Centre for Internet and Society

Digital Natives with a Cause? —Workshop in Santiago — an Afterthought

tettner — 2012-01-03T10:16:18Z

The Digital Natives had their third and final workshop in Santiago, Chile from 8 to 10 February 2011. Once again CIS and Hivos joined hands to organise the event. Samuel Tettner, Digital Natives Coordinator from CIS narrates his experiences from the workshop in this blog post.

For three days, from 8 to 10 February, I spent most of the days and almost one full night at the Digital Natives with a Cause? Workshop. The day before the workshop, I met the facilitators: Kara, Pedro and Juan-Manuel. All three of them were quite enthusiastic with each one specializing on an aspect of the research objectives. That night, I had my first formal meeting with the participants in the conference room of Hotel Windsor in Santiago. It is always fascinating to meet a large group of people, especially since you have been corresponding with them for a couple of weeks, have read about them and their projects, made images in your head of how they look, how they act, how they will get along with each other and so on.

I was particularly excited about the workshop in Santiago since it presented itself to me an opportunity to re-connect with a side of Latin America that I had not experienced. I moved from Venezuela to the United States at the age of 15. I don’t know about everyone else, but when I was 15, I was mostly interested in music, movies, my friends, fast cars, video games, and a whole lot of the nonsense stuff. Meeting these highly motivated young men and women from all over the American continent and the Caribbean islands allowed me to connect with the more nuanced and matured side of my identity— a side that had only heard English spoken to it.

The actual workshop took place at the Biblioteca de Santiago, a library in Santiago, a beautiful modern building, with an architecture that rivalled the best libraries I ever saw in the world. Our local partner Rising Voices, had done an incredible job of organizing the logistics. The workshop opened with an ice-breaking exercise that unlike most ice-breaking exercises required some neural movement. Participants were asked to come up with a word that described their practice, politics or ideology. You see the workshop participants were young people who engage with digital technologies to create social and political change. I chose my word ‘innovation’ mainly because it’s an idea that’s been hunting my day-dreams lately, but also because I knew it would elicit interesting responses. I briefly sat down with Luis Carlos from Peru and Joan from the Dominican Republic, whose words were ‘stories’ and also ‘creative’. A blog post about that experience can be found here.

Afterwards we had the pleasure of hearing from Juan-Manuel, the facilitator from Mexico. Juan-Manuel talked about issues of participation, motivation to do social change, impact of our engagements and other social change related processes. He left us with three big questions that stayed with us for the rest of the afternoon:

What is our motivation to do social work? Where does it come from? Where does it end? How did it start? Can it be replicated?
What is incidence / impact? How can one measure impact?
What does one need to know to create social impact?

I got in a group with Adolfo from Nicaragua, Maria Del Mar from Paraguay, Karl from Haiti and Julio from Chile. Kara was our facilitator for the discussion. A blog post about that experience by Maria Del Mar can be found here. After discussing for about one hour, we made a white paper that visually illustrated` our discussion. We decided to make a word / concept cloud and mix it with a collage. That was it. With a lot of anticipation and nervousness the first day of our workshop ended.

Oh wait! I forgot to add a small detail, that day Nishant also taught us how to do a Bollywood dance. I didn’t take any pictures, but I hope someone did!

On the second day, Pedro Markun from Brazil opened the floor with a thought-provoking presentation. Unfortunately, I missed most of the presentation, but if one is to judge by the tweets, it was very inspiring. After the presentation, we participated in a bar camp. During this activity participants proposed the topics for discussion, out of which we selected five to focus on. I decided to join the conversation about ‘digital rights’, a topic proposed by Andres from Venezuela. Brendon from Trinidad and Tobago, Luis Carlos and Roberto from Peru, and Joan from the DR also participated in this discussion. I wrote a small blog about my opinion on this conversation here.

During the second half of the day, the process was reversed and instead of us participants writing down concepts we wanted to talk about, five words were written on the board: mobilization, network building, awareness, campaigns, and representation. This activity, called HOW DO YOU SPELL PROCESS? asked us to choose the word with which we identify the most; it could be the word we know the most about, or the least about, or the word we’re most interested in implementing in our practice. I joined the mobilization group, because part of the job as the community manager for the Digital Natives project involved motivating the members, involving them in other’s ideas, helping them connect with greater initiatives – all ideas that I think connect with mobilization issues. I sat down with Maria Carmelita from Argentina, Brendon from T&B and Francisco from Chile.

After we were all settled in the group plenary after this activity, Fieke had a dictatorial proclamation to make: we then had around 12 hours to make a visual presentation (a video, a play, a sketch and others) about our discussions during HOW DO YOU SPELL PROCESS?

I met Brendon, Francisco, and Carmelita shortly after for dinner and the planning of our video. We decided to have an Indian night, which is ironic since I now live in India, yet the experience was very interesting: I tried ‘curry’ for the first time in my life! For our video, we decided to make a cheesy, 1984-esque “how to” video to change the world through mobilization. The video can be found here. Check out the other videos as well, they all are quite interesting and thought-provoking.

Finally, on the third day after a showing of the videos and plays, the last facilitator, Kara from Guatemala, shared with us her personal journey into her social commitment. From growing up in a banana plantation in Guatemala, to her use of digital technologies to raise funds to build a house for her uncle, Kara’s story inspired all in attendance. Kara told her story through a specific framework, which was named the Matrix. The Matrix consisted of re-framing one’s story through four lenses: dream, discovery, design and destiny. We then broke into groups and reflected into our own journeys with technology using the same framework.

In the end, we all went to a nice restaurant and had a common dinner. I love those tables of over 20+people; you can switch seats and change conversations instantly. Overall, the workshop was a huge learning experience. I was able to meet some similar people from Latin America, and better understand the cultural context of the intersection of technology and the social and the political spheres. With the last workshop now over, we have collected a plethora of research materials which we will analyze during the second phase of the Digital Natives with a Cause? project. The journey still continues.

Thanks to all of you who made the experience Possible!.

For info on schedule of events, organisers and participants, click here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/santiago-workshop-an-after-thought

The Class Question

maesy — 2011-09-22T12:45:35Z

Blank Noise aims to be as inclusive as possible and therefore does not identify any specific target groups. Yet, the spaces and the methods they occupy do attract certain kinds of volunteers and public. This raises the class question: what are the dilemmas around class on digital interventions? Are they any different from the dilemmas on street interventions?

My first click to Blank Noise’s main blog was a surprise. Having read so many media coverage about them, I expected to see a professional, minimalist looking website like other women’s organizations[1] where the menu is immediately visible. Instead, I have arrived at the most common and basic form of blogging: the personal blog.

I was greeted by entries on their latest thoughts and activities with photos and text with red font against a black background. I scrolled down a long list of permanent links on the right side of the site and arrived only at its Frequently Asked Questions link on the 28^th item while it would be one of the easiest to spot in other websites. For me, this discovery said, “we would like to share our thoughts and activities with you” rather than “we are an established organization and this is what we do”. It is not the space of professionals, but passionate people. As a blogger myself, I recognize the space as being one of my peer’s and immediately felt more attracted to it.

Reflecting on my own position, my familiarity with the space is due to my background as a young, urban, educated, English-speaking woman for whom the Internet is a key part of life. My ‘peers’ who are also attracted to this place apparently share the same background with me. The main demography of Blank Noise’s volunteers, almost equally men and women, are those between 16-35 years, urban, and English speaking (Patheja, 2010). My interviewees were all at least university educated, some in the U.S. Ivy league, and are proficient users of social media, most of them being bloggers or Twitter and Facebook users.

This dominant base reflects the discourse on the ‘youth of India’, which represents only a fragment of India’s vast population of young people. The two narratives on the youth of India are described by Sinha-Kerkhoff (2005) as ‘the haves’ and ‘have-nots’, a reflection on the broader discourse on the deep social economic inequities in India. ‘The have-nots’ are the majority of Indian youth who are struggling with the basic issues of livelihood, health, and education, while ‘the haves’ are painted as the children of liberalization: the mostly urban, middle class, technologically savvy, and highly educated students and young professionals up who maintain a youthful lifestyle up to their 30s.

Although ‘the haves’ only consist 10% of the total youth population, they are the ones identified as the youth of India by popular discourses. Lukose (2008) explained this by stating that youth as a social category in India is linked to the larger sense of India’s transformation into an emerging global economic powerhouse together with Brazil, Russia, and China (popular as BRIC) after its liberal economic reform in the 1990s. India’s information and technology industry is spearheading this transformation, thus it feeds into the discourse of youth as Digital Natives.

Although there are exceptions to this dominant demography, they are far fewer. Does this then mean that Blank Noise is ‘contextually empowering’ (Gajjala, 2004), given that it reaches only ‘the haves’ due to the digital divide and their sites of participation?

The classed nature of the virtual public space is something Blank Noise fully acknowledges. Some interviewees stated that this is why street interventions are so important; they reach people who may not be Internet users. However, people who have been involved in Blank Noise for more than two years acknowledged that class issues are also present in the physical public space.

Dev Sukumar, one of Blank Noise’s male volunteers, explained to me that the British colonial legacy still shape the way public spaces in Bangalore are organized. The commercial areas in the city centre where Blank Noise interventions were initially organized, such as M.G. Road and Brigade Road, are dominantly inhabited by English speaking people, but in other parts of the city there are many who can only speak the local language, Kannada. After recognizing this, Blank Noise organized street interventions in such places, like the Majestic bus stand, and making flyers and stencils in Kannada. In order to do this, Blank Noise specifically called for volunteers who knew the local language.

The interventions might be in a non-elite space, but the main actors remain those from the middle class. Hemangini articulated the class issue in Blank Noise, saying “Like it or not, a lot of the people in Blank Noise are from the middle class and a lot of the people we have been talking to on the streets are of a certain class. What is the ethics in a middle class woman asking ‘why are you looking at me?’ to lower class men? It is if we already assumed that most perpetrators are lower class men while it is definitely not true.”

The reflexivity Hemangini shows led me to rethink the assumptions around digital activism. It is often dismissed as catering only to the middle class, privileging only one side of the digital divide. But then again, the class issue is also present in the physical sphere. If middle class youth mostly attracts their peers in their digital activism, is it problematic by default or is it only problematic when there is no accompanying reflection on the political implications of such engagement? How is it more problematic than the ethical dilemma of middle class people addressing their ‘Others’ in street interventions? Is the problem related to the sphere of activism (virtual versus physical), or is it more about the methods of engagement and the reflexivity required for it?

Hemangini told me that her dilemma is being shared and discussed with other members in Blank Noise’s core group, consisting of those who dedicate some time to reflect on the growth and development of the collective. They have no answer just yet, but they intend to continue reflecting on it. I have no idea what their future reflection looks like, but I do know that the class implications of the cyber sphere will be resolved with more than simply taking interventions to the streets. Considering that the actors of youth digital activism are, like it or not, urban, middle class, educated digital natives, Blank Noise’s reflection will indeed be relevant for all who is interested in this issue. And if you have your own thoughts on the strategies to resolve this dilemma, why don’t you drop a comment and reflect together with us?

This is the seventh post in the Beyond the Digital series, a research project that aims to explore new insights to understand youth digital activism conducted by Maesy Angelina with Blank Noise under the Hivos-CIS Digital Natives Knowledge Programme.

References:

Gajjala, R. (2004) Cyber selves: Feminist Ethnographies of South Asian Women. Walnut Creek: Almitra Press.

Lukose, R. (2008) ‘The Children of Liberalization: Youth Agency and Globalization

in India’, in Dolby, N. and Rizvi, F. (eds.) Youth Moves: Identities and Education in a Global Perspective, pp. 133-150.

Patheja, J. (2010) Case Study: Blank Noise. Accessed 7 November 2010 <http://www.indiasocial.in/case-study-blank-noise/>

Sinha-Kerkhoff, K. (2006) ‘Youth Activism in India’, in Sherrod, L.R., Flanagan, C.A.

and Kassimir, R. (eds.) Youth Activism: An International Encyclopedia, pp. 340-348. London: Greenwood Press.

Source for picture: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/photo.php?fbid=73473166363&set=o.2703755288&pid=2095143&id=687356363

[1] For example: http://www.jagori.org/ , one of the most established women organizations in India.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/the-class-question

Computer Science & Society – The Roles Defined

tettner — 2011-08-04T10:39:56Z

Computer Science has had a big impact on the growth of modern society. In today’s world keeping in mind the intersection between society and technology, creating powerful machines alone isn’t enough rather the role of computer science in society is undergoing a change, says Samuel Tettner in this blog post.

This week much fuzz is being made about Watson, an IBM super computer that handily defeated two of the most successful Jeopardy! champions and made it look easy. This event coincides with an interview in Time magazine with Ray Kurzweil, an American author, inventor and futurist involved in fields such as optical character recognition (OCR), text-to-speech synthesis, speech recognition technology, and electronic keyboard instruments. As a technology enthusiast he often talks about artificial intelligence and is a firm believer in ‘the singularity’, a moment in time when computers will become more intelligent than human beings.

These two events are representative of a society-wide fascination we have with machines that can become ‘smarter’ than us. Such fascination is the substance of popular science fiction as prophesied by the likes of Isaac Asimov and Douglas Adams. I think this sub-culture has taken hold of mainstream computer science, with the announced arrival of the ‘Network Society’ and the insane profit software and IT companies have accumulated in the 90s and the 00s. The cult of information has reached too far. The technological cloud of today, like the market of yesterday, is more and more conceived as something omnipresent, both being everywhere and nowhere, and omniscient, capable of knowing everything. Those who believe the cloud is going to save us all with its super human powers are as blinded as those free market ideologues who thought liberalization would bring democracy, peace and stability in the early 90s. This tendency to elevate our human practices and hold them as outside of ourselves, in the pursuit of something greater than ourselves has potential damaging consequences.

There was a time when technological advances in the field of computer science were greatly beneficial to society. With more raw computational powers novel understandings of the world were possible: Everything from statistical models of weather patterns, to the sequencing of the human genome, to improvements in telecommunication greatly benefited from them. We allocated millions of dollars to research and development because there was a premise that with greater computation, better understanding of the world would be possible which in turn would lead us to live healthier and more productive lives. Today however, our most pressing global issues benefit less and less from raw technological advances. Global climate change and environmental destruction are not issues because we lack the tools to analyze the complicated mathematical models which describe the effects human societies have on the planet for example. IBM says that it plans to use the powerful computer in the health care sector: “IBM researchers are working to apply the system to business uses, such as helping physicians and nurses find answers within huge volumes of information. A doctor considering a patient's diagnosis could use Watson's analytics technology along with Nuance's voice and clinical language understanding offerings to rapidly consider all the related texts, reference materials, prior cases and latest knowledge in medical journals to gain information from more potential sources then previously possible, making the physician more confident in the patient's diagnosis.”1

I find it impossible not to ask if these are really the areas where we ought to concentrate of scientific efforts. Take for example a society like the USA, where IBM is located. Diseases like diabetes, heart disease, and smoking-related illnesses, which cause society billions of dollars a year, are highly preventable. Public health campaigns and changes in eating patterns are more promising than advances in technology when it comes to solving issues like this.

Don’t get me wrong, computer science has an important role to play in society. I don’t think this role needs to continue being framed as a race to build the most powerful machine. One of the bigger impacts of digital technologies in the last few years has been the usage of social media in political and social causes. The revolutions in Iran and Egypt most recently are examples of how digital technologies played major roles in societal transformations. And yet, the technological side of twitter and Facebook is very simple, certainly very simple compared to the room-sized, 90 servers and 360 computer chips Watson. More and more, the interplay between society and technology is becoming the determinant factor in determining the impact of the technology. This signifies in my opinion a transition point in the field of computer science— it is no longer enough to build faster, more powerful machines with more raw computing power.

While we continue to imagine our role with digital technology as one of creator-creation we will always run the risk of pulling a Frankenstein. While we continue to attribute value to technologies based on their sheer computing power and not on their application to social causes we make it easier to displace our objectives and goals. We have to demystify computer science similar to how we had to demystify economics a couple of years ago with studies about the irrationality of human beings. Markets are made of people, and computers are made by and for people. We cannot continue to conceive ‘the cloud’ as a dehumanized identity foreign and above ourselves. The idolization of computers and of computer systems only pushes us further from achieving tangible results.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110216-719076.html

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/computers-in-society

Pull the Plug

praskrishna — 2012-01-03T10:21:16Z

Is it time to start talking about the right to disconnect? There is so much expectation and focus on being connected to the internet, that it seems like we don't have a choice. This article by Nishant Shah was published in the Indian Express.

W e hear a lot about how the internet should be considered as one of the basic human rights. As more of the world gets connected through the World Wide Web, and information becomes the new capital, there is a digital divide that emerges between those who can surf the web with ease, and those who struggle to boot their computers.

It is assumed that the digital natives are wired and connected, with their fingers constantly swooping on gadgets and their eyes glued to the interfaces at their disposal. They communicate with each other but also with the world around them through their tech tools, with the world just a click away. It is also assumed that for most digital natives, this existence in a surfeit of information and action is a default mode of being -that even when they are asleep, their digital selves are interacting in social networking systems, their gadgets are harvesting information from the Web, and their personal communication tools are bombarded with messages that are queued up for them to read when they wake up.

This constantly connected future is fuelled by governments and markets who are offering greater access to the young, both for education and consumption. Projects like the US-based One Laptop Per Child and mobile phones targeted at a "tweenage" demography are testimonies to how the younger generation is at the centre of this digital matrix of information communication.

In her book Alone Together, Sherry Turkle, professor at MIT, talks about how readers who are bombarded by snippets of information from a multitude of connections feel lost when disconnected from their smartphones and laptops. One of her key findings is that "these days, insecure in our relationships and anxious about intimacy, we look to technology for ways to be in relationships and protect ourselves from them at the same time".

In light of all this, the digital natives in our research group started debating about the right to disconnect. They proposed that there is so much expectation and focus on being connected, that it seems like they don't have a choice. This was a new way of looking at the relationships that digital natives have with technology.

Paola, one of our 20-something discussants from Latin America, told the story of the tyranny of BlackBerries. One of her friends recently applied for an internship as a part of her graduation programme. He cleared the interviews and got a six-month internship position with a large media house in Brazil. On the first day of work, as a part of his orientation, he was offered a BlackBerry. He wasn't particularly fond of the device and preferred to use his own smartphone. His reasoning was, "The BlackBerry never allows you to disconnect. When I am not at work, I want to be not at work."

It came as a rude shock to him when the company said that he had to use the BlackBerry because they wanted him be connected 24X7 to the media flows online. When he insisted, he was told that he would lose his internship if he did not accept the BlackBerry.

It is a story that found resonance with many other digital natives. They agreed that the internet is an incredible space for information consumption, and that they were very keen on the digital tools of communication and mobilisation. However, there seems to be an increased pressure on them to be wired all the time -no unplugging the cable, no downtime on the computer, no turning off of the cellphone. "If I have to go offline, I actually have to put it on Facebook and Twitter so that my friends don't get anxious," said another one.

"I get messages from followers asking me if I am alright, if I don't tweet for more than a few hours", agreed another. These pressures come from peers as well as the external world. And maybe, it is time to start talk ing about, along with the right to access, the right to disconnect.

The world might be shrinking and time might be ac celerating, but there is a value in being all alone and not necessarily together. As Paola says, "The next time you don't get a reply to your message from me in five minutes, it doesn't mean I am dead. It means that I choose not to. That I am digitally disconnected."

Email:

digitalnative@expressindia.com

Read the original in the Indian Express here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/pull-plug

Wiki changes the world

praskrishna — 2012-01-03T10:23:38Z

A fortnightly column on ‘Digital Natives’ authored by Nishant Shah is featured in the Sunday Eye, the national edition of Indian Express, Delhi, from September 2010 onwards. This article was published in the Indian Express on January 23, 2011. In this Nishant Shah explains how Wiki changes the world by making the ordinary person the expert and knowledge free.

If you have a question, where do you go? To books? To encyclopaedias? To knowledgeable friends? To experts in that field? The quest for knowledge is not easy. Often, we encounter false leads and reach dead ends. We often find ourselves dependent on vanguards and bearers of knowledge. The knowledge industry, which includes academia, schools, universities, libraries, archives, etc. have created labels that define consumers, producers and mediators of knowledge.

What do you do with the answer of a question? You generally store it in your memory. If it is an answer that you are searching for collaboratively, you share it with the concerned people. If you are meticulous and like to archive information, you probably write it down in a big brown book. But for many of us, we see our relationship with knowledge as one of consumption. Books, and indeed columns like this one, are written by “experts”.

If you have an answer, but nobody is asking you the question, what do you do with it? This was the question that Jimmy Wales, asked a decade ago. He then thought of starting a web-based, collaborative platform for knowledge production — now known as Wikipedia. Working on an open structure, Wikipedia invites anybody with internet access to start contributing and consolidating their knowledge through a process of discussion, consensus-building and collaboration. Unlike a regular encyclopaedia with its army of knowledge warriors, Wikipedia depends on everyday users who harness the power of information to bring together the “sum total of human knowledge”. In 10 years, Wikipedia has become the de facto global reference point for dynamic knowledge and boasts of more than 17 million articles with more than 365 million readers in 263 language editions.

For digital natives, the growth of Wikipedia illustrates the changing ways in which digital natives are learning and engaging with knowledge, both inside and outside of formal education.

Knowledge is a process

Digital natives, who contribute to Wikipedia and learn from it, know that there is more to knowledge than what is on the surface. While the entries on Wikipedia serve as a fount of information, it is layered by discussions, edit-wars, and processes of mediation that produce objective content. For young users of Wikipedia, the ability to question the content, the protocols of producing neutral evidence, and the often intense discussions, establish an intimate relationship with knowledge.

They look at knowledge as fluid, as open to contention and produced through multiple perspectives. In the world of user-generated content, knowledge is seen as a process of engagement rather than as an object to be mechanically consumed. Hence, it is not uncommon to see digital natives encountering information online — on platforms like Wikipedia, but also on blogs and discussion forums — expressing opinions and challenging the content when it does not fit their experience of that information.

Your experiences are also knowledge

One of the most important lessons that Wikipedia teaches a digital native, is that knowledge is not authored only by people with the backing of institutions. While there are some systems of knowledge which require formal training, there is a huge value in everyday and lived experiences. Encyclopaedias discriminate between different kinds of knowledge — Shakespeare’s work might find an entry in almost all of these, but the 16-year-old writer who has a larger readership than Shakespeare might easily be excluded. However, on Wikipedia, any realm of the cultural, political or social that is relevant and significantly affects our everyday life finds space and detailed research. This translation of lived experience into knowledge is new and opens up ways of producing alternative and plural knowledge systems around objects, people, events and ideas that shape the world.

It is open to all

Digital natives who have grown up in the Wikified world have also experienced information as something that belongs to a larger community. They don’t even espouse it as an ideology, but often think of knowledge as open and residing within digital public commons. In their multiple roles as bearers, producers, and consumers of knowledge, they are used to remixing, sharing and disseminating knowledge into a wider ecology. The analogue regimes of intellectual property and copyright do not make sense to them in a medium that is intuitively made for copying, sharing and owning knowledge collaboratively.

In the largely Wikifying world that we live in, the notions of what constitutes knowledge, how one accesses knowledge and how people interact with it is undergoing radical change. And the digital natives are silently but significantly shaping new ways of imagining knowledge processes, proving to us that the pen might be mightier than the sword, but the click trumps them both.

Original article was published by the Indian Express

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/wiki-world

A FLASH of Change

praskrishna — 2012-01-03T10:22:18Z

A fortnightly column on ‘Digital Natives’ authored by Nishant Shah is featured in the Sunday Eye, the national edition of Indian Express, Delhi, from September 2010 onwards. In this article published on February 6, 2011, Nishant Shah writes that citizens are organising, congregating, acting and thereby creating revolutions.

Imagine you are in your favourite mall, walking around, looking at familiar shops, staring at the latest fashions in the windows, chatting with your friends and scouting for food. And suddenly, a bunch of people, who were just there, as a part of the larger scene, start dancing. They churn out well orchestrated but easy-to-replicate moves and for the length of a song, they convert the mall into an impromptu dance floor and then disperse. Or how about when walking through a park, you suddenly see a crowd of young and old, coming together to have a vigorous pillow fight and then after a few minutes of riotous laughter, they disappear into the blue? What would you do if you were faced with something like this in the expected and safe environments that you are used to?

The next time you see something like this, remember that you have just seen a flash mob. Organise, congregate, act, disperse — that is the anatomy of a flash mob. It is a form of mobilisation where anonymous strangers, who are connected via mobile and Web-based communication structures, come together in public spaces to perform a series of pre-determined actions for a brief period of time. They are generally fun, create a lot of confusion for those not in the know, and infuse everybody with a sense of wonder. They fuel conversations by transforming regular places with something that is new and unexpected.

I was recently at the Godrej India Culture Lab in Mumbai, to speak about digital natives, flash mobs and how they have the potential to change the world. Flash mobs are often seen to be frivolous and seen to achieve “mere fun” more than anything else. While I do want to make a case for how “mere fun” is actually the strongest means of political subversion and protest, something else erupted that made us all spectators of History (with the capital H) in the last two weeks.

In Egypt, tens of thousands of protesters came out into the streets of Cairo, Alexandria, Suez, and other cities, to demand the overthrow of an authoritarian government that has been unable to meet the needs of its citizens. In a dramatic unfolding of events, starting on January 25, young people in Egypt used Facebook, Twitter, SMS, emails and other forms of digital communication to come together in an unprecedented show of protest on the streets.

What has happened in the last few days is now the stuff of legend. There were digital blackouts and information blockages. The internet was blocked in the country so that protesters would be left in the dark. Mobile phone companies and internet service providers were ordered to debilitate the entire communication infrastructure so that word would not spread — within or outside Egypt. But such is the strength of the digital medium that the signal was lost, but the voice survived. It found echoes and resonances around the world. In a matter of hours, “Egypt” and “Jan 25” emerged as the most tagged messages on Twitter, with more than 2,500 tweets per second. The civic hackers in Egypt found supporters around the world, who not only spread their message but also provided them with legal and political infrastructure to make sure that their voice was heard.

This revolution, in the first month of the second decade of the 21st century, is not only about the present but also about what the future will hold. The young — digital natives who are integrated with the circuits of technology mobilisation and networking — were able to use these platforms to fight for their rights for freedom, dignity and expression. And all this was orchestrated using viral networking technologies and digital communication assemblages. I do not want to go into analysing Egypt’s politics, but I do want to highlight that the democratic citizen-driven future is already here.

The ways in which digital natives are able to harvest the technologies of mass communication and outreach are an indication of how the contours of global governance are going to be shaped. Citizen journalism, citizen action and civic collaboration are the new weapons of social change and transformation that the young are able to use effectively. Across the world, flash mobs like these bring together virtual strangers in spaces of physical solidarity. True, a lot of them are fun and games. But in participating in these playful structures, digital natives also develop new cultures of trust, belonging, participation, collaboration and mobilisation that remind us that we do not inherit the world from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. And they now have the power to ask us questions for which we might not always have the answers.

Original article was published by Indian Express

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/flash-of-change

"Digital Natives with a Cause?" newsletter Volume I

tettner — 2015-05-15T11:44:19Z

For everyone who is interested in learning more about the Digital Natives who form part of the "Digital Natives with a Cause?" community. The Newsletter includes opinion posts by participants from the three workshops, interview with them, comics and cartoons highlighting current issues affecting the community, as well as current news and discussions happening at the project website, www.digitalnatives.in

"Links in the Chain" is a bi-monthly publication which highlights the projects, ideas and news of the "Digital Natives with a Cause?" community members. The first volume was introductory and experimental in nature. Here are the two issues of volume I:

Links in The Chain - Volume I

Links in The Chain - Volume I issue II

For more information on"Digital Natives with a Cause?" please check out www.digitalnatives.in

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/digital-natives-with-a-cause-newsletter-volume-i

The Many Faces Within

maesy — 2011-08-04T10:41:53Z

Blank Noise, as many other digital native collectives, may seem to be complete horizontal at first glance. But, a closer look reveals the many different possibilities for involvement and a unique way the collective organize itself.

One day, during an afternoon stroll to the M.C. Escher museum in The Hague, I stumbled upon a painting called ‘Fish and Scales’. On the first glance, I saw two big black-and-white fishes and some smaller ones, but on a closer look I found hundreds of fishes, heading to different directions and merging seamlessly into the bigger fishes as their scales. Upon this discovery, I exclaimed out loud, “This is just like Blank Noise!”

No, I do not mean to imply in any way that the Blank Noise Project is like a fish, although it is definitely as fascinating as the painting. Rather, I found that this painting from the master of optical illusion is a great analogy to the structures of Blank Noise.

In the words of Kunal Ashok, one of the male volunteers, the collective consists not only of “people who volunteer or come to meetings, but anyone that have contributed in any way they can and identified with the issue.” In this sense, Blank Noise today consists of over 2,000 people who signed up to their e-group as volunteers.

How does a collective with that many people work? Firstly, although these people are called ‘volunteers’ for registering in the e-group, I would argue that a majority of them are actually what I call casual participants – those who comment on Blank Noise interventions, re-Tweet their call for action, promote Blank Noise to their friends through word of mouth, or simply lurk and follow their activities online. In the offline sense, they are the passers-by who participate in their street interventions or become intrigued to think about the issue afterwards. These people, including those who do the same activities without formally signing up as volunteers, are acknowledged to be a part of Blank Noise as much as those who really do volunteer.

Blank Noise is open to all who shares its concern and values, but its volunteers must go beyond articulating an opinion and commit to collective action. However, Blank Noise applies very little requirement for people to identify themselves with the collective. The main bond that unites them is their shared concern with street sexual harassment. Blank Noise’s analysis of the issue is sharp, but it also accommodates diverse perspectives by exploring the fine lines of street sexual harassment and not prescribing any concrete solution, while the latter is rarely found in existing social movements. The absence of indoctrination or concrete agenda reiterated through the public dialogue approach gives room for people to share different opinions and still respect others in the collective.

Other than these requirements, they are able to decide exactly how and when they want to be involved. They can join existing activities or initiate new ones; they can continuously participate or have on-and-off periods. This is reflected in the variety of volunteers’ motivations, activities, and the meaning they give to their involvement. For some people, helping Blank Noise’s street interventions is exciting because they like street art and engaging with other young people. Many are involved in online campaigns because they are not physically based in any of the cities where Blank Noise is present. Some others prefer to do one-off volunteering by proposing a project to a coordinator and then implementing it. There are people who started volunteering by initiating Blank Noise chapters in other cities and the gradually have a more prominent role. Some stay for the long term, some are active only for several times before going back to become supporters that spread Blank Noise through words of mouth. The ability to personalize volunteerism is also what makes Blank Noise appealing, compared to the stricter templates for volunteering in other social movements.

Any kind of movement requires a committed group of individuals among the many members to manage it. The same applies to Blank Noise, who relies on a group of people who dedicate time and resources to facilitate volunteers and think of the collective’s future: the Core Team. Members of the Core Team, about ten people, are credited in Blank Noise’s Frequently Asked Question page and are part of a separate e-group than the volunteers. In its seven years, the Core Team only went for a retreat once and mostly connected through the e-group. In this space, they raise questions, ideas, and debates around Blank Noise’s interventions, posters, and blog posts. Consequently, for them the issue is not only street sexual harassment but also related to masculinities, citizenship, class, stereotyping, gender, and public space. However, there are also layers in the intensity of the Team members’ engagement.

The most intense is Jasmeen, the founder and the only one who has been with Blank Noise since its inception until today. Jasmeen is an artist and considers Blank Noise to be a part of her practice; she has received funds to work for Blank Noise as an artist. Thus, she is the only one who dedicates herself to BN full time and becomes the most visible among the volunteers and the public eye. According to Jasmeen, she is not alone in managing the whole process within Blank Noise. Since Hemangini Gupta came on board in 2006, she has slowly become the other main facilitator. “It is a fact that every discussion goes through her. I may be the face of it, but I see Hemangini and me working together. We rely on each other for Blank Noise work,” Jasmeen said.

Hemangini, a former journalist who is now pursuing a PhD in the U.S., explains her lack of visibility. “Blank Noise could never be my number one priority because it doesn’t pay my bills, so I can only do it when I have free time and my other work is done.” The same is true for others in the Core Team: students, journalists, writers, artists. Unlike Hemangini who still managed to be intensively involved, they have dormant and active periods like the volunteers.

The Core Team’s functions as coordinators that facilitate the volunteers’ involvement in Blank Noise and ensure that the interventions stay with the values Blank Noise upholds: confronting the issue but not aggravating the people, creating public dialogue instead of one-way preaching. This role emerged in 2006 when the volunteer applications mounted as the result of the aforementioned blogathon. They have also initiated or made Blank Noise chapters in other cities grew. Although some of them have also moved to another city due to work, they remain active touch through online means. Together, the Core Team forms the de-facto leadership in Blank Noise.

I am tempted to describe Blank Noise as having a de-facto hierarchy in its internal organization. The form would be a pyramid, with Jasmeen on top, followed by the coordinators, long-term project-based volunteers, one-off-project-initiator volunteers, and then the casual participants. After all, it was clear from my conversations with the many types of volunteers within Blank Noise that they acknowledge that some people are involved more intensely and carry more responsibilities than others in the collective, that there is an implicit leadership roles. This is also shown by the reluctance of many volunteers to call themselves as an ‘activist’, claiming that the title is only suitable for people within those leadership roles and preferring to call themselves ‘supporters’, ‘part of the group’, or ‘volunteers’ instead.

However, doing this will be a mistake in interpreting the internal dynamics within Blank Noise. Firstly, the line between the types of participation is not as clear-cut as it appears to be. With the exception of Jasmeen, everyone from the coordinators to the one-off volunteers has active and dormant periods depending on what happens in their personal lives; they can shift roles quite easily. Some of Blank Noise coordinators, for instance, are now pursuing higher education abroad and could only be very active when the return to India during the holidays or when the school schedule is not as demanding. During momentary dormant periods, they turn into casual participants because those are the only roles they are able to take. Secondly, a hierarchy implies that casual participants are not important for the collective, whereas they turn out to be the main “target group” and the reason why Blank Noise has grown internally and in the public eye.

This is again a reason why I was so taken by Escher’s painting. There are definitely “big fish” leadership figures, but their scales are actually smaller fishes in different forms, symbolizing how the roles of a person in the collective could shift from “big” to “small” and vice versa depending on your perspective. The many fishes are not depicted horizontally, but also not in a clear hierarchy. Instead, they are interconnected with each other. The type of connection is not very clear and the fishes seem to be swimming in different directions, but they make a cohesive unity. This is the beauty of both Escher’s creation and Blank Noise.

This is the eighth post in the Beyond the Digital series, a research project that aims to explore new insights to understand youth digital activism conducted by Maesy Angelina with The Blank Noise Project under the Hivos-CIS Digital Natives Knowledge Programme.

The photo of M.C. Escher’s painting ‘Fish and Scales’ is borrowed from:

http://www.mathacademy.com/pr/minitext/escher/big.asp?IMAGE=fish_and_scales

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/the-many-faces-within

Activism: Unraveling the Term

maesy — 2015-05-14T12:25:05Z

After discussing Blank Noise’s politics and ways of organizing, the current post explores whether activism is still a relevant concept to capture the involvement of people within the collective. I explore the questions from the vantage point of the youth actors, through conversations about how they relate with the very term of activism.

Youth's Popular Imagination of Activism

As a start, I need to clarify that ‘activism’ is not a concept that the participants are generally concerned with. For a majority of them, the conversation we had was the first time they thought of what the term means and reflect whether their engagement with Blank Noise is activism. Regardless of whether one identifies Blank Noise as a form of activism or not, all participants share a popular idea of what activism is.

Generally speaking, at an abstract level all participants saw activism as passionately caring about an injustice and taking action to create social change. At a more tangible level, all participants mentioned three elements as popular ideas about doing activism. The first is the existence of a concrete demands as a solution to the identified problem, such as asking for service provision or state regulations. Since these demands are structural, activism is also seen dealing with formal authority figures in the traditional sense of politics, the state. The second is the intensity and commitment required to be an activist, for many participants being an activist means having prolonged engagement, taking risks, and making the struggle a priority in one’s life. In other words, being an activist means “... being neck-deep, spending most if not all of your time, energy, and resources for the cause” (Dev Sukumar, male, 34). The third element relates to the methods, called by some as ‘old school’: shouting slogans, holding placards, and doing marches on the streets – all enacted in the physical public space. This popular imagination of activism becomes the orientation for participants in deciding whether Blank Noise is a form of activism and whether they are activists for being involved in it.

Activism as the Intention and Action

“I have an idea of what activism is but not what it exactly looks like.”

(Apurva Mathad, male, 28).

For those who think that Blank Noise is a form of activism, there was a differentiation between the idea at the abstract level and how it is manifested at a more tangible level. The definition of activism is the abstract one, while the popular ideas of doing activism do not define the concept but present the most common out many possible courses of actions. Blank Noise is fulfils all the elements in the abstract definition: a passion about an injustice, having an aim for social change, and acting to achieve the aim. Hence, Blank Noise is activism, but the way it manifests itself does not adhere to the popular imagination of doing activism. The distinction between Blank Noise’s methods with popular ones was emphasized, along with the difference in articulating goals.

Interestingly, not all participants who share this line of thinking called themselves as activists for being involved in an activism. Again, it must be reiterated that no participants ever really thought of giving a name to their engagement prior to the interview. Instead of saying ‘I am an activist’, they said ‘I guess I could be called an activist’ for the fact that they are sharing the passion and being actively involved in a form of activism, albeit in an unconventional manner.

Those who would categorize Blank Noise as activism but not call themselves activists related with a particular element on the popular idea of doing activism, which is getting “neck-deep”. They were helpers, volunteers, idea spreaders, but not an activist because their lives are not dedicated for the cause or their involvements were based on availability. On the other hand, these participants all said that Jasmeen is an activist for being completely dedicated to Blank Noise from its inception until today.

Activism as Particular Ways of Doing and Being

“What are the repercussions if activism is so fluidly defined? It can mean not questioning

privilege... not seeing the class divisions and still call yourself activist.”

(Hemangini Gupta, female, 29).

Most participants did not consider Blank Noise as an activism. Generally, this can be explained by the discrepancies between Blank Noise and the popular imagination on the tangible ways of doing activism. Blank Noise does not propose a concrete solution or make concrete demands to an established formal structure nor did it march on the streets and make slogans. However, the underlying attitude to this point of view is not of a younger generation finding the ‘old’ ways of doing activism obsolete. Rather, there was an acknowledgement that the issue itself causes the different ways of reading an issue and taking actions to address it.

Furthermore, there is an appreciation to the achievements and dedication of activists that deterred them from calling themselves activists. These people referred to their occasional participation and the fact that Blank Noise is not the main priority in their lives as a student or young professional despite being a cause they are passionate about. As reflected in the opening quote, being an activist for some participants also means deeply reflecting on their self position in terms of class, acknowledging their privileges, and putting themselves in a position that will enable them to imagine the experience of people who are also affected by the issue but has a different position in the society. In other words, being an activist is not just about doing but also about critically reflecting on one’s position in relation to the issue and how it influences the way an issue is being pushed forward. Thinking that they are not up to these standards, these youth choose to call themselves ‘volunteers’, ‘helpers’, or ‘supporters’.

Youth: The Activist, the Apathetic, and the Everyday

“Blank Noise is a public and community street arts collective that is volunteer-led and attempts to create public dialogue on the issue of street sexual violence and eve teasing.”

(Jasmeen Patheja)

“... a group of people against street sexual harassment and eve teasing.”

(Kunal Ashok, men, 29)

“... an idea that really works.”

(Neha Bhat, 19)

As clarified before, the participants did not use the words ‘movement’ and very few used ‘activism’ during our conversations. Instead, the terms they used to describe Blank Noise are represented in the quotes above: collective, community, group, project, and even as an idea. These phrases do not carry the same political baggage that ‘movement’ or ‘activism’ would; they also do not conjure a particular imagination that the other two terms would. These phrases are de-politicized and informal; they imply fluidity, lack of hierarchy, and room for manoeuvre.

The implied meanings in the terms reflect the debates on the average youth and political engagement. For the past decade, various youth scholars criticized the dichotomy of youth as either activists or apathetic in explaining the global trend of decreased youth participation in formal politics. The activists are either politically active Digital Natives engaged in new forms of social movements influenced heavily by new media or sub-cultural resistances, which only account for a fraction of the youth population that are mostly completely apathetic. This dichotomy ignored the ‘broad “mainstream” young people who are neither deeply apathetic about politics on unconventionally engaged’ (Harris et al, 2010).

These mainstream young people actually are socially and politically engaged in ‘everyday activism’ (Bang, 2004; Harris et al, 2010). These are young people who are personalizing politics by adopting causes in their daily behaviour and lifestyle, for instance by purchasing only Fair Trade goods, or being very involved in a short term concrete project but then stopping and moving on to other activities. The emergence of these everyday activists are explained by the dwindling authority of the state in the emergence of major corporations as political powers (Castells, 2009) and youth’s decreased faith in formal political structures which also resulted in decreased interest in collectivist, hierarchical social movements in favour of a more individualized form of activism (Harris et al, 2010). Internet and new media technologies are credited as an enabling factor, being a space and a medium for young people to express their everyday activism.

All of the research participants, perhaps with the exception of Jasmeen as the only one who has constantly been the driver Blank Noise its entire seven years, are these everyday makers, people who were involved with the Blank Noise either on a daily basis as a commentator, one-time project initiator and leader, or people who were active when they are available but remain dormant at other times. Blank Noise is a space where these individual forms of engagement could be exercised while remaining as a collective. The facilitation is not only by the flexibility of coming and going, but also the lack of rigid group rules and the approach of allowing Blank Noise to be interpreted differently by individuals. Considering that the mainstream urban youth are everyday makers who would not find ‘old’ or ‘new’ social movements appealing, this can be the reason why Blank Noise became so popular among youth; however, I would also argue that the fact that Blank Noise is the first to systematically address eve teasing is a determining cause.

The implications of this finding, together with other concluding thoughts, will be shared in the next and final post in the Beyond the Digital series.

This is the ninth post in the Beyond the Digital series, a research project that aims to explore new insights to understand youth digital activism conducted by Maesy Angelina with Blank Noise Project under the Hivos-CIS Digital Natives Knowledge Programme.

References:

Bang, H.P. (2004) ‘Among everyday makers and expert citizens’. Accessed 21 September 2010. http://www.sam.kau.se/stv/ksspa/papers/bang.pdf

Castells, M. (2009) Communication Power. New York: Oxford University Press.

Harris, A., Wyn, J., and Younes, S. (2010) ‘Beyond apathetic or activist youth: ‘Ordinary’ young people and contemporary forms of participaton’, Young Vol. 18:9, pp. 9-32

Image source: http://blog.blanknoise.org/2010/02/tweet-now-feb-17-27.html

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/activism-unraveling-the-term

Digital Natives with a Cause? A Report

pushpa — 2012-01-03T10:28:41Z

Youth are often seen as potential agents of change for reshaping their own societies. By 2010, the global youth population is expected reach almost 1.2 billion of which 85% reside in developing countries. Unleashing the potential of even a part of this group in developing countries promises a substantially impact on societies. Especially now when youths thriving on digital technologies flood universities, work forces, and governments and could facilitate radical restructuring of the world we live in. So, it’s time we start listening to them.

Download the Digital Natives Report here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/digital-natives-with-a-cause-a-report

Good Karma Online

frankoweaver — 2012-02-18T15:12:35Z

I create online content to promote good karma, such as Guarani Indian culture (natives of Paraguay) and environmental conservation. I then use social media to raise awareness about those causes.

Video Genre: Documentary

Frank Weaver

Location

Orlando, USA

Age

Profession: Manager at a retail store

I use filmmaking and social media to advocate causes close to my heart, such as indigenous rights in the South American rain forests where I was born and raised, and environmental conservation in my new homeland of Central Florida.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/good-karma-online

Connecting Souls, Bridging Dreams

judeebendiola — 2012-04-04T10:08:19Z

I come from a third world country where technology seemed hard to reach in the 90s, especially by the not-so-privileged. As we progressed, technology has not only become ubiquitous (in malls, institutions and companies) but also, it has come to be used by the common man. My video will answer how technology bridges the gap between dreams and reality.

Video Genre: Documentary and live action

Marie Jude Bendiola

Location: Singapore

Age: 24

Profession: Marketing Executive

I'm an actor, writer, host, marketing executive, journalist, researcher, dancer, soon to be singer, producer,newbie in modelling, traveller, philanthropist, traveller, daughter, sister, friend,a proud Filipino, son of God, and a student of life. Be my... Friend on Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/judeebendiola Follower on Twitter:https://twitter.com/#!/judeebendiola Audience in Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/judeebee?feature=guide Fan in Google+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/112398447067099126396/

Interview

What do you understand by the term Digital Native? Do you consider yourself one? Do you think you need to belong to a particular socio-economic-geographical background to be considered a Digital Native?
For me, Digital Native means being equipped most of the time with gadgets that we have nowadays. The idea pertains to the usage of these gadgets to alleviate day to day activities or for mere pleasure. I can say that I am a Digital Native because from the moment I wake up, go to work, eat or rest I usually have a gadget in my hand. Being a Digital native doesn’t entail belonging to upper class of the society. In Philippines, most citizens own a cell phone or television. Government and private institutions bring mobile libraries or computers to depressed areas so they can be empowered by technology. One of the primary requirements of being a digital native is not your political, regional, societal or even physical status but instead it requires a level of openness or acceptance to the new technology that’s in your hands. I think the issue is how you plan to utilize this gadget to help yourself in your daily life, and how responsible you are in carrying out their functions for the promotion of the common good which may not be detrimental to others. If you’re an open and responsible user of technology then I think you are worthy to be called a Digital Native.

How effective are digital activism campaigns in raising awareness about an issue?
The online platform is an instrument for freedom of expression. Just like any protests on the street, technology provides a bigger arena to anyone to fight for their rights. But I would also add that though it is good to state what you believe in and what you’re supporting online, we should also be more responsible as users of technology. As long as we still respect others and there are no derogatory statements that may harm others, social media platforms have been useful in many ways.

A recent example of online activism is the ‘Get Kony 2012’ video campaign created by US-based NGO Invisible Children. What are your thoughts on the campaign?
It’s heart-breaking but at the same time empowering. The video compares life in a developed country with that of a developing one and exposes what is happening in Uganda. It effectively motivates us to do something good, now.

Are we seeing a trend where digital natives are more involved with local causes than with global, larger issues that don’t immediately impact their lives?
I think the use of technology empowers everyone from high officials to ordinary individuals to push their cause, stand for their rights and make this world a better place. Any local cause from a community which is posted online is no longer just a local cause but can transform into an issue that has global resonance. Somewhere in the world, other places might be experiencing the very issue that a small community is trying to highlight, so social media platforms help project a local cause into a global one. It makes our world closer so that everyone can lend a helping hand no matter how many miles we are all apart.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/connecting-souls-bridging-dreams

Immigrants not Natives

Sally Wyatt — 2012-04-30T10:27:59Z

Sally Wyatt reviews the four-book collective, Digital AlterNatives with a Cause? edited by Nishant Shah & Fieke Jansen.

Review of Digital AlterNatives with a Cause? edited by Nishant Shah & Fieke Jansen, Bangalore: Centre for Internet and Society/The Hague: Hivos Knowledge Programme, 2011:

Digital AlterNatives with a Cause? (2011) is the product of a series of workshops held in 2010-11 in Taiwan, South Africa and Chile. The aim was to bring together a different cohort of ‘digital natives’ than that which had hitherto been assumed in the popular and academic literature, namely white, highly educated, (mostly) male elites largely to be found on and around US university campuses. The workshops brought together 80 people who identified themselves as ‘digital natives’ but with very different backgrounds, and who came from Asia, Africa and Latin America. The four booklets which have been produced on the themes of ‘To Be’, ‘To Think’, ‘To Act’ and ‘To Connect’ provide many fascinating and thought-provoking insights into the possibilities for reflection, action and interaction available to this group.

In my review, I focus on the editorial comments provided by Nishant Shah and Fieke Jansen in the Preface, the Introduction, and the sidebar text running alongside most of Book One, To Be, in which they provide the context for the workshops and the books, and in which they reflect on the concept of ‘digital native’. Shah and Jansen recognise many of the limits of the concept of ‘digital native’, and reflect upon those limits and possible alternatives. They and the contributors keep the term, while at the same time challenging it, refining it and reclaiming it. It is to this ongoing process of reflection and definition that I would like to contribute, and I do so by thinking about my own position as a user and an analyst of digital technologies and as a Canadian-born child of immigrants.

I was born in 1959 so there is no chance of me being mistaken for a ‘digital native’ (often defined as someone born after 1980). Yet I was programming when I was a student in the late 1970s, and I have lived in a house with a computer in it since 1984, though I didn’t acquire home internet access until 2002, relatively late for a person living in north-western Europe with my income and occupation. One feature of this life, not at all untypical for someone of my age and background, is that I experienced digital technology before it was black-boxed, when to operate a home computer required a certain level of engineering skill, and when the sleekness of today’s devices was still a dream. Maybe I am what the editors refer to (ironically and with affection they claim) as a ‘digital dinosaur’ (p.15). I would never claim to have been part of the cohort who created the internet, though maybe I am part of the group of social scientists who began analysing the social aspects of digital technologies, in both their production and their use, sooner rather than later.[1]

I’m also of a generation deeply affected by second-wave feminism. One of the most important books for us was The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir, in which she wrote, ‘One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman’ (1949, p.267). This sentence, reproduced on countless posters, coffee mugs and t-shirts, neatly encapsulates the idea that gender is socially constructed, that there is nothing essential about the category of ‘woman’, nor of any other category. I would like to suggest that it also applies to digital natives – they are not born, they are made. Just because processes of socialisation are subtle and powerful, and one no longer has to poke the mother board with a paper clip to make the computer work, it does not mean that digital natives arrive fully formed as such in the world, nor that the identity will remain stable over time for them individually or as a group.

I read these volumes while in Canada in early 2012. I was born and grew up in Canada, though I have lived in Europe for all of my adult life. Canada and other settler societies use ‘native’ differently from Europeans. It was a term often used by colonisers to describe Indigenous communities such as the First Nations people in Canada, Aboriginal people in Australia, or the Māori in New Zealand. ‘Natives’ were not respected by the colonisers, and these groups continue to suffer disadvantage and discrimination. Moreover, the term ‘native’ is not used by Indigenous communities to describe themselves.

And because ‘native’ has different connotations, so does ‘immigrant’. I have lived for the past decade in the Netherlands, where to be an ‘immigrant’ is not comfortable, as attitudes and policies towards immigrants have become harsher, and the official definition of ‘native’ more exclusive. It is different in Canada, where the state of being an immigrant is almost the norm. Most people (except the First Nations people) are immigrants themselves, or have immigrants in their not too distant family histories. Canadians are comfortable with hybrid identities – there are not only French Canadians, but also Chinese Canadians, Greek Canadians and Chilean Canadians. I attended an international sporting event while visiting, and many of the spectators brought two flags with them to wave, depending on who was competing; or they had superimposed the maple leaf (the symbol of Canada that appears in the middle of the national flag) onto the flag of another country. There are many advantages to being an immigrant, apart from a wider choice of sporting heroes. One is that we know that identity is performance. Immigrants are constantly ‘becoming’ - legally, bureaucratically, linguistically and culturally.

Another advantage of being an immigrant comes from understanding the possibilities for re-invention. Many immigrants come for the promise of a better life for themselves and their children. It can be difficult and painful, but also exhilarating to start a new life, without the baggage of the past, whether one’s own youthful indiscretions or the burdens of expectation of the ‘old country’. I wonder whether ‘digital natives’ will ever experience the excitement of a new start. What will happen when they reach middle age, and the digital traces they have been creating since childhood cannot be erased and continue to follow them wherever they go? How will they cope when a younger generation arrives with a newer technology offering other possibilities for social transformation, because we can be certain that there will be newer technologies and that they will be accompanied by promises of social change?

It is too easy to assume that ‘native’ is a superior identity position to ‘immigrant’, or that natives always have advantages compared to immigrants because of their greater familiarity with the norms and codes of a way of life, digital or otherwise. In this volume, the project of reclaiming and expanding the reach of ‘digital native’ suggests that the editors and contributors see it as the preferred identity. Both ‘native’ and ‘immigrant’ are constructed categories, but ‘immigrant’ (from my particular historically located subject position) often feels like a more dynamic and reflexive identity position.

I will conclude by further performing my middle-aged curmudgeonly identity (and it is somewhat frightening how quickly one can slip into this as one passes 50). On many occasions in recent years, I have heard digital natives say – without shame – that they do not read anything that is not available online. Sometimes this is for understandable reasons, such as the cost and scarcity of printed versions, especially in countries where the workshops were held. But sometimes they seem genuinely unaware that many books and sources are not available digitally. One problem with only reading material that is born digital or has been digitised (sometimes badly) is that one becomes desensitised to grammatical niceties. Nishant Shah and Fieke Jansen are the editors of these four volumes, and an executive editor is listed in the colophon. I am reluctant to criticise people who might not be native speakers of English, but there is at least one language mistake in almost every paragraph. The paper books of Digital (Alter)Natives with a Cause? are beautifully designed and produced. The production values of this project were high. It is unfortunate that more effort was not expended in language editing. Copy editors are in danger of suffering the same fate as the bison of the Great Plains, but this time not at the hands of settlers but at the hands and keyboards of digital natives.

[1].See Wyatt (2008) where I discuss at greater length the relationship between information society debates and feminist analyses of technology, and include elements of my personal relationship to those debates.

References

de Beauvoir, Simone (1949/1989). The Second Sex, trans. H. M. Parshley. New York: Vintage Books.
Wyatt, Sally (2008) ‘Feminism, technology and the information society: Learning from the past, imagining the future’ Information, Communication & Society, 11,1: 111-30.

Sally Wyatt works with the eHumanities Group, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts & Sciences/Maastricht University.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/media-coverage/immigrants-not-natives

Journey to and from Digital

joseph.francis1218 — 2012-03-14T08:38:30Z

A young man gets ready to start his day: switching on his cable box, checking his Blackberry, listening to music, and microwaving his food. As he leaves, he turns on his iPod and sends a text message via his cell phone. Waiting for the train, he responds to emails and posts to Facebook. He sends a tweet and then gets to work. All day answering emails and phone calls while staring at a computer screen. Finally he ends his work day only to stare at a digital screen for train arrivals. Inside the train, he once again begins sending messages and tweets. Once he gets to his destination, he is told by an attractive woman to “unplug” and be with her. The End. Credits roll.

Video Genre: Film

Joseph Francis

Location: Brooklyn, NY United States
Age: 31
Profession: Film Producer/Director

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/journey-to-and-from-digital

Get Busy Living

mesdes2006 — 2012-02-18T15:14:25Z

Name(s): Mesfin Gebeyhu
Location: Mekelle, Ethiopia
Age: 31
Profession: I am a lecturer at the department of Journalism and communication in Mekelle University-Ethiopia. Broadcast Journalism is my major field of study and i have been teaching television program production for the last 4 years.

Video Genre: Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/get-busy-living