Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Armchair Activism That Works

By Martin Kearns and Jonathan Schwartz, TomPaine.com. Posted February 6, 2007.


Wikipedia, one of the Web's most valuable resources, is based on thousands of volunteers. Can progressives make that same power of networked volunteers work for us?
Advertisement

One of the most remarkable, unexpected developments of the Internet has been the explosive growth of Wikipedia. At first glance, the Wikipedia concept -- that thousands upon thousands of volunteers working with little central supervision can create a huge databank of accurate information -- seems untenable. And yet the Wikipedia bumblebee flies anyway. While not flawless, Wikipedia has become an invaluable resource, with detailed articles on everything from arithmetic to geodesy to the movie "Zoolander."

Can progressives make this power of networked volunteers work for us? Some are already trying. Last year, Josh Marshall's TalkingPointsMemo.com asked the site's readers to in turn ask their members of Congress, on the record: Do you support Bush's plans to privatize Social Security? A regular progressive organization would have needed a large, expensive staff to make the thousands of necessary calls -- if, as non-constituents, they could have gotten responses at all. But by working together in a mass electronic barn-raising, Marshall's thousands of readers got this critical information quickly and easily. Moreover, they had fun doing it and became more loyal to the site in the process.

A similar dynamic may be creating new forms of journalism. Jay Rosen's NewAssignment.Net hopes to cultivate a large pool of volunteers able to, for instance, check for voting irregularities in every precinct in America. And Trevor Paglen and A.C. Thompson, the authors of Torture Taxi: On the Trail of the CIA's Rendition Flights, worked with a network of amateur plane spotters to track secret flights around the world. As Paglen recently said, "When the plane-spotter community and journalists came together, it became one of the few ways to see the outlines of this program."

However, what progressives have done little of until now is sit down and consider this issue in a systematic way -- and then take sustained action on projects that demonstrate the full potential of networked volunteers. Netcentric Campaigns (of which Martin Kearns is director) is now beginning this process with the site MediaVolunteer.org. Our conclusions and plans are these:

1. Progressives should think creatively about the potential of current technology to build power.

Politics, of course, usually boils down to the many versus the few. The conservative movement has always been able to raise large amounts of money from a relatively small number of sources. This money translates in turn into a relatively small number of people -- politicians, lobbyists, think tank denizens, PR experts -- paid to spend large amounts of time advancing the conservative project.

By contrast, we have the numbers on our side, but not many multimillionaires like Richard Mellon Scaife. What the web has done is allow progressives to start leveling the monetary playing field, by aggregating small donations from many sources.

This is an extremely encouraging development. But what may be just as important is to find ways to advance progressive goals by aggregating many small donations of time.

2. Networks of volunteers are particularly well-suited to gathering information.

Information is surprisingly "expensive" -- that is, gathering accurate data requires enormous amounts of time and effort. Until now, this expense has translated into a high dollar-and-cent cost.

For instance, as anyone who's ever done press for progressive organizations knows, huge amounts of energy are required to keep track of working reporters and producers. Or rather, trying to keep track, as it's almost impossible. And while there are commercial, national media directories, subscriptions might cost $10,000, beyond the reach of all but the best funded. Thus, everyone doing progressive PR is forced to reinvent the wheel separately across the country on a daily basis.

But many hands make light work. If a database requires 25,000 hours of effort, it could be produced by a staff of 13, working fulltime for a year -- or 125,000 volunteers working for 12 minutes each.

This type of volunteering also holds special promise for progressive organizations. There's enormous, positive political energy at loose in America, but potential activists have few ways simply to dip their toes in the water. Yes, it's now easier than ever to give money, but past a certain point everyone resents being treated just as an ATM. And there are always far more people who might get involved than have the resources to contribute. Yet often the only other option that seems meaningful is for volunteers to dive in completely and spend dozens of hours a week on their chosen cause. As much as we might wish, most won't do this, at least initially.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: activism, progressives, volunteerism

Martin Kearns is executive director of Green Media Toolshed. Jonathan Schwarz's Web site is tinyrevolution.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Information is vital
Posted by: robchapman on Feb 6, 2007 3:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This author raises a critical issue in the new age of information and cyber mobilization.

It is clear from the past two election cycles that the cyber activism that the internet facilitates is the most powerful force in American politics today and that it is likely to remain so into the foreseeable future.

It is also clear that the long memories, the high level of expertise and the integrity of the vast majority of cyber activists is the reason that the inter net based activism has been so effective.

As the author points out:
Information is surprisingly "expensive" -- that is, gathering accurate data requires enormous amounts of time and effort. Until now, this expense has translated into a high dollar-and-cent cost.

Inter net activists have been willing to bear these costs and to share their expertise with the public gratis, because their view of governmental integrity has been offended by the present Administration.

In my view, the question arises as to what happens when a government is in power that is less ambiguously objectionable.

Every government will find opponents and people who are offended by something it represents; say hypothetically, that Clinton-Obama are elected in 08 and that they stimulate great outrage among the bigotted right, let's add that they are effective change agents and actually make some early headway against the entrenched privileges of the patriarchy or more likely against some of the institutions that maintain the white supremist underpinnings of the US.

Will the inter net serve this backlash as effectively as it has served the cyber activists who have so effectively opposed the Iraqi War?

If the inter net becomes a contested battleground will the progressive elements allow it to remain free and risk losing in this arena or will we attempt to curtail it in order to maintain the advantage of government?

It is clear that we have a lot to think about and a lot to do to assure both that the internet remains free and accessible to all AND THAT WE PROGESSIVES CONTINUE TO THINK AND WRITE CLEARLY AND BOLDLY TO MAINTAIN OUR ABILITY TO USE THE INTERNET EFFECTIVELY IN A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT.

Robert Chapman
Lansing, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Information is vital Posted by: TarryFaster
Wikipedia works for the Far Right
Posted by: Chevaliere on Feb 6, 2007 4:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As anyone can see who checks out the wikipedia articles on sensitive issues such as Zionism and the ADL and so forth, there is a clear slant to the Right in Wikipedia. This is probably due to the fact that the Right has almost unlimited funds to back Wikipedia editors for full time activity. If you think that sounds paranoid, see the BBC article: US plans to 'fight the net' revealed - Bloggers and Netizens beware

There is, apparently, a new pedia that is backed by progressives which aims to limit the chances of the Right taking over by vetting editors. See: Cassiopedia .

Obviously, without the financial backing that Wikipedia has, and with a determination to weed out the Far Right Bias which will limit contributors (the Left and progressives are generally lacking time and funds), Cassiopedia is going to have a fight to stay afloat much less keep up. But it is a good sign that somebody realizes that a good and objective encyclopedia IS needed. If our definitions of things determine how we view and interact with our world, then having some TRUTH can't be a bad thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Then fix it! Posted by: PeaceLove
French idea: Segolene Royal
Posted by: Bobsays on Feb 6, 2007 7:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The French Socialist candidate, Segolene Royal - who by the way casts all US female politicians into the shade - is the architect of this idea. She has been campaigning on this very idea and has started to put it into practice. We will see the results over time.

Now back to Segolene Royal, oh yes, sorry... must get serious again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gary J Minter
Posted by: garyjminter on Feb 6, 2007 8:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Could the volunteers at Wikipedia help give us an honest answer about which AIDS drugs actually work, and which don't?
We can't believe the sales pitches coming from the pharmaceutical firms anymore, there have been too many false hopes and exaggerated claims, and too little actual success! Where's the beef?
There needs to be an honest, thorough comparative analysis of all treatments for HIV/AIDS, on a large scale, to see if any of them actually work at all to prolong life of those who are HIV+.
It is long overdue to search for better ways to treat HIV infection...Even the newest, most costly drugs seem to be failing to help:<

Gary J Minter
http://aidsvillagechina.blog.sohu.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If it's wrong, fix it!
Posted by: PeaceLove on Feb 6, 2007 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wikipedia shines because anyone can modify and clarify inaccurate entries. If there's an entry you think is wrong, incomplete, or slanted, please go in and fix it. I encourage informed progressives to make their voices heard all over Wikipedia!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Take Back Our Country:
Posted by: mite on Feb 6, 2007 12:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Take time to deliberate; but when the time for action arrives, stop thinking and go in." ~President Andrew Jackson

Arm chair activism works for deliberation, one must ask themselves "am I worthy of freedom" an if "Yea" is the answer am I willing to risk it all-even death to defend it.

I say "Yea," and bring it on! I for one have sent my 'redress of grievances' to my state and federal elected officials. These grievances composed from WTP, www.givemeliberty.org were delivered for "We the People." The grievances addressed our governments failure to stop lying about; 1) 16th Amendment- Income Tax, 2) Federal Reserve System, and 3) War On Terror.

Another Lie feed to us since 1913, is 17th Amendment, and the false ratification by the State's Legislatures, by then Secretary William Jennings Bryan, on May 13, 1913.

Prior to this lie, our U.S. Constitution; Article 1, Section 3, Clause 1, said U.S. Senators shall be chosen by the state legislatures, Clause 1 prescribes the method of filling vacancies and other procedures.

Read the article by Devvy Kidd- February 4, 2005 @>

www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42711

"Our citizens have wisely formed themselves into one nation as to others and several States as among themselves. To the united nation belong our external and mutual relations; to each State, severally, the care of our persons, our property, our reputation and religious freedom." ~Thomas Jefferson: To Rhode Island Assembly, 1801. ME 10:262 http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1050.htm

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." George Washington

"Woe to those who decree unjust statues and to those who continually record unjust decisions, to deprive the needy of justice, and to rob the poor of My People of their rights. 'Isaiah 10:1,2

If one reviews their representatives and senators voting record, and researches the definitions of 'TREASON' one must ask; what about this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» World Net Daily? Posted by: lessbread
better yet...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Feb 6, 2007 3:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Get out of your chair and start making changes in how you live your life. You AREN'T going to make ANY real difference by making no changes whatsoever in your life or in the world. Start thinking about (and then making) the changes you can make in your own life. The first step is ALWAYS to stop being completely passive.

www.greenanarchy.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]