My Argument:
- Research question: As a method of digital communication, what has been YouTube’s effect on cyber-activism and hate speech?
- Thesis: YouTube has revolutionized political activism and, in doing so, it has also uniquely contributed to the perpetuation of hate, however inadvertently.
- Hypothesis: Without intelligent, rational-thinking individuals (those whose shared goal is ending inhumanity globally within religions and governments), YouTube will cease to be a viable method of disseminating information around the world, and will merely be a sounding-board for ages old prejudices that will perpetuate hatred on a much grander scale.
Why/How:
YouTube provides private citizens a means in which to participate in political activism globally, by enabling audio-visual expressions of personal, political agendas (potentially reaching millions) from the privacy of one’s home. The promotion of political awareness and political opinion (via YouTube) is extending beyond the realm of street activists and protestors, to include the everyday mom and pop sitting on their sofa: transforming the handheld messages of traditional political-activism within meat-space, to the onscreen, digital communication methods of cyber-activism within cyberspace that reach vast audiences by comparison. Although, YouTube has revolutionized political activism, in doing so, it has also uniquely contributed to the perpetuation of hate, however inadvertently.
Unfortunately, YouTube can actually diminish the voice of activism and perpetuate hate propaganda on a grand scale, because it is often used as a mere sounding board for opinion-based ideologies (often steeped in religion) - often leading to ignorance and subsequent human suffering, and incredulity – rather than a forum to disseminate credible, fact-based knowledge, thereby spreading enlightenment and improving humanity. Cyber-activism has great potential for diminishing the perpetuation of hate and ignorance worldwide through: the knowledge of science; a term that Dr. Hoch calls “substantial evidence-based thinking”; and bringing global awareness to issues of inhumanity and injustice present within many religions and governments. The civic arena should be reserved for “evidence-based thinking”. Unsubstantiated personal beliefs (based on little or no evidence) have no place in cyber-activism and will only fuel hatred globally.
Digital communication has given mew meaning to courage that is unique to cyber-activism. Courage redefined is acknowledging that respect and politeness have no place in inhumane and unjust behavior (religious or otherwise), and to call it what it is or risk perpetuating hatred. The key is to develop an appreciation for humility in lack of our own ignorance and owning up to the deplorable conditions within this society. Cyber-activism provides the perfect platform to combat the perpetuation of hate globally, and the only way that can be achieved is by setting an example for the rest of the world by ending inhumane and unjust civil actions based on unsubstantiated beliefs (as evidenced by recent events by religious extremists in the U.S. that are trying to force their religious doctrine upon the rest of us) before we condemn other countries of religious extremism.
Specific examples are:
- Racism/bigotry and YouTube: Tea Party protestors and U.S. Healthcare Reform
- Religious extremism and YouTube: Proposition 8 in California and gay rights activism
Plan/Strategy:
I will examine these recent events in history to show the link between; digital communication, cyber-activism, and online identity, and how this connection perpetuates hate through their unique relationship to YouTube.
Support:
Theories that I will argue for and against:
1.) YouTube is uniquely suited for cyber-activism due to its ability to provide the private citizen (worldwide) the means to be heard globally and the potential to make a difference.
2.) Cyber-activism, as often expressed on YouTube, reduces YouTube to a mere sounding board for opinion-based ideologies, and is often irrational (steeped in religious beliefs or cultural bias) instead of factual knowledge. Irrationality can diminish the voice of activism and reason leading to mistrust, resentment, and the agitation of ages-old prejudices perpetuating hate around the world.
3.) Cyber-activism can help end global hatred by putting an end to the injustices and inhumane practices in this country. The U.S. serves as an example for the rest of the world and digital communication has given mew meaning to the word courage that is unique to cyber-activism. Courage redefined is acknowledging that respect and politeness have no place in inhumane and unjust behavior (religious or otherwise), and to call it what it is or risk perpetuating hatred.
Annotated Bibliographies
Hock, Steven. “Class discussion”. History 102: Washington State University 1-12-10.
Nakamura, Lisa. “Name of Article.” Digitizing Race: Visual Cultures of the Internet.
Published: University of Minnesota: Electronic mediations, 2008.
Volume 23. Pgs.?.
Raghavan, Ramya. July 22, 2009. Digital Activism On YouTube. 4-25-10.
<http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/digital-activism-on-youtube.html>.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/digital-activism-on-youtube.html.
McCaughey, Martha; Ayers, Michael. 2003. Cyber-activism: Online Activism in Theory an Practice: A. 4-25-10.
http://books.google.com/books?id=KHCjMkNRAkYC&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=Cyberactivism+hate+perpetuation+theory&source=bl&ots=Nt-V3RD_Tf&sig=NZU7aOZPd4xuetZBUcdLhZsAyEg&hl=en&ei=E-XUS8_7HZHgtgP5qtHqCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false. This excerpt discusses various theories of online activism and how it can actually diminish the activist’s voice and perpetuate hate propaganda. It also mentions the unreliability of information within cyber-politics and how it actually reinforces deeply held hatred.
Many more to come (too many to list here)
