Darfur and Green Avatar (not James Cameron's)

Press the circular button (the only physical button on the front). Touch, slide, tap to enter passcode (yes, I have a passcode) - ****. I'm concerned that waking up with this routine for the last 3 weeks as if I couldn't open my eyes without it is a prelude to some greater gadget/connectivity addiction. The iPhone in itself seems to link the ever-impressive advancements of mobile internet, with a primitive instinct of touch (tactile interaction) which is familiar to most of us from infancy. Watch a child, with their endless fascination for touching surfaces and holding onto things, throwing them around, tearing them up etc, and note the parallels with iPhone wielding yuppies from Sydney to L.A.

The iPhone thus signals the return of the inner child, and in some ways the worst aspects of this. As if baby boomers and some Gen X'ers didn't have enough ammunition for their critical analyses of Gen Y, with lifephone (or lifeline, or post-phone - whichever iPhone nickname you prefer) they can hyperbolically speak of our De-Generation with our short-attention spans, moving between conversations real and online, constant email access (you can now get push e-mail functionality) and addictive games such as Paper Toss or HoopsLite in the split seconds where we were devoid of stimulation before the lifephone, when all mobiles did was make calls, send messages, and play pixelated snake games.

The idea that there are now an endless stream of procrastination methods (let's be honest, that’s what most of the cool iPhone features are about) available via software advancements is nothing new, but there are some positives out there which will hopefully catch attentions and imaginations of the time-starved, overly stimulated (or entertained) consumers of online-all the time lifestyles (proviso added that I'm firmly planted in this group myself). The plight of civilians in Darfur has been well explored in niche academic environments in Western countries, approached with constant difficulty by the United Nations (who have perplexed many in claiming that the 'war is over') and received honourable mentions by George Clooney and Madonna. Although the celebrity factor of the latter is (in many situations) a sure-fire way to reach a mass audience for public sympathy/support, the complexity of Darfur's plight (including the number of state and non-state actors involved and regional, ethnic and religious factors) makes it difficult to package the cause and the action for neat mass consumption, which often means tapping into upper middle-class guilt for $$ that fund overhead (administrative) costs for many not-for-profit organisations.

Turning a viral idea for a cause into a mass display of support is great, and provides a sign of hope to cynical minds who may feel social networking simply allows individuals of Generation-Me to create a 3rd person pseudo-celebrity version of themselves in the virtual world. But once you've got support for the cause - then what? If 1 million twitter subscribers turn their Avatar (profile picture) green in support of an inadequate Iranian democratic system (as happened prior and since the recent 'election' in Iran) can we be resolved of any further action? What are the results of such widespread support? Well the answer, in the Iranian example, depends on who's talking (The issue and the protest are absorbing in their own right - in Kase Wickman's words 'The Iranian Revolution will not be Televised, It will be Twittered' - can cover at least 6 months worth blog entries). Some view the green movement as purely symbolic, one click and the 'supporters' can delude themselves into thinking they've done something, and move on with their lives in a 4WD, with a Big Mac meal and new iPhone in tow. The Air America Media website smacks its readers more directly 'One click is too easy. One click is not one life saved, one dollar donated, not one ounce of difference made. One click is nothing at all'. BC Politics takes the same sceptical stance, but uses the time honoured tradition of parody in suggesting that along with making our Twitter Avatars green, we should also do the following to show our support for Iran from Afar (among other things):

• Change your computer to Iran's time zone (+4:30 GMT).
• Write only in Persian.
• Grow a neckbeard.
• Paint your house green.
• Paint your baby green.

The list ends wryly with 'Cease thinking about Iran once the craze dies down' (for the complete list, and a quick, funny read to boot check BC Politics). On the other hand, the Green Twitter revolution has been a definite influence in the Iranian Government's decision to censor and ban certain webpages from view within the country (including Tehran). And as we all know from the many pop songs banned by churches and governments (see 'Only the Good Die Young', or anything by the 2 Live Crew) whenever something is banned by large and powerful institutions, the more inquisitive people become to seek it.

So, following this long digression, how has gathering mass-support in the age of new media helped advocates of Darfur (for awareness, if nothing else)? If hunger is the mother of invention, then software is at least the favourite son. Having recognised that gaining support for a cause is still a far cry from real action in troubled nations, building awareness is still a great place to start. Combining the badge of support/identity of Iran's Green Avatar with the interactivity (gameplay, if not touch) of the iPhone, is a fantastic web concept developed by mtvU (MTV's college Media Network) called Darfur is Dying (http://www.darfurisdying.com/). It is worth checking out, but is a great attempt at placing users in (virtual) situations familiar to Darfurian citizens living in constant fear of Janjaweed militias. The site is multilingual, and also provides constant exposure to the real message (detailing suffering and human rights abuses in the region), and ways to take real action. A definite goal, a real issue, a worthy cause, and a clear message. Amidst the clutter lies the clear.

For a good overview of the Darfur conflict, check out the BBC Sudan/Darfur Profile and the introduction by Global Security.org.

Tweep Tweep, Who got the keys to the jeep?

'Is Madonna an early adopter?' My tweets are lame (search harpt). However, even I don't tweet out stuff like this - "i iz tired" - thanks for that brit. I'm not sure of the reason you're following me, but I know why I'm not following you. In the last 2 months, I've found slowly but surely many friends and acquaintances are using Twitter as a primary source of information, from CNN feeds, NYTimes feeds to your more sublime and poetic fare such as "u remind me of my jeep...I want 2 ride it", or the prophetic "Ow this bleach hurts, rofl" - this could be interesting if it involved another person pouring the stuff on APGirlie3 - then it would also be interesting as to why she would be 'rofl' - too vindictive?. Google take note, if you want to buy Twitter, you're also buying into banal tweets (ban-weets), same goes for Facebook who, let's face it, may see their numbers dwindle by this time next year in the face of a(nother) significant tipping point in the history of social networking. Personally, I also like the word 'tweet' because it's like the commonly applied sounbyte used to censor swearing on brilliant broadcast TV like Jerry Springer and the like (I don't think HBO has this sound in their database - thankfully). In honouring this, for the remainder of this entry I feel it's only right...nay, necessary, to use the word 'tweet' place of profanity.

When you can break news of an American Airlines flight qualifying for Olympic Diving in the Hudson River, or a swine flu epidemic, or insider updates during the Mumbai Terrorist attacks (11/9 as its being cemented in the public consciousness) faster than the big boys of breaking news - you are onto something. When you figure out how to profit from feeding tweet inquiry into business enquiry - you are onto something. Likewise if a profitable model for news and reliable journalistic practice can be created from this technology (I am indebted to UNSW lecturer Kate Crawford for thinking in this direction). Invariably, in times of revolutions be they industrial, artistic, musical or technological (informational), the old system always breaks before a solution appears.

By the late 1800's, Horse Carriages, or more specifically the horses themselves, were producing such significant amounts of tweet that they placed an almost unbearable liability on the streets (infrastructure) and citizenry of New York City (amongst others), that a solution seemed nigh impossible till Henry Ford waltzed in with those wheels of his, and the internal combustion engine came of age (for those factussies - fact fussy people). Indeed, the tweeting horse tweet problem was such a threat that it dominated discussion at the first International Urban Planning Conference in 1898 - the issues were pollution, environmental by-products and infections where swelling human populations were in proximity with horses and their tweet, and the rise of carriage related accidents. Till Ford, citizens were left with more pedestrian solutions including development of NYC's professionalised street-sweeping service and developments of road rules to reduce carriage-related accidents and deaths (which happened more frequently than us of the 21st Century may expect). For a while there was a system in complete chaos, the dominant thinking being how to preserve the system rather than finding a completely new and innovative solution out of left field. We know the rest of the story, the horse-carriage arrived at it's not so glorious finish line, and a new race started with the Ford Model-A (1903). To begin a sentence with a classic line from 30 Rock's Dennis Duffy, 'In this analogy..', the horse tweet is the old way of doing things - newspapers, online newspapers, facebook (oops), and the internal combustion engine is what we're waiting for, Twitter is just the wheels - and someone's developing the idea for a new Ford Model-A.

Till then the metaphorical chaos in the virtual world gets reflected in the physical world. Illness, Flu. Swine? Is Medieval English on the comeback trail? Well the Urban Dictionary entry is particularly informative in this endeavour, and brings up such gems of definition as "Swine: probably one of the best words ever, swine can be used in any situation to degrade another person... ". The following are U.D's suggestions for potential uses around the watercooler and in everyday banter/duel with your arch nemesis from the middle-ages:

- Leave me alone you swine!
- Look at that tweeting swine.
- That man is a filthy swineish animal.
- You are the swine of all swine.

So it goes, and these may prove more effective in the event of the swine flu epidemic (or is it pandemic? - WHO's Margaret Chan is confusing us all). If it's pandemic, believe I’m taking a break from my beloved Vietnamese Pork rolls at Phuong’s Bakery. However, the possible severity of a pandemic should not be underestimated, particularly in light of the first swine-flu related death in Mexico. That there is any general sympathy about those most likely to be affected is questionable in light of...what else other than a tweet. Here's an incredibly touching, humanistic tweet from NYTimes columnist Charles M. Blow: "Pandemic, Smandemic, I want to invest in that surgical mask company". Lovely. We have the wheels, we need the engine, but what we really need is for these guys to stay in the passenger seats, preferably up the back with the naughty kids. Another browser window is chirping away with news, recommendations, and ban-weets about gardening and recessionary stock-tips. I would love to chuck my 140 characters of gold in with the rest of this horse tweet...but I iz tired.

Finally...a message from Jon Stewart.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Twitter Frenzy
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis First 100 Days