Kony

B

brianluce

What are you thoughts and opinions. 40 million views in 3 days.
I think it's propaganda at worst, 4th rate journalism at best. It's so Geraldo.
 
Didn't watch the video, though I noticed lots of people posting it last night. I did read an interesting op-ed piece on it this morning:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/09/kony_meme_facebook_marketing/

Good quote:
Hence, the push-button advocacy that Kony 2012 suggests may be just what the Western world wants: an easy way to feel like one is making a difference, even if the actual utility of the advocacy is questionable
Click to expand...

Again, can't comment on the content because I didn't see it, but it certainly had social impact.
 
I have a radio show, and talked about it this morning. There are plenty of links that show the information in the video is pretty out of date, and that the group/charity "Invisible Children" is less than transparent with their spending of funds taken in...

I am wary of this campaign. It might be on the up and up, but I wouldn't advise anyone throw any money to it without more research, and seeing how comfortable you are with current info and numbers...

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/09/world/africa/uganda-viral-video/index.html

It did have an impact, but so do posts that say "Obama's birth certificate is fake". Is impact without accuracy enough?

gelder
 
It hasn't been successful or will be.
I didn't watch the video, just heard in the background.
Heard a lot of information is outdated,which is lying.
But knowing Hitler's name doesn't matter, does it?
They should've already hired some badass hitman to go kill him. That's really the only real way to fix it. Kill the guy. Simple. Or do what America does? Send some cash to start a fake uprising?
 
Personally, I like to have a little faith in my fellow man. I believe the campaign is legit and will hopefully do some good. They're not saying that someone can only help if they donate money. They're giving people a means to get involved on they're own as well. They're telling people how to get in touch with their Congressman and just pass the message along. And they're right, if no one knows who his guy is, the government will never do anything about it...
 
I saw the video and I fell for the sweetness of that little blonde kid they expose.

I shared the video and posted the link to sign the pledge on everyone's Facebook wall.

I started regretting it minutes after when I learned that it wasn't AS simple as it looked. Usually, I google everything before getting too much excited about it but I must admit that video is powerful...
 
i didnt like the way he put such a heavy trip on his own kid and also the way he was like "I'm gonna stop this! Stop crying, I'm gonna stop this!" damn let the kid cry for his brother and stop trying to be superman is what i say. I think the cause is just but dont like the melodrama of the promotion and solution...plus they paint the US politians as 'the ones who can help' when most (if not all) have their hands in the pockets of third world country and some are directly responsible for genocide...yuk...i don't like momentary movement trends but i do like knowledge seeking and justice and the latter didn't show through for me on this campaign. What was possitive was the same idea for other tyrants, like i saw the same branding poster with Tony Blair and i wuld like to see more of that TBH, implicating many more banking, wallstreet mogals and 'world leaders' all on posters having the light shined on them, that is one good spin i see coming from this...
 
Last edited:
I'm going to be a member of Team Anti-Cynical when it comes to Kony:

What's important to understand is that whilst the video currently has 55 million hits that's a freak event and nothing that the makers could've predicted. Obviously they produced the video in the hope of attracting attention but the attention that it has attracted, in such a short space of time, is unbelievable and could never have been factored in to their production.

Yes, it is clearly an over-simplification. But that's because you're watching an emotive YouTube video made by a charity with a clear agenda when it comes to Kony. If you don't want a simplified version, go and read the ICC's indictment reports. If you are looking for information on YouTube, it's hardly fair to complain that it over simplifies things. It's the equivalent of, in my English Literature degree, taking all my references from Wikipedia rather than specific critical texts.

I would also defend the charity by saying that the purpose of the video isn't to raise money. Yes, it makes people want to buy t-shirts and posters but there is no reference to 'you can help by donating'. Almost all charities go down that line of attack but don't get these criticisms levelled at them, so the fact that Invisible Children gets this stick without even making that argument is, in my opinion, unfair. Yes, there are some transparency issues within the charity's fundraising capacities but that's because it's come under such enormous and unprecedented media scrutiny in such a small space of time. The press will always be able to find some sort of issues when they have the upper hand over a (relatively) small charity. I'm not saying that totally excuses any discrepancies but I think it's unfair to dismiss them out of hand just because one or two things have emerged. However bad their policies are, they're not as bad as what's being done in Uganda.

Which brings us to the most important issue regarding the Kony2012 campaign and that's its political and social validity. Really this ought to be the only rational argument being brought against it. There is a suggestion that the US could be infantilising Africa by intervening with the LRA and that the Ugandan army is a dangerous ally to equip with state of the art technology. These subjects are certainly up for dispute but the fact remains that Joseph Kony is #1 on the ICC's list of indicted but uncaptured human rights criminals. Clearly he ought to be brought to justice; I don't think anyone will dispute that. Whether you agree with moral interventionism is another thing altogether but it should only be a fundamental disagreement with that principal that leads anyone to actively object to the Kony2012 video and campaign. I think that is a totally valid line of debate and one that the charity would be happy to engage in.

So, in summary, I think it's easy to be cynical when something explodes in social media and makes a lot of people become overnight advocates of a cause they'd never heard of before. There is definitely an argument about the moral position of supporting US intervention in Uganda but, in terms of bringing to light a devastating global issue, the film is excellent. Simplified? Of course, but they've managed to get millions of people to watch a 30 minute video on YouTube which is more than any of us could ever say for our short films. People who feel strongly about the issue ought to pursue a more rigorous investigation of the issues before trying to convert others, but as a jumping off point this video expresses a lot that I think is good about humanity's social conscience.
 
Boy, if I could get .001% of that many YouTube hits I'd feel like I'd won the lottery.

They created global awareness for their cause. Good for them.

I didn't see the entire film, just a clip on the news.
 
NickClapper said:
There is definitely an argument about the moral position of supporting US intervention in Uganda but, in terms of bringing to light a devastating global issue, the film is excellent.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can really call this a devastating global issue. There is no risk that Kony will devastate the Earth.

I appreciate the things you say, about awareness, but - http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12429 - Invisible Children has been a charitable organization since 2004/2005. Invisible Children supports the Sudan People’s Liberation Army and the Ugandan Army in military action against the LRA. Those two groups have been known to commit similar atrocities to those blamed on the LRA.

They're trying, with the Kony 2012 campaign, to keep pressure up on the U.S. and other governments to have him captured by the end of 2012.

I think they can do that very well with the 6 million dollars they have on hand, already.

gelder
 
The more I learn about the Invisible Children NP the less I like them.
Biggest thing is that they embellish, exaggerate, and sensationalize. Essentially they're liars. Contrary to the video, t's been years since Kony was in Uganda and, and his numbers are believed to be just a few hundred now, not 30,000 as the film indicates. Why should anyone trust anything Invisible Children says? They aren't credible.

The whole thing seems more about them than the kids. A what's with putting your 5 year old son on camera? I'm surprised he didn't film a puppy and talk baby-talk to it.

It's propaganda. And I ain't down with any propaganda -- even if it's vilifies a thug like Kony.
 
I think most of the people criticising the video are just as guilty of not watching it or research as they accuse supporters of being. Most of those against have read one blog and assumed it as fact just like many who saw it did.

It's a fantastic piece. When I was done, I read the against and was a little confused by the claims made. The Kony 2012 video says that the LRA moved out of Uganda and is in neighboring countries, all he references to Uganda was to show what Kony has done and is capable of doing and why he's a bad guy. Also, the video barely, barely mentioned financial support. The other 29 minutes and 50 seconds urged for people to let the world know and write their representatives.

I've actually been an Invisible Children fan for years, they've done a lot of good work. All the main criticism is that they've spent a few million over the years producing documentaries and raisin awareness, but you could argue that without the publicity they raised they wouldn't have raised any money for ground support. Just like film marketing, it takes money to make (or in their care, raise) money.

One more debuff, IC doesn't support the Ugandan military. The US sent advisors over, and IC celebrated the American goverent finally getting involved, but it's not like money raised buys weapons for their army. Towards the end of the video they talk about the ground support they do.

All in all, it's been a successful campaign so far and over 50,000,000 hits in a few days for a 30 minute documentary is fantastic.
 
NickClapper said:
I'm going to be a member of Team Anti-Cynical when it comes to Kony:

What's important to understand is that whilst the video currently has 55 million hits that's a freak event and nothing that the makers could've predicted. Obviously they produced the video in the hope of attracting attention but the attention that it has attracted, in such a short space of time, is unbelievable and could never have been factored in to their production.

Yes, it is clearly an over-simplification. But that's because you're watching an emotive YouTube video made by a charity with a clear agenda when it comes to Kony. If you don't want a simplified version, go and read the ICC's indictment reports. If you are looking for information on YouTube, it's hardly fair to complain that it over simplifies things. It's the equivalent of, in my English Literature degree, taking all my references from Wikipedia rather than specific critical texts.

I would also defend the charity by saying that the purpose of the video isn't to raise money. Yes, it makes people want to buy t-shirts and posters but there is no reference to 'you can help by donating'. Almost all charities go down that line of attack but don't get these criticisms levelled at them, so the fact that Invisible Children gets this stick without even making that argument is, in my opinion, unfair. Yes, there are some transparency issues within the charity's fundraising capacities but that's because it's come under such enormous and unprecedented media scrutiny in such a small space of time. The press will always be able to find some sort of issues when they have the upper hand over a (relatively) small charity. I'm not saying that totally excuses any discrepancies but I think it's unfair to dismiss them out of hand just because one or two things have emerged. However bad their policies are, they're not as bad as what's being done in Uganda.

Which brings us to the most important issue regarding the Kony2012 campaign and that's its political and social validity. Really this ought to be the only rational argument being brought against it. There is a suggestion that the US could be infantilising Africa by intervening with the LRA and that the Ugandan army is a dangerous ally to equip with state of the art technology. These subjects are certainly up for dispute but the fact remains that Joseph Kony is #1 on the ICC's list of indicted but uncaptured human rights criminals. Clearly he ought to be brought to justice; I don't think anyone will dispute that. Whether you agree with moral interventionism is another thing altogether but it should only be a fundamental disagreement with that principal that leads anyone to actively object to the Kony2012 video and campaign. I think that is a totally valid line of debate and one that the charity would be happy to engage in.

So, in summary, I think it's easy to be cynical when something explodes in social media and makes a lot of people become overnight advocates of a cause they'd never heard of before. There is definitely an argument about the moral position of supporting US intervention in Uganda but, in terms of bringing to light a devastating global issue, the film is excellent. Simplified? Of course, but they've managed to get millions of people to watch a 30 minute video on YouTube which is more than any of us could ever say for our short films. People who feel strongly about the issue ought to pursue a more rigorous investigation of the issues before trying to convert others, but as a jumping off point this video expresses a lot that I think is good about humanity's social conscience.
Click to expand...

I think Nick has hit the nail on the head.
 
It's far from just "one blog" being critical of Invisible Children. It's also not mere cynicism due to an explosion in social media, at least, not on my part.

But, everyone can investigate and make their own decisions.

gelder
 
steve gelder said:
It's far from just "one blog" being critical of Invisible Children. It's also not mere cynicism due to an explosion in social media, at least, not on my part.

But, everyone can investigate and make their own decisions.

gelder
Click to expand...

I don't think Paul was saying that there is only one blog criticizing Invisible Children. I just think he meant that a lot of the people who've derailed the organization have made up their minds after reading one blog (of which there are many).

Also, I personally don't think you are being cynical, and I'm basing that assessment on the many well-thought-out posts I've read of yours on FB. But a lot of people I've spoken to have been cynical, and it's like they're geared towards not liking this campaign, for no reason other than the fact that it has blown up on FB and twitter. Give them a fair shake, and if you still don't like what they're about, after truly learning about them -- fine. But someone shouldn't be anti-IC just because their marketing has been so ridiculously-successful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top