As my sister says, sorry I'm not sorry.
Invisible Children has responded to the criticism. I appreciate the clarifications they offer regarding their finances--part of me thinks this info should have been more available up-front, but we can't all think of everything (though I think if you're asking for people's money in any significant amount
(
Read more... )
My problem with this specific instance of it is not that it's partial info, or oversimplified info, or incomplete info, but that it is incorrect and racist info in addition to all of those other things, and that it is framed in such a way that it suggests that literally all you need to know is "he's a bad man and we need to stop him" (and also buy our $30 "action kit"). I think a lot of other viral campaigns and things along these lines actually encourage the opposite of that: they openly own that things are complex and that "awareness" needs to be the starting point for a much larger and more complicated conversation. That, I'll support until the day I die. Because that stuff? Really can and does change the world.
But incomplete info is often worse than nothing if it's never more than incomplete, especially if it has policy implications (again, see: Iraq). And if what someone is telling me is just flat-out wrong, and further serves to rob already marginalized people of their agency... I'd frankly prefer they never said anything at all. Especially not when other people with less slick ad campaigns are saying it so much better.
I think the key is to recognize that the oversimplification that makes viral media so effective and so palatable also makes it far more susceptible to certain problems--and again, oversimplification so often has the potential to be harmful, not just offensive. Ethan Zuckerman makes that point really well here:
Here’s the problem - these simple narratives can cause damage. By simplifying the DRC situation to a conflict about minerals, the numerous other causes - ethnic tensions, land disputes, the role of foreign militaries - are all minimized. The proposed solutions - a ban on the use of “conflict minerals” in mobile phones - sounds good on paper. In practice, it’s meant that mining of coltan is no longer possible for artisanal miners, who’ve lost their main source of financial support - instead, mining is now dominated by armed groups, who have the networks and resources to smuggle the minerals out of the country and conceal their origins. Similarly, the focus on rape as a weapon of war, Autesserre argues, has caused some armed groups to engage in mass rape as a technique to gain attention and a seat at the negotiating table. Finally, the focus on the Congolese state as a solution misses the point that the state has systematically abused power and that the country’s rulers have used power to rob their citizenry.
So yeah, I totally grant your point about how sometimes you need to be stripped down, simple, and less confrontational than you might be in dealing with these issues and helping people become informed. I run into this constantly in my Social Problems class--believe me, you really get brought up against it when you have to try to get sixty college freshmen to start thinking about the ways in which they are directly complicit in multiple overlapping systems of oppression and domination. But there are still risks here and we need to recognize them in order to manage them effectively. Invisible Children doesn't do that, and that's only one of the problems I have with them.
Reply
Commenting quickly tonight just to say that my brain is a pile of mush and I'm going out of town straight after work tomorrow, so I'm not ignoring this response -- it fully merits a coherent reply of my own. I'm just not able to make one right now! But thank you for writing such a long and fulfilling reply. I shall enjoy reading it again when my brain is back in working order lol
Reply
<33
Reply
Leave a comment