From Carthage to Mount Kilimanjaro, Africa’s heritage sites imperilled by climate

Places at risk include the ruins of the Numidian-Roman port of Sabratha in Libya, Algeria’s Punic-Roman trading post of Tipasa and Egypt’s North Sinai sites.

Wednesday 09/11/2022

A partial view of the Antonine Baths, the largest bath complex in the African provinces and the third largest bath complex in the Roman world. (AFP)

TUNIS -

From the snow-capped peak of Mount Kilimanjaro to the ruins of the ancient Tunisian city of Carthage and Senegal’s slave island of Goree, Africa has a wealth of iconic cultural and natural heritage sites.

But climate change impacts, from higher temperatures to worsening floods, now threaten to condemn these and dozens more African landmarks to the history books.

As rich nations scramble to protect their cultural landmarks from extreme weather and rising seas, African countries face additional hurdles such as funding shortages and a dearth of archaeological expertise, said conservationists and researchers.

“These sites are places that we learned about at school. They are our identity and history. They are irreplaceable. If we lose them, we will never get them back,” said Nick Simpson, research associate at the African Climate and Development Initiative at the University of Cape Town.

“Africa has already experienced widespread losses and damages attributable to human-induced climate change: biodiversity loss, water shortages, food losses, loss of lives, and reduced economic growth. We can’t afford to lose our heritage also.”

Some historical landmarks have already succumbed.

For visitors to the historic colonial slave forts scattered along West Africa’s coastline, an important ritual is to pass through the “Door of No Return”,  a centuries-old doorway which leads directly from the citadel to the shore.

The custom pays homage to the millions of Africans who were forcefully taken from their homeland during the transatlantic slave trade, retracing their final steps as they were led from the dungeons through the door to slave ships, never to return.

But at Ghana’s 18th century Danish slave-holding post, Fort Prinzenstein, the original metal doorway and an adjoining passageway is now missing.

“The main ‘Door of No Return’ has been washed away by the tidal waves a long time ago,” said James Ocloo Akorli, caretaker of the UNESCO World Heritage site.

Africa has about a fifth of the world’s population, but produces less than four percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, the major driver of climate change.

Despite this, the continent is disproportionately affected by climate impacts such as droughts and floods, underlining the need for countries to invest in projects that protect infrastructure and improve resilience.

At the COP27 UN climate summit in Egypt, which started on Sunday, world leaders will debate how much financial assistance rich countries should provide to developing nations to help them cope with the effects of global warming.

A general view of Goree Island is seen off the coast of Dakar, Senegal. (AFP)

Flooding and erosion

There is no comprehensive data on the total number of African heritage spots at risk, but research co-led by Simpson on coastal sites found that 56 locations are already facing flooding and erosion exacerbated by rising sea levels.

By 2050, if greenhouse gas emissions continue on their current trajectory, this number could more than triple to 198 sites, said the study, published in the scientific journal Nature Climate Change in February.

Places at risk include the imposing ruins of the Numidian-Roman port of Sabratha in Libya, Algeria’s ancient Punic-Roman trading post of Tipasa and Egypt’s North Sinai archeological sites, the study found.

Kunta Kinteh Island in Gambia and the Togolese village of Aneho-Glidji, both tied to Africa’s slave trade history, are also in danger, it said.

A vast array of sites of exceptional natural value are also extremely vulnerable as higher temperatures melt glaciers, raise sea levels and bring more coastal erosion.

These include rich biodiversity hubs such as Cape Verde’s Curral Velho wetland with its unique vegetation and migratory birds and Aldabra in the Seychelles, one of the world’s largest raised coral atolls and home to the Aldabra giant tortoise.

“African sites are really, really in danger because of climate disruptions,” said Lazare Eloundou Assomo, director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre.

“We see typhoons, we see floods, we see erosion, we see fires. I would say climate change is one of the major challenges that world heritage is facing now and in the future.”

Assomo said he was particularly concerned about sites such as Africa’s tallest peak, Mount Kilimanjaro, in Tanzania, which is expected to lose its glaciers by 2040 and is experiencing increased outbreaks of wildfires.

Heritage, tourism at stake

As climate change threatens the future of Africa’s natural and cultural riches, jobs and tourism linked to the heritage sites are also being jeopardised.

This could spell disaster for attractions such as Ghana’s slave forts, Namibia’s indigenous rock art and the wildebeest migration in Kenya’s Maasai Mara, which together draw droves of visitors and millions of dollars in annual tourism revenues.

In Ghana, for example, the castles have not only shaped the country’s history but have also become pilgrimage sites for the African diaspora looking to reconnect with their roots and honour their forefathers.

Events such as Ghana’s “Year of Return” in 2019, to mark 400 years since the first recorded African slaves arrived in the Americas, saw record numbers of African-Americans and European Africans visiting the country for heritage tours.

In Namibia, tens of thousands of visitors arrive each year to see some of Africa’s largest collections of rock art, generating much-needed income for local communities in the sparsely populated southern African nation.

The ancient rock paintings and engravings, including the UNESCO World Heritage Site, Twyfelfontein, were created by San hunter-gatherers long before Damara herders and European colonialists arrived.

But archaeologists fear climate-linked flash floods, dust, vegetation growth, fungus and desert animals seeking water close to these sites pose a threat to the art’s survival.

From Indonesia to Australia, archaeologists have found climate change impacts such as more variable temperatures, flooding and wildfires are causing blistering, peeling and even rock explosions at important sites of ancient art.

Independent Namibian archaeologist Alma Mekondjo Nankela fears the same lies in store for her nation’s rock art heritage.

“We can really see that the artwork is deteriorating and it’s deteriorating actually very fast,” she said, adding that most of the factors causing the deterioration were “likely linked to climate change.”

She added that urgent funding and resources were needed to further understand and track long-term climate changes over the years.

In Kenya, one of world’s most famous natural heritage attractions, the mass migration of the wildebeest, is also at risk, say wildlife conservationists.

The migration, one of the greatest spectacles of animal movement on earth, sees hundreds of thousands of wildebeest, zebra and gazelle making their annual trek from Tanzania’s Serengeti National Park across the border into the Maasai Mara in Kenya.

The sight attracts hordes of safari-goers every year, eager to witness the iconic scenes of the wildebeest that run the gauntlet of hungry Nile crocodiles as they cross the Mara river.

Tourism, much of it centred on Maasai Mara safaris, is a key economic pillar for Kenya, providing more than two million people with jobs and accounting for about ten percent of the East African nation’s gross domestic product (GDP).

But conservation experts say the great migration is under threat due to increased droughts and floods in the Mara’s delicate ecosystem, which is depriving the wildebeest of grazing land.

This has affected the number of animals migrating to Kenya, and the period for which they stay.

“The wildebeest migration is happening later and they stay for a very short time,” said Yussuf Wato, wildlife programme manager at conservation non-profit WWF Kenya.

“And then, because the rain has delayed to come to the Mara, or the rainfall in the Serengeti is prolonged, they do not come to the Mara as they have sufficient pasture on the other side.”

An edifice at the site of the ancient Roman city of Sabratha, around 70 kilometres from the Libyan capital Tripoli. (AFP)

Resources needed

But despite the potentially far-reaching consequences of climate-related loss and damage to Africa’s heritage sites, the threats have gained much less attention than risks for other cultural and natural landmarks in richer nations.

One study estimates that only one percent of research on the impacts of climate change on heritage is related to Africa, despite the fact that the continent has been on the frontlines of global warming for decades.

“We need more national archaeologists,” said David Pleurdeau, an assistant professor at France’s National Museum of Natural History in the human and environment department, leading an archaeological team in the Erongo region of Namibia. “We need more training for Namibian students, funding and for the Namibian Heritage Council to employ more archaeologists,” said Pleurdeau, who works with Namibian archaeologist Nankela.

Some countries such as Ghana and Egypt have made heavy investments in the construction of sea defence walls and groins to protect their coastal sites.

But Simpson said such “hard protection” strategies often do not take into account future sea levels and can distort the site’s natural ecological equilibrium.

Hybrid protections that include natural infrastructure such as rock walls combined with salt marshes, seagrasses or restored mangroves to slow the action of waves, can be more effective.

It is also essential to improve governance around threatened sites and ensure local communities are involved in preservation and protection efforts, he added.

Back at Fort Prinzenstein, the caretaker Akorli points to some words etched on the dilapidated back wall of one of the few remaining slave dungeons: “Until the lion has historian, the hunter will always be a hero,” it reads.

“Often history can be distorted,” said Akorli. “Sites like these tell us the painful truth. This is why we need to look after them, we need to know what happened in the past, so that we can learn in the future.”

 

Bidding farewell to Kurdistan's master of visual modernity

Ismail Khayat (1944 - 2022) was one of the most influential symbols of modern art in Iraq in general and in Kurdistan in particular.

Wednesday 02/11/2022

Ismail Khayat with some of his artworks. (TAW)

Last month, we bid farewell to Ismail Khayat, the maestro of visual modernity in Iraqi Kurdistan, who died at the age of 78.

He left us with a great artistic legacy, having held more than sixty exhibitions over many parts of the globe, from Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan, many Arab countries, some European nations and the United States. He left us although we are still inhabited by his art. Indeed, true creative artists do not die, but are always resurrected from the womb of their deeds.

Ismail Khayat (1944 - 2022) was one of the most influential symbols of plastic art in Iraq in general and in Kurdistan in particular.  He has occupied a prominent place in the Iraqi plastic scene and even more so in Kurdistan's artscape.

Ismail Khayat can be rightly described as the maestro of visual modernity in the Kurdish plastic art scene.  He started his creative journey by adhering to conditions of the prevailing plastic art discourse, like most artists of his generation. Thereafter, he found himself searching for alternatives in the fertile Kurdish lands where he evolved.

Khayat was the author of the largest painting in the world and by it he deserved to enter the Guinness Book of Records. He depicted the foot of the Kurdistan mountain stretching between Koys Snjaq to Dukan in the Kani Watman regions.

 

Ismail Khayat at work in studio. (TAW)

But he is also the author of the most accurate documentation of the massacres that were inflicted on all Iraqi people and especially the Kurds over more than four decades of Iraqi Baath party rule and dictator Saddam Hussein.

That is why his works are truly an historical narration of various stages of persecution, displacement and repression, which he presented in private exhibitions as a reflection of the challenges that confronted him throughout this dark period.

Dreams and recollections of sadness are intertwined in his artistic memory. He once said, "During my childhood, my brother and I had a bird. We started taking care of it, but he died one day and we buried him with sadness. This bird remained embedded in my visual memory. I wished it would not die, that it would always stay with me. That is why I give it in my works this virtual existence. It lives in my paintings as a contemporary subject which symbolises the pain I still feel."

 

Written ByGharib Mula Zalal

Gharib Mula Zalal is a Syrian art critic.

 

Eskander Tej's artistic talent turns murals into open air museums in Tunisia

For Tej, a graffiti painter born in Monastir, Tunisia, what matters more than the painting techniques themselves is the message he tries to convey.

Wednesday 26/10/2022

Design of Tunisian ceramics is embedded in Tej's motifs. (TAW)

Tunisian modern artist Iskander Tej looks at life in his home country, Tunisia, with a lot of imagination and social commitment.

His inspiration helps him embellish villages with large murals, turning streets and public places into open air museums which highlight local identity traits and the importance of preserving the attributes of Mother Nature.

For Tej, a graffiti painter born in Monastir, Tunisia, what matters more than the painting techniques themselves is the message he tries to convey.

His main message is to bridge the distance between the eye of the art lover and the artwork. He seeks to make artworks, which might once have been confined to halls and indoor museums, widely accessible to the common man.  His creativity is rounded off by the locals’ enjoyment of art, be it drawings, sculptures or other displays.

Birds join human faces in depicting beautiful landscapes in Tej's murals. (TAW)

As he encourages people to interact directly with his artworks, Tej seems motivated by a desire to develop the aesthetic taste of the locals while improving and preserving their surrounding landscapes by decorating public places and spaces with works of art that eventually belong to everyone.

The artist sees an environmental value in his art which preserves “pristine” life and protects the existing milieus from pollution and destruction. They also add to tourist attractions in many places in the country.

Tej studied for five years at the Tunisian higher institute of science and design technologies, specialising in image design. After years of studio work, he left for the street.

The artist is a wanderer moving from one region to the other.  He is currently aiming to complete work in 24 villages across 24 governorates. His dream started at the village of Sawaf, in the governorate of Zaghouan, northern Tunisia and he has continued ever since.

 

Love of nature and animals are part of eco-friendly murals. (TAW)

Every project generally starts by getting in touch with the people in each village where the mural is to be completed.  He visits each place talking to locals about their lifestyle and their way of thinking, so as to adapt his themes and techniques to the local culture and taste.

The murals become the property of the people, the district and the street where they are completed.

The artist’s involvement ends with the completion of his work. The murals are left for everyone to critique and the artist moves on to another location, having achieved what he came for: to revive the street if not a whole  village or city, establish closer dialogue with the public and plant the seeds of artistic interaction with the population everywhere.

Written By

Adnan Bashir Maiteeg

Adnan Bashir Maiteeg is a Libyan art critic.

‘Handmaid’s Tale’ author Margaret Atwood shuns Russian sanctions, ridicules travel ban

Russian personal sanctions amount to a travel ban

Written byMetamorphosis Foundation

Posted 21 November 2022 14:00 GMT 

Front cover of a Macedonian edition of The Handmaid's Tale” and a photo of Margaret Atwood by Larry D. Moore via Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 4.0.

This story is based on original coverage by Meta.mk. An edited version is republished here under a content-sharing agreement between Global Voices and the Metamorphosis Foundation. 

Canadian poet and writer Margaret Atwood was joined by Hollywood actor Jim Carrey in ridiculing the travel ban to Russia imposed on them alongside 98 other Canadians.

On November 14, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation published a list with a hundred Canadian citizens targeted with “personal sanctions” as an act of revenge for the latest round of sanctions introduced by Canada for 32 persons related to Putin’s regime. The blacklisted Canadians include state officials, political analysts, journalists, members of organizations related to Ukrainian diaspora, and also artists like the Atwood and Carrey.

The Russian Foreign Ministry announced that these latest sanctions, amounting to a ban from entering Russia, are a reciprocal “response to the ongoing imposition of sanctions by the regime led by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Russian leadership, politicians and parliamentarians, members of the business community, analysts and journalists, and cultural figures, as well as anybody whom the Canadian Russophobic authorities consider objectionable.” Radio Free Europe noted that “there are now 1,005 Canadian citizens and companies on Russia’s sanction list.”

Writer and poet Margaret Atwood (82) has published 18 novels, 18 books of poetry and 11 nonfiction books. She’ a recipient of numerous awards including two Booker Prizes, and of the Golden Wreath of the Struga Poetry Evenings in 2016, (which is possibly the oldest continuous international poetry festival, held annually in North Macedonia).

Atwood was already world famous when the Netflix TV series based on her dystopian science fiction book “Handmaid’s Tale,” which was nominated for the Nebula in 1986, increased her celebrity status. She is often among the candidates for the Nobel Prize for literature.

Jessie Gaynor, senior editor of Literary Hub, opined that the “sin” which caused the Kremlin to put Atwood on their latest sanctions list was signing the Open Letter by PEN International,  signed by over 1000 writers worldwide, including several Nobel Prize winners, expressing solidarity with writers, journalists, artists, and the people of Ukraine, condemning the Russian invasion and calling for an immediate end to the bloodshed.

Atwood has been outspoken critic of all kinds of tyranny both through her works and public appearances, and over the last year she has been adamant in addressing the failures of  Putin’s propaganda.

Actor Jim Carrey was allegedly sanctioned by Russia for tweeting a recommendation for a documentary movie about Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny.

After the announcement of Russian sanctions against them Atwood and Carrey took to Twitter providing ironic reactions. First Atwood tweeted:

In response, comedy actor Carry also mockingly lamented the travel ban, concluding with a cliché quote from classic romantic drama Casablanca: “We’ll always have Paris. Here’s looking at you kid.”

Political analyst and blogger of Ukrainian origin Ariana Gic, who was placed on the 97th position of the new Russian sanctions list, at a position right before Atwood also tweeted a commentary on the situation:

 “It’s official. I’ve been sanctioned by Russia.

Moscow is truly delusional to think their sanctions matter to those of us who want their evil regime destroyed.”

Canada had started introducing Russia related sanctions on March 17, 2014, through amendments of the Special Economic Measures Act, “in order to respond to the gravity of Russia’s violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, and grave human rights violations that have been committed in Russia.”

These Canadian sanctions include asset freeze, export and import restrictions, and financial prohibitions. The list, which had been updated with new amendments over the last 8 years includes over 1,090 individuals and legal persons, including 32 new members added on November 10.

It’s Time to Revisit the Framing of Internet Shutdowns in Africa

IGINIO GAGLIARDONE, NICOLE STREMLAU
NOVEMBER 21, 2022
COMMENTARY

Summary: Examining these actions through alternative perspectives could illuminate often-overlooked aspects of these communication blocks.

Internet shutdowns have emerged as an extreme, yet recurrent, practice to control online communication. In Africa, both autocratic and democratic governments have increasingly resorted to shutdowns as a response to concerns about disinformation around elections or the potential for online hate speech to encourage violence. Partial or nationwide network disruptions, however, have also occurred at times where no threats seemed imminent, including peaceful demonstrations and national exams.

Internet shutdowns appear disproportionate and abusive, especially from the perspective of citizens and end-users who are denied opportunities by a power both arrogant and insecure or incompetent. When leaders who have long overstayed their time in office, such as Cameroon’s Paul Biya or Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni, assert their need and right to enforce suppressive measures to guarantee peaceful elections or prevent the threat of external interference, we see aging, despotic men clinging to power. But are all their claims illegitimate, just cover-ups to retain control? What if these—and similar—arguments were not coming from them, but from more respected sources?

What if it was a respected leader such as Thomas Sankara who asserted the need for this kind of response? Sankara was a revolutionary and pan-Africanist who led Burkina Faso from 1983 until his assassination in 1987. Nigerian literary scholar Abiola Irele wrote that Sankara was “a leader with the genuine interest of the people at heart,” leading “a revolution in the true sense of the word.” His stature and commitment were recognized not only by his admirers, but also by his rivals, who saw how his style of leadership and commitment to socialism served as an inspiration to others on the continent. As a U.S. Embassy cable recognized, following his “example of simplicity, austerity, and honesty,” Burkina Faso had become “highly regarded for the lack of corruption in the government.”

Examining internet shutdowns through the life and thought of Sankara illuminates an often-overlooked aspect of these communication blocks: how these measures are a response to the overwhelming power of for-profit social media companies to enable unprecedented forms of interference with national politics—without taking responsibility for it.

This imbalance has glaringly emerged in whistleblowers’ leaks and revelations, which add to a growing body of evidence demonstrating Big Tech’s negligence and bias. Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen has referred to her former employer’s strategy and behavior as hypocritical, expanding into new markets under the banner of “building community” and “bringing the world closer together.” In practice, social media companies have avoided taking responsibility and action when interactions between their platforms and local politics sowed and strengthened divisions and antagonism. Sankara would have called it a manifestation of imperialism—a term that has largely fallen out of fashion, but whose core tenets aptly describe the conduct of social media companies—which act in ways that seek to benefit the center of this power, disregarding the consequences on the peripheries.

The model of profitability for social media companies relies on attracting and keeping users’ attention, even when this means promoting vitriolic and polarizing content. Aware of this feature, but seeking to respond to waves of scandals and criticism, companies have invested in systems to remove hate speech and disinformation. But these efforts reflect deep inequalities and have been largely driven by financial incentives and disincentives.

The vast majority of content moderation activity focuses on rich markets, such as the United States or European Union, that are in a position to force companies to act. There are a few exceptions, such as geopolitical events that are U.S. foreign policy priorities (Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, for example), or stories that galvanize global public opinion, such as the genocide against the Rohingya in Myanmar. But in 2020, 87 percent of the time allocated to training disinformation detection algorithms focused on English content, while only 9 percent of users were English speakers. For low-resource languages, including many across Africa, the investment of resources and time can be measured in decimals. As a result, as Haugen has stressed, the most fragile countries end up using the least safe version of the platform: one with little to no content moderation.

These double standards in dealing with core and peripheral markets are also evident from how Big Tech companies openly interact with actors deemed powerful and resourceful. While Facebook has been forced to comply with Germany’s demanding and costly requests to remove content violating its national laws, it has largely dismissed demands originating from African leaders and legislators. This reflects another form of imbalance, which is the very disparate ability of policymakers and legislators in the Global North and Global South to understand how Big Tech firms operate and the expertise and resources to both engage and challenge them. Many European countries have specialized government departments monitoring online content and experienced lawyers ready to challenge companies. In September, the European Union opened an office in Silicon Valley with the explicit intention to extend the capacity of EU regulators to engage American social media companies, a benefit few African countries could afford.

An example of African countries’ struggle in engaging with the rules set and implemented in California came just before the Ugandan elections in early 2021. The Uganda Communications Commission requested Google to take down seventeen YouTube accounts that it accused of inciting violence, compromising national security, and causing economic sabotage. Google declined this request and cited the lack of a court order. Nicholas Opiyo, a human rights lawyer, argued that the way the Ugandan government approached Google revealed a lack of understanding of how large social media companies operate and how content is assessed. He noted that the government cannot simply point to a statute and say the company is in violation of it. “Digital companies work on the basis of legitimate court orders,” he told The Observer. “In other words, there has to be due process to make the point of breach of the law. No digital company is going to take such a letter seriously. It will be put in the dustbin immediately.”

At the same time, during this preelection period, Facebook took down a number of progovernment pages for engaging in “coordinated inauthentic behavior,” despite allegations that the opposition was using similar tactics. The move was made on the recommendation of the Digital Forensic Research Lab, a nongovernmental organization focused on the opposition’s claims and concerns. The government saw Facebook’s action as biased and an unequal application of rules, arguing that the company was “tak[ing] sides” against the government. As Museveni argued, “We cannot tolerate the arrogance of anyone coming here to decide who is good and who is bad.” The internet was shut down during the election period, and Facebook remained banned for more than six months.

These arguments do not seek to justify or condone internet shutdowns. But recognizing shutdowns also as forms of contestation—rather than just abuses by despotic leaders—may open alternative avenues for responding to them. This is where we see the possibilities offered by a leader like Sankara. While many African leaders have—in the words of Cameroonian historian Achille Mbembe—adopted and fetishized the concept of the nation-state from colonial powers, and even borrowed terms “such as ‘national interest’, ‘risks’, ‘threats’ or ‘national security’ . . . [that] refer to a philosophy of movement and a philosophy of space entirely predicated on the existence of an enemy in a world of hostility,” this need not be the case. Rather, Mbembe suggests that African nations must abandon these concepts for “our own long held traditions of flexible, networked sovereignty.” Mbembe’s conclusions would align well with Sankara’s precepts.

It is with regard to the world-of-hostility mindset that internet shutdowns are invoked by leaders as legitimate and proportionate responses, but it may be by relying on networked sovereignty that internet shutdowns are made redundant. Networked sovereignty has its roots in precolonial Africa, when long-distance trade was one of the drivers of cultural and political exchanges. Yet is surprisingly akin to foundational ideas of the internet. Mbembe notes that at that time, these networks were more important than borders, and that what mattered the most was the extent to which flows intersected with other flows.

RELATED ANALYSIS FROM CARNEGIE

Government Internet Shutdowns Are Changing. How Should Citizens and Democracies Respond?

As decolonization took root, newly independent African states were supposed to exercise a monopoly on state functions almost immediately, once the colonial authorities transferred power to the local ruling elites. This entailed these leaders leveraging media—including print, radio, and television—as tools for state and nation building, in order to generate a type of authority that could not be achieved during previous revolutions. Control of the media in the immediate postcolonial period combined authentic projects of community building, such as large-scale language and literacy projects, with self-serving tactics to retain power for the few.

Until recently, the ability of African governments to regulate media outlets in ways that ensure they follow certain national standards had seemed in reach via coercion, cooptation, or negotiation (with the possible exception of some international broadcasters). However, social networking platforms, which are tremendously popular and evoke powerful imagery of tools for activism and contestation, have remained inaccessible to national authorities, thereby breaking this mechanism of control.

Sankara’s pan-Africanism and Mbebe’s image of Africa’s networked sovereignty could offer a stronger and longer-lasting response to this loss of control and deep inequality. Facebook and Google are betting on the exponential growth of data usage and production on the continent, financing two of the largest undersea cables on the coasts of Africa. As a result, greater coordination and solidarity among African leaders and collectives—of users, companies, and entrepreneurs—could force powerful tech actors to one negotiating table. If the institutions of regional cooperation or the African Union were able to offer shared guidelines to counter online speech inciting violence, they could not only gain greater leverage with the tech giants, but they could also push back against members that claim that internet shutdowns are the only means available to stop violent or destabilizing speech.

Carnegie’s Digital Democracy Network is a global group of leading researchers and experts examining the relationship between technology, politics, democracy, and civil society. The network is dedicated to generating original analysis and enabling cross-regional knowledge-sharing to fill critical research and policy gaps.

End of document

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

A plan to stop Elon Musk

NATIONALIZE TWITTER

Amanda Marcotte, 

Salon
November 21, 2022

At this point, the conspiracy theory that Elon Musk bought Twitter to destroy it is starting to feel a teeny bit persuasive. The billionaire troll originally bought the social media company on a whim with a bid that was literally a '90s-era joke about marijuana and has proceeded to run it into the ground. He continued his fantastically inept reign Thursday by demanding employees sign a pledge to "be extremely hardcore," which "will mean working long hours at high intensity." This was after Musk fired half the company, which suggests that his new demands could be less about "exceptional performance" and more about getting the remaining employees to pick up the slack left behind.

Unsurprisingly, a bunch of employees turned in their notices. The bleeding out was so bad Twitter closed its office buildings and disabled work badges until the company could assess the damage. Thursday night, the social media network itself exploded in a very Twitter-iffic bout of hysterics, as users imagined the platform could be shut down entirely within hours.

That didn't happen. As I write this, people are still tweeting as freely as ever before. Worse, Musk doubled down on his trollish theory of how to run Twitter by dramatically reinstating Donald Trump's account. As with his original purchase of the site, inspired in no small part by Musk's anger over Twitter banning transphobic accounts, Musk's driving impulse appears to be a childish desire to trigger the liberals.

Still, it's likely that if Musk continues along this path, Twitter is probably not long for this world. Like Friendster or MySpace before it, it will become increasingly desolate and unusable as its users drift away. Years from now, the shell of its former self will be formally put to bed. Former Twitter-heads will read the news coverage and be mildly surprised that "Twitter" was still around long after they had forgotten about it.

Of course, there is one way Twitter could be saved: By actually making it the "digital town square" Musk says he wants it to be. Which is to say the government should buy and run Twitter, just as government owns and operates actual town squares. Yes, I'm talking about a "socialist" takeover of Twitter, just like we have "socialist" libraries, schools and museums.

A nationalized Twitter would solve the current dilemma: the contradictory goals of running a network that protects free speech while also being socially responsible and profitable. Take away the profit motive and so much of what makes Twitter a deleterious force in society would disappear.

Here are five major ways a nationalized Twitter would be better for users, for society, and for people's basic mental health.

1. Disempowering trolls, misinformers and racists.

 The most compelling counterargument to Twitter nationalization is the concern that the first amendment makes it much harder for a government-run entity to ban people for bigotry. And it's true that private companies have more leverage to ban people. Still, I think a government-run Twitter would end up having less racism, disinformation and overall trolling.

The notion that Twitter is good at banning people for misbehavior has been way overstated, and that's even before Musk took over. Far more important is this: Twitter and its algorithm have long promoted and pushed ugly language, giving the site's trolls and goblins a much wider audience than they would if the company's thumb wasn't on the scale. For instance, Twitter let Trump have his account, despite his constant misinformation and bigotry, only banning him after he used it to help incite the January 6 insurrection. The anti-LGBTQ hate account Libs of Tik Tok has 1.5 million followers, even though it only exists to stir up violent hatred against marginalized people.

Take away the profit motive and so much of what makes Twitter a deleterious force in society would disappear.

That's because, to quote tech journalist Kara Swisher, "Enragement equals engagement." Racists and trolls attract attention because people like to argue with them and retweet them for dunking purposes. The algorithm then pushes the gross tweets further, because all that negative attention means people are spending more time on the platform and therefore making the company more money. Advertisers may not like users saying the N-word. But people who know how to trigger the liberals while not quite crossing the line into overt slurs — think Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., or professional trolls like Glenn Greenwald — make the site money. Misinformation also gets a boost, because arguing with it boosts engagement numbers.

Without that profit motive, there's no need to have an algorithm at all. People can just follow who they like in real-time. (The Tweetdeck service already does this, for an idea of how that looks.) So while there would be racists and fascists saying their thing, they would be lost in the shuffle rather than boosted into folks' timelines. Without attention, much if not most of that attention-seeking nastiness would dry up.

2. More jokes, less sanctimony. 

In the early days of Twitter, it was genuinely a fun place to be. People tried to entertain themselves and each other with jokes. Over time, however, it became clear that while people like jokes, they don't engage with them. What gets people going — besides trolling — is sanctimony. I've been on the service since 2007, and one thing has become depressingly clear: People get way more RTs, replies and likes if they take a hectoring, moralistic tone. Especially if they are dunking on someone else for having a "wrong" opinion, or even for being a little too gleeful about having a happy marriage.

Jokes can take time and energy to understand. Face-stomping and chest-beating are primitive emotions that garner a lot more reactions. Also, sanctimony — like bigotry — causes engagement through argument. Either way, it's making everyone into assholes and bores, and advertisers get more of our eyeball time. Take away the profit motive and algorithm, however, and you've changed the calculus away from quantity back to quality — more people tweeting to be funny and fewer seeking engagement through moral superiority preening.

3. Simplifying the verification system. 

The "blue check" verification system started as a way to reassure users that a person behind a Twitter account is who they say they are. Quickly, however, the process of verifying your identity became so onerous that only users who had employers willing to do the hard work for them were able to get the marks. Soon, only public figures like journalists, celebrities, politicians and academics got the checkmarks. That in turn led to accusations of elitism. Musk's solution — making the blue check something you could buy — backfired spectacularly, as people lined up in droves to create fake or parody accounts that looked "verified."

Sanctimony — like bigotry — causes engagement through argument.

Clearly, verification is a mess. But if the government owned Twitter, it could be simple. The government, after all, already verifies your identity through documents like Social Security numbers or passports. If people want to be verified, all they would need to do is tie their online identity to one of these already documented ones. There would be some need for tweaks on the margins, such as figuring out how to handle people who use a different name publicly than the one they use on documents. But overall, it would be a way to make the blue check system fairer and more accessible, without giving up the original purpose of verifying people's identities.

4. Gutting fraud.

 The government is generally more restrained from policing language choice than a private company is, but there's one place that's not true at all: Dealing with fraud. On that front, the federal government is the 800-pound gorilla, equipped with powers through agencies like the Federal Trade Commission to penalize people who try to make money through false advertising.

Right now, Twitter is rife with people peddling snake oil, crypto scams and other fraudulent businesses. Sometimes they get banned, but often they sneak right back on. With federal government powers, however, those people can be run off altogether or slapped with massive fines. The government could even — if they wanted — ban all use of the platform for trade. Lawyers would have to figure out the enforcement mechanisms, but ultimately, a federally run social media network would be more able to shut down the flourishing fraud market than Twitter currently has.


5. Cutting off the "influencers."

 There's a whole subcategory of people who aren't exactly frauds, but whose business model is parasitic: "Influencers." Like trolls and sanctimonious poseurs, influencers goose Twitter's algorithm by appealing to base instincts. Except, instead of rage or egotism, they go for lust and envy. Some are fairly harmless, like people who post thirst traps to separate the horny from their money. Others are more sinister, such as influencers who use heavily photoshopped images of "perfect" bodies to make others feel bad about themselves, and therefore more likely to buy supplements or fad diet programs.

Right now, Twitter is rife with people peddling snake oil, crypto scams and other fraudulent businesses.

But without the algorithm trying to trick your brain into lingering on the site, such people would lose the boost they currently get on Twitter. They wouldn't go away, of course. They'd still have Instagram, TikTok and every other social media network that exploits our animalistic impulses in order to get at our wallets. But Twitter would stop being quite so useful for them.

Look, there's no doubt that Twitter would be a bit more boring, if it was changed so it's no longer about making money. But so what? Without the need to sell ads, Twitter would be freer to provide what people claim they want from it: Information, community and intellectual discourse. Imagine a Twitter where people were actually talking to each other a bit more, and talking less about Matt Yglesias's latest provocations. There'd be no need to try to figure out alternatives like Mastodon to make that happen. It would be the same software and the same accounts — just owned by Uncle Sam and not Elon Musk.

Twitter, like all social media companies, makes more money if its users are addicted. Unfortunately, the cocaine button we rats are pressing all day is one that dispenses outrage, conflict and self-righteousness. It's hurting people's mental health and ability to handle ambiguity and nuance. Would it really be such a bad thing if Twitter were a little more boring? Would it be so terrible if people spent less time on Twitter and more time actually reading the news, reading books, or even — heaven forbid! — getting out of the house to touch some grass? There's a lot of good on Twitter, but it's being drowned out by the toxicity. Take the money out of it, and let's make it something that is a lot more beneficial to society and the people in it.

What the world would lose with the demise of Twitter: Valuable eyewitness accounts and raw data on human behavior, as well as a habitat for trolls

The Conversation
November 19, 2022

Twitter [AFP]

What do a cybersecurity researcher building a system to generate alerts for detecting security threats and vulnerabilities, a wildfire watcher who tracks the spread of forest fires, and public health professionals trying to predict enrollment in health insurance exchanges have in common?

They all rely on analyzing data from Twitter.

Twitter is a microblogging service, meaning it’s designed for sharing posts of short segments of text and embedded audio and video clips. The ease with which people can share information among millions of others worldwide on Twitter has made it very popular for real-time conversations. Whether it is people tweeting about their favorite sports teams, or organizations and public figures using Twitter to reach a mass audience, Twitter has been part of the collective record for over a decade.

The Twitter archives allow for instant and complete access to every public tweet, which has positioned Twitter both as a archive of collective human behavior and as a credentialing and fact-checking service on a global scale. As a researcher who studies social media, I believe that these functions are very valuable for academics, policymakers and anyone using aggregate data to obtain insights into human behavior.

The proliferation of scams and brand impersonators, the hemorrhaging of advertisers, and disarray within the company call the future of the platform into question. If Twitter were to go under, the loss would reverberate around the world.

Analyzing human behavior

With its massive trove of tweets, Twitter has provided new ways to quantify public discourse and new tools to map aggregate perceptions, and offers a window into large-scale human behavior. Such digital traces or records of human activity allow researchers in fields ranging from social sciences to healthcare to analyze a variety of phenomena.

From open source intelligence to citizen science, Twitter has not only been a digital public square, but has also allowed researchers to infer attitudes that are difficult to detect through methods from traditional field research. For example, people’s willingness to pay for policies and services that address climate change has traditionally been measured through surveys of subjective well-being. Twitter sentiment data gives researchers and policymakers another tool for assessing these attitudes in order to take more meaningful action on climate change.

Researchers in public health have found an association between tweeting about HIV and incidence of HIV, and have been able to measure sentiment at the neighborhood level to assess the overall health of the people in those neighborhoods.

Place and time

Geotagged data from Twitter helps in a variety of fields such as urban land use and disaster resilience. Being able to identify the locations for a set of tweets allows researchers to correlate information in the tweets with times and places – for example, correlating tweets and ZIP codes to identify hot spots of vaccine hesitancy.

Twitter has been invaluable in the field of open source intelligence (OSINT), particularly for tracking down war crimes. OSINT uses crowdsourcing to identify the locations of photos and videos. In Ukraine, human rights investigators have focused on using Twitter and TikTok to search for evidence of abuses.

Open source intelligence has also been helpful for cutting through the fog of war. For example, OSINT analysts were quick to provide evidence that the missile that exploded in Przewodow, Poland near the Ukrainian border on Nov. 15, 2022 was likely an S-300 antiaircraft missile and unlikely a ballistic or cruise missile fired by Russia.

Credentialing and verification

Although misinformation has been disseminated far and wide on Twitter, the platform also serves a role as a global verification mechanism. First, vast numbers of people use Twitter and other social media platforms. With crowdsourcing writ large, social media assumes the role of an authoritative information provider, reducing some of the uncertainty people face in searching for new information. The platforms perform a credentialing role that some scholars refer to as “public relevance algorithms,” in that they have replaced dedicated business or technical expertise in identifying what people need to know.

Another way has been official credentialing. Prior to Elon Musk’s takeover, Twitter’s verification method provided public figures with a blue check mark on their profiles, which served as a shortcut in establishing whether a source of a tweet was who the person claimed to be.

While problems such as fake news, misinformation and hate speech exist, the credentialing ability coupled with the vast number of people who use the platform in real time made Twitter a provider of credible information and a fact-checker.

The digital public square

Twitter’s dual role in fostering real-time communication and acting as an arbitrator of authoritative information is of crucial interest to academics, journalists and government agencies. During the pandemic, for example, many public health agencies turned to Twitter to promote behavior that mitigates the risk of infection.

During disasters and emergencies, Twitter has been a great venue for crowdsourced eyewitness data. During Hurricane Harvey, for example, researchers found that that users responded and interacted the most with tweets from verified Twitter accounts, and especially from government organizations. Official Twitter accounts helped in the rapid dissemination of information during a water contamination crisis in West Virginia. Twitter data has also helped in hurricane evacuations.

Twitter has also been an important way for people with disabilities to participate in public discourse.

Twitter’s real value has been in enabling people to connect with each other in real time and as an archive of collective behavior. Recognizing this, international organizations, government agencies and local governments have invested significant resources in using Twitter and have come to rely on the platform. Sen. Edward Markey has described Twitter as “essential” to American society. If Twitter were to collapse, there’s no clear replacement in sight.

Anjana Susarla, Professor of Information Systems, Michigan State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.