[R-G] RSF 'cyberdemo' falls flat

[Anthony Fenton]

http://21stcenturysocialism.com/article/rsf_cyberdemo_falls_flat_01623.html

RSF 'cyberdemo' falls flat

The virtual possibilities opened up by the internet appear to be  
endless. One can create for oneself a new name, a younger age, a more  
exciting personal appearance, and make friends with other such  
'avatars' who live in parallel worlds. The more ambitious can  
construct great empires out of code and pixel, and make war with the  
empires of their rival gamers. Now we have a new development; affluent  
Westerners can travel by broadband to electronic versions of the  
capital cities of poorer countries, in order to wave virtual placards  
demanding that the governments of these Third World nations change  
their policies.

The non-governmental organisation Reporters Sans Frontiers / Reporters  
Without Borders (RSF), a pioneer of the 'cyberdemo', is already  
familiar with worlds in which all is not quite as it seems. While the  
organisation conducts its campaigns for journalistic freedom almost  
exclusively against governments in the South and the East of our  
planet, the funding for these campaigns comes exclusively from Western  
sources.

Although the presentation of the official accounts of RSF seeks to  
spin the information in a deliberately misleading way, a brief perusal  
shows that the group's resources are provided by big business in  
France and the UK (plus a donation from the billionaire George Soros),  
and also - oddly for an organisation which is described as 'non- 
governmental' - by the governments of France and the USA. The  
presentation on RSF's website brazenly refers to one of its funders,  
the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), as a "private foundation",  
despite the fact that the NED is a fully-funded arm of the United  
States government. RSF claims that it is mainly "self funded", to the  
amount of €2,154,299, through the sales of publications; but given  
that the costs of producing and distributing these materials are fully  
met by (mainly French) corporations, this 'self funding' amounts in  
reality to the provision of funds to NSF by big business. And the  
British advertising firm Saatchi & Saatchi designs and conducts all of  
RSF's media campaigns- for free, of course.

Another donor which the RSF website lists as a "private foundation" is  
the Center for a Free Cuba, a Miami-based organisation which is funded  
by the US government. The Center for a Free Cuba is headed by veteran  
CIA operative Frank Calzon.

Having such a financial provenance, it is unsurprising that Reporters  
Sans Frontiers makes no mention in its campaigns of the restrictions  
on journalistic freedom which are imposed by the fact that the bulk of  
the mass media, based in the rich Western countries though operating  
beyond those frontiers into the poorer countries, is owned and  
controlled by the big capitalist corporations.

Sans frontiers, no doubt at all. But without doubt also, ces reporters  
sont sans intégrité.

As a Western organisation promoting an agenda aligned to that of  
Western governments and business interests, the credibility of RSF in  
the Third World has up to now been limited. But that seemed set to  
change on 12th March 2008, when RSF opened its Online Free Expression  
Day, branded with the logo of UNESCO, the highly respected  
educational, scientific and cultural department of the United Nations,  
and giving the appearance of having the full support of that body.

The targets of Online Free Expression Day were fifteen member states  
of the UN: Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, North  
Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam  
and Zimbabwe, which were declared to be "Internet Enemies" for their  
restrictions of online expression. Online participants in Free  
Expression Day were invited to allow a a virtual representation of  
themselves to be whooshed though CGI-created clouds (designed by  
Saatchi & Saatchi), to virtual public squares in the capitals of nine  
Third World countries: Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Eritrea (which for  
unexplained reasons was not on the 'enemies' list), North Korea,  
Tunisia, Turkmenistan and Vietnam. Having sent their 'avatar' almost  
instantaneously by the magic carpet of broadband to one or more of  
these sites of pixillated protest, which were found to be populated by  
faceless figures wearing white hoods, participants were then asked to  
select a virtual placard, with a list of five possible slogans  
opposing the alleged restrictions on free expression by the relevant  
government.

UNESCO responded immediately, repudiating RSF with the following  
announcement, which was placed on the front page of the UNESCO website:

     UNESCO has withdrawn its patronage of the Online Free Expression  
Day, organized by the non-governmental organization, Reporters Without  
Borders.

     UNESCO reiterates its support for freedom of expression on the  
internet but felt compelled to withdraw patronage following the  
publication of information by RSF which did not follow the  
arrangements agreed upon between the two organizations concerning the  
event.

     Following a request from RSF, made through the French National  
Commission for UNESCO, the Director-General of UNESCO Koïchiro  
Matsuura, in a letter dated 22 February 2008, granted UNESCO patronage  
to the international day. This letter clearly indicated, however, that  
the Organization could not “be associated with the activities  
envisaged for this occasion” by RSF.

     In its communications on the day, RSF published material  
concerning a number of UNESCO’s Member States, which UNESCO had not  
been informed of and could not endorse. Furthermore, UNESCO’s logo was  
placed in such a way as to indicate the Organization’s support of the  
information presented.

     UNESCO has a clear mandate to defend the free flow of information  
and freedom of expression. It does so using the channels and fora of a  
UN intergovernmental organization, respecting the sovereignty of its  
193 Member States. For example, UNESCO spearheaded debate in favour of  
freedom of expression on the internet throughout the UN-organized  
World Summit of the Information Society and continues to do so in the  
Internet Governance Forum, an ongoing UN dialogue on the future of the  
internet.

It appears that misrepresentation is something of a hallmark of RSF.  
Its attempt at subterfuge exposed, RSF issued a rather intemperate  
statement, in which it grandiosely referred to itself, in the  
grammatical third person, as "the press freedom organisation".  It  
accused UNESCO of "grovelling" and its director of "caving in" to  
authoritarianism, and - rather unusually for a non-governmental  
organisation- insisted that the French Foreign Ministry should call  
UNESCO to order:

     We were notified of the decision by the director of its Freedom  
of Expression, Democracy and Peace Division. Defending the move,  
UNESCO said it gave its patronage for the "principle of this day" but  
could not support the various demonstrations organised to mark it.

     "We are not fooled," Reporters Without Borders said. "Several  
governments on today's updated list of 15 'Internet Enemies' put  
direct pressure on the office of the UNESCO director general, and  
deputy director general Marcio Barbosa caved in. UNESCO's reputation  
has not been enhanced by this episode. It has behaved with great  
cowardice at a time when the governments that got it to stage a U-turn  
continue to imprison dozens of Internet users."

     The press freedom organisation added: "Unfortunately, it seems we  
have gone back 20 years, to the time when authoritarian regimes called  
the shots at UNESCO headquarters in Paris. UNESCO's grovelling shows  
the importance of Online Free Expression Day and the need to protest  
against governments that censor."

     Reporters Without Borders immediately informed the French foreign  
ministry of UNESCO's decision as it was at the suggestion of the  
French National Commission to UNESCO that this UN body granted its  
patronage for this event. The commission is an offshoot of the foreign  
ministry. Reporters Without Borders is of the view that the French  
government cannot remain silent in the face of the rebuff it has  
received as a result of pressure from authoritarian governments.

The statement also included a plea for more 'avatars' to turn up for  
the demonstration:

     Reporters Without Borders has issued an updated list of "Internet  
Enemies" as part of its actions to mark this day. There are 15  
countries on the list - Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia,  
Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan,  
Uzbekistan, Vietnam and Zimbabwe.

     Cyber-demos are being organised in online versions of nine  
especially repressive countries. Internet users can create an avatar,  
choose a message for their banner and take part in one of these  
virtual protests.

This last request was quite in order, as very few virtual protestors  
were arriving at the electronically represented city squares of the  
'enemy' states.  Peculiarly, for a demonstration which on the RSF  
website is described as a "24-hour online protest" for the 12th to  
13th March- several days later, the facility is still open and one can  
send ones avatar to any or all of these foreign places to make a  
virtual statement.

Of course, one cannot make just any statement. The RSF facility does  
not permit you to write your own slogan. You must pick one of five pre- 
prepared anti-government slogans chosen by the RSF organisers- 'online  
freedom of expression' does not extend quite that far.

Nevertheless, I took part. Never having had the time or the money to  
visit Beijing or Hanoi, I took the opportunity to arrive at 'Tianemen  
Square' and then only a minute later, at the 'Place du Parti Unique'.  
The virtual entity 'Jimmy Cross', from London UK, has been added,  
twice, to the numbers which RSF is claiming as participants in its  
protest. Having broadband access- something which only a tiny minority  
of Third World citizens are able to afford- it was free for me to  
travel, and no knowledge of the political situations in China or  
Vietnam, or understanding of their international economic context, was  
required of me.

As I write, my avatar is still there, waving its placard in two far- 
flung places at once. Yet so far, RSF has managed to send only 1,962  
virtual demonstrators to 'Vietnam', and, despite all the anti-Olympic  
publicity, only 8,438 avatars have turned up in 'China'.

Why so few? It is not as if Reporters Sans Frontiers lacks a publicity  
machine. Perhaps, for all the ease and anonymity which the internet  
offers to the relatively affluent, there is yet a sense that is not  
such a good idea for Westerners to arrive in a poorer country with the  
intention of changing the political system. George Bush and Tony Blair  
have done it for real; maybe, that was something of a lesson.