Facebook, networking, and social justice

"It would be naive to identify the Internet with the Enlightenment. It has the potential to diffuse knowledge beyond anything imagined by Jefferson; but while it was being constructed, link by hyperlink, commercial interests did not sit idly on the sidelines. They want to control the game, to take it over, to own it. They compete among themselves, of course, but so ferociously that they kill each other off. Their struggle for survival is leading toward an oligopoly; and whoever may win, the victory could mean a defeat for the public good."

-- Robert Darnton in "Google & the future of books"; the New York Review of Books (February 12 2009).

As Darnton observes, the Internet is not necessarily a logical extension of the Enlightenment. While there is tremendous potential, whether or not the Internet stimulates can consistently produce coherent discourse remains to be seen. 

India has a peculiar relationship with the Internet; while access and usage is set to explode at exponential rates over the next couple of decades, our reading culture is taking a hit. Millions from my generation -- especially those who attended urban English medium schools -- grew up reading British children's literature. The United States has since made significant inroads into our colonial legacy. But (in my admittedly limited experience), it seems to me that fewer children of that same demographic connect with American writers such as E.B. White or Theodor Geisel -- or for that matter, those old British writers, Kipling, Wodehouse and Blyton. Indian kids today in the age group 13-17 are more likely to have caught an episode of "The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air" or played "Prince of Persia". 

As has proven the case in many countries, Indian children's attention span is on the wane. From time to time people send me messages saying that they don't have the patience to get through the text we have put up on the Teach in India group pages. Part of this is TII's fault: we haven't yet migrated to our own website, something that could do much to make the reading experience pleasant. Instead, we are working out of our Facebook and Google group pages. But the larger point we are making is, if you don't have the inclination to read for long stretches you are likely not the sort of mentor we are looking for; after all, critical thinking requires a prolonged engagement with content. 

The rule of self-selection applies: we need (in Gramsci's words) organic intellectuals, an elite group of brilliant individuals who will under no circumstance succumb to elitism.

In general, from what I have observed Facebook groups are especially successful in ramping up the rhetoric. While these groups might ultimately satisfy very different needs and gratifications, several promise much by way of words, but produce few measurable results. For instance, “Can you please take BARKHA off air!” is a popular Facebook group that has gained more than 3500 members since the terrorist attacks on Mumbai late last year. The group exists solely to excoriate Barkha Dutt, a Columbia University-trained TV journalist, who earned some criticism for her hysterical behavior on air during the army’s counter-attack, and for giving away commando and hostage positions. From the posts on the group’s wall, it is evident that users believe they are achieving something productive by drawing attention to her actions (and indeed Dutt has cited the Facebook group in her response to the criticism posted on the news channel’s website). But in practice they're only letting off a bit of steam; at worst, enjoying the entertainment.

Online networking may not be the best approach to take while launching an effort to mobilize the public. Nevertheless I am ultimately optimistic that many (if not most) of the 1000 members who have signed up for "Teach in India" are operating on the desire to actively bring about social change.