denver”, November 4th, 2008, camphone video, 31 seconds, http://qik.com/video/526162

*All links were accessed on November 24th, 2008.
* Special thanks to Diana Kimball for proof reading.

…………………

Gaby David, born in Uruguay, is a PhD candidate from the Lhivic (Laboratory for Contemporary Visual History) at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS). At the Lhivic she co-coordinates both the Methodological workshop and the Lhivic’s students’ collective blog.

G. David holds a masters degree in Fine Arts from the University of Paris 8, Saint Denis.
A versatile scholar, her professional experience is both in the fields of arts and languages teaching. With a curious soul, she has already lived in Uruguay, in the United States and in Israel. In Nov. 2002 she moved to Paris and has been living there since.

Her actual field of research is the study of camphone videos—understanding how these images can be at the same time very intimate and publicly shared. Through her research, she is trying to decipher the intriguing part of the camphone: its familiarity. How the role of contemporary camphone visual auto-mediation of our daily lives is increasing, especially on the web. Because, contradictorily, the camphone videos that mirror us show us that familiarity never ceases to amaze us.

Email: championnet4@yahoo.fr
Gaby David on Facebook

Guest-blogger Tyler Goulet explores how social networking sites may be the key to increasing civic engagement among youth

The wonders of the World Wide Web have been talked about for years now. The internet has evolved from a media similar to T.V. (one way interaction) to a media where content producers can interact instantly with the audience. This type of interaction has never been made so easy. In fact, the instant interaction between people hundreds of miles away is making social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook explode in popularity. Anyone who uses the internet can see the benefits of joining social networking sites. The question must be asked. Can social networking sites be used to leverage political power?

More and more people are starting to believe in the power of social networking sites. Some would argue that our most recent President-Elect, Barack Obama, would not have been elected if it hadn’t been for his use of social networking sites.

Using social networking sites to communicate and organize has proven to be very effective in many campaigns. We at the Center for Communication and Civic Engagement (CCCE) are trying find a solution to the downward trend in youth civic engagement. We believe that social networking sites may be the key to defeating this downward trend.

Professor Lance Bennett, the director of the CCCE theorizes that there has been a fundamental generational shift in how today’s youth view civic engagement versus past generations and how they have viewed civic engagement. His paper on this topic can be found here.

In summary, he argues that today’s youth “see [his]/her political activities and commitments in highly personal terms that contribute more to enhancing the quality of personal life, social recognition, self esteem, or friendship relations, than to understanding, support, and government” which is how previous generations have viewed civic engagement (Source p. 6).

What does this mean? Well, it means we need to stop telling the youth what political issues to care about, let them choose what interests them (aka what would enhance the quality of their personal life), and teach them how to become involved. We need to give them, and teach them how to use, the tools to create and implement a plan to solve issues they care about. A little spark of confidence and help in getting the project off the ground would help too.

In order to ensure that they have social recognition from their community and to increase their friendship relations, the project they work on should be local. That would make recognition easy and simple because their impact could be seen easily. If the project they are working on is local than they can include their friends and have them help which would increase their friendship relations. A local project will also show more immediate results than a large scale project. Once a youth has complete a local project and sees positive results their self esteem will increase and they will be more likely to continue down the civically engaged path they have stumbled down so far.

Currently the CCCE is working on a project that will allow the youth in the Puget Sound area of Washington State, which includes Seattle, to do all of the above.

www.PugetSoundOff.org is a social networking site designed to connect teens with similar political passions so that they can easily organize and communicate with each other in order to solve problems they care about in their communities.

The site was recently launched at the beginning of September. We currently have about 500 members. The website is a revolutionary experiment in youth civic engagement. Stay posted for more blog posts about the future of PugetSoundOff.org and how it relates to Digital Natives.

————————————————————————————————–

Tyler is a Junior at the University of Washington, Seattle, where he is currently triple majoring in Communication, Political Science, and Community Environment and Planning. He has been a Research Assistant for the CCCE for nearly a year. For more information on Tyler Goulet check out www.tylergoulet.com.

My friends will be writers. They will be scholars and journalists and novelists, and they will write about what is important to them; the places they grew up.

We grew up on the internet.

I am lucky to live and learn in a city where the internet, and other digital expanses, are taken seriously. The Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard—home to the Digital Natives project—brings together cyberscholars from around the world. The Convergence Culture Consortium at MIT examines the future of entertainment and narrative in a digital world. (Incidentally, C3’s Futures of Entertainment conference is coming up this weekend, and was by far the most illuminating conference I attended in 2007.) These centers have helped to aggregate the critical mass of interest in Cambridge necessary to really start thinking about what the digital age will mean for culture, politics, and society.

But the internet is not bound by geography, and my friends are distant, too. A few weeks ago, I got an email from Gaby David, writing from France. She studies cameraphone videos—the intimacy, and the “auto-mediation of our daily lives,” constructed by the filming and sharing of grainy personal videos. She wrote to me after reading through this, the Digital Natives blog, and ever since I’ve been blown away by the depth of research she and her colleagues in Paris are embarking on. (Their collective blog is here.) Gaby and I are living through the internet. We connected through the internet. The internet is, in many ways, the substrate of our parallel—though distant—lives. But digital life is the substrate of Gaby’s research and art, too. And that’s true of so many people I know.

Christina Xu is writing her thesis about the short history of communication in the digital age. Recently, she posted to her blog a paper she wrote last year about her experience as a teenager on a GameFAQ message board. Christina’s research examines a past so recent, it’s almost present. But that’s the reality of the digital age: it’s so young, and we’re so young. For Digital Natives and those barely older, it will be more than an obvious topic for study; it will be impossible to ignore. The curve of digital innovation, the vanguard of digital innovators, will race forward. For now, Digital Natives may be the first to recognize en masse how much there is to see. How urgent it is to keep up, to try to study the future as it unfolds.

Digital innovators, after all, are hardly just the people constructing that future. They are also the scholars, journalists, and novelists who will have to figure out how to study everything that has happened in the almost-present past, and everything that will happen in the fast-approaching future—a future that is already here.

* * *

For further reading in young scholarship on convergence culture and internet & society, two more pieces from among more than I can count: