G20

All weekend I felt myself wanting to be glued to a blackberry or iphone in order to get the latest on where the protests where happening, what was happening, and where things were headed. The speed and potential of services such as Twitter, especially over a G20 weekend had turned me away from my usual anti-latest technology into a person who feels they would really benefit from such an application on a new phone. Luckily so many around me were Tweeting that I was able to catch up on the latest occurrences through others.

This weekend's events were some of the most disgraceful I have ever witnessed in this country. And as a therapeutic measure, I felt the desire to write down my thoughts of my experiences and hopefully share them with others who are still out of the loop or have been mislead by biased media coverage. And so, although this doesn't have much to do with my actual topic (although it will tie in because of my strong desires and 'need' to stay updated over Twitter over this entire process), I would like to post up a note that I have written about my G20 experience. Here it is....

The past 72 hours have represented one of the most disgraceful scenes our city has ever witnessed. Toronto, Ontario was host to the latest G20 gathering, an event that was already gathering mass criticism for the over $1.2 billion that was spent to ensure the ‘safety’ of the world’s leaders and of our city’s people. What resulted was the full use of those hired forces, to the most disgraceful measures I have ever witnessed or ever want to witness on Canadian soil. We are a country of peaceful citizens, mobilizing on rare occasions to protest any given cause. We are not a nation of unruly, violent people, seeking to instigate violence in any form.





What happened this weekend was horrendous. What started as a peaceful march with upwards of 25,000 protestors depicting various causes, soon turned into what police and the media have claimed to be ‘anarchy’ and ‘chaos’. What was this referring to? A group of radicalists called the ‘Black Bloc’ which tore through Queen and Younge street smashing up windows of large corporations. Amongst them, and following in curiosity were other protesters and bystanders who although kept a safe distance, did not appear to feel any threat of human violence from this group’s members. Police cruisers were also targeted (and some say planted) as they were set on fire and smashed along the way. This scene would become the justification the government and security forces needed for the security bill our country would soon face after all this was over.

Protestors continued to gather in all parts of the city, surprised at the violence displayed in the city centre, yet standing in solidarity for the causes they came out to support. Hearing of pockets of violence and police confrontations around the city core, many decided to make their way back to the designated protesting and free speech zone at Queen’s Park. What appeared to be a safe option had soon turned for the worse. Riot police formed lines together with those on horses in front of a small group of protesters. Most were sitting on the lawn, eating sandwiches, some even sleeping on the edge. Yet, we seemed threatening to police. Suddenly, crowds of people were running for their lives, and so were we. Riot police had decided to charge into the crowds including those on horses, not afraid to knock people over as they strode. People reacted and fell back to the further end of the park. Yet, that wasn’t sufficient enough for police, who brought in bus loads of reinforcements to thicken the lines facing the now severely outnumbered protesters. And with sudden bursts, they charged, and we retreated. Every time, spotting our next point of refuge, a tree, or perhaps a stone statue that could block an incoming rubber bullet or baton from the line. We were scared, yet wanted to stand strong with the others since it was our democratic right to protest. After all, we were in the officially designed ‘protest zone’. I don’t know what triggered them to want us to leave, but few by few, more riot police pushed back the small crowds to side streets and around the other side of the park, forming a blockade around entire Queen’s Park. Where did they want us to go? We were told to stay in this zone, yet we were now being forced out of it.

That night came word that a large crowd of staff and supporters sat peacefully outside Novotel hotel, quietly, holding out peace signs towards police. Soon, they were surrounded, cops on all corners telling them to leave or they would be arrested. But there was no way out. Those that tried to leave would be mistaken as making an attack on the officials and would surely be taken down forcefully. So they sat. And one by one were pulled out of the crowd to be questioned and arrested. Hundreds of peaceful protesters would join the detention centre’s prisoners that night.

The next morning, a small group of protesters gathered in a park nearby the Detention Centre. We would march peacefully to the centre, and stand outside the facility, cheering on the release of those who had been detained for no apparent reason the night before. Our goal was to support freed detainees and provide them with water and food once they had been let out. And so was the case. Police escorted us to the site and blocked off streets so we could get by. We stood with a man playing base guitar, singing songs and cheering loudly when a new ‘prisoner’ had been released. But suddenly something changed. Two vans emerged from behind the line of police and we were being charged at. I dropped my bike amidst the crowd, feeling bad that it had become an obstacle for protesters trying to flee forceful police attacks, but I was too fearful to retrieve it. The cops began yelling and telling us to go back, yet had blocked our path in that direction. I saw my bike being thrown by a cop and hoped that it would still be there when I decided it would be safe enough to go back later in the day. We began chanting ‘peaceful protest’ and ‘we are peaceful, how ‘bout you’ to the line of police intimidatingly starring us down. And soon, reinforcements came (what exactly they were reinforcing was unclear). Some even sat on the ground, we joined. We held out our hands in peace signs to showcase that we were not there to cause trouble, but to support those who were being released. Yet something triggered another rampage of police force and we were pushed further up the street. The crowd dispersed, yet saddened organizers pleaded for us to stick together as they watched their peaceful protest falling apart. We fell back and continued to observe the line encroaching on us. Then, the artillery emerged. Two cops stepped in front of line, holding up large guns and fired shots into the crowds. We continued running. Looking ahead, a squat team had formed a line ahead. I was fearful that we’d all be surrounded and arrested one by one, as had been the case a few times in the past 12 hours. We held up our hands in a showcase of peace and stepped off onto the road, where we all dispersed.

We ducked into a convenience store to wait it out, so that we could go back to retrieve our bikes. Half hour later, we figured the area should be safe and made our way back. Luckily our bikes were there. Parts missing and a little scratched up, but still present none the less. We were happy that major news stations had been there with us, filming the attacks. Hopefully viewers would recognize that the level of force police were using was completely unnecessary.

Unfortunately I had to go to work and so left early. Yet I continued to play back the images in my mind. I was and am still so frustrated about the accounts of the weekend and continued to hear about new attacks and police encroachments as I served customers. That night, I was happy to see that many people had posted videos of what had happened. Pedestrian accounts of uncalled violence by police who were hired to ‘protect us’. Perhaps one of the most striking videos was one taken by an onlooker at birds eye view of protestors singing Oh Canada to a group of riot police. When they finished, a few began to sit down, backs facing the police, and for no apparent reason, the police charged. It is videos like these that make me more frustrated about the weekend’s events. How can police say that their use of force and tactics were appropriate and called for when we see videos that showcase attacks on peaceful protesters? It is despicable and insulting. I hope that people will continue to press for answers in the reasoning behind these attacks and use of unnecessary force by police officers. Justifying $1.2 billion of security was not worth making those calls to instigate and carry out acts police brutality.

As I sleep at night, all I dream about are those attacks on peaceful protesters. We must not let this go. We must hold officers and those who made the calls to attack accountable for their actions. It maddens me further to watch interviews of police chiefs and government officials saluting the work of security forces over the weekend. Madder still to hear citizens commemorate police officers for ensuring the protection of our streets and its people. But where were these forces when the real damage and violence was being committed? Perhaps letting this violence occur provided them with a good excuse for justifying police brutality and unlawful arrests in the proceeding days. These were not ‘calculated’ uses of force. They were undeserved showcases of police brutality. We must continue to stand together in solidarity and to fight for our democratic rights. This is not a country of war, violence, or dictatorship. Over the past 72 hours however, it has become a country of shame and disgrace.

More updates

I just finished watching 'For Neda', an HBO documentary about Neda, a young Iranian woman that was killed during the Iranian election protests. It was a very touching movie. I was surprised as the level of oppression faced by women in Iran yet happy to see that millions of people came out to protest together in what they believed in.

I also talked more today with friends about the topic and am thinking that I can do case studies where Twitter has gotten a lot of publicity for being successful (in such cases as spreading information on the Iranian 'revolution' protests). In this way, I can see if there are any commonalities which allowed the use of this social networking site to get word out to the international community. I may then choose to look at the western world as well as the Third World to look at both cases and why perhaps this type of information spreading is not or is occurring. For example, in the poorer context, what are the barriers to using this type of service and if they weren't there would they still be used? Then looking at the western world. These barriers do not exist really (at least not as much as they do elsewhere) yet perhaps this service is not being used in the same context, why or why not is this occurring? It may turn out that most cases where Twitter has seen success have been in industrializing countries, thus looking at the other two extremes, may offer an interesting insight.

Changing Directions

I've been talking out my topic with a few friends in hope of really getting to know how I can tie in Twitter and the sharing of information, and history (my original idea) to development. It seems as though the more I think about it, the more I could potentially tie it in, but not really directly and I fear that the need to include development into my topic may just lead me to include a paragraph or so and try to loosely tie everything together.

So I talked again about it last night with a friend and went back to my original inspiration, the Iranian Twitter Revolution. We talked about how in its core, this revolution was about giving voice to the oppressed.

Thinking again about development, there is little that Twitter can do in countries of extreme poverty where there exist so many barriers to the use of the technology. Internet is available to most at a small cost at an internet cafe, but the reliability of this service is not always there. And the use of Twitter is spectacular where people have access to it through their phones, so they can Tweet the action as it is happening. This would seem merely impossible in places such as sub-Saharan Africa where an internet connection via cellphone still seems far off the development path. Most people in developed countries still do not have this application on their phones, so it would be remarkable to see such a strive in countries where there are so many other development issues that take precedences.

All in all, I thought that maybe the direction of my paper should thus be on a case study and an analysis of these barriers. Something like looking at the Iranian case and how Twitter was made possible there, then to another case where Twitter was not possible and why. Then look at all of the barriers to this type of technology. Next, I could look at how these barriers could be removed, and if they were, would this be any better? Would the removal of these barriers give social media a bigger role? We assume that it is the barriers to these types of technologies that are preventing its use, but if these barriers were removed, would they be used in such ways as it was in Iran? This would tie to the theme of development in terms of improving information technology as well as analyzing Twitter as 'giving voice to the oppressed'. It would not be an analysis of development in terms of health or education, but rather in terms of political oppression and individual rights.

Thoughts?

Notes from the meeting

Met with my supervisor to discuss some issues and topic ideas. Here is a brief summary of the points taken away from that meeting:

1. Are the particular cases (i.e. Iranian Revolution) just hype? Are these actually giving 'word' to the poorest? Or are they just secluded cases which gives false hope to the idea that Twitter can be revolutionary?

2. How does this connect to development and could it be used by the development world?

3. More theoretical work - look at memory, how is institutional memory or general memory changing the way we do or see things? Has the concept of memory and what it entails changed over time? Has Social Media been the driver behind this change, if one does exists?

4. Pre-social media and post-social media: look at how history is privileged and is history in social media going to be any less privileged than past histories? Look at the demographics of Twitter users. Does this reflect a 'voice from below' or are most users still representational of the upper-middle elitist white class?

5. NEDA - documentary on HBO

6. Wired.com - check it out for interesting look at the wired world we live in.



Voila, just a few key points I took away from that meeting. I will particularly look at #4 for the focus of this project, but all the other points do provide some interesting insight as to what the social media world has become.

Tweaking

My subject has got to be tweaked a bit. The whole Media and Development theme was the initial inspiration for a project, however after a lot of research, the subject was just too overwhelming to be able to narrow it down to a concise and relevant topic. Information and stories were pulling me in all directions and I could not come up with a specific enough project that would allow me to be focused in one aspect of these themes.

So my solution was to focus on one aspect of media (Twitter) and loosely tie it to development (in the way that it is being used in a revolutionary fashion to bring light to the rest of the world on issues or events that are happening where there is political oppression or development barriers). But this again may be too vague after some discussion on the topic yesterday.

So in an attempt to solve this issue, I think I will re-focus my topic on the concept of 'who writes history', and 'memory', in the way in which memory and history is being written by the masses rather than the white elitist. Or is it? There in lies the question. We assume that by using such social media sites that it is giving voice to the masses and the minority and those who are oppressed, but has anyone looked at the demographics of these sites? Do they really represent the minorities? Or are they still ruled by white, intellectual, upper-middle class citizens?

That's what I hope to discover...

The latest

Proposal is in. I decided to look at this new phenomenon (or rather decision) by the Library of Congress to save all past and future Tweets from the popular Twitter website as 'historical data'.

Who decided that everyday tweets held any historical relevance? My first perceptions of Twitter was that the user was the average 'joe' who tweeted about their next meal or which movie they were contemplating seeing next. As I researched though, I found it fascinating how it is being used by people for more academic use. I was particularly interested in how it is being used by the marginalized as a tool to project information. In this case, the use of these tweets may be the only historical telling that we have of certain events. Perhaps tweets will be the source of information for the next chapter in our history books.

At first, the idea seems a bit ridiculous and a sort of farce, however if we really think about it, perhaps our history will now have greater knowledge of what's going on in the world, especially in important events where the formal source of reporting is not permitted. Will this lead to more or a new kind of history? All of those histories that were ignored (or suppressed) in the past by powerful actors. Perhaps Twitter will offer us the tool we need to get history 'from the ground', a history written by the people who are living on the marginalized side of things, rather than a history written by the 'white colonizing elitist'.

That is what I tend to discover...

There's so much stuff to know

I have been researching full heatedly for the past few days, reading a lot of articles written by academics and the general public on their experiences with Twitter. In most cases, a lot of them were skeptics of the 'Twitter revolution' and what it had to offer, but as I read on they seem to have changed their opinions on the benefits of using such microblogging sites.

I would consider myself, not a skeptic per se, but someone who just doesn't feel the need to sign up to another social networking site that I may just sign on for the sake of it being 'the in thing' and then not use it. However the more I read on about this site, the more I too become a believer that this is not just a site where the general population may update us on what they are eating or thinking at the moment. I suppose my doubts have derived from what I have heard being exposed from Twitter. These precise 'tweets', where people feel the need to tell the public what they are doing, eating, etc. at every moment of the day, no matter how 'ir'relevant it may be to most of us. However, I was surprised to see that the young population are not the #1 'tweeters' on the site, in fact the most popular users are those who are older, those in their 30s. This gives me hope that those who use Twitter are not just using it as their own personal venting space, but that intellectuals and professionals are increasingly finding it important and very useful to use this site to network and get the word out on relevant events and information.

I have yet to sign on to Twitter however, but am going to so in the next few days to check out what all this fuss is about. I am more intrigued and willing to sign up now that I know that there are so many intellectuals who make use of the site. I went on last night for the first time, and spent 5 minutes watching the homepage fill up with random tweets coming in and disappearing seconds later. It was making me dizzy watching posts come in and out so fast. If television or facebook wasn't ADD enough, this site sure seems like it is taking it to the next level. Which leaves me to be concerned over whether we are becoming so regulated to these instant services, that anything that takes longer than 1 minute makes us antsy or impatient. I feel as though the intellectual insight that I will gain from the site from just subscribing to tweeters who I find have something relevant to say will hopefully avoid these feelings of impatient immediacy.

Until my official sign up to the site, I will read on in hopes of discovering what the Twitter world is all about.