development? Photo: Jia Lu
that if all 2.5 million people who liked Chase Bank’s campaign pooled $2 each, they would have the opportunity to give away $5 million dollars of their own money to the charities of their collective choice, without the Man getting in the way. That would demonstrate the democratization of charitable giving. I digress. One of the charities who decided to throw their hat into the million dollar ring was Invisible Children. As a youth- driven movement, they had already worked for almost five years building an extensive network of young people from coast to coast in America. Their offbeat, unorthodox tactics and uninhibited approach to charity struck a chord with high school and university students alike. I myself imagined packing up my possessions and joining their
van tour to teach youth about the child soldiers of Northern Uganda. Even though Invisible Children initially mobilized through word-of-mouth and a lot of grassroots organizing, it didn’t hurt when they landed a spot on Oprah and built a great web site. When they signed up to win with Chase Bank,
Invisible Children must have known their network and Facebook friends would make them a formidable contender to bag the million. They even risked taking a (somewhat) critical position when angling to accept a million bucks from one of the big banks, and that’s not easy. Invisible Children asked in a blog, “Can you smell post-banking crisis PR campaign?” They went on to write that Chase was going to “
...give out $5 million of their money to the charities that receive the most votes. Whatever your opinion on these big banks may be, we think their commitment to supporting social causes is admirable.” They hyperlinked to a scathing article by George Pitcher in the Telegraph that harshly chastised big banks for squandering taxpayer money on multimillion dollar executive bonuses. Who says you can’t bite the hand that feeds you? It must work, because Invisible Children received 123,990 votes in the competition, taking the lead and landing the million dollars.
Despite the ease of a click and the simplicity of
a link, I don’t believe they could have received that kind of support if they hadn’t laid the groundwork for five years. I imagine their voters had seen the documentary, screened it for their friends, fundraised in their schools, joined the direct action events and bought the bracelet while wearing the t-shirt. There was an established precedent of engagement in their lives. Invisible Children could approach thousands of supporters who knew them already, instead of begging a group of digital strangers to support their previously unknown cause. An organization’s strongest support will always
derive from stakeholders who possess an established, real-world connection with the charity and cause. I believe we will continue to confirm that clicktivism and the digitization of charity does not, on its own, create an engaged citizenry with activists committed to change beyond the computer screen. In the digital age, apathy can easily direct our mouse, as it has directed our actions, pocketbooks and commitments in the past. Alternatively, it can capture the momentum, passion and dedication that thousands of activists possess and apply those qualities in advantageous and effective ways. In the case of Chase Bank and Invisible Children, securing a million dollars from a corporation by popular vote had less to do with the mechanism of social networking than the strong foundation of community organizing and engaged activism. When Chase Bank showed up offering a million, Invisible Children already had more than 100,000 people who believed in helping child soldiers in Northern Uganda; let’s call it charitable opportunism. Organizations will continue to carve out a space
in the digital commons. I hope we remember that at the heart of engagement is the human desire to create purpose in our lives, to belong to a community and share in the creation of a just and fair world. We need this to take place outside of the virtual vacuum, in the experience of our real, daily lives. There might be 14 million people on Facebook, but there are six billion people in the world and we can all contribute to social change, no clicking required.
Angela Wallace has been a public speaker, youth leader,
musician, and writer for over a decade. She writes creative non-fiction and documentary film reviews in the independent Canadian magazine Geez.
www.angelawallace.ca
iAM March 2011 7
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43