Kony 2012: Is social media the new solution to social and political problems?

The Kony Film 2012 launched by the American not for profit organisation Invisible Children became an instant hit. The documentary was used to raise awareness of Joseph Kony’s crimes against humanity and to increase donations for their “Stop Kony” campaign. Once the film went viral, it fired up intense discussions about its credibility.

This controversial campaign leads to bigger questions about the limitations of social media campaigns to solve deep-rooted political and social issues.

By now you know who Joseph Kony is and you can also probably recount a short biography of him. He is the Ugandan leader of the brutal Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) which sets sights on establishing a theocratic state based on the Ten Commandments. . The International Criminal Court has listed him as one of the most wanted men and Kony is accused of crimes such as murder, rape and sexual enslavement, torture, looting and abduction of children and forcing them to become child soldiers. 

The film called for global support and asked the world to participate in an event on April 20 to rally for the arrest of Kony. In Australia alone, 50,000 Australians signed up for the event and supporters around the world even planned to overwhelm their streets with “Stop Kony” red posters and supporters in Perth claimed they were ready to “paint their town red”.  In Washington, New York, San Diego, Austin and Los Angeles, followers hung “wanted” posters of Kony in their streets.

All well and good, but to this author, the Kony Film 2012 is another example of Slacktivism.

The film wants audiences to take part in this ‘feel good campaign’. It gave audiences the impression that if we play our part in showing support for the “Stop Kony” campaign, we can get rid of Kony and this will end the suffering and hardships in Uganda. 

The “Stop Kony” campaign is successful in firing up people’s inner desire for justice – enough to make them want Kony arrested and tried. However the film does not offer in-depth analysis or awareness of the social and political complexities that are happening in the Central African region and this oversimplification has perhaps clouded supporters’ understanding of the situation.

The film largely focusses on Kony’s heinous crimes. Former Ugandan presidential candidate Norbert Mao commented "let those who are the professors write their books and create academic awareness. But this one grabs your gut and shakes you until you are forced to pay attention."

The film has been viewed more than 38 million times on Youtube and more than 13 million times on Vimeo. The message of the film is a call for quick response, appealing to the world as well as world leaders to stop Kony.

The film also has inaccuracies such as claiming Kony is still in Uganda when he has not been in Uganda for six years. The film has also been criticised for using excessive emotional appeal to simplify the problems LRA is causing.

Senior Lecturer Dr Tanya Lyons, who is the President of Africa Studies Centre in Flinders University, commented “I think it's quite interesting the film producer was willing to exploit a young child in a good versus evil, very emotive, documentary, which is trying to tap into the western guilt for inaction".  

We are seeing a growing trend in not for profit organisations using oversimplified messages and promoting simple solutions to problems in order to get support.  Organisations sell the message that problems can be solved by signing online petitions and sharing and retweeting. Recently, I saw a tweet by the UN which said “we can end new HIV Infections among children by 2015. Here’s 3 things everyone can do”. Despite the good intentions of the UN, it does not provide any in-depth information about why HIV infections are endemic in children. People can help cure the problem by online donations or writing messages on e-cards to raise awareness.  I saw a post on Facebook by Amnesty International that asked people to sign a petition to Shell Oil Company CEO Peter Voser to stop exploiting the Niger Delta. Audiences are encouraged to ‘take it to Facebook’ and Twitter and type this message to Shell “Stop profiting from human rights abuse. Own up and pay up for the devastation in Niger Delta! http://amnestyusa.org/shell”.  With such simple actions, we can surely take part in stopping a global company exploiting local populations but it leaves a lot of unanswered questions about the effectiveness of inactive participation.  Would petitions sway Mr. Voser’s decision? Without active involvement, would we understand the current politics of Nigeria and why companies are not challenged by the Nigerian government when they are exploiting locals?

This is not to say using social media campaigns is totally futile, but I believe it is effective when trying to achieve short term goals. In April this year, a Norwegian woman name Lill Hjoennavaag used Facebook to organise a crowd to gather in Oslo to sing Children on the Rainbow to mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik. The campaign rounded up tens of thousands of people, chanting the song which Brevik detests because he believes the song does not complement his ideologies. 

However, when we try to solve complicated and intricate issues such as political instability, conflicts, human rights, social injustice and endemic health issues, we need to have a greater understanding of what are the root causes of these turmoils. If we have a greater knowledge, we can develop effective strategies to tackle them. 

Promoting simple solutions seems to be the new way to attract supporters. Though they are quick and easy, this undermines the work by activists who are working closely with governments, local organisations and communities.  Encouraging people to take part in these feel good campaigns only engages them for a short while. Furthermore, engaging people with feel good campaigns may not guarantee supporters’ commitment to long term goals because firstly, they do not have enough knowledge of the issue; secondly, they are acting in the heat of the moment; and lastly they are not passionate enough to dedicate their time to get involved in the organisation.

Living in the information age, consumers are inundated with news which prompts organisations to use shock and awe tactics or any means to grab audiences’ attention.  Kony Film 2012 gained enormous support because it was simple and it empowers us that we can make a change.  But after sharing the film on Facebook and retweeting it – is this enough to stop Kony and solve the current problems in the Central African region? Is this the new way of tackling all political and social issues without properly engaging with people who are involved or affected by these issues?  So with one just click and signing petitions – does this really encourage us to understand and pay attention about what is really happening out there?