What she said

I've tried twice to explain how the big tech companies have disproportionate (and often morally questionable) influence over our culture and our commerce.  Rebecca MacKinnon comes from a different perspective but she did a much better job explaining it than I did.

Media Overhype and the Profound Wisdom of the Warlock Assassin

Over the past week I've watched with everyone else the nightmare that's happening in Japan.  I've seen the surreal videos, the ongoing drama of the situation at Fukushima, and the incessant commentary on it.

The team at Global Voices Online asked me to provide a summary of what science bloggers were saying about the whole mess, and I have two posts there now - one that provides explanations of earthquakes and tsunamis, and one that looks at what's being said about the partial nuclear meltdown.

I'm really struck by two things, however.  First, the panic the US media has instilled in everyone through their horror-movie graphics and end-of-days tone.   Earlier this week I heard Eliot Spitzer teasing upcoming segments on CNN by saying things like "is the situation as bad as the pictures tell us, or is it even worse?" and then peppering people on his show with questions like "so what is the worst-case scenario for us here."  Never mind that the worst-case scenario isn't close to being the most likely scenario, but hey, if it bleeds it leads.

The next morning CNN reports that people in the United States are stocking up on iodine pills, despite the fact that they're not even remotely necessary here and these pills have some side effects.   And I do note the irony that the media reports on the frenzy it helped create.

The second thing that strikes me is how amazingly polarized the discussion about energy is becoming, and how that is affecting our willingness and ability to plan. Rita King wrote a great piece at the Scientific American Guest Blog and summed it up thusly:

Opinions around nuclear energy tend to be binary, with industry proponents acting as if nothing could possibly go wrong while critics, terrified of nuclear apocalypse, remain convinced that old nuclear plants are time bombs.

She's right.   A very significant portion (though not all) of the environmental movement is now NO NUKES- NO WAY.  Make it 100 percent safe before you do it.  But the truth is there's no such thing as a 100 percent safe anything - particularly when it comes to energy.  Coal mines will cave in from time to time.  Oil rigs will explode.  Hurricanes will hit refineries.  Even windmills have their issues (though not nearly on the same scope).  And we sometimes forget that we have enormous energy needs and the only way we can meet those needs right now is through those high-yield, high-emission fossil fuels.

What's worse to me, though, is the PR position of the energy industry - perhaps in reaction to the environmentalists, but I think more likely in reaction to the regulatory environment - the idea that so many things that could go wrong are simply not possible.  The messaging apparently became part of the culture at BP and other companies.  It's why you submit a disaster response plan for the Gulf of Mexico that's simply cut and pasted from your disaster response plan for Alaska.  It's not like anything's going to happen anyway, so who cares?

We have moved forward on energy siting and building decisions with an incomplete notion of contingencies.  And of course, this isn't isolated only to the energy sector - essentially any company or government or NGO that has anything that serves as a potential risk is vulnerable.

Shockingly, so much of this can be resolved by following the advice of Charlie Sheen, the self-described warlock assassin with tiger blood coursing through his veins - PLAN BETTER.  Seriously, suck it up and acknowledge that crazy stuff can and eventually will happen and you should be ready for it.  Embracing this notion will make companies more, not less credible with their neighbors, customers and the media. The evidence that we don't do enough of this is staring us in the face in the Gulf of Mexico, in coal mines in West Virginia, and in Fukushima.

Rewiring the World

This TED talk by Ethan Zuckerman is worth watching.



From his talk:

We look at the internet, we think we’re getting this wide view of the globe, we occasionally stumble on to a page in Chinese and we decide we do in fact have the greatest technology ever built to connect us to the rest of the world, and we forget that most of the time we’re checking Boston Red Sox scores.
So this a real problem – not just because the Red Sox are having a bad year – but it’s a real problem because as we’re discussing here at TED, the real problems in the world, the interesting problems to solve are global in scale and scope, they require global conversations to get to global solutions this is a problem we have to solve.

I appreciate the Sox references - pretty sure he calls Massachusetts home, at least some of the time - but the great thing about this talk is he discusses what he's doing to fix it and he asks for help.

Haiti Speaks - Who Listens?

It's now more than a month since a horrific earthquake killed almost a quarter million people and displaced thousands more in Haiti. Arguably this is when we truly learn about the amazing resilience of the human spirit, because this is when the shock has worn off, most of the global mainstream media has left, and crisis responders have other crises to address.

It's a bit of a shame, really - while it's somewhat understandable that the world's attention is focusing elsewhere, there are amazing stories of perseverance and inspiration being told. Perhaps more importantly, Haitians are telling the stories themselves.

I've sung their praises countless times before, but Global Voices Online deserves so much credit and respect for bringing these personal stories from citizen journalists forward. I make special note of a recent post by Fabienne Flessel that looked at how Haitians were celebrating Valentine's Day this year.

GVO's commitment to this story and to covering it from the perspectives of those living it is unique among "professional" media, yet amazingly common in the world of social media. Something for communications "pro's" like me to keep in mind.

Crowdsourcing Diplomacy

Secretary Clinton gave a very important speech today about the role of new technologies in achieving diplomatic and humanitarian goals. Of course, this topic is nothing new to groups like Global Voices Online or Appropriate Infrastructure Development Group. But here's something that IS new:

...today I’m announcing that over the next year, we will work with partners in industry, academia, and nongovernmental organizations to establish a standing effort that will harness the power of connection technologies and apply them to our diplomatic goals. By relying on mobile phones, mapping applications, and other new tools, we can empower citizens and leverage our traditional diplomacy. We can address deficiencies in the current market for innovation.

Let me give you one example. Let’s say I want to create a mobile phone application that would allow people to rate government ministries, including ours, on their responsiveness and efficiency and also to ferret out and report corruption. The hardware required to make this idea work is already in the hands of billions of potential users. And the software involved would be relatively inexpensive to develop and deploy.

If people took advantage of this tool, it would help us target our foreign assistance spending, improve lives, and encourage foreign investment in countries with responsible governments. However, right now, mobile application developers have no financial assistance to pursue that project on their own, and the State Department currently lacks a mechanism to make it happen. But this initiative should help resolve that problem and provide long-term dividends from modest investments in innovation. We’re going to work with experts to find the best structure for this venture, and we’ll need the talent and resources of technology companies and nonprofits in order to get the best results most quickly. So for those of you in the room who have this kind of talent, expertise, please consider yourselves invited to help us.

In the meantime, there are companies, individuals, and institutions working on ideas and applications that could already advance our diplomatic and development objectives. And the State Department will be launching an innovation competition to give this work an immediate boost. We’ll be asking Americans to send us their best ideas for applications and technologies that help break down language barriers, overcome illiteracy, connect people to the services and information they need. Microsoft, for example, has already developed a prototype for a digital doctor that could help provide medical care in isolated rural communities. We want to see more ideas like that. And we’ll work with the winners of the competition and provide grants to help build their ideas to scale.

Now THAT'S an open platform.

Of course, we're already seeing innovation from the ground up to meet a multitude of challenges, like mapping technology from Ushaidi's work in response to the earthquake in Haiti to the work of innovators like Lalitesh Katragadda. But it's amazing and inspiring to see this kind of open call from the most influential diplomat in the world.

I'm looking forward to learning the details of this contest. I'm wondering if they will make all the submissions public - it could become one of the largest (if not the largest) repositories of technology-based innovative solutions to the worlds problems ever built.

I don't think I'm exaggerating at all to suggest that this project could become Secretary Clinton's legacy. The potential here is absolutely enormous.

Protest and Social Media in Iran

While the United States media focuses the bulk of its attention on screaming people at "town hall" meetings (presumably about health care) and the fact that Michael Jackson is STILL dead, I thought it was important to take a look at what real journalism looks like today and at how high the stakes really are for free speech in some places in the world.

Earlier this week, I was very fortunate to speak briefly with Hamid Tehrani, Iran Editor for Global Voices Online. He's been covering Iran's presidential election and its aftermath. In my opinion no one has provided better coverage than GVO, because they are able to curate the primary source material, translate it in many languages, and present it in its proper context. Hamid has written extensively on the protests and the use of social media to facilitate and report on them.

So much of the "social media coverage" of these protests has been about the tools, and they're no doubt important. But I still think this story is still about the people, the messages, the stories, and what's at stake. Hamid made some excellent points about how social classes have come together in protests, something you wouldn't expect to see in Iran. And for all the talk about Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, I loved his point about history. In 1978 the Ayahtolla distributed audio cassettes to spread his message and people climbed to their rooftops to yell "God is great" in protest. Today, they're using social media tools, but the protesters are still going to the rooftops and they're still chanting "God is great."

The audio quality is so-so, I'm still getting the hang of it. But this is well worth a listen - just under 20 minutes. Here's a link to the page on the Internet Archive. It's also embedded here.

Honduras, Journalism, Government and Social Media

While most of the English-speaking blogosphere continues its obsession with dead pop stars, there have been a number of very important developments in foreign policy - even aside from the historic preliminary agreement between the US and Russia to cut their nuclear weapon stockpiles by a third. I'm finally seeing very strong integration between mainstream journalists, social media mavens, political entities and technology.

If you know where to look, you can find a wealth of information about Honduras, a Central American nation with about 7.5 million people. Shortly after President Manuel Zelaya tried to hold a non-binding referendum that would potentially change the country's constitution to let him remain in office beyond 2010, military leaders placed Zelaya under arrest on June 28 and shipped him off to Costa Rica, and swore in a new president from Zelaya's political party. Zelaya has tried to return, but his plane was prevented from landing in Honduras.

There has been some debate over whether this is a coup d'etat or not, and the best breakdown of it I've found is at, not surprisingly, Global Voices Online. They've assembled videos from people on the ground on both sides of the issue.

The Organization of American States has suspended Honduras' membership and demanded the President be restored to office. Further, Secretary Clinton made a point of attending the State Department's daily briefing personally to raise the issue. The journalists in attendance asked some very insightful and important questions. Here's the video of the briefing:


Now if we could only let the dead rest and move on with our lives...

Beyond Bizlex: Ceasefire Liberia

I'm back in the office - and it seems quite a lot has happened since I placed the blog on auto-pilot. Hopefully I'll have some time to get to all of it.

While I was away my latest column in Business Lexington ran - it's a feature on Ceasefire Liberia, an innovative new project led by a journalist named Ruthie Ackerman and supported by my friends at Global Voices Online.

It turns out there's a rather interesting link between Liberia and Kentucky. The Bluegrass Region is actually the birthplace of two Liberian Presidents. I think this is the kind of column my editors had in mind when they brought me aboard - find a local link to a global issue.

I had the chance to do a quick email Q&A with Ruthie Ackerman - as always, here's the complete back-and-forth.

-------------

What is Ceasefire Liberia and its mission?

Ceasefire Liberia is a blog bridge between the Liberian community in Liberia and the rest of the Diaspora. Its mission is to create a dialogue between Liberians who remained in the country during and after the war and those who fled. You can see the blog at www.ceasefireliberia.com

How did you learn about this project and get involved?

I started the project with the help of a grant from Global Voices, a non-profit organization of bloggers. I am a journalist who is writing a book about Liberian youth in Staten Island. As the project developed over the last few years it became more multi-media focused. I decided that instead of just documenting the experience of Liberian youth living in this one community in America after they fled their country's 14-year civil war, I wanted to give the youth the chance to document their own experiences. Thus, Ceasefire Liberia was born. Now instead of just a book, there are several short films, and a blog, which includes video and photography.

What's your impression of how the project participants have benefited?

The project is just getting off the ground now, but already I can see the impact it has made. Young people who never would have interacted previously are now planning and making short video pieces together. Liberian youth who were dealing drugs and told me they felt they had no way out of their situation are now saying that they feel they can really make a difference in their community through blogging and video. Young Liberians in Staten Island are communicating with young Liberians in Liberia telling each other about their lives. This is the power of technology to bring people together and bring about social change.

Why should people in Kentucky (or anywhere else for that matter) care about this project?

I love this question. People in Kentucky or anywhere else should care about this project because the world is not just about what's happening my my backyard anymore -- it's about a global backyard. With globalization the entire world is interconnected. This means that what I do impacts people in Africa and vice versa. Liberia is a perfect example of this. Liberia was created by the American Colonization Society to send freed black slaves back to Africa where they were meant to live in racial harmony. That one action led to over a century and a half of tension and turmoil in Liberia between the Liberians who originally lived on the land and the new settlers. Eventually when tensions bubbled over a gruesome civil war broke out, which led Liberians to flee back to America, coming full circle. Now these Liberian refugees are literally in our backyard. We didn't intervene in their civil war in the 1990's and now the fallout is a large number of Liberian refugees that are falling through the cracks here in our very own cities and suburbs.

What's your understanding of the perspective Liberians have of the way they're treated in the US and the other countries they've relocated?

My understanding is that Liberians have always looked to America as their big brother. The Liberian flag is similar to our flag and Liberia's capital of Monrovia was named after our president James Monroe. But from what I understand Liberians are bitterly disappointed about the way they've been treated by America. They feel let down by America's handling of their civil war when America could have stepped in and ended it quickly, saving thousands of lives. They are hurt that Pres. Reagan continued to support former Pres. Samuel Doe financially despite his record of human rights abuses. Then when Liberians arrive in the U.S. they are left to struggle and many fall through the cracks. Liberians expected more from the U.S.

Is there anything you've gleaned from the struggle between acclimating to a new home and maintaining your cultural identity and customs?

There is always a struggle between the old and the new. It is important for Liberians, like any immigrant or refugee community, to hold onto their cultural identities and not forget where they came from. But it is also important if they want to integrate into American society to assimilate and acclimate and integrate. Thus the tensions between both worlds. The more the communities around Liberians reach out to them and provide much-needed services the better off they'll be and the more integrated they'll feel.

What do Americans gain by supporting projects like this?

Americans gain an understanding -- a glimpse -- of what the world beyond their four walls looks like. I believe that all boats rise with the tide so when one family or individual in a community is doing better than everyone benefits.

You and others can find out more by going to the ceasefire website and reading what the youth -- and I-- have written. You can also look at some of my earlier work on this project at : http://pulitzercenter.typepad.com/liberia/

That link is for the blog but you can also see more information about the project here: http://www.pulitzercenter.org/showproject.cfm?id=40

Adding My Voice

It's no secret that I've been singing the praises of Global Voices Online and its advocacy arm for some time now. So when I saw this - even though it's a contest run by organization that's working closely with a competitor - I thought it was important to add my voice to a global chorus in support of Global Voices Advocacy.

Zemanta has a new add-on tool for blogs, and they're trying to promote blogging for a cause. The cause that gets the most blog posts will win $3,000.

I vote for Global Voices Advocacy, because they represent the future of activism and communication in a newly-wired developing world.

There are dozens of great causes participating in this contest, and each deserves support. For at least part of my career I spent time focusing on the developing world and trying to find solutions through trade and intellectual property rules to the enormous public health challenges in the poorest countries. I quickly learned that there are far more urgent priorities than a rulebook and a tariff schedule updated regularly in Geneva, and the top priority can be summed up in a single word: infrastructure.

When most people hear the word "infrastructure" they think roads and bridges and ports. When they hear "communications infrastructure" they usually think about fiber-optic cables or cellphone towers. And they're right. But infrastructure is also about people. It's about people with the right training, in the right place, at the right time. Bridges don't get built without engineers and construction workers. Communications networks don't get utilized without people who know how to use them.

You could make medicines for HIV, tuberculosis and malaria available for free, but they're useless if there isn't a system in place to distribute and administer those medicines. That means you need working ports to unload the vaccines and the medical supplies, but you also need everyone from the person who knows how to drive a truck on rough terrain without tipping over to the person who knows how to give a vaccine to the person who knows how to convince others to come back regularly for care. In too many places that's all the same person, and if anything happens to her or him, the entire infrastructure is gone.

History has shown that the key to preventing disease - as well as addressing any number of injustices - is the free flow of information.

Global Voices Advocacy is providing that channel for information to flow both ways - they're quite literally building and training a network of advocates and communicators where they're needed most, and they're helping those whose voices haven't been heard before share their stories and solutions. They're building the links between those "in the field" and those in the boardrooms and the broadcast booth. Global Voices Advocacy is the human global communications infrastructure of the 21st century. It is the foundation upon which large-scale grassroots campaigns will be built.

On top of that, they're redefining the "business of journalism." The global news network of the future is going to look a lot more like Global Voices than it will BBC or CNN - a loose coalition of smart people leveraging low-cost technology for high-concept results with sound production values. They'll circumvent censorship and oppression with flip-phones and portable solar chargers. They'll download data and conduct research from internet cafes in Ghana. They'll produce compelling, high-definition content with laptops and $200 cameras. Language barriers will be virtually meaningless. Most importantly, they'll be constantly growing their ranks as people understand the value of telling their own stories and learning from others.

How can you raise awareness about a specific disease, or recruit people to address a tragedy, or offer a solution to a problem, if there's no way to tell your story to the world in your own words?

This blog post is part of Zemanta's “Blogging For a Cause” (http://www.zemanta.com/bloggingforacause/) campaign to raise awareness and funds for worthy causes that bloggers care about.

The World According To Mom

A while back I discussed an idea with a couple of bloggers - it would be great to demonstrate how "global" many online communities truly are. Find bloggers with common backgrounds or interests all over the world, and ask them to discuss a specific topic.

Of course, reading bloggers from virtually any country is easy today - just go to Global Voices Online and start clicking.

But what if we did it with bloggers in one specific online community, one that transcended borders? And what if that community, from a global perspective, has been marginalized in politics and media to a certain extent - despite its enormous value?

What if we could use social media to help amplify their voices, strengthen their bonds with each other, and teach the rest of the world a thing or two?

So today, together with some impressive bloggers, we're launching "The World According To Mom: Around the World in 80 Clicks."

We're going to try to find 80 mom bloggers in 80 different countries to write a post in response to a meme Catherine "Her Bad Mother" Connors develops.

I can't think of two better people with whom to try this. Catherine has been a force in the blogosphere, especially among moms, for some time now. She's giving some thought to what we'd ask moms in 80 different countries to share with the world, and providing an intellectual and emotional rudder to this project. Amira Al Hussaini is the Regional Editor for the Middle East and Africa at Global Voices - I interviewed her about her amazing project, Voices without Votes, for a Business Lexington column a few months ago. She's graciously offered to help us find bloggers in 80 countries. I'm essentially a worker bee here - part recording secretary, part dot-connector, part publicist.

Catherine was on the faculty at the University of Toronto, so she's accustomed to giving out assignments. She's developed a straightforward, inclusive and powerful meme for online moms across the world: Describe five things you love about being a mom. Amira Al Hussaini and GVO's Managing Editor, Solana Larsen, have already been enormously helpful finding online moms in scores of countries, and they've offered help with translation, an obviously critical aspect of this project.

As this progresses, I'll be posting links to all the moms in all the countries so you can actually go "around the world" in 80 mouse clicks. I'll also tweet with a hashtag - #globalmoms.

I'm hoping we get more than 80 - we'll soon see. If you're interested in participating - whatever country you're in and whatever language you speak -I hope you'll join in by writing your post, linking to friends, and letting us know by commenting at Catherine's post or here, or sending an email.

When we're completed, I'm hoping we'll have an amazing collection of perspectives on motherhood. I'm excited to see what moms across the world have in common, or how opinions differ. I'm also excited to read GVO's take on this, and Catherine's reactions once this is complete.

I realize it's somewhat odd for a man, and a PR flack at that, to help kick this off. But the "mom-o-sphere" has been the focus of much of my work for years now, and I've come to learn a few things. With all due respect to those (actually rather smart) people who consider "mommyblogs" (I don't like this term either, Liz) to be "media properties" or offer "helpful hints" on pitching them, maybe this will remind us all that online moms exist for something other than the convenience of marketing and PR people.

But this isn't about me, and it's much bigger than whatever PR flacks are talking about. . Once it starts, it belongs to all the people who participate in it and it will exist for the reasons they say it does - that's what "social media" is all about.

Seriously, people, it's not a lecture.

Social Media at work in Mumbai and How the Corporate Media Still Doesn't Get It

The corporate media is jumping on the Twitter bandwagon, even as it lobs not-so-subtle criticisms at it. They continue to try to integrate social media tools without truly embracing their purported applications. In short, they forget the "social" in social media.

I noticed that the Boston Globe was sharing information about statewide Thanksgiving Day high school football games via twitter, and the Lexington Herald-Leader was live-tweeting Black Friday at a variety of retail chain stores in town. I'm sure other publications were as well, and this is kinda cute, but it's still mainly the one-way communication the mainstream media prefers to employ. They see twitter basically as an RSS feed, hoping to drive traffic to other sites. They remain largely uninterested in a conversation unless it's on their terms.

I was actually impressed with CNN's online coverage of the attacks in Mumbai, but basically because they just cut live to their Indian English-language "sister station," IBN. I still went first to BBC and Global Voices Online, which quickly set up a special coverage page.

Then I noticed a curious piece on CNN's website called "Tweeting the Terror." The Mumbai violence certainly wasn't the first time an emergency was broadcast by several people at once on Twitter, but it is the first time I've seen the suggestion that people shouldn't tweet and the oft-used "they're not journalists" screed from a dying media that keeps getting scooped:

However, as is the case with such widespread dissemination of information, a vast number of the posts on Twitter amounted to unsubstantiated rumors and wild inaccuracies.

For example, a rumor that the Indian government was asking tweeters to stop live updates to avoid compromising its security efforts was published and republished on the site.

This was seemingly given credence by at least one major news Web site, which posted the tweet on its live update.

It read simply: "Indian government asks for live Twitter updates from Mumbai to cease immediately. ALL LIVE UPDATES - PLEASE STOP TWEETING."

Then it was suggested via Twitter that terrorists were using the medium to gain information about what Indian security forces were doing, which led to numerous abusive postings urging the terrorists to "die, die, die, if you're reading this."

As blogger Tim Mallon put it, "I started to see and (sic) ugly side to Twitter, far from being a crowd-sourced version of the news it was actually an incoherent, rumour-fueled mob operating in a mad echo chamber of tweets, re-tweets and re-re-tweets.

"During the hour or so I followed on Twitter there were wildly differing estimates of the numbers killed and injured - ranging up to 1,000."

What is clear that although Twitter remains a useful tool for mobilizing efforts and gaining eyewitness accounts during a disaster, the sourcing of most of the news cannot be trusted.

Actually, in my opinon it's not clear that Twitter is any less reliable than many if not most mainstream media sources. I counted several bits of information from mainstream channels during the crisis in Mumbai that turned out to be inaccurate. I also know that I learned - quite correctly - about a number of breaking stories via Twitter.

This tool has taken away one of corporate media's most important assets - the ability to report "breaking news" first - and they're having serious difficulties grappling with this. It's just the latest innovation that shows how corporate media will have to redesign their business model sooner rather than later.

The Interview: Dr. Wendy Baldwin

As I wrote earlier, my most recent contribution to Buisness Lexington features Dr. Wendy Baldwin of the Population Council, the premiere global NGO that conducts public health research on population issues.

Dr. Baldwin was exceptionally gracious with her time. I'm particularly impressed with the commitment she's made to poverty and gender issues, and to furthering the careers of women in research. Here's our Q&A.

Q: Would you please explain Population Council's mission and what you do there?

A: The Population Council is an international non-governmental organization with the motto "Research that makes a difference"...we have offices in 18 countries and work in more. there are programs in reproductive health; HIV and AIDS; and then the one I lead, in Poverty, Gender, and Youth. In the Poverty, Gender, and Youth program we develop an evidence base about how adolescents make the transition to healthy, productive adulthood.

Q: You had a position at the University of Kentucky that anyone would consider an excellent capstone to an outstanding career, but then you decided to take a position at the Population Council. What prompted the departure from UK to the big city?

A: I have a career because from very early on I was motivated by the challenges faced by young people -- especially young women -- to make it to adulthood with the basic skills that they need for their lives and able to have the number of children they want. So, while UK is a great place, this was a chance to go back to the topics that hold my heart... I just felt that was the capstone that I wanted for my career.

Q: It seems you spend a lot of time going back and forth from Lexington. What is it about this area that keeps you here?

A: It is true, I commute between Manhattan and Lexington... my husband lives here in Lexington (and I am rather fond of him!) and Lexington is just a terrific place to live.

Q: What does success look like in your line of work?

Success sometimes takes a long time to see, but when you see it in a better life for young people; when you see them able to take on leadership roles in their own communities; when you see them freed from some of the most damaging practices; well... that looks like success.

Q: What are some examples of that?

A: Success might come quickly, but more often it is a long process. The kinds of problems we deal with take a long time to address. There may be longstanding traditions of child marriage, but families and communities can learn ways to redefine those traditions that also protect young girls from marriage. the younger the girl, the greater the age GAP between her and her spouse, the less voice she is likely to have in the decision to marry, the end of schooling and the beginning of very early childbearing. So, when we see communities that begin to value their daughters more, provide alternatives for them, support their schooling, and open up new opportunities for them... well, that looks like success to me!

Q: Why should people in Lexington or Kentucky pay attention to the work you do? How does it relate to people here?

A: Work that we do goes to the heart of how girls are valued (or not)... I believe these are issues that everyone can relate to. Too often problems in developing countries seem so far away and it isn't clear what can be done to make the lives of girls better. Well, I have seen programs that have a transformative effect on girls; I've talked with fathers who were so appreciative of the help in finding a better life for their daughters...there is a fundamental satisfaction that comes from such work.

Now, I also think that this work is a wonderful way to spread a vision of the compassion of people for others. I would like more people to associate that view with the people of Kentucky.

Q: Recently you told me about a meeting at the World Bank that featured participation from large companies. How does the corporate sector play a role in your work?

A: There is growing involvement of the corporate sector in the work that we do. For many companies that work around the world, they see the need for young people to have positive life courses, and to develop their potential. Also, many of these programs help young people make the transition into income generating work. One of the most popular aspects of such programming is financial literacy. young people are eager to learn how to manage their money -- when they are able to earn it -- and how to function in a world that may be very different from what their parents' experienced growing up. We are working with banks to develop savings products that are especially geared to young people. Sometimes it seems that people think poor teenagers have no need for banks; but it is the poorest who are most in need of help in learning how to protect themselves against financial shocks and have safe places to save.

Q: Given your ties to Central Kentucky, do you feel there's a role for the local business community in supporting your work? What are some of the options available to local firms? What will they gain by supporting you?

A: I would love to see the business community come together and sponsor an internship so that a student in Kentucky could learn more about this work. I think there are many students in Kentucky who understand the challenges Of growing up in a changing world... and they could bring their skills to others who are facing challenges that are, frankly, unimaginable to most of us. Also, some have said that the greatest happiness comes from knowing that you have done something that makes the world a better place... sounds corny, but I believe it, I feel it, I live it and I'd like to see more students get the opportunity to experience it.

Q: Is there anything I haven't asked but should?

A: How are we different from a humanitarian organization? we do not just provide services to those in need. there is a role for humanitarian organizations, especially in times of crisis. but, there is also a need for organizations that seek to understand problems in ways that they can build an evidence base and support fundamental changes. We look for ways that the results of our work can influence governments to change policies -- perhaps to make it permissible for young girls to return to school if married, or programs that specifically support school fees.

It is exciting to see families or communities change practices in constructive ways.

Beyond Bizlex: Working Locally, Serving Globally

My latest contribution to Business Lexington features Dr. Wendy Baldwin, the former EVP for research at the University of Kentucky and the current director of the Poverty, Gender and Youth program at the Population Council.

The Population Council is the world's premiere organization conducting biomedical, public health and social science research on population issues. They have offices in 18 countries and programs in more than 65 countries. They don't get a ton of publicity but they do important work, and they deserve much more attention.

I actually met Dr. Baldwin on a plane - coming home from a trip to the DC office a while back. She was "commuting" home as well - her office is in New York while her home is Lexington. She struck up a conversation with me and as we got chatting I thought I had a nice column idea.

As always, the column format is a nice way to express a thought but it doesn't tell the whole story. I'll share the Q&A of my email interview with Dr. Baldwin in the near future.

The Interview: Amira Al Hussaini

This week's Business Lexington features excerpts from an email interview I got with Amira Al Hussaini, the editor of one of my favorite websites, Voices without Votes. She (along with many of her colleagues at Global Voices Online) represents the kind of global citizen and next-generation journalist the Internet has helped create. To me she also represents a sort of global counterpart to Jacki Schechner, the journalist-turned-activist I interviewed a few months back.

Voices without Votes is, to me, one of the most important collaborative projects on the 'net.

As always, the newspaper column format allows for some of my opinions but doesn't really allow for the whole discussion. So I'll let Amira explain her perspective on this outstanding project in her own words. She was very generous with her time.

Q: First, can you explain to my readers the history and mission of Voices without Votes and perhaps some of the numbers behind it? How many bloggers from how many countries? I've listened to the Open Source podcast that features Christopher Lydon, Ethan Zuckerman and Solana Larsen a few times but I'm wondering if there's anything else we should know.

A: Launched on Super Tuesday, Voices without Votes is a Global Voices Online project, commissioned by Reuters, which is a huge Global Voices Online fan and backer. The idea came to life at a time when interest around the world was picking up about the US elections, and as Global Voices Online focuses on non-US material, we decided it was time to set up a separate project, which will enable us to track and report on what the world is saying about US elections and US foreign policy.

Our mission statement is: "Voices without Votes opens a window on what non-Americans are saying in blogs and citizen media about US foreign policy and the 2008 presidential elections."

It continues: "Americans are the only ones who can elect the United States president, but the 2008 election offers a unique opportunity to harvest global commentary on America's politics and foreign policy and how it affects the rest of the world."

Voices Without Votes highlights conversations in non-American blogs and citizen media, with emphasis on the regions covered by Global Voices: Africa, Asia, Europe, South America, and the Middle East.

The site is really the fruit of cooperation between GVO's volunteers and a few interested bloggers from around the world, who continue to monitor the online conversations in their countries, or the countries they cover, and produce features on what they read. We have volunteers working on the site from practically every corner of the world, from Iraq to Madagascar, and Fiji to Canada, as well as translators who are active in bringing us voices in other languages, such as Farsi, Arabic, French, Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese and Japanese, to name a few. As the countdown to the elections continue, we are discovering new blogs and websites to add to our coverage, and more people are joining our team of volunteers.

For more about our team of volunteers, please check this page: http://voiceswithoutvotes.org/authors/

Q: Second, could you give me a little information about you and your professional background? I know you're the Middle East & North Africa Editor for GVO - how did you get involved in GVO and Voices without Votes?

A: I am a Bahraini journalist and the former news editor of the Gulf Daily News (GDN) in Bahrain. I started work as a trainee reporter in the GDN in 1991, while I was at my first year in university. By the time I graduated with a BA English (Honours), I swear I must have clocked more hours in the newsroom than the classroom. My career goal was set by then, I caught the bug and wanted to be a journalist for life. I continued working at the GDN, where I was promoted first to assistant news editor and then to become the first Bahraini news editor of an English language daily, until I left Bahrain to Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, to join my husband who is working towards his PhD, in October 2005. In my career as a journalist, I can claim to have covered every type of story, from business and economics, to human interest and politics. In 1996, I also won the coveted Dag Hammarskjold Scholarship, http://www.unjournalismfellowship.org/node/230, which offered me a three-month fellowship to cover the United Nations in New York. I have since been a frequent visitor to the UN's headquarters, where I covered the General Assembly and Security Council, whenever my travels brought me to the US.

In 2004, I ventured into blogging and embraced online media with the same intensity I fell for mainstream media at a young age. My involvement with GVO started after I came to Canada, as I really needed to maintain my work ethics and continue writing. I consider myself really lucky and have found my match in GVO, as I truly believe in its cause. According to its mission statement:

"Global Voices seeks to aggregate, curate, and amplify the global conversation online - shining light on places and people other media often ignore. We work to develop tools, institutions and relationships that will help all voices, everywhere, to be heard."

At GVO, I am the Middle East and North Africa, Arabic Language Editor and Voices without Votes editor. I am also a Board Member.

Not only am I gaining hands on experience in evolving online citizen journalism, learning skills I wouldn't have grasped had I continued in the newsroom, but I am applying my skills and expertise to help bridge understandings, mend fences, and show that it is a small world - and we are all the same in our hopes, aspirations, fears and dreams for tomorrow.

Q: I'd love to know if you've seen any trends from foreign writers. In the Open Source podcast, Ethan Zuckerman made some interesting general statements (I'm paraphrasing here) like "Jamaicans are upset at how Barack Obama is being treated" and "In Israel they're scared of what an Obama presidency might mean for them." What stands out to you about how people outside the US view this election? Do you feel that one candidate is getting more support than the other? Are there particular attributes being ascribed to one candidate or another?

A: I personally am amused at the way the US elections are closely being monitored by bloggers from all corners of the globe and how passionate people are over its developments, especially that they can't vote. Bloggers are actually commenting on developments as the stories break in the US, with commentary coming out as if in competition with mainstream media - and they are really passionate about it. Remember that those are citizen journalists - and are not paid for what they write. What really stands out though is the Obamamania which has taken the blogosphere by storm - making my job as editor and that of my colleagues a difficult balancing act. While it is easy to find international blogs supporting Obama, I literally have to appeal to my volunteer authors to look closely for and report on McCain stories! All the volunteers working on VwV, understand the nature of the project and are trying to portray all reactions as our goal is to rise above the political divisions, evident in US blogs, and reflect what is being said in a timely manner, without taking sides. Our aim is to bring all voices we have access to under one umbrella - and so far we feel we have had a lot of success, in such a short time - thanks to volunteers who have kept the site updated on a daily basis since its inception and voices we wouldn't have had access to otherwise translated and heard. Also, from my observations, people really are looking up to the US as the beacon of democracy and want to see a change - and a different policy from Washington DC which has succeeded in dividing up the world into those who are with us and those who are against us. People all around the world, like some in the US, are tired of instability, wars, and destruction at this day and age and are really rooting for an administration which will correct what they perceive as the mistakes of the current US administration.

Q: Why is Voices without Votes so important? Why should people in Kentucky pay attention to the opinions of people outside our borders on our internal politics?

A: At this time and juncture in history, I feel that VwV is a witness to history in the making where you can find international reactions to a breaking news story under one roof, offering us an insight to how the world feels, thinks and reacts to the most fascinating race to the White House ever. Why should anyone in Kentucky or the US for that matter care about what the world thinks? My question would be why shouldn't they? The US doesn't exist in a vacuum and as the world's only superpower, decisions taken in Washington DC impact not only the people of Kentucky, but those in South America, the Middle East, Asia and the rest of the world. And why shouldn't we all listen to each other? Why can't we open our ears to what people in the Caribbean, Iraq and the Far East, to name a few, have to say? They are just talking but you will be casting the ballot come November 4. The power is in your hands and the least you can do is listen to what they have to say.

Q: Turning the tables a bit, should people in Kentucky be paying closer attention to elections taking place in, say, Ghana or Morocco? Why or why not?

A: Why shouldn't they? The idea abroad is that the US is insular and cocooned on itself and that is not right or fair - not for a country people travel across the world to study in its institutes of higher education. While almost any student from any Third World country knows the world map and can pinpoint at least which continent any country you throw at him is on it, I can't say that is true of many people in the US - even the officers guarding the country's very own borders. In my travels to the US, I have had officers asking me: "Bahrain? Is that in the Bahamas?" - and Bahrain is only the naval headquarters of their Fifth Fleet. http://www.cusnc.navy.mil/history/index.html

Why should the US be the butt of jokes - when it comes to geography and general information about the rest of the world?

Yes, while I don't expect all Americans to be well versed in every aspect of foreign policy, a little understand and knowledge of the world around us is essential. With access to information being easier than ever, thanks to the Internet, what has anyone of us got to lose?

Q: Has the growth of communications technology, and specifically the growth of the blogosphere, changed the way you think about global politics? If so, how?

A: Of course it has. It is so easy to remain abreast with the latest developments by programming your computer to pull the latest headlines and compile them in a neat basket for you.

We also learn new things everyday, about ourselves and the way we interact with the world and reflect on global politics. The biggest lesson I have personally learned is to listen. Yes, I have my ideas and opinions, but I need to also listen to and understand what others think and feel.

Q: Finally, I'm also very curious about your visit to Kentucky and the Idea Festival. (The 2007 archive for the IF website appears to be down.) What did you speak about? Did you have any time to look around Kentucky or meet anyone from here? Any reactions or thoughts? It's always nice to endear the source to the readers by including a quote that says something nice about the Bluegrass... ;)

A: I was invited to the Idea Festival, in Louisville, Kentucky, last year, where I witnessed the Southern charm and hospitality for the first time in my life. The idea behind the festival itself blew me away - and I was touched by the compassion, understanding and brilliance of everyone involved with IF, starting from organiser Kris Kimel and including all the friendly faces I saw there, whether organisers or panelists or attendees. At IF, I was on two panels - one discussing world peace and the other shedding light on the work we do at Global Voices Online. Being involved in IF was both exciting and enriching to me - both as a journalist and a human being. IF provides a truly stellar line up of speakers and Louisville acts as charming, warm and friendly backdrop to this explosion of ideas. I have made many friends who I am in touch with over the Internet and would have loved to have spent more time exploring the place and interacting more with the people there. Perhaps some other time, when I travel wearing my tourist hat!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/georgiap/sets/72157601997048549/

Here are some of our photos from the Idea Festival, taken by my colleague Georgia Popplewell, who is the Managing Editor of GVO.

More Big Think on South Ossetia

from Professor Robert Farley. Great example of how bloggers are actually smart.

South Ossetia and Social Media - The Discussions

The Russians have decided to "end" their activities in Georgia while the Georgians claim the attacks continue - so says CNN.

I took a quick look at the reactions people have had to the crisis in particular communities - specifically US-based political liberals and US-based political conservatives. Not surprisingly, a discussion that could have been about Vladimir Putin, Dimitri Medvedev and Mikheil Saakashvili quickly became a discussion about George Bush, John McCain, and Barack Obama.

More often than not these communities spend their time attacking the leader of the opposing world view. The consensus: conservatives think Barack Obama's position is to the left of Ben & Jerry while liberals think John McCain's position is to the right of Attila the Hun. And everyone is ready for George Bush to leave the Olympics and get back to work.

This is a stern reminder to those who are trying to reach out to top political blogs right now - if what you're talking about isn't something a political blogger can use to attack the other guy, you're not likely to get their attention. Political bloggers care about the horse race right now. If you're not relevant to their agenda, you're actually setting yourself back by reaching out to them.

One other interesting and insightful update - Jonathan Wong of Armchair Theorist found my post from yesterday on Friend Feed and sings the praises of social media. (Thanks for the shout-out, Jonathan.) I was struck by a comment he made in his post - something that perhaps he's far more qualified to make than I am:

And like I have said many times before, the importance of social media in offsetting complementing mainstream media coverage is 10x more important in the country where I come from, where our press freedom is ranked 153rd in the world, sandwiched between luminaries such as Iraq and Kyrgyzstan.

Global medium, indeed.

South Ossetia: Social Media Tells the Rest of the Story

I must be signed up to the wrong email alerts. Over Friday and the weekend I had plenty of information sent directly to my inbox about John Edwards, Bernie Mac and Issac Hayes - but nothing about South Ossetia, where for a while there it looked like the cold war was beginning again.

For those of you who get your news from western television, Georgia (the country, not the state) became an independent country right after the fall of the Soviet Union. Georgia's territory included enclaves (like South Ossetia and Abkhazia) that border Russia and in which a majority of the people feel more loyal to Russia than Georgia. South Ossetia is separated from North Ossetia in Russia by a mountain range. Many people in South Ossetia carry Russian passports. Virtually all countries and international organizations consider South Ossetia to be part of Georgia, but the people there have declared independence and set up a de facto government. Georgia has worked to install an autonomous provincial government there, but as recent events show it hasn't gone smoothly. Last week Georgia sent troops into South Ossetia's capital, Tskhinvlali, to surround the sepratist government there. Russia responded quickly by calling Georgia's movements criminal, even genocidal, and quickly occupied the territory by force. Some reports indicate the Georgian military is attempting to withdraw and call a cease-fire, though the Russians dispute this.

News junkies like me have scurried to the interwebs to find as much information as possible. I immediately bypassed US coverage (which to be candid hasn't been terrible but clearly hasn't been great either) and used BBC as my starting point. They've put together a reasonably useful tick-tock of the crisis, but they've also rushed to put up a "lessons learned" piece that is more than a bit presumptous.

Not surprisingly, the US media has focused on the US-Russia dynamic, particularly at the UN Security Council. This isn't without justification; the Russian media suggests the United States actually orchestrated Georgia's initial move into South Ossetia. This has produced a tense (and some would argue embarrassing) public exchange at the Security Council meeting between US and Russian diplomats. Associated Press also ran a story about how Georgia is moving its 1000 troops from Iraq to make them available for the conflict in its own borders - but since it's an AP story I don't want to get into trouble for linking to it.

I confess it's been hard to find comprehensive Georgian media coverage in English, though I did find The Messenger, which includes headlines like "The World Supports Georgia" and Yes, It's War With Russia." The Messenger has been providing updates via its (rather sparse but still informative) blog. Not surprisingly, the most commented post was one about the safety and location of its journalists.

Of course, I'm relying on social media channels to fill out the narrative and get the most complete story. As expected, wikipedians quickly assembled a list of international reactions to the events in South Ossetia that I haven't been able to find anywhere else. The big-thinkers have shared their big thoughts on blogs like Globalsecurity.org, Open Democracy and Whirled View. I've assembled a bunch of links on my del.icio.us page with the tag Ossetia.

The best source of information is, once again, Global Voices Online. They've set up a special section on the conflict that includes everything you could ask for - background, links to posts from individual bloggers on the ground (I was struck by this post from a pair of Peace Corps Volunteers in the Tblisi area) as well as experts across the globe, a South Ossetia flickr stream, and links to other mainstream media sources. GVO is doing a great job assembling the overwhelming about of content and pushing it through a smart, balanced human filter. I've said it before - if you want to see the future of journalism, and how journalists will cover a crisis in the future, look at GVO today.