The first words that come to mind when watching avatars march on a computer-generated Capital Hill are: How Futile. A Better World In Second Life explores second life activism and the people who believe this serves as a method of helping a cause. Basically, these people engage in activities that are meant to illuminate and bring real world aid to a specific social or international problem, for example the Darfur genocide. The anti-war protest visited was taking place on “Capitol Hill” with 120 avatars in attendance. Each avatar had a typical anti-war slogan written across a virtual sign and engaged in dialogue amongst themselves or journalists. Now here’s a point, how is this reaching the real world? Frankly it’s not. Only the 120 people involved experienced the direct effect and they are all like-minded so what you have is preaching to a non-existent choir. If one is so motivated to take on a protest, get off the computer and re-enter reality as opposed to evading it in pixels. The response, “Aren’t these people reacting to reality? Clearly these are actual social problems, so how can one say that they are evading it?” This is a lack of productivity where an illusion becomes existence - being “productive” in a fake world does NOT translate into real world activism. You cannot give sanction to these activities because they seem to be socially responsible. I will concede that at least the Roots Camp organization is an actual group where they are better able to communicate in second life and their activities are not limited to that sphere. Of course dancing avatars typing out “Humanity before politics” bares no consequence in the real world. If you actually cared about humanity, you would do this in the human world and forget the digital. This “protest” on “Capitol Hill” is an insult to every person who ever had the fortitude to avidly stand up for their beliefs, despite the potential for physical harm. The National Guard cannot fire on or beat avatars.
An activism project that I’m closely related to is not only run by a media company, but is using media to combat a serious problem in our society. Guns 4 Cameras [learn more] is a non-profit division of Eye On It, a media company that does film, television and music videos. The organization was created by the company’s chairman Hezues R’ after a first hand experience with gun violence and his ambition to eradicate these senseless crimes. Guns 4 Cameras works to decrease youth gun violence in urban communities. This activist group is looking to do after school film projects to teach kids how to use cameras and create their own media. They are heavily involved in community outreach to both educate youths and proactively address the problem. They are not in front of a computer screen simulating gun violence to show the havoc it creates in communities and the dire consequences within families. There can be no comparison between second life activism and Guns 4 Cameras. If you do not see the difference use your rational judgment and answer the question: Do I want to see gun taken out of a child’s hand or a computer-generated firearm removed from a place that exists only on the internet?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You're right: the virtual march on virtual Capitol Hill is an example of particularly impotent Second Life activism. That is, in part, because marches on actual Capitol Hill are one of the more impotent examples of political activism - in that they preach to the choir, in that they proliferate tired sloganeering, in that they essentially exist for their own sake without pursuing a consequence by directly related action. But yeah, at least on actual Capitol Hill, actual politicians might actually view a mass of people in favor of a particular action. And at least there is personal interface. And at least information is distributed on a greater scale. And yes, I suppose at least people on actual Capitol Hill are taking an actual risk.
ReplyDeleteBut what do you think of internet activism in general? Some of the Second Life projects seem like decent methods of raising consciousness (albeit on a limited scale). How about websites devoted to distributing information or collecting donations? Guns 4 Cameras is a great idea, but not everybody has the resources (or the innovative spirit) to make available such a radical program. Does it have to be all or nothing?
Internet activism has to be defined in the terms as you mentioned: having websites to receive donations and spread knowledge. However, this cannot be the only source of that particular organization's activism. Clearly the number of people who use the internet for resources is surging and most consider it their only method of information gathering. There is a divide between that and second life. What exactly is being done in a virtual wildlife habitat? Nothing, except a fake person riding a fake Orca. This is a brutal translation and anyone can say aren't you being narrow minded? Yes because it is all or nothing at all - there is no such thing as a grey area, you are either right or wrong, answer yes or no. You don't get away with fabricating the real world due to a misconceived guise of making a better world. That is exactly the problem in fact, the lack of ambition and innovation, searching for the easiest way out of action. Guns 4 Cameras works because we don't limit ourselves to computer screens despite lack of resources. We think and problem solve to execute strategy that will provide the best results. I don't see the second life as reaching more people. Who hasn't heard for the past decade about endanger species and preservation? Figure 2003, anti-war protests have been rampant in this country or at least the obvious bumper sticker "no blood for oil." Darfur that was exploited by any method of delivering news media.
ReplyDeleteThough it's from a couple years ago, I'd recommend the book Future Active by Graham Meikle to you guys if you'd like to investigate virtual activism further. It gives several innovative cases of media activism that go beyond a website with information and donations (which is sort of web 1.0, right?), and includes hactivism and a lot of hybrids of digital and actual activism. I think the projects in the book manage to stay grounded in reality in a way second life doesn't. There may be more up to date case studies, but I enjoyed it a lot and still go back to it when I'm thinking about these issues.
ReplyDeleteinterestingly, I mentioned on another post that we could read the virtual protest as a networking event for second life activists (they could meet and network to share resources later). Though I agree with Caroline that real world protests often involve a physical danger that makes them very different from this second life protest, I wonder how significant their functions as networking events is.