If there was a prize for the NGO who best commodifies white man’s burden on the African continent, and more specifically in Uganda, Invisible Children would win.They recently struck again with a new video and campaign titled “Kony 2012.” I was surprised to see it popping up everywhere on my Facebook feedback yesterday: clearly, their social media tactics are to be admired. Their underlying message – which is, of course, more important – is not to be.
I think it would be useful for persons unfamiliar with the issues featured in the movie and with the difficulties of poverty porn messaging to read up on some past blogs about Invisible Children before sharing this film. A friend has circulated a list of links providing critique from bright and well-qualified individuals speaking on these issues:
Wronging Rights is headed by two human rights lawyers who, for many years, have been on top of the development and humanitarian aid debate, as well as international justice. A few thoughts on the previous Invisible Children “Abduct Yourself” campaign from their blog:
First, organizations like Invisible Children not only take up resources that could be used to fund more intelligent advocacy, they take up rhetorical space that could be used todevelop more intelligent advocacy. And yeah, this may seem like an absurdly academic point to raise when talking about a problem that is clearly crying out for pragmatic solutions, but, uh, the way we define problems is important. Really, really important. Choosing to simplistically define Congolese women as “The Raped” and Ugandan children as “The Abducted” constrains our ability to think creatively about the problems they face, and work with them to combat these problems.
Second, treating their problems as one-dimensional issues that can be solved by a handful of plucky college students armed only with the strength of their convictions and a video camera doesn’t help anyone. These gets back to something very simple and very smart that Alanna Shaikh wrote a few months ago: “Bad development work is based on the idea that poor people have nothing. Something is better than nothing, right? So anything you give these poor people will be better than what they had before.”
Over on Texas in Africa, the blog has previously hosted two students who have provided some additional thoughts on Invisible Children. The students made a good faith effort to get in contact with Invisible Children and get both sides of the story on their former abduction campaign:
This is a symptom of the larger problem at hand. Not only does IC fail to base its decisions on what Ugandans think is best for them, the organization also make efforts to explain away any dissent. IC has become a brand with machine guns and cameras as its apparent logo and celebrity filmmakers as the protagonists against the evil LRA. The war is no longer about the people versus the LRA; it has transformed itself into something far too sensationalized and, at times, seemingly insincere. Poole, Russell, and Bailey v. Kony.
… And this is why we are as concerned as we are. IC has great potential and opportunity to do good. The organization has successfully motivated masses of young people to be globally and politically active. Advocacy, however, does not end at trendy t-shirts and cool graphics.
While I could reiterate what bad advocacy looks like and why we do not want nor need it, Texas in Africa has provided a thoughtful list of issues to consider as well. There is little I could add to it and I strongly suggest you read the whole post here.
Unmuted has also posted an excellent critique of this new video. An extract:
The dis-empowering and reductive narrative: the Invisible Children narrative on Uganda is one that paints the people as victims, lacking agency, voice, will, or power. It calls upon an external cadre of American students to liberate them by removing the bad guy who is causing their suffering. Well, this is a misrepresentation of the reality on the ground. Fortunately, there are plenty of examples of child and youth advocates who have been fighting to address the very issues at the heart of IC’s work. Want evidence? In addition to the organizations I list above, also look at Art for Children, Friends of Orphans, andChildren Chance International. It doesn’t quiet match the victim narrative, does it? I understand that IC is a US-based organization working to change US policy. But, it doesn’t absolve it from the responsibility of telling a more complete story, one that shows the challenges and trials along side the strength, resilience, and transformational work of affected communities.
Revival of the White savior: if you have watched the Invisible Children video and followed the organization’s work in the past, you will note a certain messianic/savior undertone to it all. “I will do anything I can to stop him,” declares the founder in the video. It’s quite individualistic and reeks of the dated colonial views of Africa and Africans as helpless beings who need to be saved and civilized. Where in that video do you see the agency of Ugandans? Where in that Video do you see Jacob open his eyes wide at the mere possibility of his own strength, as Jennifer Lentfer of How Matters describes here? Can we point out the problem with having one child speak on the desires, dreams, and hopes of a whole nation? I don’t even want to mention the paternalistic tone with which Jacob and Uganda (when did it become part of central Africa by the way?) are described, not excluding the condescending use of subtitles for someone who is clearly speaking English.
Finally, a few words of my own. My impression is that the movie is being used as means for Invisible Children to (i) stay relevant and (ii) raise more funding. Capturing Kony and the focus on international justice is a good excuse. Regardless of this opinion, running campaigns to raise awareness is not necessarily damning in itself (and, indeed, in many cases should be commended). Rather, as all the writers above suggest, the manner in which it is done is very important. A few comments on this new video.
The issue with social media is really highlighted by Invisible Children. The number of “likes” on your Facebook page is not necessarily related to the quality of information you share. Social media allows making anything viral, quickly. People often do not look into the substance of the message, or even watch the video you are sending. Once you become a brand, you can do anything. Invisible Children has successfully become a brand, but is sharing information that is far from nuanced and based on emotional reactions. It fails to paint the full picture. In addition to what Unmuted and others have said, I’d like to add the following thoughts:
My main concern is that Gulu – and Uganda - has gone through some incredible changes. The economy is booming. The region is re-stabilizing. While Kony’s men continue to kill, rape and slaughter elsewhere, Gulu is not a static, unchanging place. Neither is Uganda, neither is the continent. Portraying a region like Gulu as such, and sending the mass message that the whole continent reflects this, is damaging. It undermines possibilities of investment. It clouds story of entrepreneurship, success and innovation. This goes hand in hand with saying “I work in Africa.” Lumping the continent as one messy area.
When it comes to the ICC indictment of Kony, the film clip fails to consider the difficulties that such an international indictment can have and what alternative effects an offer like amnesty might have had. There have been major debates about the peace versus justice debate (an interesting and recent reflection on this is available here), which not only have an impact on how we conceive of the Kony indictment, but also of the ICC as an institution. When it comes to supporting American troops in Uganda, it fails to consider the wider systemic problems that are likely contributing to a failure to arrest Kony and which have little to do with whether the US sends a few soldiers abroad or not. Surely Invisible Children’s audience is not so simplistic that being presented with these critical questions would kill their messaging? I think Musa Okwonga, writing in the Independent, highlights the tension between the need to draw attention to these issues, while using sophisticated techniques:
I understand the anger and resentment at Invisible Children’s approach, which with its paternalism has unpleasant echoes of colonialism. I will admit to being perturbed by its apparent top-down prescriptiveness, when so much diligent work is already being done at Northern Uganda’s grassroots. On the other hand, I am very happy – relieved, more than anything – that Invisible Children have raised worldwide awareness of this issue. Murderers and torturers tend to prefer anonymity, and if not that then respectability: that way, they can go about their work largely unhindered. For too many years, the subject of this trending topic on Twitter was only something that I heard about in my grandparents’ living room, as relatives and family friends gathered for fruitless and frustrated hours of discussion. Watching the video, though, I was concerned at the simplicity of the approach that Invisible Children seemed to have taken.
The thing is that Joseph Kony has been doing this for a very, very, very long time. He emerged about a quarter of a century, which is about the same time that Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni came to power. As a result the fates of these two leaders must, I think, be viewed together. Yet, though President Museveni must be integral to any solution to this problem, I didn’t hear him mentioned once in the 30-minute video. I thought that this was a crucial omission. Invisible Children asked viewers to seek the engagement of American policymakers and celebrities, but – and this is a major red flag – it didn’t introduce them to the many Northern Ugandans already doing fantastic work both in their local communities and in the diaspora. It didn’t ask its viewers to seek diplomatic pressure on President Museveni’s administration.
About ten minutes into the video, the narrator asks his young son who “the bad guy” in Uganda is; when his young son hesitates, he informs him that Joseph Kony is the bad guy. In a sense, he let Kony off lightly: he is a monster. But what the narrator also failed to do was mention to his son that when a bad guy like Kony is running riot for years on end, raping and slashing and seizing and shooting, then there is most likely another host of bad guys out there letting him get on with it. He probably should have told him that, too.
There is another aspect about this particular video and campaign that I, and others, find disturbing. Invisible Children says it will be targeting “culture makers.” Not one of these individuals have significant, vested interests in the African continent (let alone Uganda). Not one person is from Uganda or the wider region. Encouraging a diversity of voices, and providing a platform for new African leaders – whether political, economic, or social – would help highlight that the continent is not just Kony, war and rape and would provide a valuable, wider messaging. The bottom line with poverty porn messaging is that it paints leaders who are struggling in their communities to tackle these problems as hopeless and useless. Keep the American “culture makers,” but why not also provide Ugandan leaders with a platform from which to speak?
In closing, I think the ‘we must start somewhere’ and the ‘better than nothing’ arguments are really tricky. The thing with Invisible Children is that they are not just starting from nowhere and they aren’t just doing nothing. They affect a huge contingent of people around the world. Through extensive fundraising, they have incredible resources. They have a strong foundation and could present a more nuanced and respectful campaign if they wanted to. With that said, I guess I think it is a shame that, after all this time and with their experience, they (i) believe their listeners do not want more answers to the complicated questions and (ii) that they have not considered including and uplifting leaders from the communities which they talk about who could provide a more honest and in-depth picture.
Regardless, I’d like to thank Invisible Children for giving us yet another opportunity to discuss how destructive bad advocacy can be. Here’s an opportunity to challenge ourselves, particularly those who work in development and aid communication, to try and collectively brainstorm how we can generate important stories and campaigns, while sending messages that are empowering, accurate and thought-provoking. It is also an opportunity for each of us to personally dig a bit deeper into the challenge of Kony and the LRA and become more familiar with these issues in a respectful way.
My first suggestion would be to start listening and engaging with the following individuals:
The advocacy and increasing interest toward child soldiers is definitely one of the positives to take away from this. The campaign has caught the attention of all types of people and the conversation is growing! However, advocacy can only take this new interest so far. As various academics, such as Michael Wilkerson and Yale professor Chris Blattman, as well as the Acholi people have identified, the misrepresentation of information and actual call to action through military means is troubling. There is a need for people to connect with these greater issues—but through people who are actually making a difference and are well informed. Here is a list of organizations that I have found who are actually doing great work on the ground, are inclusive of the people who are, and have been most affected. Last, and most importantly, these organizations come from well-informed positions:
http://childsoldiersinitiative.org/
http://www.easterncongo.org/
http://www.unicef.ca/
Also, check out what Chris Blattman, Michael Wilkerson and the Acholi Times has to say on the issue:
http://chrisblattman.com/2012/03/10/my-thoughts-on-kony-2012-and-a-defense-of-invisible-children/)
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/03/07/guest_post_joseph_kony_is_not_in_uganda_and_other_complicated_things?page=1
http://www.acholitimes.com/index.php/perspectives/opinion/15-open-letter-to-jason-russell-ceo-of-invisible-children-inc-on-kony2012)
The ICC verdict on Thomas Lubanga is step in the right direction. Lets continue to make this issue loud and make a difference.
PS I wholeheartedly agree with the original article.
If some help does get there great, but it is only a side effect of the real aim.
Does anyone actually believe that these posts, expertly written at length are from genuine born and raised Ugandans? Haha.
IC are a front for the Far Right/Christian movement in the USA so that foreign policy can be altered in the name of charity, so as to get US troops into the country without any pesky accusations of those in Iraq etc. Uganda has lots of oil you know. USA has known about Kony for 20 years!
IC are getting lots of money, even passing some of it on, but that money is not spent fighting Kony as he has not been there for 6 years. Now Mr Russell has cracked and I think it is due to either being duped by those in power or his conscience has finally caught up with him. Or maybe he just loves the Meth!
Please note that it is not just Siena who has this point of view. If you look at the following, both Ugandan and ‘Western’, you may understand that maybe IC’s campaign is, yes, ‘helpful’, but at the same time even more unhelpful:
http://blog.africacanada.org/?p=85
http://www.acholitimes.com/index.php/perspectives/opinion/15-open-letter-to-jason-russell-ceo-of-invisible-children-inc-on-kony2012
http://thislifetheuntoldstory.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/kony-2012-video-campaign-inappropriate.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/jane-bussmann/the-war-that-isnt-what-it_b_541696.html
I am a northern Ugandan from the area worst affected by the Kony/Museveni war but beg to differ from Rosebell Kagumire’s opinion expressed through her video link. I think the majority of northern Ugandans are very grateful to Invisible Children for bringing their plight to a wider audience. During the entire duration of the war, Uganda government kept up the narrative that Kony was a spent force and consistently played down the intolerable suffering and abuse meted on northern Uganda. With the spotlight on Kony’s CAPTURE, perhaps some justice will be done after all, and both Kony’s and President Museveni’s brutal armies will face justice for crimes against humanity and human rights violations committed by both sides during the long conflict.
To those who complain that the war is long over in northern Uganda and therefore stopping Kony is now irrelevant I ask, is it OK for Kony to continue killing and abducting children in Congo, S. Sudan and Central African Republic? Is it OK for northern Ugandans to be plagued with worry that Kony could one day return to restart where he left off? Wouldn’t capturing and putting Kony on trial bring at least half-closure for the victims and help in the healing process, even if other perpetrators (government) still go free?
Those southern Ugandans like Rosebell, and other Ugandan government apologists criticizing the Kony2012 campaign are just being defensive and would rather see the Kony problem hidden under the carpet. Or perhaps they are too embarrassed by the 20-year unwillingness and/or failure of the Ugandan government to bring an end to northern Ugandans’ suffering under Kony. Ugandans from other regions too are embarrassed at the way they downplayed the reality of the war crimes in northern Uganda and repeatedly berated northerners for the Kony problem. Unfortunately, some of their typical reaction is still denial. See the documentary “Uganda Rising” for a comprehensive explanation of the north-south divide in Uganda.
Tell me, how could Kony’s rag-tag foot army of a few thousand composed mostly forced recruits elude a powerful Ugandan government army of over 50,000 with sophisticated weapons, and years of financial and military aid from the US?
The only logical conclusion one can make is that the whole Ugandan-driven project been a complete FAILURE and demonstrates the UNWILLINGNESS of the Ugandan regime to see an end to Kony. And any clever attempts at whitewashing this fact will not disguise it. The Ugandan government is either uncomfortable at this exposure and wants to hide it under the carpet, or else it is complicit in Kony’s atrocities and does not want him apprehended for fear of the entire truth being exposed. Why else would anyone oppose an attempt to STOP such a war crime fugitive who has committed untold atrocities over a 25-year period and rescue the children still in captivity? Does that make sense to anyone? One would think it should be in Uganda’s interest to have Kony apprehended!
One of the tools Ugandan government apologists use is the “colonialist”, “neo-colonialist”, “western greed for oil” or “western savior” card to sidetrack viewers from the real issue which is the documented UNWILLINGNESS and FAILURE by the Ugandan government to STOP Kony all these 25 years! Should we continue advocating for the same Ugandan-driven remedies again after it has failed again and again? Reminds me of the famous Einstein quote about insanity, “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”
Over the 26 years of President Museveni’s rule so much distrust (justifiably too) has been built between northern Ugandans and the Museveni regime that it should not be surprising to hear that the only hope for true justice and intervention is from external “saviour figures”. Over the years the Ugandan Amnesty Commission set up to address justice for victims has continued to “forgive and exonerate” ex-combatants of Kony’s army who surrender. The government then gives the most notorious high ranking ones big cash payoffs and government perks, yet totally neglects victims. Efforts on peace talks and other initiatives from within have also been repeatedly frustrated and struck down (1994 peace talks is a glaring example; local elders and religious leaders trying to negotiate release of abducted children were attacked and some killed by government forces etc.). Because of such a pattern of duplicity, utter marginalization, and open discrimination in addition to suppression against northern Ugandan efforts from Museveni’s regime, groups like Invisible Children and other NGOs, however flawed, became the only real honest brokers in the situation, offering the only lifeline and support in an otherwise hopeless situation.
Invisible Children has a base in Gulu, Uganda and consults and works directly with war-affected Ugandan communities giving hope to hundreds of families by rehabilitating schools, providing scholarships and mentoring disadvantaged children in school etc. Speaking on behalf of fellow northern Ugandans, the war-affected community is very happy with the new spotlight on Kony and very grateful for Invisible Children’s continued assistance on the ground. The assistance from Invisible Children is at least tangible; due to its policy of marginalisation against the north, the government of Uganda has offered no aid to resettling communities; not even for the most recent Nodding Syndrome emergency in northern Uganda – it had to be pressured only a week ago to have the Ministry of Health begin to allocate funds and act.
Another proof of the success of the Kony2012 campaign is yesterday’s announcement by Uganda of a 5,000 strong joint military force composed of troops from Uganda, Congo, Central African Republic and S. Sudan has been approved to start operations to pursue and capture Kony in his hideout . World exposure and pressure does move mountains! We can only hope it is a well-planned and well-executed effort this time around.
SPOT ON! From someone who lived/ worked in Uganda for years….thank you for having the courage to speak the truth about this! I have banged my head against the wall for years trying to get people to open their eyes and stop being such blind/ignorant followers of what seems to be the “right” thing or the ‘in” thing when it comes to 3rd world/emerging nations or whatever the pc term is now.
Have we really gotten that cynical that we are compelled to dissect, question and criticize everything out there? Is everything a shade of grey and are there no absolutes? I will continue to stand with the few who still believe there are some things in that are just unacceptable. If nothing else, the film shows that just one person can make genuinely effect change in our interconnected world; that anything is possible. Kony is a sick, saddistic man who eludes accountability – not acceptable for anyone, period. He is symbolic of many ills in our society – we not only have become conditioned to accept them, but it is actually okay to criticize individuals who take a stand. Shame on us.
My friend, its kind of useless lose time around IC when it is Kony the problem. Where is their fault? They posted a video on ytube and they reached more then 60 milions viewers…go to say something to these 60 milions viewers, tell them you are more smarter then IC and with you and texasinafrica and the others western bloggers about Africa all the african problems will be solved soon.
good luck.
I definitely think the dialogue opened up by Invisible Children about the LRA, international development, and the ICC has been great. Kony 2012 has definitely caused some controversy, but taking a critical look at aid and development is very important. I am an employee for a NGO based in Uganda called BeadforLife. Kony 2012 is all about the people BeadforLife is directly serving in Nothern Uganda – over 5600 people in over 700 households. If you want to help people directly affected by the atrocities of the LRA in their rebuilding process, BeadforLife is a great organization to work with. We work with women who create beaded jewelry out of recycled paper, and harvest Shea nuts for soap, lip balm, and body butter. Host a free BeadParty to help introduce the products and the women to your community, and help women in Ugandan lift themselves and their families out of poverty. Learn more at http://beadforlife.org/beadparty.html
Despite the lack of nuance, KONY is using media – large scale media – for the first time to focus society on the evils committed by JK. Would you rather he not be a target of the developed nations? To just go about his business? By the way, I don’t see any place in the film where Gulu is equated with all of Africa.
Hey Charlie,
Thanks for your comment!
Unfortunately, I think you have misunderstood my article. I am not saying that raising awareness about Kony is inherently a bad thing – of course it isn’t! – I am saying that Invisible Children can do it better (particularly since they had the opportunity to learn from past mistakes). In my comments section, I have offered a few, concrete suggestions.
As for your second point, I would watch the film again and pay attention to the language.
Thanks,
Siena
Amazing read. I won’t claim to be one of the media-driven, born overnight social activists out there because I have a “like” button in Facebook. I also won’t say I claim enough to argue against the campaign either. I can say after watching the video with such a strong following and expectation, I was disappointed. After reading your article I was far from it. Well done.
I am not surprised by critics alleging that the documents was packaged badly. But i challenge them to make a 30 min video that captures and answers all issues on a complex situation like this case Kony.
I am Ugandan, i am happy the American people have woken up after sleeping for too long and believe you me, few new about Kony and how the situation was neglected for more than 2 decades. Mean people without a sheer sense of charity will be the very fast to criticize a noble cause. And by the way it is just $30 and MOST IMPORTANT very voluntary and less persuasive.
Utmost am delighted it has created awareness of the problem the world at large had neglected.
Hey Kenneth,
Thanks for your comment.
I tried offering a few small suggestions on how IC could improve their website, for example, to offer more context and places to learn rather than pushing people to buy their products (and what does buying a product do for anyone except provide Invisible Children with fundraising for questionable expenditures as compared to other NGOs? See: http://glenpearson.ca/2012/03/09/click-here-to-care/).
Have you read Okwonga’s article in the Independent? I think he offers some small ways of improving the video: http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/03/07/stop-kony-yes-but-dont-stop-asking-questions/.
Also, I’m not convinced Americans “have woken up after sleeping for so long”. Only time will time if this concern for the atrocities committed by the LRA will last beyond a social trend.
Cheers,
Sien
The Guardian is providing excellent coverage on this issue. Like Siena, they’re rounding up a large variety of sources to demonstrate the consequences of this whole sudden movement. I highly recommend watching the two first videos (excluding the kony 2012 video), the first is a 10 minute sandwich of interviews to the inhabitants of a village that at the time of recording was under severe threat of the LRA, the second portrays the reaction of a ugandan blogger.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/mar/08/kony-2012-what-s-the-story?fb=native
Thank you…one of the best articles i’ve read so far on the negative impacts of KONY 2012
Encouraging people to approach world famous celebs has a reason: those are the opinionleaders and can affect more people. Ugandan celebs will follow, but I dont believe that the campaign would have been as effective as it is now.
“But what the narrator also failed to do was mention to his son that when a bad guy like Kony is running riot for years on end, raping and slashing and seizing and shooting, then there is most likely another host of bad guys out there letting him get on with it. He probably should have told him that, too.”
What IC’s campaign probably will accomplish, is that not only Kony but also people LIKE Kony will hopefully get the message that acts like this will no longer be tolerated. I think IC made the right choice to make it as simple and understandeable as possible to reach as many people as possible. Again, the campaign wouldnt have been as effective if the movie was too detailed. People will first absorb the ‘basics’, and if triggered they will start reading up on the details like mentioned in your article. IC has raised worldwide awareness which I think should only be applauded instead of downgraded or people being cynical about it. At least something is being done after letting them do this for two decades.
Thanks for your comments….I’ve been following this story with interest, both to get the truth and mesmerized by uniformed modern people who fall in line with the latest slick digital “news”.
I’ve tried to break down I thoughts on Invisible Children and Kony 2012 in my blog. Go to the link below to check it out.
http://jgaynor.com/2012/03/08/i-stand-with-invisible-children/
I’m interested in a list of places, other than Invisible Children, that I can donate my time/money/effort into, I would really appreciate some great sources!
Jamie,
http://www.kiva.org/
A great way to help! Out of all the NGO’s it is one of the few I agree with. Or volunteer with the Peace Corps
Agreed! I am trying to compile a list of places to get more information. I also think Laura Seay (see @texasinafrica) has been providing some great suggestions on this question.
A really excellent starting point. Always do your research.
http://www.charitywatch.org/hottopics/uganda.html
Thanks, but I believe this link is outdated.
1st of all IC should be applauded for reaching such a massive audience. Even bono couldnt pull this off. However the video is plagued with a multitude of inaccuracies that end up potraying northern uganda as an active war zone, which by the way has been peaceful since 2006. Also it gives the false impression that the US mission will be cancelled, and can only be saved by buying a $30 kit.
Furthermore, Uganda has plenty of popstars, football stars and other celebrities they could have exploited but didn’t.
Oh, and BTW Uganda is in east Africa not central Africa!
Siena,
I want to start off by admitting my total ignorance of this issue until some 24 hours ago, thanks to the viral proliferation of the Kony 2012 feature. Call me cynical but I tend to take all information that comes my way with at least a grain of salt, so I have been reading into the subject of the video.
Your post popped up in the Foreign Policy article that has been mentioned in one of the comments and that is how I got here. I found that article to be heavily biased and one sided, lots of finger pointing, speculating and bone picking, but I understood the underlining criticism behind it.
I agree that just awareness isn’t enough, that there is more to be done and that it isn’t as easy as the video and IC portrays it to be. The undeniable truth however is that this massive awareness is (or can be) a step to reaching a palpable and plausible solution to the problem.
The video could have delved deeper into the problem, but as you certainly know it’s hard to keep people focused for more than 2 minutes let alone 30 (or 27 if you want to be picky) in a world where we’re flooded in information in all directions. In this aspect and in the opinion of a marketing professional (albeit a young one) this video excelled in driving across a point and getting an emotional response. It might not shine a light on the whole problem but it does focus on two main difficulties that IC encountered:
i) The American Government only reacts if its in America’s interests either diplomatic of pecuniary. Which in my opinion is hypocritical and shameful seeing as that America’s history is inherently tied to that of the whole world (being a country composed by immigrants). IC applied pressure for the public to act and expose the whole Kony issue in a way that even congress couldn’t ignore, kudos. People may say that this is moving more than Americans, but I believe that this is a consequence rather than a first intention.
ii) The risk of losing interest for passing over too much information. Yes, too much information, people don’t want to dig deep, people want bite sized chunks to chew and spit out. Obviously this implicates the existence of trade offs: “we either explain everything, or we drive the nail home in one whack of the hammer” (not a quote).
As for the whole “at least they’re doing somehting” argument, I agree, “something” isn’t enough, those resources that IC has been able to amass have to be applied in a controlled, responsible manner in cooperation with Ugandan agencies and also importantly with other experienced international institutions (like Unicef) that help implement the advice that you give into IC’s activity in order to provide help that helps solve a problem and not just a way of discarding guilt.
You can’t expect everyone who is now aware of the issue to suddenly get on a plane to Uganda and dedicate all their efforts to solving this worrisome problem. They do what they can, and the fact that they’re doing anything in the dire economic straits the “developed” world finds itself in is admirable. They do what they can by giving means for those who actually “do” to achieve a tangible end (ideally, and hopefully).
After watching the video (sensationalist as it may be) I felt compelled to do more than hang up posters and wear a bracelet, I for one want to get my hands dirty and apply my help where it matters.
I’ll end my rambling with a request, can you point me to organisations that are accepting volunteers on the field in places that are in need of humanitarian assistance like Uganda and such?
Dear Vasco,
Thanks for this constructive comment.
Having worked in communications and with a background in journalism, I am very aware of the difficulties of portraying a nuanced, yet simple message. I think Mr. Okwonga has provided some interesting and easy ways in which the film could have been improved – i.e. become more nuanced – while retaining its aim of raising awareness of Kony generally: http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/03/07/stop-kony-yes-but-dont-stop-asking-questions/. While it would have been hard to portray a more balanced view of the ICC, for example, it would have been easy to put in a clip of Gulu – a truly thriving town in many ways – with a brief comment on the present day situation before getting into the story of night commuters (just to be clear, since the video wasn’t, no one in Northern Uganda is night commuting and internally displaced persons camps have largely closed).
Now, for the more important point! “You can’t expect everyone who is now aware of the issue to suddenly get on a plane to Uganda…” This is the LAST thing I – or anyone in development or aid for that matter – would want! First of all, Uganda is not how it was portrayed in the movie, so the difficulties faced by the country go far beyond an immediate humanitarian disaster in a conflict zone (which the average person, including myself, do not have the experience to assist with, nor should we try). The war is over and Gulu, in fact, is overrun with NGOs to the point where – at least from what I saw in 2008 – coordination between similar programs becomes imposible, truckloads of volunteers come in when school lets out and perform jobs that local persons need more, and an artificial NGO economy flourishes (among other problems).
You have asked me about organizations accepting field volunteers. Now, I don’t want to discourage people from volunteering when they do so in a smart and informed way (and you strike me as a person who would take the necessary steps to be informed). Instead of suggesting organizations right away, I would like to point you to a blog called Good Intentions are Not Enough. I think reading through some of the author’s older posts will give you an idea of the potential pitfalls of volunteering, and what kind of a negative effect it can have in communities. It’ll also give you an idea of the kinds of questions you should be asking about organizations accepting volunteers. Here’s a good post to start off with: http://goodintents.org/staffing-or-employment/voluntourism-what-could-go-wrong. A few other good posts for background reading: http://goodintents.org/staffing-or-employment/how-to-get-involved-in-aid and http://goodintents.org/in-kind-donations/donating-shoes-aid-fads.
This is not to say that you should not try to find an organization in Uganda where your particular, individual skills are required and would be useful. I would be happy to discuss via email (siena.anstis(@)gmail.com). However, the background reading is important. And, as someone who made the mistake of jumping into a volunteer spot without doing this initial reading the first time I worked in Gulu, I truly think it will help.
With that said: actually, helping and getting involved in these issues in a smart way from the US, or wherever you are based, is probably far more necessary and useful in the context of the post-conflict situation in Gulu. It would, if done well, also do less damage. Here’s an example: A couple of years ago, I worked with a small NGO in Northern Uganda that brings internet and other ICT tools to rural areas outside Gulu. One of the programs was a ‘cyber’ science exchange between a school just outside Gulu and a school in the US. Students worked on mapping and water testing and shared their results online while using wikispaces to discuss their findings. This is brilliant and the kind of high-impact initiative that does not take jobs from local teachers or involve exporting and distributing used t-shirts from the US. This is something you could organize with your former high school or another educational institution in your neighbourhood with some help.
Once again, and I really want to make this clear, the last thing I want to do is dissuade people from caring about other individuals and communities and dedicating themselves to the improvement of humanity as a whole. However, just like any other industry or sector in the world – and yes, charity is an industry – getting involved does require some leg-work. Charity is not simple. In fact, it affects people’s lives intimately and thus requires even more care and thoughtfulness.
Otherwise: (i) I think your first point with regards to the American government is probably somewhat accurate. Of course, it is difficult to measure exactly how Invisible Children’s work directly contributed to getting the US to send troops to Uganda, though I believe there is a relationship. Of course, getting the US to send troops to Uganda doesn’t solve the wider problems, and that’s where viewers could have benefited from a bit more information; (ii) I don’t think sharing information has to be an either/or situation of dumbing it down enough for it to be digestible, versus offering a bit more context and then additional places to learn outside the video itself. For example, the main site featuring the video could provide additional links better explaining the complexities of the issue.
Thanks again for raising these important issues!
Siena
Sienna,
Your piece is intelligent, sophisticated and thoughtful. We should all be grateful for your part in the debate. May I join in the debate too? Is it possible that you have been overly influenced by exceedlkingly defensive people in Uganda and elsewhere who have worked for decades and FAILED, and now are caught off guard watching an inspired, video-driven effort dwarf their efforts. An effective video by a ‘looki-loo’, a ‘do-gooder? A do-gooder who has actually done good, who has actually inspired the US and several countries in Africa to step it up, to set an example with Kony?
I observe that many of the commenters on your blog offer sharp, Uganda-born statements of support for the IC efforts, which have had an immensely positive effect both in terms of awareness, as a call to action. And I observe you are spending a lot of time writing defensive counter comments, rationalizations for calling a tremendously helpful effort unhelpful. It IS helpful. Can’t you admit it’s helpful, though imperfect, so you yourself can then get on with TRYING to help rather than spending so much time defending your over-thinking it, your overly critical attack of IC, your overly nuanced attempts to delegitimize a legitimate success, the first global-scale, super-effective movement against attrocities that you admit continue to this day?