This Manifesto is a fluid document, which we have begun to draft and will continue to refine throughout this project, with the participation of many. It is an organic process: all are invited to participate.
______________________________________________
“Never Again.”
These two words have become the most uttered and the least meaningful in a world that still witnesses genocide, crimes against humanity and atrocities. These two words were first said in the context of mass genocide, after the Holocaust in 1948, when the United Nations General Assembly passed the Genocide Convention. And we as a world said we would never let something like that happen again on our watch. We had a set of guidelines, a commitment, a promise.
And yet it happened, over and over again.
Throughout the history of our species, we have created divisions among people, based on region, religion, belief, economic advantage and political expediency. We have devised ways of creating a sense of “otherness” -- of peoples who don’t look like us or believe as we do -- that has made us capable of seeing the “other” as less than human. This has resulted in injustice, inequality, and in the worst cases, in premeditated massacre and ethnic and cultural cleansing.
What can possibly stop this?
The time has come to build a vision for a world without atrocity. Leaders as diverse as The Dalai Lama and Martin Luther King have shown us the need for vision to build a path to lasting peace and progress. But, to date, we don’t have a collective vision for a world free from atrocity. We’ve had conventions, treaties, sanctions, military interventions, technological interventions, social movements, cultural artifacts and discussions. But If we as a global community don’t have a vision of a better future, how will we really create one?
This Manifesto represents the collective thoughts of visionaries around the world on a promise and a path to build a vision for a world without genocide, atrocity or crimes against humanity.
FIRST: There is no “other.” We are all one, irreversibly connected.
SECOND: Human beings are members of a global community, and we are connected. If atrocity can happen to one group, it can happen to any other, because when it happens to one of us, it happens to humanity.
THIRD: We must achieve universal respect for each other. Each generation must find ways to explicitly affirm and reaffirm its commitment -- through ritual, story, technology or practice-- that each individual will accept responsibility for the well-being of each other individual in the world, regardless of who or where that individual is, and that each of the billions of the global masses is accountable to all the others for safety, security and life.
FOURTH: We have always been connected, but technology and communication now connects us directly in ways that reduce the “otherness” of people. Access to the tools of technology and communication must be used to help us grow our collection of stories of being human and will put a human face on that which we used to view as “other.”
FIFTH: There are always patterns and warning signs before an atrocity. Ensuring universal access to tools of technology and communication will help us collectively disseminate and listen to cries for help. We will pay attention to these patterns and signs and keep watching for them, to stem the possibility of devolution into violence.
SIXTH: We acknowledged there will always be hostilities, conflict, and perhaps even war. We must work toward building, supporting and enriching our growing culture of human rights-- through rational means of technology and networks, strong cross-border civil society interventions, institutional and governmental treaties and efforts, but also through cultural means, through humanism, emotion and sentimentalism, reflected in narrative, stories, art and media.
SEVENTH: We aim to create a new “soul” for humanity, one that is infused in a new path away from what we have been to each other and toward one that gives us the means to not inflict undue harm on innocent bystanders. We should aim to foster the creative in humans, and to encourage achievements that add to universal livability, prosperity and satisfaction, and we must invest in universal accountability and mass empathy to do so.
EIGHTH: Our history books and cultural narratives are a succession of leaders who led us to glory in war and subjugation-- and we’ve accepted it as the norm. We need to move away from that, to histories and narrative about the caring and nurturing of families and communities, of culture, art, commerce and design-- those things that bind a community to itself and create communities across borders.
NINTH: We must create and sustain balance among the genders, in roles of power and decision-making, and in true equality and respect. We must protect and integrate as equals those members of society we perceive as weaker, less successful, less worthy or capable, or living slower, simpler or lives connected to ideals that may differ with ours. We must invest in the economic prosperity of all, and acknowledge that any of our economic and political systems that create inequality in turn create instability and vulnerability.
TENTH, AND LAST: We aim to create and grow a global community that exists and works across national and regional borders, one that is at once bottom-up and top-down, that invests in commerce and institutions, as well as grassroots efforts and individual expression, and that embeds in subsequent generations a collective ethical code based on individual speech, shared and heard voice and reformed institutional leadership that moves toward end of atrocities.
[This Manifesto is part of the 3 Generations project, "The End of Atrocity."]
3 Generations is building a global vision on the end of atrocity
Since the Holocaust and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, civil society has promised "never again" -- and still genocide and appalling atrocities have continued into the 21st century. We don't have a collective vision for how to build a world free from atrocity. And if we don't have a vision of a better future can we really create one? We need one. The End of Atrocity is a project from 3 Generations that is beginning to create a collective vision.
To launch, 3 Generations has filmed 14 world luminaries who are on the front lines of advocacy and asked for their individual visions. Visit the site to see the videos and share the work of creating a global collective vision for a world without atrocity.
The release schedule for the videos is:
April 14:
Peter Gabriel: Co-Founder, WITNESS and The Elders
Carolyn Forche: Poet and Professor, Georgetown University
April 15:
Alex Stark: Consultant and Teacher
Rachel Lloyd: Founder and President, GEMS
Scilla Elworthy: Founder, Peace Direct
April 18:
James Smith: Co-Founder and Chief Executive, Aegis Trust
Freddy Mutanguha: Director, Kigali Memorial Centre
April 19:
Stephen Smith: Executive Director, USC Shoah Foundation
Brian Steidle: Frmr Captain, USMC; Consultant, Humanitarian Affairs and International Development
Jerry Fowler: Open Society Policy Foundation
April 20:
Ann Curry: Journalist, NBC
Kathy Freston: Author + Host, Oprah Winfrey Network
April 21:
John Prendergast: Co-Founder, Enough
Luis Moreno Ocampo: Prosecutor, International Criminal Court
April 22:
Manifesto: The beginning of our vision on ending atrocity.
How you can participate:
* Watch the stories at the website.
* Help share these visions: Send them to your friends via email. Share on Facebook. Post to Twitter: "3 Generations is Building a Vision for a World Without Atrocity: http://3generations.org/vision.aspx #genprev"
* Share your own vision: What does a world without atrocity look like to you? Send comments on
* Facebook
* Twitter
* 3 Generations' blog (via “Submit”)
* Your own blog (send a link to info@3generations.org)
[Note: Client relationship.]
To launch, 3 Generations has filmed 14 world luminaries who are on the front lines of advocacy and asked for their individual visions. Visit the site to see the videos and share the work of creating a global collective vision for a world without atrocity.
The release schedule for the videos is:
April 14:
Peter Gabriel: Co-Founder, WITNESS and The Elders
Carolyn Forche: Poet and Professor, Georgetown University
April 15:
Alex Stark: Consultant and Teacher
Rachel Lloyd: Founder and President, GEMS
Scilla Elworthy: Founder, Peace Direct
April 18:
James Smith: Co-Founder and Chief Executive, Aegis Trust
Freddy Mutanguha: Director, Kigali Memorial Centre
April 19:
Stephen Smith: Executive Director, USC Shoah Foundation
Brian Steidle: Frmr Captain, USMC; Consultant, Humanitarian Affairs and International Development
Jerry Fowler: Open Society Policy Foundation
April 20:
Ann Curry: Journalist, NBC
Kathy Freston: Author + Host, Oprah Winfrey Network
April 21:
John Prendergast: Co-Founder, Enough
Luis Moreno Ocampo: Prosecutor, International Criminal Court
April 22:
Manifesto: The beginning of our vision on ending atrocity.
How you can participate:
* Watch the stories at the website.
* Help share these visions: Send them to your friends via email. Share on Facebook. Post to Twitter: "3 Generations is Building a Vision for a World Without Atrocity: http://3generations.org/vision.aspx #genprev"
* Share your own vision: What does a world without atrocity look like to you? Send comments on
* 3 Generations' blog (via “Submit”)
* Your own blog (send a link to info@3generations.org)
[Note: Client relationship.]
"No, no, not the Museum!"
"I felt if the Cairo museum is robbed, Egypt will never be able to get up again." -- Zahi Hawass.
Egypt is in the midst of an uprising against 30 years of repressive rule and a flawed, corrupt governmental system, blocked avenues for political participation, and low employment and wages. This uprising closely follows the Tunisian revolution and is potentially one in a series of revolts and movements in the MENA region-- and perhaps in other regions, as well-- to fight for rights and the freedom to exercise self-determination and build livable societies.
Very soon into the revolt, the Egyptian government took the drastic step of shutting down access to information and communications systems (save landlines). As of this writing, reports are that all access to servers and mobile phones have been shut down, as well. Rather than inhibit protest, this has coincided with and may have added impetus for a swelling of protest, with people gathering en masse in the hundreds and thousands. (The extent to which this is a tech or a social media revolution has been debated by commentators for days-- and will continue to be so. But similarly to what I've written before, for the moment this argument, while worth studying in the abstract, is besides the point.) This fight is playing out on the streets. The protesters are fighting no matter which technologies are available, willing to put themselves at risk to protect what is important to them. And one of the things they took to the streets to protect was their museums.
One of the most enthralling moments happened when images started circulating through AlJazeera and social media of protesters forming a human chain around the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
Archaeologist Zahi Hawass said, "all the inspectors, young archaeologists, and administrators, are calling me from sites and museums all over Egypt to tell me that they will give their life to protect our antiquities. Many young Egyptians are in the streets trying to stop the criminals." The sight of people committing themselves to possible harm in defense of what is on the one hand a series of inanimate objects and on the other, the cultural legacy of millennia, touched the hearts and minds of people across the media universe. As Thomas Campbell, Director of New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art, stated said, "If [the Egyptian Museum] is damaged through looting or fire, it would be a loss to all humankind."
(Standing in solidarity at the Really Free School, London)
The Museum was, however, looted and reports started to trickle out of institutions around the country being robbed and vandalized. Whether these sackings were an expression of rage or seizing an opportunity to grab gold and treasures, they're more likely to be the acts of thieves and looters and not acts of politico-cultural destruction akin to the bombing of the Buddhas of Bamiyan or the siege of the National and University Library of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This didn't make reaction any less swift and poignant.
What makes these reactions particularly noteworthy is how deeply universal and human was the choice to protect the institutions, in the midst of all the unrest and chaos. The cultivation and preservation of cultural heritage--no matter how varied that heritage may be in modes of expression across societies--is a concept most individuals and societies understand (even if it is not always afforded concrete support). Our modes of cultural expression are contoured, dynamic signifiers of our cultural identity. The means by which we--as communities, cities, regions, countries or groups of individuals--express ourselves, and the means by which we distribute, curate and preserve that expression are essential elements of how we forms our societies.
Rebuilding, regeneration and revitalization, then, are all deeply tied to cultural identity. As the revolt wears on and the protests grow stronger in Egypt and potentially around the world, those of us who think about social innovation and transformation should think more deeply and constructively about the role that cultural expression and heritage play in creating societies that are fair, just and stable, and tailor efforts to incorporate cultural identity in concrete ways.
I have to note here that historian and archaeologist Alex Joffe has written a piece castigating Zahi Hawass' quest to repatriate Egyptian antiquities as "misguided or at least poorly timed," and calling into question the intentions of a "vast, impoverished underclass" that "seems less taken with either the nationalist narrative of Egyptian greatness that stretches back to the pharaohs, or the intrinsic value of antiquities for all humanity, and more intrigued by the possibility of gold and other loot." I am regrettably not informed or qualified on the issues surrounding repatriation and preservation to weigh in on this line of the argument, even while acknowledging that these issues must be dealt with if considering cultural heritage as an element of societal rebuilding. In this post, though, I'm drawing a point about the intersection between culture and post-conflict reconstruction and--taking exception to the term "underclass"--Joffe's second point about this demographic does intersect that notion, particularly in terms of the ability of a society to support both the needs and priorities of its community, while broadening a national narrative to include all members regardless of economic status.
Whatever stage of economic development a community is in, culture is an essential building block, just as important to progressive and actualized societies, as technology, governance, finance and the other "hard" elements. Tunisia and Egypt could represent clear points in a global revolution in politics, technology, finance, media, culture. It is too early to predict where we as a global community are headed, but what is clear is that almost nothing in our current systems and structures will remain the same. The hard work of fighting for or ensuring rights and creating livable communities doesn't go away after protests end. Out next challenge as a globe will be to focus and support efforts at community livability around the world, so that no society remains in danger of not recovering. Although the discussions around these efforts have centered around technology, information, social media and open systems that promote transparency and access, we need to look at all of those factors through the filter of culture and identity. And we need to make sure our models incorporate heritage, history, memory on the one side, and contemporary forms of cultural expression on another.
Laser recreations of The Buddhas of Bamiyan, Hiro Yamagata
Egypt is in the midst of an uprising against 30 years of repressive rule and a flawed, corrupt governmental system, blocked avenues for political participation, and low employment and wages. This uprising closely follows the Tunisian revolution and is potentially one in a series of revolts and movements in the MENA region-- and perhaps in other regions, as well-- to fight for rights and the freedom to exercise self-determination and build livable societies.
Very soon into the revolt, the Egyptian government took the drastic step of shutting down access to information and communications systems (save landlines). As of this writing, reports are that all access to servers and mobile phones have been shut down, as well. Rather than inhibit protest, this has coincided with and may have added impetus for a swelling of protest, with people gathering en masse in the hundreds and thousands. (The extent to which this is a tech or a social media revolution has been debated by commentators for days-- and will continue to be so. But similarly to what I've written before, for the moment this argument, while worth studying in the abstract, is besides the point.) This fight is playing out on the streets. The protesters are fighting no matter which technologies are available, willing to put themselves at risk to protect what is important to them. And one of the things they took to the streets to protect was their museums.
One of the most enthralling moments happened when images started circulating through AlJazeera and social media of protesters forming a human chain around the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
Archaeologist Zahi Hawass said, "all the inspectors, young archaeologists, and administrators, are calling me from sites and museums all over Egypt to tell me that they will give their life to protect our antiquities. Many young Egyptians are in the streets trying to stop the criminals." The sight of people committing themselves to possible harm in defense of what is on the one hand a series of inanimate objects and on the other, the cultural legacy of millennia, touched the hearts and minds of people across the media universe. As Thomas Campbell, Director of New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art, stated said, "If [the Egyptian Museum] is damaged through looting or fire, it would be a loss to all humankind."
(Standing in solidarity at the Really Free School, London)The Museum was, however, looted and reports started to trickle out of institutions around the country being robbed and vandalized. Whether these sackings were an expression of rage or seizing an opportunity to grab gold and treasures, they're more likely to be the acts of thieves and looters and not acts of politico-cultural destruction akin to the bombing of the Buddhas of Bamiyan or the siege of the National and University Library of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This didn't make reaction any less swift and poignant.
What makes these reactions particularly noteworthy is how deeply universal and human was the choice to protect the institutions, in the midst of all the unrest and chaos. The cultivation and preservation of cultural heritage--no matter how varied that heritage may be in modes of expression across societies--is a concept most individuals and societies understand (even if it is not always afforded concrete support). Our modes of cultural expression are contoured, dynamic signifiers of our cultural identity. The means by which we--as communities, cities, regions, countries or groups of individuals--express ourselves, and the means by which we distribute, curate and preserve that expression are essential elements of how we forms our societies.
Rebuilding, regeneration and revitalization, then, are all deeply tied to cultural identity. As the revolt wears on and the protests grow stronger in Egypt and potentially around the world, those of us who think about social innovation and transformation should think more deeply and constructively about the role that cultural expression and heritage play in creating societies that are fair, just and stable, and tailor efforts to incorporate cultural identity in concrete ways.
I have to note here that historian and archaeologist Alex Joffe has written a piece castigating Zahi Hawass' quest to repatriate Egyptian antiquities as "misguided or at least poorly timed," and calling into question the intentions of a "vast, impoverished underclass" that "seems less taken with either the nationalist narrative of Egyptian greatness that stretches back to the pharaohs, or the intrinsic value of antiquities for all humanity, and more intrigued by the possibility of gold and other loot." I am regrettably not informed or qualified on the issues surrounding repatriation and preservation to weigh in on this line of the argument, even while acknowledging that these issues must be dealt with if considering cultural heritage as an element of societal rebuilding. In this post, though, I'm drawing a point about the intersection between culture and post-conflict reconstruction and--taking exception to the term "underclass"--Joffe's second point about this demographic does intersect that notion, particularly in terms of the ability of a society to support both the needs and priorities of its community, while broadening a national narrative to include all members regardless of economic status.
Whatever stage of economic development a community is in, culture is an essential building block, just as important to progressive and actualized societies, as technology, governance, finance and the other "hard" elements. Tunisia and Egypt could represent clear points in a global revolution in politics, technology, finance, media, culture. It is too early to predict where we as a global community are headed, but what is clear is that almost nothing in our current systems and structures will remain the same. The hard work of fighting for or ensuring rights and creating livable communities doesn't go away after protests end. Out next challenge as a globe will be to focus and support efforts at community livability around the world, so that no society remains in danger of not recovering. Although the discussions around these efforts have centered around technology, information, social media and open systems that promote transparency and access, we need to look at all of those factors through the filter of culture and identity. And we need to make sure our models incorporate heritage, history, memory on the one side, and contemporary forms of cultural expression on another.
Laser recreations of The Buddhas of Bamiyan, Hiro Yamagata
Looking ahead to 2011: Projects, people, organizations and companies to watch
Looking ahead to 2011, I've been thinking about the people, projects, organizations and companies I've worked or connected with this past year. There is amazing work going on around the world that is effective, game-changing and necessary, and I'm feeling privileged and grateful to be a part of at least some of it. There are a number interesting projects in various sectors that I will be keeping on my radar to see their continued growth and impact. Explore (by clicking on each name for its link):
These organizations and projects creatively and effectively use culture, narrative and media to seed movements:
3 Generations
Who is Dayani Cristal?
BYkids
Sanjhi
The Line Campaign
Artist as Citizen
Aspen Institute Global Initiative on Culture and Society
The following are rich networks and initiatives that create spaces for collaboration, knowledge or online action:
Mobileactive
Purpose
ThinkState
Jovoto
Business Innovation Factory
These will be gamechangers in transmedia, media distribution and social networking:
VODO
Kleiner Perkins sFund
Mirada
Seize the Media
Power to the Pixel
CrowdCentric/Social Media Week
These organizations dedicate themselves to working with vulnerable populations dealing with intractable problems, by leveraging and enhancing local solutions:
Global Grassroots
Mandala House
Princess Umul Hatiyya Foundation
Appropriate Infrastructure Development Group
Eastern Congo Initiative
Villages in Action
Interesting innovations in diplomacy, peacebuilding and development, respectively:
Independent Diplomat
Peace Dividend Trust
UNICEF Innovation
FrontlineSMS:Legal
And a special nod to some exciting original work by:
Hybrid Realities Institute: A new institute dedicated research around the effects of technology on the individual in the context of Society, Business and Politics.
Business Model Generation: A simple, elegant methodology for business model innovation.
Finally, here are a few that I don't really know about yet, but am excited to learn more about:
Ethnos Project:
Institute for Culture in the Service of Community Sustainability: (no website yet: Project of Demos
Akshay Trust
FreeDimensional
The list is extensive, but it takes many more than I've cited to join in together and get the work done. As we mature and progress in all the fields and sectors under the umbrella of "social change," I hope to see more cross-sector collaborations based on knowledgeable deep-dives that are context-specific and culturally-appropriate, and leverage global innovations and local solutions. As for me, I will continue to work in strategy, planning, culture and transmedia--to advocate for projects in which culture is a foundational element of community transformation and resilience, through projects, writing and collaboration.
(Note that I currently work or have worked with a number of these listed above. I hope that doesn't count as bias, but as more intimate knowledge. Please send me an email, however, if you want more details.)
These organizations and projects creatively and effectively use culture, narrative and media to seed movements:
3 Generations
Who is Dayani Cristal?
BYkids
Sanjhi
The Line Campaign
Artist as Citizen
Aspen Institute Global Initiative on Culture and Society
The following are rich networks and initiatives that create spaces for collaboration, knowledge or online action:
Mobileactive
Purpose
ThinkState
Jovoto
Business Innovation Factory
These will be gamechangers in transmedia, media distribution and social networking:
VODO
Kleiner Perkins sFund
Mirada
Seize the Media
Power to the Pixel
CrowdCentric/Social Media Week
These organizations dedicate themselves to working with vulnerable populations dealing with intractable problems, by leveraging and enhancing local solutions:
Global Grassroots
Mandala House
Princess Umul Hatiyya Foundation
Appropriate Infrastructure Development Group
Eastern Congo Initiative
Villages in Action
Interesting innovations in diplomacy, peacebuilding and development, respectively:
Independent Diplomat
Peace Dividend Trust
UNICEF Innovation
FrontlineSMS:Legal
And a special nod to some exciting original work by:
Hybrid Realities Institute: A new institute dedicated research around the effects of technology on the individual in the context of Society, Business and Politics.
Business Model Generation: A simple, elegant methodology for business model innovation.
Finally, here are a few that I don't really know about yet, but am excited to learn more about:
Ethnos Project:
Institute for Culture in the Service of Community Sustainability: (no website yet: Project of Demos
Akshay Trust
FreeDimensional
The list is extensive, but it takes many more than I've cited to join in together and get the work done. As we mature and progress in all the fields and sectors under the umbrella of "social change," I hope to see more cross-sector collaborations based on knowledgeable deep-dives that are context-specific and culturally-appropriate, and leverage global innovations and local solutions. As for me, I will continue to work in strategy, planning, culture and transmedia--to advocate for projects in which culture is a foundational element of community transformation and resilience, through projects, writing and collaboration.
(Note that I currently work or have worked with a number of these listed above. I hope that doesn't count as bias, but as more intimate knowledge. Please send me an email, however, if you want more details.)
"The Invisibles": Pushing the Needle Forward on NGO/Artist Collaborations
Marc Silver and Gael Garcia Bernal have partnered with Amnesty International to make four compelling short films that highlight the journey tens of thousands of people take every year from Central and South America, through Mexico, and onward north in the hopes of reaching the United States. People who are driven by poverty and a dearth of economic opportunity and social support in their own countries, take this trip motivated by hope and the basic need to provide for their families. As the films recount, along the way they encounter dire, life-threatening risks. This journey is one of the most dangerous in the world.
Watch all four films on their dedicated youtube page (in Spanish, and in Spanish with English subtitles.) Watch the first film in the series, Seaworld, here:
First, the films and the action campaign are created through a collaboration of established entities, but the campaign's foundation is community-centered storytelling that builds context through narrative. The migrants directly tell us their own stories--ones that show the human side of the issues and create a narrative thread directly through to underlying issues, demonstrating the actual cost to individuals of human rights issues, poor economic systems and the lack of community-building societal structures. They tell their stories as they want, and they are depicted with the respect they as participants in this campaign merit.
This respect shines through not only from the storytelling itself, but also because the filmmakers have invested in creating aesthetically engaging content. The creation of four individual, yet aligned short films that place importance on the form of the films as well as their function grounds these films and the issues that are depicted in both "activism" and "film making": This is film making that advances the art of activism through a deep, precise attention to the art of storytelling.
Finally, the films' platform is built to create a direct link between the films and the campaign, making the content a conduit to action, even before the films' launch. During interviews with migrants, Amnesty International registered the experience of abuses against the migrants. Following the films' release, both Amnesty and the filmmakers, through the Resist Network, are moving to use the film in policy advocacy-- for example, Amnesty is using the films during the Global Forum on Migration and Development to call on the Mexican government to "establish a clear action plan and to collect and publish nationwide data on abuses against migrants and on the action taken to hold those responsible to account."
This campaign is evidence that the best way to create and reach an audience, and to subsequently turn them into committed participants engaged in dialogue and activism, is to create aesthetically excellent, engaging film making and digital media. And finally, this series of films provides a concrete sense of the spirit and resilience that underlies the migrants' despair-- and due to this, among many other reasons, these are people you can't ignore.
[Disclosure: I am a partner on the social engagement strategy team for the Resist Network, one of the partners in creating these films. I am not a member of the films' production team.]
Watch all four films on their dedicated youtube page (in Spanish, and in Spanish with English subtitles.) Watch the first film in the series, Seaworld, here:
'Seaworld' (Film 1 of 4 from 'The Invisibles' series) from marc silver on Vimeo.
This series of films demonstrates the potential of direct collaboration between NGO, activist, filmmaker and actor, and advances the art of activist film making by concentrating on and striking a balance among community-centered narrative, a commitment to aesthetic resonance, and to tying content directly to action.First, the films and the action campaign are created through a collaboration of established entities, but the campaign's foundation is community-centered storytelling that builds context through narrative. The migrants directly tell us their own stories--ones that show the human side of the issues and create a narrative thread directly through to underlying issues, demonstrating the actual cost to individuals of human rights issues, poor economic systems and the lack of community-building societal structures. They tell their stories as they want, and they are depicted with the respect they as participants in this campaign merit.
This respect shines through not only from the storytelling itself, but also because the filmmakers have invested in creating aesthetically engaging content. The creation of four individual, yet aligned short films that place importance on the form of the films as well as their function grounds these films and the issues that are depicted in both "activism" and "film making": This is film making that advances the art of activism through a deep, precise attention to the art of storytelling.
Finally, the films' platform is built to create a direct link between the films and the campaign, making the content a conduit to action, even before the films' launch. During interviews with migrants, Amnesty International registered the experience of abuses against the migrants. Following the films' release, both Amnesty and the filmmakers, through the Resist Network, are moving to use the film in policy advocacy-- for example, Amnesty is using the films during the Global Forum on Migration and Development to call on the Mexican government to "establish a clear action plan and to collect and publish nationwide data on abuses against migrants and on the action taken to hold those responsible to account."
This campaign is evidence that the best way to create and reach an audience, and to subsequently turn them into committed participants engaged in dialogue and activism, is to create aesthetically excellent, engaging film making and digital media. And finally, this series of films provides a concrete sense of the spirit and resilience that underlies the migrants' despair-- and due to this, among many other reasons, these are people you can't ignore.
[Disclosure: I am a partner on the social engagement strategy team for the Resist Network, one of the partners in creating these films. I am not a member of the films' production team.]
Welcome to the debate, Malcolm
Malcolm Gladwell's article "Small Change: Why the revolution will not be tweeted," revisits an argument it seems like we in the activism community have been having for quite a while. While it can only be good to open the debate up to the masses who read the New Yorker, Gladwell misses the target. In the debate on digital activism, Gladwell and most commentators on `social media for social action' elevate the "digital" as opposed to the "activism." Digital tools are now a permanent part of our toolkit (whether we're managing discrete actions, campaigns or movements), and can be leveraged effectively whenever they are appropriate and accessible. Sometimes they're necessary to a campaign and sometimes they are not (particularly where their use would jeopardize the safety of the activists or the viability of the campaign). But that's it. They're tools.
Gladwell's distinction between hierarchical vs. decentralized movements is a very necessary one-- but the claim that all offline activism is centralized while all campaigns that rely on digital tools are ad hoc and without direction, is a rather sweeping and strange argument. All campaigns within a movement require strategy and stewardship, through communications structures that are either horizontal or vertical. Again, the tools might allow for new forms of communications which help create flatter campaigns-- but thinking that successful online campaigns don't have centralizing nodes is a bit naive. Furthermore, despite his exploration of social movements, Gladwell's dismissal of decentralized networks as automatically ineffective can't have taken into consideration examples of the communications networks that underpinned historical wide-sweeping movements like the Peasants' Revolt of 1381, The Underground Railroad, or the network of safe houses for Jews in WWII. (And anyway, isn't there some truth that those of us who try to organize campaigns hope that elements will in fact decentralize and embed to become cultural norms?)
By continuing to argue the merits of "twitter activism," I think we're all now starting to miss the point. The way a campaign engages empathizers, influencers and activists-- whether based on what Gladwell notes as weak or strong ties-- is really more a matter of strategy-- issue identification, context, methodology, desired action, outcome, etc. Use and application of digital tools is a tactical concern-- important, but not the endpoint. And so Gladwell creates a false distinction when he claims it is the nature of the tool that creates strong or weak ties. I would argue it's the content and the context that determines and strengthen ties. The medium is not the message here.
Gladwell's distinction between hierarchical vs. decentralized movements is a very necessary one-- but the claim that all offline activism is centralized while all campaigns that rely on digital tools are ad hoc and without direction, is a rather sweeping and strange argument. All campaigns within a movement require strategy and stewardship, through communications structures that are either horizontal or vertical. Again, the tools might allow for new forms of communications which help create flatter campaigns-- but thinking that successful online campaigns don't have centralizing nodes is a bit naive. Furthermore, despite his exploration of social movements, Gladwell's dismissal of decentralized networks as automatically ineffective can't have taken into consideration examples of the communications networks that underpinned historical wide-sweeping movements like the Peasants' Revolt of 1381, The Underground Railroad, or the network of safe houses for Jews in WWII. (And anyway, isn't there some truth that those of us who try to organize campaigns hope that elements will in fact decentralize and embed to become cultural norms?)
By continuing to argue the merits of "twitter activism," I think we're all now starting to miss the point. The way a campaign engages empathizers, influencers and activists-- whether based on what Gladwell notes as weak or strong ties-- is really more a matter of strategy-- issue identification, context, methodology, desired action, outcome, etc. Use and application of digital tools is a tactical concern-- important, but not the endpoint. And so Gladwell creates a false distinction when he claims it is the nature of the tool that creates strong or weak ties. I would argue it's the content and the context that determines and strengthen ties. The medium is not the message here.
Transmedia Activism in Action
Having first written about Transmedia Activism two years ago and, after spending much of last year working alone or with partners and clients to build out the framework (more to come on that later this year), I am gratified to see the concept take off in a number of realms. One of my favorite moments came at Lance Weiler's DIYDays in April of this year when a participant told me my work sounds like transmedia activism, asking me "Have you heard of it...?" There's a simple thrill that comes from having one's ideas move past oneself and into other people's theories and projects.
A few weeks ago came a second thrill when Robert Pratten of Zen Films-- a creative thinker on the methodology and practice behind transmedia-- sent me a proposal he presented to Coalition on Homelessness in San Francisco for a transmedia campaign aimed at increasing support and donations for the organization. He cites our work on the transmedia activism framework as inspiration for building out his campaign and adapts part of the framework directly to his strategy. The proposal is a good, real-world example of how transmedia can enrich a charitable organization's communication platform. (A sustained transmedia effort, which starts to build content and context around systemic issues, can also help in the organization's programming and direct impact-- and I would be excited to see where the organization takes this strategy in the future.)
Another thank you to Robert for sharing this presentation, here:
A few weeks ago came a second thrill when Robert Pratten of Zen Films-- a creative thinker on the methodology and practice behind transmedia-- sent me a proposal he presented to Coalition on Homelessness in San Francisco for a transmedia campaign aimed at increasing support and donations for the organization. He cites our work on the transmedia activism framework as inspiration for building out his campaign and adapts part of the framework directly to his strategy. The proposal is a good, real-world example of how transmedia can enrich a charitable organization's communication platform. (A sustained transmedia effort, which starts to build content and context around systemic issues, can also help in the organization's programming and direct impact-- and I would be excited to see where the organization takes this strategy in the future.)
Another thank you to Robert for sharing this presentation, here:
Transmedia Activism And LowLifes
View more presentations from Zen Films.
Pelis Con Misión Social
An article about social mission film and Transmedia Activism from the beautiful Spanish design magazine Yorokobu.
(Click on the image to enlarge.)
(Click on the image to enlarge.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)