Bit of Good

A discussion about technology, transparency, and trade equality with industry leaders, social entrepreneurs, and hopefully, you.

[bitofgood-blog]

Meditation can help you reduce stress and discover inner peace. Stemming from ancient Eastern origins, the practice of meditation is believed to help still the mind and reach a heightened level of awareness, improving health and well-being as a byproduct. Science is now proving the health benefits of meditation. The latest study from a team of Harvard Medical School scientists reveals how this mind-body practice can affect genes that control stress levels and immune function. Harvard psychiatrist John Denniger and his team used neuro-imaging and genomics technology to measure potential physiological changes in each subject more accurately. After observing the high-stress individuals as they followed the study’s prescribed yoga and meditation practices, the team noticed an improved mitochondrial energy production, utilization and resiliency, which help to reduce the stress linked to health conditions like hypertension and infertility. Compassion is the key to a meaningful life. Tibetan Buddhist tradition includes a practice called metta, or loving-kindness. A 2012 study from Emory University found that compassion meditation based on this Tibetan model can effectively boost one’s ability to empathize with others by way of reading their facial expressions. Another loving-kindness meditation study from 2011 found that, over time, this practice increased participants' positive emotions that allowed them to find a deeper sense of mindfulness, their purpose in life, the network of support surrounding them, and their health. These components helped increase their overall life satisfaction.

[bitofgood-blog]

"Early on in our philanthropic journey, my wife and I became aware of something I started to call Philanthropic Colonialism. I noticed that a donor had the urge to “save the day” in some fashion. People (including me) who had very little knowledge of a particular place would think that they could solve a local problem. Whether it involved farming methods, education practices, job training or business development, over and over I would hear people discuss transplanting what worked in one setting directly into another with little regard for culture, geography or societal norms."

The Charitable-Industrial Complex

[bitofgood-blog]

Testing Cell Networks Across America: Part One

Hi, my name's Gabe and I am over-caffeinated. Why am I over-caffeinated you might ask? Because I’m working with OpenSignal and TechHive to collect some standardized data across the U.S. of A. Part of that data collection is finding out how well different carriers work in all the places you might use your phone, including inside buildings.

And what better place to pop inside to run some tests for a minute than your local coffee shop? I just started collecting data a few days ago, but so far, it’s taken me to at least ten different Starbucks locations in San Francisco (as you may have suspected, they all look the same, with the fascinating exception of the large-unstealable-item-that-the-restroom-key-is-attached-to).

I’m taking along eight phones, four iphones and four android devices, each with service from one of the four major US carriers.

I’ve already found out that standing around downtown with a bunch of phones in a portfolio will invariably be met with generous and not-so-generous offers of cash. I’m guessing that if you’ve ever had a phone lost or stolen, this is probably how it found its next home. I won’t single out a specific city for this, because it has happened literally in every downtown stop of every city so far. I’ve also come across a few shop owners who wanted to be reassured that I was not there to do some kind of strangely conspicous surveillance. I can only wonder about what is there to be surveilled.

At each testing location I’m using a modified OpenSignal app to collect all the data we can about things like signal strength, tower location, and upload and download speeds.

Aside from the fact that I find this raw data totally fascinating, it’s important for OpenSignal to have a baseline for the kind of data we’re crowdsourcing as well. Because I’m using the same devices in each area and tightly restricting any other variables, we can get the kind of unbiased scientific information that can be used to check the crowdsourced information as well as truly quantify claims like “best nationwide network” and “best 4G coverage” that marketing departments tend to toss around. We’ll also be comparing it to similar data collected in previous years to see what has changed.

In the coming weeks I will be in about 18 more cities, and many, many more coffee shops. As much as I appreciate the amazingly consistent Starbucks atmosphere, I appreciate a bit of variation. This week I’ll be in San Diego, Los Angeles, Las Vegas and Phoenix. Are there local cafes you like? Tell me, dear reader, where I should go.

You can also see where I am by following me on Facebook (OpenSignal Gabe), FourSquare (OpenSignal) where I’ll be checking in periodically.

(X-posted from my own article on TechHive)

[bitofgood-blog]

So our biggest challenge in creating a new set of goals for our planet is in ensuring not that they are achievable, but that they are ambitious enough. I assume we will continue fundamental advancements in food security, public health, arresting climate change and addressing human rights. My suggestion is that we add another, equally challenging, item to that list: Significantly increasing the lifespan of consumer goods we purchase, particularly in the area of technology. My hope for 2030 is that those of us in the richer countries and communities of the world will find a way to change our culture to one where our consumer behaviors are sustainable. A focus on making technology that lasts will also necessarily yield products that can serve more of the world.

Anil Dash for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation - My Hope for 2030: Lose the Culture of Disposability

[bitofgood-blog]

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act: Aaron Swartz as a Good Primate

Many, if not all, primates share food. The extent to which they share outside of their immediate offspring (a behaviour known as parental investment) is varied and there is much speculation as to what complex social hierarchies are at work. According to Jaeggi and Van Schaik’s research, there are two key factors that have been identified that encourage proactive food sharing. Firstly, primates who are using "extractive foraging" are more likely to share. Essentially, tool use encourages sharing. For example, if I have a tool or a skill with that tool - perhaps I am a chimpanzee with a stick to extract termites - that you do not, I am more likely to share my termites with my offspring or other members of my group. It might be easy to overlay a very human feeling of pity or "feeling sorry" for the individual without the tool on the situation, but that would be a very human centric oversimplification. Contrary to initial logic, they also found that it doesn't matter how high quality (nutrient rich, etc) the food is, just how comparatively hard it is to get. 

Secondly, and possibly less surprisingly, adults shared food with each other "in exchange" - though I think this term is an oversimplification - for companionship and to increase mating potential. Romance via fruit exchange. Though, as with humans, reciprocal altruism is not just about sex. On a broader level it helps to form coalitions and support among non-mating individual as well.

When we get over to the idea of humans-as-primates there are many more complexities that we, as humans, are privy to. As an academic I see the contents of JSTOR as some very hard-won academic brain food. Just one of the above referenced primate studies had Andrew King and his team following a group of 14 baboons through the Namib desert for almost two years. That is what I call one hell of a termite stick that most of us don't have. It is easy to understand why one would want to share the results of a study that takes such an investment of time and resources. I also feel that sharing research like this helps bring us all together in our global understanding of ourselves and our world, or in other words, "form coalitions and support among non-mating individuals." I believe Aaron Swartz did too.

I don't know enough about Aaron as an individual to comment on the sad circumstances surrounding his death. I'm happy though, that this terrible news has sparked anew questions about internet piracy and access to information. There are plenty of good social and economic arguments for the widespread access to academic information. The most logical of which (to me) stems from the enormous investment governments make in their institutions of higher learning. Surveying the bylines of academic articles, you would be hard pressed to find an individual or institution who has not benefited from access to public or tax-based funding. From small subsidised student loans to large research and development grants, so much is aided by We the People, with a capital P, only to be put under lock and key in it's metaphorical ivory tower, accessible only to the small-p-privileged to have access to it. By making millions of academic articles widely accessible, Aaron Swartz was practising his very own primate reciprocal altruism.

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, under which Aaron was being prosecuted, was put in place in a vastly different era and under entirely different circumstances. While the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act was being passed through Congress in 1986, I was playing Oregon Trail on my Apple IIe. In my wildest dreams I could not have imagined the global state of computing today. Information is no longer something to be regulated through the machine on which it exists, computers are now merely the tools we use to form our world community and all the complex information in it. It is one hell of a termite stick, now lets start sharing.

Gabe Scelta is the Innovation Director at Ethicodes. A fellow at the Emerge Venture Lab, Gabe’s deep knowledge of the technology industry keeps Ethicodes pushing the frontiers of the fair trade industry. He holds a master’s degree from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies and a bachelor’s degree from Boston University. He lives in New York City.

Related articles

Anonymous attacks MIT websites after death of internet activist Aaron Swartz (guardian.co.uk)

Academics Tweet Tribute To Aaron Swartz, Share Research With Internet In Honor Of Activist (huffingtonpost.com)

MIT Probes Role in Case Leading to Web Activist's Death (bloomberg.com)

Aaron Swartz, freedom fighter (salon.com)

[bitofgood-blog]

Barcodes have been the mainstay of the consumer world for close to 40 years, first used on a food product in 1974 when Wrigley’s chewing gum received the first barcode (the predecessor to the Universal Product Code, or UPC). But the linear displays of bars and lines have been in use elsewhere since the early 1950s, initially as a code to label railroad cars.

[bitofgood-blog]

Culture: You're Soaking In It

I think Laura Agustín's post about Nicholas Kristof's Half the Sky documentary (trailer below) is an interesting read. Read it here: "Kristof’s Paternalistic Smarm: the Soft Side of Imperialism redux"

I also had a hard time watching the PBS documentary. Aside from my general uneasiness when men talk to women about "how hard it must be for you," media is a tricky thing. On one hand I think it's a good thing that anyone (Kristof or Agustín) is telling that story, as skewed as the perspective may be. On the other hand... all the things she wrote about. 

The key is promoting discussion, which posts like this prove it accomplished, in some small way. What I really wish is that writers like Kristof were more explicit in their framing of the debate and that consumers of media would see documentaries as jumping boards for larger conversations, as opposed to passive media to be consumed and filed away as unbending truth.

There are bigger issues at play about how we (the west, white people, media spectators, the internet) can participate in helping the people who want to be helped (from poverty, sex work, disease, low wages, you-name-it) without falling into centuries of our own unpleasant cultural muck in the process. In Epstein's "The Invisible Cure," she talks about the gross misuse of AIDS funding spent in eastern Africa creating western style hospitals, overhead, travel, and buying state of the art equipment - when the best care was given in homes and small scale centers with budget-limited control measures. It's a similar problem faced with trafficking. How to help without some kind of culture translation? And who's translation to trust?

Gabe Scelta is the Innovation Director at Ethicodes and Research Associate at the Ethiopian Global Initiative. A fellow at the Emerge Venture Lab, Gabe’s deep knowledge of the technology industry keeps Ethicodes pushing the frontiers of the fair trade industry. He holds a master’s degree from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies and a bachelor’s degree from Boston University. He lives in New York City.

Related articles

'Half The Sky': Meg Ryan, America Ferrera & Olivia Wilde Tell Pain, Hope Of Exploited Women (huffingtonpost.com)

'Half the Sky:' Series on exploited women looks to empower (csmonitor.com)

Voices to the Voiceless: Confronting Sex-Trafficking and Other Gender-based Issues Worldwide by M. Pitter (inparenthesesmag.com)

[bitofgood-blog]

Fair trade coffee has been a valuable experiment, one that has brought concrete benefits to hundreds of thousands of farmers. But it rests upon a fragile foundation, and the corporate embrace of the concept could undo decades of work by activists, consumers and farmers: democratically run, farmer-owned cooperatives may be unable to compete with corporate-sponsored plantations. “The fair trade model provided some protection from the unequal conditions of the open market,” says Nicki Lisa Cole, a sociologist at Pomona College who has studied fair trade. Welcoming large-scale plantations into the model “re-creates the problematic conditions for small producers that spurred creation of the model in the first place.”

The Brawl Over Fair Trade Coffee

[bitofgood-blog]

The Daily Show's John Stewart interviews economist Dambisa Moyo, who's book "Winner Take All: China's Race for Resources and What It Means for the World" hit bookstands (and kindles) back in June. This may not be available for viewing outside the US, but it's an excellent interview for anyone interested in the US' (and China's) involvement and outlook on development in Africa. I haven't read the book yet, but this interview definitely bumped it up on my reading list.

Gabe Scelta is the Innovation Director at Ethicodes and Research Associate at the Ethiopian Global Initiative. A fellow at the Emerge Venture Lab, Gabe’s deep knowledge of the technology industry keeps Ethicodes pushing the frontiers of the fair trade industry. He holds a master’s degree from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies and a bachelor’s degree from Boston University. He lives in New York City.

[dentonjuice]

If environmentalists used sex to sell sustainability the way automakers sell cars, people would be a lot greener by now.

 - Peggy Liu, on an ambitious project aimed at promoting sustainable consumption by China’s middle classes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/china-dream-sustainable-living-behaviour-change?CMP=

[bitofgood-blog]

The Sign of the Beast, and Three Signs of the Best

I was talking with a friend earlier this year (recently returned to the UK from Central and North America) about the potential for tracking supply chain information with QR codes. "Ah", she nodded knowingly, on being shown an example of the 2D barcode, "we used to call that the sign of the beast."

This is somewhat discouraging to hear when you are, as I am, convinced of the usefulness and potential of these little codes to contribute to positive social change. However, it connected a few disparate things that I've heard and read about QR codes, and technology more generally - some ideas that are specific and recent, and some broader themes that they refer to.

To start with, the specific - I was lucky enough to hear what Unltd's Chief Executive, Cliff Prior, thought about QR codes - he voiced concerns over exactly the kind of sentiment that many people may have to QR codes. Essentially, the worry is that people like my friend are not in the minority in (correctly) identifying that the codes are mostly used for advertising or some other form of marketing. The unimaginative ways that they have often been used (or, indeed, completely unusable, such as on the side of a bus or in places with no internet connection, as documented variously here, here and particularly here) also don't set inspiring precedents. Those most motivated about changing attitudes to consumption are (presumably) least likely to be engaged by marketing gimmicks.

With that in mind, below are some of the ways that QR codes (and barcodes in general) have been used for more interesting and noble causes.

(On a general note, the idea that barcodes can be used to contain ethical information on products has a history which predates the recent spread in the use of QR codes: between 2007 and 2010, the Fair Tracing project (which was an early contemporary of GoodGuide in the Ethical Consumer Information Network) looked into using barcodes to contain supply chain information, using case studies of both Chilean wine and Indian coffee.)

In the interim, a number of organisations have picked up the challenge, with Goodguide being the obvious leaders in the US, and Barcoo providing a more crowd-sourced version in Germany (although with a number of users from the UK continually adding content).

Last year, the idea was picked up again but with eco-intentions by Canada's inaugural Clean50 Tech summit.

Here is another kind of use - linking QR codes on museum exhibits in Derby to wikipedia articles and further information.

And then there are those which are less about information persay, but the lighter side of life. Aside from sites like QR code art, which offers a continually refreshed catalogue of new and innovative uses of the codes, I thought this little gem really stood out for me in terms of creating a more interesting urban landscape.

But to dip back into the world in which Gabe and I entered when we started the Bunna Bet Project in 2011, there are mixed signs that QR codes,  transparency and ethical consumption can go hand-in-hand-in-hand. Firstly, since the whispers of what we are up to and/or the same ideas have occurred to others, we've seen QR codes in use by Starbucks and Sainsbury's supermarkets to link to information about geographic areas and FairTrade, respectively.

Secondly, there are a number of projects which are involved in using the technology to provide information related to ethics in some direct way. These are my top 3:

1) http://www.talesofthings.com/

 - A university-led project using the power of QR codes as a "quick and easy way to link any media to any object", specifically aimed at telling the stories and histories of objects.

2) http://iouproject.com/

- Direct trade at its finest. A real text-book study in transparency and definitely one to watch for all those interested in how the principles work out in the practice of business.

3) http://traceandtrust.com/

- The latest incarnation of a number of efforts using QR codes to trace fish, these guys share a belief I hold for coffee: that greater levels of transparency promote higher quality, fresher products.

The real question remains whether the fad-obsessed world of marketing will kill these codes in the public's perception, or whether there will be enough other, better-implemented uses to create a lasting association of usefulness and value with QR codes. There will be some tasks that Augmented Reality, or other forms of Near Field Communication, are better equipped to manage. However, the problems with getting machines to recognise the intricacies of images in the real world means that QR codes will retain an unmatched usefulness for some kinds of links. The real challenge - as with all implementation of new technologies - is to use the most appropriate tool to make the greatest positive impact; my hope is that the inherent neutrality and usefulness of the QR code itself allows more creative and beneficial uses to emerge and dominate over the poorly implemented and pointless uses. For this to happen, those in the fields of transparency and sustainability would be wise to avoid the pitfalls of the fad-crazed marketeers, and must be careful to differentiate how interacting with their code is more rewarding than accessing a mobile version of an advert.

Related articles

Barcodes of the Next Generation: London Takes QR Technology to the Streets (smartsign.com)

QR Codes? Don't Bother. 5 Reasons (inc.com)

Should Your Resume Have a QR Code? (sloanreview.mit.edu)

[bitofgood-blog]

Part II: Pizza, Beer & Stock Options Don't Cut It Anymore: Technologists and Social Entrepreneurs

This is part two of "Pizza, Beer & Stock Options Don't Cut It Anymore: Technologists and Social Entrepreneurs" - part I is here. 

In my role with Ethicodes I’m designing a mobile game-type app for ethical and sustainable consumption. In my professional life, I’ve been a designer and programmer for web and mobile. That means I have the unique experience of having been on both the management / programmer table. The work I do for Ethicodes can’t be done alone, and I’ll admit, there are (many) elements of programming that are better left to the specialists. In my juggling of these two worlds, I’ve come across the paradox of social enterprise technology. Most often it comes down to money, understanding and respect. Here’s some advice from both sides of the table.

Part II: Tips for Developers

No Eye Rolling. Sometimes opportunity is about showing up. We understand everyone from your grandmother to your boss is asking you to fix something. But please be open to the possibilities and try to leave the jaded personality at home. It takes a certain type of person to be a programmer—some say it is a cynic's exterior over an incurable optimist inside—after all, it is your job to constantly find ways to break your own code, with the expectation that there is a way to make it logically perfect eventually. I suspect the social entrepreneur is the exact opposite—incurably optimistic on the outside (we can fix the world!), with a constant cynicism on the inside (because the world needs fixing badly).

Consultation Fees. An interview is not a consultation. Everyone understands you are in high demand, and your time is valuable (at least they do if they read the above). However a 1/3 of a total standard consulting fee should be business and overhead related. That means $50 of your $150 fee is there to account for this initial meeting, as well as computer upkeep, and the time it takes to invoice clients. I recently had a very talented developer request a consultation fee before even discussing their skills. They were off the list immediately, but a little further research revealed their skillset wasn't the greatest—which could have been a costly mistake for me. On the other hand, if they had agreed to an initial discussion, they would have gotten the opportunity to convince me otherwise.

Understand business etiquette. As a programmer you have a lot of wiggle room as far as business attire goes. In fact, I frequently feel like the older the t-shirt I wear, the more I am assumed to be a talented programmer. Very few people expect you to show up in a suit (and if the above is true, it might actually work against you). So when I say business etiquette, I am not primarily talking about attire (though sweatpants might not be the best idea). Despite what you learned from your brilliant CS professor, some basic social and conversational skills are necessary. Texting and muttering during a meeting are not looked upon favorably by anyone. Inability to manage your own schedule and terse, incongruous and borderline rude emails (despite a footer that says "sent from my iPhone") are also not working in your favor. You will need to be able to work with other people in some capacity for the rest of your life regardless of how talented you are.

Be clear about your skills. We all know you can learn as you go along, and too often that is what must happen as new technologies and languages arrive. Hiring managers should understand this. That said, be clear about what you know now versus what you can learn. When I worked at LiveJournal, all the programmers had to learn BML (Brad's Markup Language - which only existed in Brad Fitzpatrick's work). Obviously, no one came to the company knowing how to do this (aside from Brad of course) and all of them learned. However, there are always going to be programmers who know Ruby, C+, and all of the main languages better than you. Managers just want to know what they are signing up for in the skills department, so be honest and clear about what you know now and what you would be happy to learn in the future.

Invest in future employers. You undoubtably will come across social entrepreneurs who are hoping that you can "share their vision." Sometimes this means working at a discount or being available for questions when otherwise you would not. You shouldn't do all of their work for free or let them stomp all over you. Make this clear from the start, but also let them know how interested and invested you are in their vision. Try "I {am;am not} really into the goal of {fixing the world;helping the poor;educating children} so I {can help;cannot help}. However I think it would be a good business decision if you hired {me;a specialist;a team} to do x, y, and z." Knowing your investment level from the start will help them gauge how much they can lean on you when the going gets tough, and will prevent any misunderstandings for both sides.

Don't steal ideas. This should be another obvious one, but isn't. You may have the CS talent to bring an idea to fruition with little help. However, social entrepreneurs likewise have talents that you don't have, usually business and field-specific ones. They also (hopefully) had legal agreements, copyrights, and precedent over an idea long before they brought you in on a project. It is a much better option for both of you to work together for a common goal than get into messy legal battles later.

Agree on Baby Steps. Entrepreneurs want a perfect product, and often don't yet have the backing or technical process-knowledge to make it bulletproof. And you might not be sold on their product or time commitment. A good way to start off is to both agree to a minimum viable product - meaning the smallest commitment you as a programmer can get a way with while still testing some of their business and usability assumptions. It might be as simple as a programming diagram, a series of mobile web pages or a pong-level app (free of fancy graphics or complex engagements).Taking a small first step will help everyone figure out if they work well with one another and how on board everyone is. After that, you can throw in the towel or figure out the next small step.

Just like last time, I’d love to hear from other management / developers about experiences, tips, and frustrations in the comments.

Gabe Scelta is the Innovation Director at Ethicodes and Research Associate at the Ethiopian Global Initiative. A fellow at the Emerge Venture Lab, Gabe’s deep knowledge of the technology industry keeps Ethicodes pushing the frontiers of the fair trade industry. He holds a master’s degree from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies and a bachelor’s degree from Boston University. He lives in New York City.

Related articles

What is a Social Entrepreneur? (fiwal.org.uk)

Entrepreneurship and the Social Entrepreneur (ruralstops.blogspot.com)

Four Business Tips for Social Entrepreneurs (bayintegratedmarketing.wordpress.com)

[dentonjuice]

The Backflip Slamdunk Change Model

When I was first getting interested in ethical consumption, and talking with friends about how best to encourage others buy the things we think are better for us and our planet, I suggested that it is more effective to “be the change you want to see” in as cool and impressive a way as possible, than it is to preach about it in a boring way (even if your preaching is perfectly accurate and correct). One friend thought for a second, and asked if this meant that when out in the supermarket, you should take your bag of FairTrade/Organic/ethical coffee beans, do a backflip and slam-dunk it into your trolley/basket? 

Essentially, I had to agree that this was the essence of what I was suggesting. One of the most influential schools of thought which has informed my understanding of people is that related to the role of ‘affects’ on the way we think. A key lesson for me came from the work of Brian Massumi, and the idea that the ‘rational’ thoughts that we have are always the output of a continuing back-and-forth between the impact of our environments and external stimuli (the ways we are affected by the outside world) with the memories and knowledge which constitute our character. In terms of its relevance here, it is a lesson which marketing and advertising bods of the big-bads are on the cutting edge of - it ain’t what you sell, it’s the way that you sell it which is crucial: convince people, even in the crudest possible terms, that what you have is desirable then they will find themselves buying it even if they have no need for it (even better, they will invent reasons for needing it after they’ve bought it). We are, in spite of our complexities, very simple beings in many ways: use colours that are widely well-received, words which are of the moment or make people smile, and the positive association created, no matter how subconsciously, has achieved its goal.

A question that stands out, however, given that people are not completely unthinking and ignorant of rational arguments, is to what extent it’s possible to change the stimuli which give people a positive association and lead to certain actions. Should you use the lowest-common-denominator approach of selling to the most obvious and basic instincts you perceive, even if you completely disagree with the tendencies they sell to? Advantage: reaching the widest possible audience with the message you want to promote. Disadvantage: reinforcing stereotypes and messages you are not so keen on.

This advert, as discussed by UK ethical fashion entrepreneur Esther Freeman, is a good example of the kind of dilemma I’m talking about. (Question: brilliantly effective marketing campaign or hopelessly undermining itself and women’s struggles everywhere?)

This question reappears contantly for me, not least in Kris and Gabe’s disagreements on this blog. In this form, it appears as a reformulation of a classic division amongst progressives and those pushing for change: should you compromise on some issues (e.g. focusing on price to better sell ethical products) to the detriment of other issues (e.g. drawing attention away from price towards people and real costs)?

This understanding makes it a question of political philosophy: do the ends justify the means? From an ethical point of view, is consequentialism (what you do) or deontology (the way that you do it) more important?

The backflip slamdunk change model incorporates both sides of the debate under the helpful umbrella of affects: the way you do things is fundamentally important to the emotional response that it creates, but what’s more important is to recognise that ‘rational’ reasoning emerges out of this response, and that ‘rational’ elements of messages may also carry emotional impact. For Massumi, and other slightly less comprehensible theorists like Deleuze and Guattari, our understanding of the universe is based on the resonance that images, messages and the external world has with our bodies - bodies made from the affects of the sum total of our experiences.

This ‘sum total’ viewpoint suggests to me that not only do you have to do things in a way which is in line with the ethics of what you’re promoting, but that if you can give the right message in the right way to the right people its effect will be profound - the key here is to search for the highest common denominators. And a backflip slamdunk would seem to me the highest possible.

[bitofgood-blog]

Move yer money month! - A story of failure, a call to action

If you're in the UK, chances are you bank with one of the "Big 5" (Natwest, Barclays, HSBC, Santander and RBS hold the vast majority of our accounts). Why? Probably because they're big - they're everywhere, so it's easy to open an account, and they've got mahusive advertising budgets etc. etc. Also, perhaps, because their unscrupulous investment techniques have, in the past, been highly profitable. Apart from the occasional global financial meltdown.

The problem is, being so big means they can do essentially what they want (especially, perhaps, if they're deemed 'too big to fail'), and what they want is to make loadsa loadsa money. Amazingly to everyone, in 2008 (and apparently also in the 30s) we discovered that some people making loads of money isn't the same as a healthy economy, and further that it might actually make you inclined to make money from propogating unhealthy economies (who knew?).

But what was really amazing was that - partly because the Big 5 are about as bad as each other when it comes to making a quick buck by any means necessary, and partly because we are lazy and ill-informed - although we (the people) Occupied and got thoroughly outraged at bankers' pay, we didn't actually put any economic pressure on the banks as consumers.

It was to address this gap in activism that Move Your Money Month was founded - to encourage people to put their money where their mouths are and switch their accounts away from the Big 5. I am pleased to say that last month I was inspired by how easy and straightforward they reminded me the process was and finally took a plunge I'd been meaning to for a while.

At least, it was with these intentions that I told HSBC, in no uncertain terms, that Yes please I very much would like a 'close your account form' and sent it back promptly. 

I was then going to write this:

"So it's goodbye HSBC - I was lured into your student account because I wanted the overdraft and the 100 MP3s you were offering (how I wish I'd got the railcard offered with Natwest's student account), and now I can finally set you free.

[Pic of me snipping card gleefully in two here]

Ahhhhh. That feels much better."

Instead,  they sent me the 'But You Still Owe Us Money' form. At first, convinced of a conspiracy, I was outraged. Then it turned out I did owe them money.

So the saga continues, and let this serve as classic example of how life  - in particular, a form of life where it's easy for me to accumulate debt and continue putting money in the pockets of those whose activities I find ethically repulsive - gets in the way of the ethical decisions we'd like to take. And I've got it pretty easy, which makes it easier to understand the objections that many raise on the exclusivity of ethical consumerism.

BUT DO NOT BE DESPONDENT, residents of the world wide web. You do not have to be as hopeless at managing your finances as I am! YOU CAN make the switch, and you should (that is, if you don't like: the earth dying screaming, recurrent financial collapse and instability, bankers and banks dodging tax whilst earning mega-packets) because as hardened money-makers, money (and especially not giving it to them) is one of the few things they understand. I will be paying off HSBC and getting well rid, and when I do I will inspire you all with pictures of me offending a debit card as best I can.

[bitofgood-blog]

THE THING THAT HAPPENED (by CauseEffectAgency)

[bitofgood-blog]

though, to be honest, my reaction was visceral and emotional. I think what bugs me the most is my own culture, the fact that the most successful recent attempt to raise awareness about a human rights abuse in Africa starred and was narrated by a handsome white man, came in the form of a high-concept, high-cost video with a booming rock soundtrack, titled to hook the 2012 US presidential race, and happily simplified its cause for the sake of an easy-to-absorb and appealing emotional narrative (protagonist, antagonist, easy solution, your role). And it worked. Or is so far. If this is the new recipe for engaging Americans in the problems of the rest of the world, this makes me sad. Are we only able to engage with others’ suffering through the glitzy flashing lens of our own popular culture?

Why Kony 2012 Brought Out the Cyber-Skeptic in Me

[bitofgood-blog]

The idea that Americans can only speak out if they have 20 years of experience on the ground is as silly as it is undemocratic. Citizens have every right to express concerns about a tragedy far from our shores while expecting that appropriate expertise will be brought to bear by their elected officials.

Invisible Children have never been cut from the traditional Washington cloth — their advocacy is designed to appeal to young Americans. The group’s strength lies in their ability to connect with folks outside the beltway about something that doesn’t have a direct or immediate impact on American lives. To this end, Invisible Children has succeeded. They’ve connected with and inspired millions of Americans to be active and engaged on an issue that has historically been on the periphery, at best, of American foreign policy priorities.

Their grassroots mobilization contributed overwhelmingly to the passage of The 2009 LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act — the most widely cosponsored bill Africa-related piece of legislation in the last 37 years — and more generally to the ongoing prioritization the LRA throughout State and USAID, as well as to the President’s decision to deploy U.S. military advisors to central Africa. Of equal importance is that Invisible Children also supports an innovative radio program in the remote regions of eastern Congo. This program collects information about LRA movements, abductions, and defections and is often better and more up-to-date than the information obtained by the United States government.