Boko Haram didn't #bringbackourgirls. So what are we going to do now?
Where are our girls? A month ago everyone wanted to know. Michelle Obama wanted to know. David Cameron wanted to know. A whole host of celebrities, politicians and opinion formers wanted to know.
It was the campaign that social media had been invented for. From Toronto to Timbuctoo, ordinary mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters held up their hand-written signs to the world. And the world responded. “Bring back our girls,” it demanded.
But they weren’t brought back. So the world put down its signs, and moved on.
This week we have a new cause: Bring back our journalists. It’s a worthy one. Three Al Jazeera journalists have been sentenced to seven years in jail in Egypt for the crime of “spreading false news”. Social media has mobilised again. Twitter and Facebook have come alive with thousands of images of news gatherers, politicians and celebrities with their mouths taped shut. The hand written signs have again been deployed – “#FreeAJStaff”.
They should be freed. Their incarceration is an abomination. But so is the incarceration of 250 Nigerian schoolgirls. And suddenly, they seem to have been forgotten.
They may not have been forgotten, of course. As we speak, Barack Obama’s Seal teams may be conducting their final training runs. The SAS rescue squad that had reportedly been sent to Nigeria may already have received its orders to lock and load. There could be a very good reason why world’s politicians have fallen silent.
But if that is the case, then that information won’t have been communicated to the army of celebrities and social media surfers who four weeks ago had adopted “our girls” as their crusade.
There is no reason, of course, why the plight of the Al Jazeera journalists and the plight of the Nigerian schoolgirls should be mutually exclusive. Our basic sense of compassion and intolerance of injustice should enable us to embrace more than one worthy cause at a time.
Except it’s quite clear that in the social media age, we can’t. A month ago people were holding up the “Bring Back Our Girls” campaign as an example of the power of Facebook and Twitter to do good. Both platforms could bring to people’s attention vital issues that would previously have been ignored, or if communicated via traditional media outlets, resulted in a giant global shrug. “That’s terrible. But what can we do?”
But as we’ve seen, what Twitter and Facebook give with one hand, they take with the other. As soon as their focus shifts, so does ours. And the very nature of the medium – fast, transient, superficial – means that focus never stays in the same place for long.
Our world must now be encapsulated in 140 characters. So we can have Boko Haram as our sadistic Islamists of the week. Or we can have Isis. But we can’t have both. Not at the same time.
“Ah, yes,” people say, “but at least we’ve done something. Those people who held up their signs have taken a stand.” And it’s true, they have. But then why wouldn’t they? Taking a stand is fairly easy these days.
Not so long ago supporting a campaign involved actually giving something. You wrote a letter. You went on a march. Maybe you even delivered a leaflet. It required an investment of both thought and time. And because you had invested in the action, you had also invested in the outcome.
Now we press “retweet". It takes half a second. And then, if you’re like me, you then move on to your next retweet. “#bringbackourgirls”. Click. “#suarezbiting”. Click. “#hackingtrial”. Click.
Are we really taking a stand? Or are we sitting by our computers, killing a bit of dead time.
If you were a parent of those girls, imagine how you would have felt when you saw Michelle Obama holding up that sign about your daughter? Your own little girl. And how would you have felt when you saw her recent tweet: “2 days, 3 states, thousands of kids and lots of dancing. Check out photos.” Are they our girls? Or are they really just our click bait?
Here’s how Boko Haram have responded to us taking a stand. According to reports, the terror group last week assaulted a village called Kummabza in the Damboa district of Borno state. The attackers left 30 dead, and kidnapped 60 women and young girls, and 31 boys.
When terrorists see the world responding to their atrocities with hand written signs on Twitter, what lesson do they draw? Do they say to themselves: “We’ve made a mistake. This is just the beginning. They are coming for us now”? Or do they say: “This is the extent of their response"? They will hold up their signs for a few weeks, then move on to something else? We are safe”? And what lesson should they draw?
Last month I asked a question – if Boko Haram don’t bring back our girls, what are we going to do about it? Well, they haven’t brought back our girls. So I’ll ask again. What are we going to do now?
Source: This article was first published on Telegraph UK by Dan Hodges. He is on Twitter at @dpjhodges.
 |
| Image: Pius Utomi Ekpei/AFP/ |
But they weren’t brought back. So the world put down its signs, and moved on.
This week we have a new cause: Bring back our journalists. It’s a worthy one. Three Al Jazeera journalists have been sentenced to seven years in jail in Egypt for the crime of “spreading false news”. Social media has mobilised again. Twitter and Facebook have come alive with thousands of images of news gatherers, politicians and celebrities with their mouths taped shut. The hand written signs have again been deployed – “#FreeAJStaff”.
They should be freed. Their incarceration is an abomination. But so is the incarceration of 250 Nigerian schoolgirls. And suddenly, they seem to have been forgotten.
They may not have been forgotten, of course. As we speak, Barack Obama’s Seal teams may be conducting their final training runs. The SAS rescue squad that had reportedly been sent to Nigeria may already have received its orders to lock and load. There could be a very good reason why world’s politicians have fallen silent.
But if that is the case, then that information won’t have been communicated to the army of celebrities and social media surfers who four weeks ago had adopted “our girls” as their crusade.
There is no reason, of course, why the plight of the Al Jazeera journalists and the plight of the Nigerian schoolgirls should be mutually exclusive. Our basic sense of compassion and intolerance of injustice should enable us to embrace more than one worthy cause at a time.
Except it’s quite clear that in the social media age, we can’t. A month ago people were holding up the “Bring Back Our Girls” campaign as an example of the power of Facebook and Twitter to do good. Both platforms could bring to people’s attention vital issues that would previously have been ignored, or if communicated via traditional media outlets, resulted in a giant global shrug. “That’s terrible. But what can we do?”
But as we’ve seen, what Twitter and Facebook give with one hand, they take with the other. As soon as their focus shifts, so does ours. And the very nature of the medium – fast, transient, superficial – means that focus never stays in the same place for long.
Our world must now be encapsulated in 140 characters. So we can have Boko Haram as our sadistic Islamists of the week. Or we can have Isis. But we can’t have both. Not at the same time.
“Ah, yes,” people say, “but at least we’ve done something. Those people who held up their signs have taken a stand.” And it’s true, they have. But then why wouldn’t they? Taking a stand is fairly easy these days.
Not so long ago supporting a campaign involved actually giving something. You wrote a letter. You went on a march. Maybe you even delivered a leaflet. It required an investment of both thought and time. And because you had invested in the action, you had also invested in the outcome.
Now we press “retweet". It takes half a second. And then, if you’re like me, you then move on to your next retweet. “#bringbackourgirls”. Click. “#suarezbiting”. Click. “#hackingtrial”. Click.
Are we really taking a stand? Or are we sitting by our computers, killing a bit of dead time.
If you were a parent of those girls, imagine how you would have felt when you saw Michelle Obama holding up that sign about your daughter? Your own little girl. And how would you have felt when you saw her recent tweet: “2 days, 3 states, thousands of kids and lots of dancing. Check out photos.” Are they our girls? Or are they really just our click bait?
Here’s how Boko Haram have responded to us taking a stand. According to reports, the terror group last week assaulted a village called Kummabza in the Damboa district of Borno state. The attackers left 30 dead, and kidnapped 60 women and young girls, and 31 boys.
When terrorists see the world responding to their atrocities with hand written signs on Twitter, what lesson do they draw? Do they say to themselves: “We’ve made a mistake. This is just the beginning. They are coming for us now”? Or do they say: “This is the extent of their response"? They will hold up their signs for a few weeks, then move on to something else? We are safe”? And what lesson should they draw?
Last month I asked a question – if Boko Haram don’t bring back our girls, what are we going to do about it? Well, they haven’t brought back our girls. So I’ll ask again. What are we going to do now?
Source: This article was first published on Telegraph UK by Dan Hodges. He is on Twitter at @dpjhodges.
Boko Haram didn't #bringbackourgirls. So what are we going to do now?
Reviewed by Msl
on
04:13
Rating:
Reviewed by Msl
on
04:13
Rating:
No comments: