Invisible Children, Kony 2012, and criticisms

[essius.livejournal.com]

The other day I noticed the Kony 2012 video by Invisible Children that has been receiving a great deal of attention on the Internet as of late (it’s received over 56 million views on YouTube). I watched the video and was immediately curious. Evidently, the video has received multiple lines of serious criticism. No one denies, of course, that Joseph Kony must be brought to justice. But Invisible Children’s methods (and in some respects even intent) are highly questionable. I’ll mention just a few of the criticisms brought against the film and the movement.

Chris Blattman, a Poly Sci & Econ Assistant Professor at Yale, argues not only against the style of the film (“the hipster tie and cowboy hat” and the “macho bravado” tend to detract from the message) but also against the notion of rescuing or saving African children: “It hints uncomfortably of the White Man’s Burden. Worse, sometimes it does more than hint. The savior attitude is pervasive in advocacy, and it inevitably shapes programming.” One result, says Blattman, “is a lot of dangerously ill-prepared young people embarking on missions to save the children of this or that war zone. At best it’s hubris and egocentric. More often, though, it leads to bad programs, misallocated resources, or ill-conceived military adventures.” Finally, Blattman is also troubled by the film showing the faces of child soldiers, as well as implying (erroneously and incredibly) that the US and Invisible Children “were instrumental in getting the peace talks to happen.”

Grant Oyston, Sociology and Poly Sci student at Acadia University, has made several criticisms—such as the fact that “[m]ilitary intervention may or may not be the right idea, but people supporting KONY 2012 probably don’t realize they’re supporting the Ugandan military who are themselves raping and looting away” (q.v.)—and also provided links to many others as well. Among the latter, perhaps the most important are lawyers Kate Cronin-Furman and Amanda Taub’s article, “Solving War Crimes With Wristbands: The Arrogance of ‘Kony 2012’,” which raises methodological criticisms, and writer Joshua Keating’s post “Joseph Kony is not in Uganda (and other complicated things),” whose chief argument is that IC “has made virtually no effort to inform” concerning important details (such as where Kony is located, where the LRA’s members are currently distributed, and how many “mindless child soldiers” the LRA presently has).

Author Michael Deibert helpfully lays out some of the important historical details and concludes with another heavy charge against IC: “By blindly supporting Uganda’s current government and its military adventures beyond its borders, as Invisible Children suggests that people do, Invisible Children is in fact guaranteeing that there will be more violence, not less, in Central Africa.”

My father, a retired juvenile hall peace officer, was also pretty critical of the video and, in addition to some of the familiar criticisms, he said it “seemed to violate some pretty serious child rearing tenets, i.e., ‘tis not good to expose a child to an adult’s world as it robs them of their childhood, etc.; and, beyond that it seemed to prepare the film maker’s kid to early indoctrination (and believe me, he’ll get that soon enough as kindergarten is just around the corner for that boy)…”

Meanwhile, IC has responded to some of the above criticisms, and the group certainly has its defenders (e.g.), but it would seem IC has yet to address one of the main claims many are raising: that it is working with groups that are guilty of the same atrocities as the LRA.

Here is another recent source attempting to make sense of the issue.

I’m still wading through some of the various criticisms and IC’s response, but I tend to think IC’s basic motives are pure, but their methods and strategic intent are questionable and in various ways even dangerous. What do you think?

Comments

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I think criticizing things is an industry in and of itself, with boiler-plate, cookie-cutter, abstract criticisms that apply to any and every subject that comes up. I think hearing the same tropes and phrases over and over again gets a little old. Personally, I knew of the guy years ago when studying terrorism, so I'm just annoyed at watching the internet be one giant Johnny-Come-Lately, and Facebook activism once again proving the rule that Americans are great at talking about things.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Some instances: "It smacks of White Burden." Well, everything smacks of White Burden when white people are involved. This sort of criticism is entirely rote and rhetorical, and simply fills space.

"It could lead to malinvestment or bad strategies." 1)appeal to consequence 2)everything could lead to malinvestment and/or bad strategies. Just simply saying it also betrays it's inherent emptiness, its lack of substance. More rhetorical space-filling, fill-in-the-blank "criticism".

I'm reminded of science class wherein everyone gets trained to be a "critical thinker" and regurgitates statements about "sample sizes" and "generalizability" ad nauseum in some rote, repetitious, purely rhetorical charade of criticism.

[essius.livejournal.com]

What do you make of the charge that IC is working with those who commit the very same kinds of atrocities as the LRA?

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I wonder if everyone would be so critical if the LRA were a muslim group.

\trollface

[terminator44.livejournal.com]

If they were a Muslim group, then we'd already be bombing them.

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

Still processing all the stuff I'm reading. I just came across an article questioning IC's financial dealings (how much they've gotten vs. how much is actually doing anything but going back into more marketing.)

The difficulty in leveling what might be legitimate criticism here is that sometimes people misunderstand that you can agree with conclusions (like Kony, or genocide, or the enslavement and military indoctrination of children are all bad things) while disagreeing with methods. We've all seen situations where something ostensibly helpful is criticized at not being effective at fixing the problem, and defenders will rise up and level accusations of being against solving it in the first place. What surprises me is the amount of intelligent, knowledgeable criticism coming out re: "Kony 2012" that's been able to both express in very strong tones just what's wrong with the LRA, but also what's wrong with THIS approach to dealing with it, mostly without falling victim to that. It's kind of nice for a change.

[essius.livejournal.com]

What surprises me is the amount of intelligent, knowledgeable criticism coming out re: "Kony 2012" that's been able to both express in very strong tones just what's wrong with the LRA, but also what's wrong with THIS approach to dealing with it, mostly without falling victim to that. It's kind of nice for a change.

I agree. Oyston, above, has been a particularly good example of that type of balance.

[fornikate.livejournal.com]

i think well-meaning but ignorant white people need to stay the fuck out of africa's business 99% of the time

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Except for AIDS and condoms.

[its-anya.livejournal.com]

So you're not in favour of development aid, human rights aid, education and employment initiatives, peacekeeping initiatives, microfinance, etc.?

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Imagine of the Lord's Resistance Army were Islamist instead of Christianist. The GOP would probably be making a big race-loaded stink about how Obama doesn't care about his fellow blacks. Instead when it's Christians being the murdering scum their reaction is a measured silence or in the case of Rush Limbaugh praising this nasty little toad.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

It is driving me FUCKING BONKERS that no one is saying "Christian Fundamentalist Joseph Kony" or "Christian Terrorist Joseph Kony".

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Naw, I think the cannibalism, the dozens of wives, the child soldiers, and the sex slaves are enough that the GOP will not be cutting them breaks because they ID as Christian. The measured silence has a lot more to do with the victims being black people living in hard to reach places in Africa than with the religion of the perps. We're fine with terrorists who blow up folks in India after all, even though many are muslims.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

I'm making a video about how Hitler is bad and we need to save the European Jews. Send me $10m please.

This is bollocks. Where was the outrage when Kony was actually killing people? Why haven't these guy directed their energy to problems happening today? Why are they trying to get guns into a country in the process of a fragile rebuilding after a civil war.

THIS IS A FUCKING SCAM AND IF YOU SEND THE VIDEO ON TO ANYONE YOU'RE A CUNT.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

I'm making a video about how Hitler is bad and we need to save the European Jews. Send me $10m please.

If you’re going to make a fund raising infomercial (which I believe this is all this is) you might as well have something a little more recent like Idi Amin Dada (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idi_Amin).

The thing that seems to make this seem so easy is that there doesn’t seem to be a good guy or hero in this scenario. The New York Times had a pretty good article (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/09/world/africa/online-joseph-kony-and-a-ugandan-conflict-soar-to-topic-no-1.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss) that describes the scenario of this pretty well.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

One look at how they handled their finances in the past should tell you everything you need to know. Anything that has this much viral marketing has to be suspect, especially when it doesn't come from a type of 'last straw' scenario.

A true advocacy group would not be telling everyone to give them money to solve the problem, they would be directing it to the real players like Red Cross etc.

[danalwyn.livejournal.com]

I can see why people really don't like IC's approach, and I think I agree with the critics here. I don't like IC's spending patterns, but more to the point, I don't see what they're hoping to do. Despite there stated claim, which is that they intend to protect the villagers of Central Africa, I just can't figure out how they're going to approach it.

1) I don't see how they're going to get the resources to do it, no matter how much time they spend lobbying Congress. Nobody's quite sure where Joseph Kony is - he could be anywhere in Orientale (which is about 80% the size of Afghanistan for comparison), northern Uganda (unlikely), the CAR, or Southern Sudan. He could even be in the Kivus. Deploying enough troops to sweep the area in search of one man and a fast-moving band of followers will not be easy; too many of the Brigade Combat Teams we need are still in Afghanistan, or are rebuilding. I don't see any way that they can get ten or so BCTs deployed into the region in the near future no matter how much support they can get among voters. The EU is not any more likely to lend their troops, which means that basically things boil down to "hope you get lucky" (this may not be true - the US may have found him in the CAR, but it won't be the first time he's been found and subsequently slipped away. We can hope).

2) I don't see how they plan to overcome the morass that is the DRC. If they depend on the SPLA/UPDF alliance, well, those forces have already invaded Orientale twice, and the natives aren't likely to forget. I don't seem them with a plan to get diplomatic buy-in from the anti-Ugandan side of the DRC, which could lead to renewed fighting. Kony would probably escape if a third Congo war breaks out, but I don't see a plan here to keepthat from happening. Pushing an aggressive response to a former foe hiding across the border in the DRC is what started this mess in the first place. Let's not do it again.

3) I have no idea what they're going to do if they catch Kony. After all, do they think if they catch him the leaders of the other factions of the LRA are going to wake up and say "Wow, I've been leading a life of horror. I should go get a respectable job now."? The focus on Kony is a short-term solution, and would have positive effects, but I can't see what the long term solution here is. More worrying, there's no real "after-Kony" thinking I can see here. It's sort of a magic bullet type of solution.

4) Perhaps most importantly, I have no idea what the phrase "we focus on civilian protection" means. Do they intend to protect civilians in all affected areas? How? How are they planning to protect civilians from the UPDF or the SPLA - neither of which has a particularly good record. The US has to cooperate with the UPDF because we owe Uganda a hefty favor, but these people do not. So why do they? And how do they plan to defend civilians from the forces who participate in their photo-ops? Do they have a plan? Are they going to recruit young western students and activists and ship them to serve as combat garrisons in Ugandan territory? Are they building a military force that can rival Uganda (the regional powerhouse)? There are just too many questions about how they plan to ensure long-term security, and none of them are answered.

I'm just not sold on this. I admit that they mount a decent defense, but there are too many questions left. I don't like the vague focus on "civilian protection" without some sort of description of what it entails - it sounds either too vague to be useful, or too ominous to be good. They seem a bit too friendly with the UPDF, even given that they claim that none of their proceeds go to the Ugandan government. I support some things they do, and I've always supported the Early Warning Radio Network and its various radio support programs, but that's not entirely their doing.

Plainly, I think they can do good, but they haven't managed to prove that they have the vision to do anything in the long run. If Kony dropped dead tomorrow, it's unclear what they would do. I wouldn't demand they disband or anything, but if I had to donate, I think I'd pick a more professional charity that spends more of their money in their target population.

[oportet.livejournal.com]

If you're going to ask for money, I say stick with the Nigerian Prince Inheritance Bank Transfer thing. Easier to sell that claiming you're going to solve a problem in Africa.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

DQ, yo.

This guys pretty much sums up my opinion

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I was with him until his Muslim tirade. What the fuck? Unless that was satire. I can't tell anymore with the internet.

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

From what I have heard and read, one of my biggest problems with this campaign is how many people come away from watching the video without the foggiest idea about current events in Uganda. Lots of surveyed viewers think Kony and the LRA are active in Uganda now and they do not know anything about the various players and ALL of the atrocities by the different parties.

Creating a hoard of Ill informed people with good intentions but no constructive knowledge is not an admirable goal.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Tell it to the newspapers!

[essius.livejournal.com]

This is IC's response to a couple of these issues:

RE: OVERSIMPLIFICATION OF A COMPLEX ISSUE
KONY 2012 portrays, in no uncertain terms, the image of a madman who manipulates children spiritually for his own tactical gains. In our quest to garner wide public support of nuanced policy, Invisible Children has sought to explain the conflict in an easily understandable format, focusing on the core attributes of LRA leadership that infringe upon the most basic of human rights. In a 30-minute film, however, many nuances of the 26-year conflict are admittedly lost or overlooked. The film is a first entry point to this conflict for many, and the organization provides several ways for our supporters to go deeper in learning about the make-up of the LRA[*] and the history of the conflict[**]. Likewise, our work on the ground continually adapts to the changing complexities of the conflict.

RE: EXAGGERATING THE IMPACT OF THE LRA AND IMPLYING THE WAR IS IN UGANDA
Since the LRA left Uganda in 2006, Invisible Children has been publicly denouncing their atrocities in DR Congo, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic (CAR), while continuing to work with now-peaceful communities in post-conflict northern Uganda. In September 2011, Invisible Children launched the LRA Crisis Tracker[†] website with the aim of providing high-quality, verified information about LRA attacks in DR Congo, South Sudan, and CAR. A detailed methodology is available on this website that explains how information is collected, verified, and rated in terms of its accuracy and reliability. Every incident that is reported through the Early Warning Radio Network run by Invisible Children's partner organizations is carefully verified with other actors in DR Congo and CAR before being published to the LRA Crisis Tracker; even after publishing, incidents on the website continue to be modified as--and when--further information becomes available. Each incident is rated according to two criteria, on a scale of 1 to 5: whether an incident has actually occurred, and whether it was committed by the LRA. In this way, Invisible Children is providing concrete data and helping to dispel unfounded rumours about LRA attacks.

* http://vimeo.com/28628155
** http://s3.amazonaws.com/www.invisiblechildren.com/history.html
† http://www.lracrisistracker.com/

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

What do I think?

Well since someone asked for it... I've seen this on another LJ political talk group (In the words of Yoda, Oh Not They Did) And saw a heavy focus on the "hints at White Man's Burden". I'm skeptical on the methods of "Invisible Children" but the idea got me thinking of what is the proper way of a white person wanting to help, if that should be done at all.

For example, I remember when Haiti suffered the 2010 earthquake and like so many people at the time I donated money to help. I was white, but the race of the people affected didn't cross my mind at all. I'm not going to pretend that I "saved Haiti" because I only could contribute a small bit compared to people that were able to do a whole lot more. But is something like that considered wrong?

Do people in a crisis receiving foreign aid ask what race of people were helping them? Do people in life or death situations concern themselves with all the little complexities of racial inequality, and at that are people of other countries so concerned about racial inequality in the United States?

As for Invisible Children, are they mostly made up of white people? If they are based in the western world where they can accept members of the African American community, or Latino, or Asian, or people of various races, do they include them? If not why don't they?

Lastly, at the end of the day I don't feel very happy over the outcome, because with or without the video there is still child soldiers. It makes me wonder if snark over someone's perhaps misguided efforts are really that much better then those efforts... It's hard to accept that it is better to just allow human suffering to happen then it is to try and do something to help.