One of the assignments we got in Social Media Campaigning, was a group project: the ignite talk.
We would have only 2 minutes to present a topic using slides. That means 30 seconds each, and approx 5 seconds per slide.
My group got the subject of Wikileaks.
We met as a group two times, and did the rest by our selves at home.
The project of making a short presentation turned out to be, almost ironically, time consuming.
It is worth noting that as soon as we grouped up, we made a group on facebook which we have been using actively ever since to share files and discuss our projects.
Back to the ignite talk, we all started off by researching wikileaks in general, to get a better point of view of what we were dealing with. Then, we picked out four main parts to talk about, and distributed the four topics among us - one topic each.
After putting together 5 slides each with suggestions to the topics, we met as a group (-1) in the NAB café and tried putting the slides together as a whole. We found holes, we were missing some points we should be talking about, and some of the topics where too similar.
We revamped it - set more specific topics for each of us, and researched it again.
A week later, we all met at the BBC, where we worked on the slides for hours.
Not only did the information on the slides have to make sense, the order, the timing and the design all had to match up as a whole.
We practiced the presentation, and cut off all information that wasn't important enough to talk about; 5 seconds per slide does not add room for extra information. We had to keep it simple and to the point.
Instead of showing the slideshow as a 'normal' slideshow - we set a timer to the Powerpoint file, so that it would automatically show 5 seconds per slide. Needless to say, there was no room for questions from the class, or messing up with saying too much about a topic - because that would effect the person talking after us - if we used too many seconds, the next person would have even less time to talk.
My topic was the threats to the future of wikileaks.
I was the one with the last slides for the ignite talk, and my last slide therefore contains questions to open up for a discussion after the presentation.
These were my slides
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/15407379/wikiMyTipic.pdf
These are my notes for my slides:
Slide 1:
Julian has said that one of the biggest threats to the future of wikileaks is the United States and the laws they want to set in order.
The new laws would mean the end of national security journalism in the United States.
Slide 2:
It would mean that if any journalist that publishes any part of a classified paper - would be a criminal - a spy - and the person who gave them the material - has committed the crime, communicating with the enemy.
Slide 3:
Anytime something is published - there is always a chance that the enemy can read it. Which means that any communication to a journalist, is communicating to the enemy.
Sarah Palin has called Julan Assange a terrorist - and that he should be treated like one.
Slide 4:
Bradley Manning got access to information while he was serving for the military - he sent the information to wikileaks, and has today been in prison for 1000 days without a trial. People all over the world is protesting - calling him a hero "Blowing the whistle on war crimes is not a crime!"
Slide 5:
While all of this is scaring the general public from leaking information - information is still leaking.
Julian Assange said that the internet is so massive, and so easy to access, that information from now on will find its way. With or without wikileaks.
What is the future of wikileaks?
Will it change the world?
Has it all ready done so?
- - -
The entire presentation with all the four topics put together as one, is here:
http://www.slideshare.net/mjneutel/wikileaks-the-hackers-game
Through researching this topic, I did learn more about how free speech online can affect people badly. In war, where 'there are no rules' - almost anyone can be accused of being a spy. And when these people, in a war zone, can be accused of being a spy - a criminal - then their lives are at stake.
The fact that war journalist has been murdered, simply for walking in the streets, and that the proof of the fact of it was hidden - is all chilling. It makes us think: How much information like this is still hidden? How many has been killed, simply for wanting to distribute information?
And while the people who shared this information, ended up being 'the criminals' because they shared 'confidential information' that was 'not theirs to share', I can't help but wondering how much information like this is still hidden? People who does know about information like this, will more or less be too scared to share the information they got - because that would make them 'spies' and 'criminals' .
Wikileaks has provided an output for people to distribute information while still being anonymous. The electrical traces are all deleted, and therefore there are no 'criminals' behind the files that are shared through wikileaks. But yet, Bradley Manning got caught - simply because he told one other person that he had shared some confidential files. If he had kept quiet, would he then still have been a free man, even thought he shared the files? Apparently so.
Manning has turned into a scape goat - an example of what 'not to do' - and because they have proof that he shared files, he is being used to scare any potential sharer of information; scare them into not sharing what they know.
Through this project, I have gotten better knowledge of what sites like wikileaks really is, how it is effecting people, and how it is effecting companies.
I've also learned that putting together a short slide as a group, is time consuming and challenging. But we were all happy when the presentation was over - a job well done!
romaincrisis
germansingergirl
pixelskylines
ellievsbear
izzy806
kianamaiart
baratheonpilled