Internet and Democracy Project

The Berkman Center recently announced their newest project, Internet and Democracy. The project will focus on the Middle East and include both research and the development of Internet tools for democratic activists in these areas. A graduate student and researcher for the project contacted me a little while back about the project to get some input and tips on the blogging situation in Iran. I'm interested in seeing what they come up with.


In the press release Jon Zittrain, a co-founder of the Berkman Center, noted one of the primary goals: "We want to help develop and test simple, lightweight tools for civic engagement online – tools that facilitate coordination among people who share a common cause, and good faith dialogue among people who disagree." Of course, I have my own ideas about what sort of projects they could create. Clearly, the main factors inhibiting free speech and democratic use of the Internet in Iran are censorship and accessibility. While its a difficult task to try an find solutions to these issues, there are a couple of areas where one could make headway. For instance, one of the first things that could be done with regards to censorship would be to compile and maintain a categorized list of censored websites, blogs, etc. This has been done on an informal level (Derakhshan's now defunct stop.censoring.us is one example), but could definitely be expanded upon and deepened. Of especial concern is the task of making this information available to netizens in Iran. Thinking about this problem from the angle of decentralized networks (think P2P filesharing) could provide solutions, as this is one of the potential strengths of blogging communities.

Another, perhaps more far-fetched approach to the question of accessibility would be to utilize the State Departments' Iranian democracy promoting budget to improve Internet access through remote servers. Is it out of the question to attempt some sort of remote Internet broadcasting into Iran, much as was done with satellite in the 90's? I'd argue if successful it would be more effective than spending that money on broadcasting propaganda tv as we are now.

Thesis

A little over a year ago I posted a PDF link to my thesis on my old blog. That link is no longer active, and anyway the post attached to it no longer exists either. So here it is again (PDF format still). Enjoy.

Press TV

What to make of the Iranian government's new Press TV? Its a recent 24 hr English tv news channel produced by the Iranian government. I learned of it through an article from the New York Times. Whether it was my server acting up, or something more sinister, I could not visit the new station's website myself, but I did visit a cached link by Google. The results: pretty much what you would expect from the Iranian regime. The stories look pretty blatently pro-Ahmadinejad, anti-American. Still, one wonders what sort of news or footage might be aired here that may not make it on Western channels.

I have yet to watch the channel itself, but I would say that this is a very clear indicator that Ahmadinejad & co. are taking their role as competing regional power very seriously (as if that wasn't clear before). This play moves Iran up in terms of its ability to counter American efforts at media propoganda (a la RadioFree Europe and US-based Persian language stations). I can't imagine what the exact impact will be, or who will tune in. The Iranian regime is learning to become more sophisticated in its geopolitical power-struggle with the West.

Censorship in Iranian Magazines

It's a bit old, but I just ran across this post by a Swedish traveller about censorship in Iran. It has some interesting pictures, as well as some thought-provoking commentary on the role of censorship in various societies today. His point is that Americans are subject to censorship just as the Iranians are, it is simply a more subtle form. In fact, he suggests that in Iran, at least the censorship is transparant (at least in magazines). His point about "colonialist" perspectives of National Geographic and other US magazines struck me as interesting.

WSJ Op-Eds: US Policy and Blogging

Today's Wall Street Journal had two op-eds that particularly caught my eye. The first dealt with the question of the suggestion put forth by the Iraq panel that the US begin negotiations with Iran and Syria. The opinion, written by Stanford's Abraham Sofaer, positioned itself as the "Reagan strategy" to hostile countries. I found the general sentiment a sound one. I especially agree with the idea of limited and segmented negotiations with the two countries on less controversial issues. As Sofaer put it, "The distrust between the U.S. and Irani suggests that negotiations between them should commence on limited issues, in a noncontroversial forum." His suggestion of the U.S./Iran tribunal at the Hague was an interesting one. I feel that Bush's policy of complete rejection and pre-condition is futile. Negotiation will not work without diplomacy, which is what I feel the American public at large is finally realizing.

The second editorial discussed the phenomenon of blogging, and specifically its impact on public political discussion. Written by Joseph Rago, an editor at the WSJ, it takes a highly negative position (incidentally, the article begins by referring to Iran, noting that blogs are so popular that "Even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has one."). This position, which is actually discussed extensively by Alireza Doodstar in his article "The Vulgar Spirit of Blogging," (pdf) argues that blogging has debased debate about important issues. Rago believes that the internet, and specifically blogging, has created an atmosphere where the very style of writing has become so sloppy and informal as to be undignified. Says Rago, "The way we write affects both style and substance... The closest analogue [to blogging] might be the (poorly kept) diary or common place book, or the note scrawled to oneself on the back of an envelope- though these things are not meant for public consumption." While I can't argue with many of Rago's points, I think that he in turn misses an important point when it comes to substance. His is the response one would expect from a elite writer, positioned high above "the fray." Perhaps Rago doesn't understand power that the informality of blogging contains, the freedom or accessibility that it implies. Of course, if he is being published in the WSJ, I guess there is no incentive for him to see this.

On the other hand, I do want to point out an important point he makes that has been a point discussed on Sounds Iranian. This deals with participants on the internet talking past each other rather than to each other. As Rago puts it (rather well), "The Internet is very good at connecting and isolating people who are in agreement, not so good at engaging those who aren't." Very apt words that I think bloggers need to deal with.

Collaborative Blog

I am excited to be a part of a new collaborative blog, named Sounds Iranian, that deals with the Iranian blogosphere. I have been traveling the past few weeks and have not had muh time to take a parge part in the discussion. I do look forward to spending more time on it soon, and investigating the work of the other involved bloggers.

New Blogs

My continued romp through a rediscovered blogosphere placed me in the links section of Shiva the Spy. There I found a number of interesting Iranian blogs, including this one by an environmental activist from Iran. I'll be sure to go through that one sometime soon.

Two Bad Eggs in a Pod

Forgive me for mixing metphors, but I thought it was an apt description of the recent
meeting between Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe and Iran's Mahmood Ahmadinejad. Apparently the two politically isolated leaders are reaching out to each other in an attempt build some sort of unity in the face of Western criticism. Personally, this only delegitimizes Ahmadinejad's position in my mind. Despite his populist rhetoric, Mugabe typifies the corrupt leadership that so much of Africa has suffered under since decolonization.

It's amazing (and terrifying) to see the chaotic currents of the modern colonial project continue to swirl around us today. The words of Mugabe, Ahmadinejad, and other products of the backlash to Western imperialism continue to rely heavily on the anger of colonization. Despite their despotism, these leaders' words garner them with some small sense of legitimacy simply because those who they rail against have devalued their own rhetoric. Africans, Persians, Arabs, Indians all simply yearn for a justice and equality that seems suspiciously absent in their lives. Yet in frustration they often turn to ideologues- and their impostors- who promise to hold the answer to Western dominance. Hyperbole becomes truth as the complexity of modernity is paved over with sound bites and simple answers.

And who says this confusion merely arises in Harare, Mumbai and the West Bank? What about the millions of Americans who would rather blame Islam for terrorism, or who think the conflict between Shi'ites and Sunis (or Hutus and Tutsis or Serbs and Croats) is an immutable conflict between perpetual enemies? We glaze over the complexities of the modern world and fall for the same generalities that create misunderstanding, mistrust and animosity between people all over the world.

I guess what I am getting at (if there is any point to my ramblings) is that we need a more comprehensive understanding of the factors at work in the societies we find ourselves in. Culprits like Mugabe and Ahmadinejad use frustration and misunderstanding to fuel their ambitions. Their solutions ring hollow, but as long as their claims of injustice are substantiated by the actions of our world leaders, they will continue to wield legitimacy. The responsibility is with us to hold our leaders and ourselves accountable to our actions. We have a chance at fixing injustice only by understanding its dimensions.

Among the articles I’ve read about in the past few months is one on Paris Marashi, a student at NYU who is working to promote Iranian vlogs (video weblogs). I visited one of her sites and found myself watching a number of her vlog posts from this summer. I am intrigued by this project, which was essentially an exercise in ethnographic participatory cinema. It is amazing how images serve as such a striking means of conveying information and ideas. The crossing of geographic and socio-cultural boundaries that comes through so powerfully in blogs (and specifically bridgeblogs) feels even starker with video.


Among her other projects is an attempt to promote vlogging in Iran. Her site, vloginiran.blogspot.com sets out to instruct Iranians on how to create a vlog, much as Hoder originally did with blogging. Ultimately, a project such as this might have a harder time catching on because 1) of the cost and availability of the necessary technology and 2) because of the issue government censorship. It is nonetheless an exciting prospect.


Marashi’s projects prompted me to view vlogs from a more anthropological perspective. That her summer project follows the now classic ethnographic genres of cinema verite and participatory cinema (genres blazed by the likes of Jean Rouch, John Adair and others) reminded me of the potency of these types of visual documentary study, as well as their pitfalls. The question of objectivity, one that anthropology has wrestled with for so long, is being reintroduced in the new context of globalized interactive communication. Just as the handheld video camera revolutionized visual anthroplogy during the second half of the 20th century, the internet brings a whole new level of access to the portrayal (read manipulation) of culture. What does this mean in terms of the study and interpretation of ethnic/geographic/socio-economic others? What are the implications in the fetish-ization of the image, especially in the context of Euro-American consumer culture? I don’t have the background to speak with authority on the subject, although I have studied it some and am intrigued by these questions. Take for instance this quote by Marashi from her interview with GVO’s Farid Pouya:

Vlogging immediately opened up the things I wanted to share about my life in Iran to the rest of the world. Today I do something; tonight I post it online; tomorrow someone watches it. It is fascinating how it opens up what you are doing to a global audience. Once something is uploaded on the Internet, or on your videoblog, it is at the hands of the world and available for them to see.

Susan Sontag would have a field-day.


Note to self: keep an eye on this one:
homeyra.wordpress.com