New Media Against Racism

The importance of any technology comes from the way that people appropriate it and make it useful within the boundaries of their cultural context. So when we talk about twitter as an important contribution to the Arab Spring and other recent political changes, Manuel Castells reminds us that social media is a tool whose sociotechnical features mirror the trends of social practice in those countries, not like something which fundamentally changes social organization.

Castells suggests that one of the side-effects of gaining ground by being an alternative media activist is the requirement to adapt to mainstream media’s form and language. This provides an interesting bridge to what Leah Lievrouw calls “culture jamming”; a variety of ways in which alternative media allows for juxtapositioning, reconstructing, fragmentation of mainstream media to create radically different messages that expose inequalities, inconsistencies and abuse of power. Culture jamming often uses popculture form, but turning it on its head to reveal the problematic structures hidden inside. Not a new phenomenon, culture jamming should rather be seen as the continuation of a long tradition of subversions and parodies that vastly precede the internet and new media.

Banksy is probably one of the most famous culture jammer of our time. He is most known for his oevres of graffiti and often combines culturally well-known symbols with crude, realist messages that expose the hypocrisies and horrors of our time. His latest project was a trip to Gaza, where he created several pieces aimed at getting the world to act in defense of Palestinians. Apart from his usual graffitti-style pieces, Banksy also created a short documentary titled “Make this the year you discover a new destination“, playing with traditional marketing formats for tourist destinations, while shedding light on the hardships of everyday life in Gaza.

Banksy uses phrases from travel ads ironically, like “well away from the tourist track (access via a network of illegal tunnels)”; “the locals like it so much they never leave”; “watched over by friendly neighbors”, “development opportunities are everywhere”, contrasted with images of armed military, barbed wire and bombs going off. One of the most central pieces are shown in the videoclip. It looks vaguely like Rodin’s “The Thinker”, but it’s placed in the midst of bombed houses and the person is more likely protecting herself than philosophizing. Banksy first uploaded a picture of the piece titled “bomb damage” to his instagram account two weeks ago. It aready has over 14.000 likes.

(picture from Banksy.co.uk. Note how the picture is taken to display the Israeli watchtower in the back)

Last week a group of Gazan parkourers created a video-reply to Banksy’s documentary, titled “Yes, Banksy, this is Gaza”, where they invite Banksy to come back to Gaza. “I’m sure we can find you someplace to stay“, one of the young guys in the video says. “but there are over 12.000 people in Gaza needing homes”; “We can offer you bread and water, but 90% of the water is undrinkable”. The video shows some of Banksy’s artwork, but more importantly it follows the group around as they perform somersaults, jump off buildings and throw themselves over obstacles around Gaza. It’s a powerful way of taking back the narrative, while continuing the juxtaposition between hope/despair and capitalism/poverty that was used in Banksy’s clip.

There is a discussion concerning culture jamming and its limitations to achieve real change. One of the reasons is that the sort of co-optation that is the basis of culture jamming, is increasingly used also by commercial actors. Culture jamming is powerful precisely because it cannot be controlled, but this means that it flows in all directions at the same time, and a symbol can be hijacked by anyone, for any purpose. Even in mainstream culture, the notion of subculture, rebellion and indivudualism is gaining increasing ground, and producers of consumer goods often borrow from these subcultures because they know it sells well. Lievrouw argues that subcultures and alternative media are sometimes even complicitly engaging in the cross-fertilization of symbols and messages.

The lines are indeed blurry. Consider, for example, John Oliver, a well-known British satirist with his own HBO-show, wherein he consistently mocks big corporations, often by turning their logos into their exact opposite and generally uses guerilla semiotics to expose them. One recent example is his bashing of tobacco company Philip Morris, where Oliver created a new logo (“Jeff the Diseased Lung in a Cowboy Hat“)  to replace the “Marlboro man”. Oliver’s staff had posters printed and hung them in various places around the world. The hashtag #JeffWeCan started a minor Twitterstorm.

But how shall we think about this? In terms of impact, John Oliver’s segment was definitely effective, and sparked a general discussion about the power and influence of tobacco companies and their marketing strategies. But does the fact that Oliver himself is employed by HBO for a hugely successful tv-show in any way diminish his takedown of a crony capitalist company? As Lievrouw says, the lines are increasingly blurred between what is “alternative” and what is just alternative-like portrayal of the mainstream.

Similar difficulties have been discussed in the context of anti-colonial and anti-racism social media campaigns. Suey Park has spoken and written much about how to use -especially- hashtags to gather momentum to expose racial bias and stereotyping in the mainstream media. But the risk of corporations and other organizations (NGOs etc) co-opting the messages for their own benefits and thereby diluting the cause is something which must always be taken into consideration.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }