Mediaboss Marketing

Nearly every year our Instagram and Twitter feeds are filled with crude images of black death from somewhere in the US. Its the same alarming cycle: theres an unarmed black man, the police or their fellow citizen murder them, a video of the incident is found, pressure is needed to bring their killers to justice, theyre acquitted, the news moves on, we all forget. The death of Ahmaud Abrey is yet another tragic tale of American racism that has shocked the world.

This time the world must not look away. We cant let the news cycle move on. We cant let this kind of tragic injustice continue. I'm a 17-year-old black teenager from London. Ive never even been to America. But still the death of Ahmaud Abrey should concern us all. Hes our brother -- he had a mother, father, family and friends. He was human. No one, anywhere, in any country should suffer such a needless, brutal, unjust death. Even when the powerful across the world turn a blind eye we must speak louder and demand better.

In 2012 Trayvon Martin, aged 17, was gunned down by George Zimmerman in Florida. Zimmerman was acquitted. In 2014 Eric Garner was choked to death by an NYPD officer during an arrest, uttering the words I can't breathe. No charges were brought against the officer. In 2015 Walter Scott, who was unarmed, was fatally shot as he ran away from a police officer. In 2016 Alton sterling was shot dead by two police officers at close range. In 2018 the 23-year-old Stephon Clark was on the phone in his grandmother's garden, when he was shot and killed by two police officers. In 2019 Bothham Jean was fatally shot by his neighbour, an off-duty Dallas police officer. And thats just scratching the surface. There are countless other names not included in this list.

On February 23, as Abrey jogged through a small neighborhood in Brunswick, Georgia, his life was taken by murderous hatred. For being a black man in America he paid the ultimate price. His life was ended by 34-year-old Travis McMicheal and his father George McMicheal, and in doing so, they extinguished the potential of the young 25-year-old. His memories yet to be made, dreams yet to be realised, life yet to be lived. All taken away in the flash of an eye. The sadness, rage and anger we feel at the video has to be transferred into action, demanding justice for Abrey and an end to the racism that allows this to happen.

The video is horrific to watch. Imagine how distressing it must have been for Abrey. To know that you went out for a run, never committed a crime, never hurt anyone, only to be hunted down and killed. Words cant describe the pain, suffering and anguish he must have experienced. He should've never died. He shouldve lived to see his dreams realised. He should be alive. Thankfully, his two killers have now been arrested and charged with his murder. But that isn't proper justice. Justice would be dismantling the racist system that made them feel like they could take his life.

We as humans are far too complacent. We think progress is won far too soon. An entire system exists which allows racist injustice to continue. The racism we thought was confined to the dusty pages of history still haunts us today. The American court system locks up African Americans for non-violent drug offenses for a long period while the killers of people like Trayvon Martin walk free. The police departments often dont properly investigate the deaths of African Americans like Abrey. Police officers shoot unarmed African Americans often with very little consequence.

In his 1963 letter from Birmingham jail, Martin Luther King Jr. famously said: a threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We must enter a new day where we are united against all forms of oppression. Where we challenge the powerful, give voice to the voiceless and justice for all. We owe it to Abrey, and those who wrongfully suffered a similar fate, to ensure the brutal crime committed against him never happens again. Progress doesn't fall from the sky, its won by uniting, participating in activism and organising our communities.

Maybe Im too young to understand what the world should be. How the economy should be structured. How we can get better politicians. How to stop so much needless suffering. But it cant be this.

Excerpt from:
The death of Ahmaud Arbery concerns us all - i-D

The writer is professor of sociology at Manchester university

Every Thursday night at home in London, around 7.55pm, its the same. I tell myself not to overthink it. I go to the kitchen cupboard, pull out a saucepan and a wooden spoon, take them to the front door. Then I wait until the clock strikes eight, step out and start whacking the pan. My wife claps beside me. Occasionally the kids join in.

The street comes out; people I havent seen since last week. My daughters piano teacher across the road; the downstairs neighbour. Wewave, chat, clap and cheer for the workers in the National Health Service who are fighting Covid-19 on our behalf. Then we go back inside. And I ask myself: What, precisely, was that about?

Many countries have developed rituals for celebrating their medical workers during this pandemic. But very few of them have nationalised health services. As a nation, the UK ismore proud of the NHS than the monarchy.

So when people come out en masse and cheer for the NHS the one issue that vied with Brexit as a priority during last Decembers general election it is, by definition, a political act. Quite what those politics amount to is, of course, deeply contested. The experts keep saying the UK is just a few weeks behind Italy, where there have beensignificant protests over the effects of the lockdown for a month now. If British politics are keeping stride with our pandemic then a backlash is overdue.

I am clapping for the NHS and the people who work in it, as my mother did; for the disproportionately black and brown migrant and low-paid labourers who keep the institution going, have done so since its inception and are nowdisproportionately vulnerable to both the disease and lockdowns challenges. Im clapping with pride that I live in a nation that has created and sustained this, but also with rage that they still do not all have the protective equipment or testing they need, and with hope that one day soon theyll get the pay they deserve and the service the investment it needs. When I see the prime minister, Boris Johnson, or Prince Charles out on the doorstep I think: Well clearly were not all clapping for the same thing. You can evoke national unity but you cannot enforce it.

As public trust in the governments abilityto handle the pandemic plummets and the death toll, particularly of health workers, rises, the Thursday outing feels less like just a consensual display of gratitude than the closest thing you can get to a national demonstration with social distancing.

It feels like an exemplar of the modern social movement par excellence: an inadequate, if popular, gesture that highlights an issue it is not equipped to solve. Born as a callout on the internet, it owes its spread to social media. It has no leader, centre or organisational structure. It emerged from a sentiment that was broadly felt but essentially latent a colourless gas in search of a spark, a meme in pursuit of meaning.

Like #BlackLivesMatter or #MeToo, it may well find that meaning in one moment, only to find its biggest audience in another. The #BlackLivesMatter hashtag was coined in 2013 following the acquittal of George Zimmerman for killing an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin, in Orlando, Florida. But it became globally popular a year later, after the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown, 1,000 miles away in Ferguson, Missouri.

The MeToo movement was the 2006 MySpace invention of a Bronx-based community organiser seeking to advance empowerment through empathy among women of colour who had been sexually abused. It was not until the revelations of Hollywood producerHarvey Weinsteins serial sexual abuse and rape, more than a decade later, that it became global phenomenon.

The Financial Times is making key coronavirus coverage free to read to help everyone stay informed.

Find the latest here.

What they lack in form and structure these movements have no meetings or minutes they partly compensate for in scale and flexibility. They can respond quickly; but they can fade fast too. Whatever we would like to believe, clicking, sending, retweeting and liking is not the modern day equivalent of marching, picketing or sitting-in. Activism demands, at the very least, activity.

Still, people can be rallied on an unprecedented scale and with a new speed. Absent a definite target, these movements raise consciousness but not demands. That makes it difficult to gauge what success would look like even as they have impact. No one can claim a causal connection between #MeToo and the historic number of women that were elected to the US Congress a year later. But the contextual relationship between the two is hard to dismiss.

Similarly, Occupy Wall Street did not lead to reforms of the financial industry; but Barack Obamas communications director has said that it had a significant effect on the former US presidents re-election prospects because it gave people permission to openly discuss something that had not really been openly discussed which was the growing inequalities and the unfairness.

So, come Thursday, I will once again try not to overthink it. I will step out and make some noise with the vague hope that, somewhere along the line, it might help make change of some kind.

Tell us about whats happening around you. Are jobs being cut? Are workers being put at risk? Send your tips and stories to coronavirus@ft.com

Read more from the original source:
Gary Younge: What, precisely, are we making noise for? | Free to read - Financial Times

In March, Hungary became the first democracy to succumb to the coronavirus. With stunning speed, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban jammed through an emergency decree that gave him extraordinary powers for an indefinite period of time and put in place draconian restrictions on political freedoms. Experts immediately began debating which democracy would be the next to fall from an autocratic power grab.

Yet while other democracies face increasing political turmoil, none has experienced a similar seizure of power. There have been plenty of instances of democratic slippage during the pandemic, including unexpected signs of leadership weakness, populist consolidation of power, political transition uncertainties, and violent crackdowns undermining state legitimacy. If the democracies experiencing these problems cant reverse course, the political consequences will be severe.

Pandemic-fueled leadership wobbles are widespread but especially serious in Brazil, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Brazil is by far the most likely to see its leader replaced due to his failed response to the pandemic. Rather than following the Hungarian governments example of exploiting the crisis for political gain, President Jair Bolsonaro has hemorrhaged public support through an erratic and inconsistent response. He has labeled the virus a hoax, suggested unproven self-medication remedies, and rejected any national social distancing measures. Deaths from the virus have grown steeply, and researchers from Imperial College London assess that Brazils rate of transmission is now the highest in the world. As a result, Bolsonaros approval rating has plummeted. (Of course, one could argue the departure of an erratic leader like Bolsonaro would be a gain for Brazils democracy, showing that democratic disruption isnt always a bad thing.)

While Indonesian President Joko Jokowi Widodo and Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte have not flailed nearly as much as Bolsonaro, both have displayed unexpected deficiencies in leadership, raising questions about their continued rule. In Indonesia, Jokowi also neglected to provide clear social distancing guidelines and even peddled an unproven herbal remedy to ward off the virus. Partly as a result, Indonesia is second only to China in the number of coronavirus-related deaths in Asia. There are murmurings that Jokowis inconsistent response has opened the door for the military to reemerge into a larger political role. In the Philippines, Duterte has followed his typical playbook of adopting strongman tactics to confront political challenges. He authorized shoot to kill orders for quarantine violators and has reportedly rounded up over 17,000 individuals for curfew-related infractions. Popular frustration with his leadership has boiled over on social media with #OustDuterteNow trending globally with almost 500,000 tweets.

While these democratically elected leaders are now losing support through gross mismanagement of the pandemic, others are managing to consolidate their power in questionably democratic fashion. India, Israel, Poland, and Sri Lanka are apt examples. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modis government has encouraged and in some cases directly contributed to coronavirus disinformation targeting Muslims, Dalits, and other political minorities. In Sri Lanka, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa won a recent and divisive election last November, rallying Sri Lankas Sinhala ethnic majority. As the sociologist Ahilan Kadirgamar writes, the pandemic has allowed the government to reinforce its push to mobilize majoritarian social forces, consolidate power, and forestall an economic crisis. It has adopted a militarized response to the pandemic and initiated widespread anti-Muslim scapegoating. Rajapaksa is no stranger to exploiting identity politics for political gainhe honed many of these tactics when he served as defense secretary in the final phases of Sri Lankas brutal civil war.

Israel and Poland, meanwhile, are stronger democracies and present a lower possibility of political upheaval. Yet both countries demonstrate worrying signs of populist excesses. In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu leveraged the coronavirus crisis to the hilt, using a mixture of alarmism, populist rhetoric, and self-promotion to snatch a political power-sharing deal out of thin air and remain head of state. Polands ruling Law and Justice party is forging ahead with presidential elections on May 10, despite a national quarantine that essentially prevents opposition members from campaigning. At the same time, the government is pushing changes to the judiciary in order to establish a chamber of extraordinary control to certify the elections.

Other democraciesincluding Bolivia and Lebanonnow face political transitions that have been disrupted by the pandemic. In Bolivia, the caretaker government led by Jeanine ez had committed to holding elections in May 2020 to choose a successor to longtime leader Evo Morales. In the intervening months, she initiated a wave of political persecutions and dismantled key parts of the countrys socialist safety netactions far beyond the mandate of a caretaker government. The coronavirus has brought an indefinite electoral delay, allowing ez to continue pursuing her exclusionary political agenda. Lebanon, for its part, had been rocked by economic protests since October. The pandemic resulted in an uneasy calm as a national lockdown kept citizens at home, but on April 26, coinciding with the easing of coronavirus restrictions, protests started anew. Demonstrators were particularly incensed by surging food prices created by Lebanons tanking currency. Thus far, the government has been unable to obtain a parliamentary quorum needed to pass a big spending bill to alleviate the food crisis. What happens next is uncertain. As Human Rights Watchs Aya Majzoub observes: The governments uncoordinated and inadequate response to the pandemic has further eroded public trust in its ability to help people weather this pandemic and pull Lebanon out of its worst economic crisis in decades.

Sign up for Foreign Policys latest pop-up newsletter, While You Werent Looking, for a weekly update on the world beyond the coronavirus pandemic. Delivered Friday.

The final and perhaps most dangerous type of democratic disruption amid the pandemic is the violence undertaken by overzealous security forces to maintain quarantine restrictions. In both Nigeria and Kenya, police forces have killed tens of people to enforce strict curfews. In Kenya, at least 12 people have been shot dead by the police, making its quarantine one of the deadliest in the world, as the Washington Post reports. The killings have been accompanied by other forms of police brutality, including use of live ammunition to disperse crowds, widespread beatings, harassment of journalists, and even the tear-gassing of commuters rushing to make curfew. Kenya is rivaled only by Nigeria when it comes to police-initiated fatalities related to its coronavirus lockdown. In April, Nigeria had the dubious distinction of having had more people killed by its security forces enforcing its quarantine (at least 18 individuals) than recorded coronavirus deaths (12) at the time. Both countries suffer from persistent democratic weakness and regular state violence. It is not immediately clear that their heavy-handed responses will lead to political disruption. But if fatalities continue to rise under the lockdowns, then the prospect for political instability commensurately increases as well. While the Philippines hasnt recorded nearly as many security-related deaths as Kenya or Nigeria, its massive quarantine arrest figure, along with the governments alarming human rights record (groups estimate that Dutertes war on drugs campaign has claimed over 20,000 lives), is foreboding.

How best to counter democratic backsliding in this array of countries? Each situation carries its own particular challenges.

The first set of countries, displaying unexpected leadership weakness (Brazil, Indonesia, and the Philippines), run the risk of sudden political transition initiated by a military coup. Policymakers in the United States and elsewhere hoping to forestall such moves must be direct in their messaging: Coups will not be tolerated and will bring considerable political and economic consequences. A similar message must be offered if embattled leaders (particularly relevant in Brazil and the Philippines) choose to double down on violent repression to preempt political challengers.

The concern for the second group of countries (India, Sri Lanka, Israel, and Poland) is longer-term patterns of democratic decay. While the immediate risks for political volatility are minimal, there is potential for significant future damage. The optimal strategy would be for U.S. policymakers and their allies to identify specific democracy guardrails that should be respected and to make it clear that tough measures will be taken, such as implementing targeted sanctions, if their leaders continue to dismantle their democratic structures.

For the third set of countriesBolivia and Lebanon, whose political transitions have been jeopardizedpolicymakers have more options. In Bolivia, the conspicuous silence of the Trump administration in the face of increasingly egregious political behavior by ez should end. Public support for a transparent and accountable pathway to credible elections might make ez think twice about continuing to double down on illiberal actions. In Lebanon, the biggest short-term risk is a major food crisis that threatens millions of Lebanese with hunger. The international community should work with government authorities to address the immediate humanitarian problem. While resources are scarce, the world can ill afford an escalating emergency in Lebanon that would further destabilize the region. Hopefully, this would provide space for a serious political dialogue to address protesters broader concerns.

Finally, for the fourth group of countries experiencing heightened levels of police violence, namely Nigeria and Kenya, policymakers should be very clear about their disproval. Like-minded democracies might consider running a resolution through the U.N. Human Rights Council that publicly names and shames this behavior. The United States and other nations have pushed Nigerian and Kenyan authorities in the past to carry out reforms and develop proper accountability for security forces. It may be time to reinforce these admonishments with real sticks, such as withholding assistance or sanctioning culpable individuals.

The coronavirus is proving to be a significant test case for democracies worldwide. But the negative implications do not fit neatly into a single basket of political overreach la Hungary. Other democracies are experiencing more complicated disruptions, requiring differentiated and nuanced response strategies. If democratic backsliding intensifies, then we can add another casualty to the terrible toll already inflicted by the coronavirus: the demise of democracies that were too fragile to withstand the authoritarian inclinations of their leaders.

Visit link:
India, Brazil, and Israel Among the Countries in Danger of Losing Their Democracy - Foreign Policy

In Kosovo, the recently elected government was ousted during the pandemic thanks to political scheming by entrenched political elites.

In a surreal development, pot-banging protests took place to express support for the outgoing government and urge leaders to refrain from creating an artificial political crisis in the middle of a health crisis.

The government will serve in a caretaker role until the Constitutional Court rules on whether the country needs a fresh election or the formation of a new government is possible without elections.

Albania suffers from the fact that it does not have a real and representative opposition.

Following last years unprecedented decision by opposition lawmakers to resign en masse and renounce their parliamentary mandates, experts say there is no effective check on the excesses and abuses of the government.

North Macedonia, meanwhile, is battling the pandemic with a caretaker government and had to postpone snap parliamentary elections scheduled for April 12.

Across the region, the collusion between powerful businessmen and governing elites feeds unfair practices, harms economic competition and discourages investment, analysts say.

The COVID-19 crisis risks serving as an opportunity for companies to engage in anti-competitive practices while there is less scrutiny of government mismanagement and corruption in public procurement.

Not that the pandemic is to blame for stagnant reforms and backsliding on democratic standards. But experts say it has thrown those deficiencies into sharp relief.

Amid draconian measures, secretive decision-making on procurement and selective distribution of resources for groups hit by the virus, local efforts to promote transparency and accountability have morphed into a Sisyphean struggle.

Amid draconian measures, secretive decision-making on procurement and selective distribution of resources for groups hit by the virus, local efforts to promote transparency and accountability have morphed into a Sisyphean struggle.

In the meanwhile, even positive news like the EUs decision to start accession negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia went largely unnoticed.

More than the pandemic itself, the main factors overshadowing the talks are skepticism about the pace of much-needed domestic reforms and doubts about the viability of EU membership in the short-to-medium term.

As countries move towards reopening, analysts predict that the strange mix of economic shock, institutional fragility and frustration with dysfunctional politics will lead to renewed and strengthened calls for change.

The leaders of the region have benefitted in the recent past from migration as a valve to release pent-up frustration. Rather than asking for change at home, those dissatisfied with the economic and political realities mostly went quietly and tried their luck in Western countries.

As the West is itself hit by economic uncertainty, this option will be less available and attractive. Dissatisfaction will have to express itself differently.

Optimists say this period represents a new opportunity to channel the overwhelming desire for change. They say the region needs to forge ahead at last with real reforms that lead to fairer economies, stronger institutions and more prosperity.

But the window of opportunity after the pandemic will not be open for long. If time is squandered, disillusionment risks turning into the regions defining emotion for years to come.

View post:
Democracy Digest: Frustration Looms Over Western Balkans | Reporting Democracy - Balkan Insight

What the app lacks also sets it apart. India has no national data privacy law, and its not clear who has access to data from the app and in what situations. There are no strong, transparent policy or design limitations on accessing or using the data at this point. The list of developers, largely made up of private-sector volunteers, is not entirely public.

Kumar stresses that the app was built to the standards of a draft data privacy bill that is currently in the countrys parliament, and says access to the data it collects is strictly controlled. But critics have expressed concern because it is not open source, despite an Indian government mandate that its apps make their code available to the public. Kumar says that this is a goal for Aarogya Setu and will happen down the line, but he could not confirm a timeline or expected date.

When Aarogya Setu was first announced, the Indian government did seek consent, and using the app initially sounded voluntary. Today, at least 1 million people have been given orders to use it, including central government workers and employees of private companies like the food delivery services Zomato and Swiggy. Its a well-practiced tactic in India, where voluntary mandatory technology has a history of being used as a gatekeeper to certain important rights.

While India is the only democracy to make its contact tracing app mandatory for millions of people, other democracies have struck deals with mobile phone companies to access location data from residents. In Europe, the data has largely been aggregated and anonymized. In Israel, law enforcement focused on the pandemic has used a phone tracking database normally reserved for counterterrorism purposes. The Israeli governments tactics have been the subject of a legal battle that made its way up to the countrys Supreme Court and legislature.

Many of these difficulties can be traced to a lack of transparency. Neither the privacy policy nor the terms of service for the app were publicly accessible at the time of publication, and the developers have not shared them despite requests. Since the app is not open source, its code and methods cant easily be reviewed by third parties, and there is no public sunset clause stating when the app will cease to be mandatory, although Kumar says data is deleted on a rolling basis after, at most, 60 days for sick individuals and 30 days for healthy people. And there is no clear road map for how far Indias national and state governments will go: one recent report said the government wants Aarogya Setu preinstalled on all new smartphones; another said the app may soon be required to travel.

In the early days of the apps development, Kumar said it would leverage the technology being jointly developed by Apple and Google for iPhone and Android. That system will be released in just a few days, but it now comes with rules that include requiring user consent and banning location trackingneither of which Aarogya Setu complies with. Kumar says Google engineers have been in close contact with Aarogya Setus developers, and his team will evaluate whether they can still implement the decentralized Silicon Valley system, which is intended to preserve privacy. Google and Apple have fast-tracked the app into both the Android and iOS app stores.

But there are still deep concerns that blurring the line between voluntary and mandatory, and between privacy-preserving and privacy-invading, will have long-term consequences.

There is no effort made by the state to earn citizen trust, says Anivar Aravind, executive director at the civic-technology organization Indic Project. Here are a set of private-sector corporate volunteers, with no accountability, that built an app for governments that is forced to personal devices of everyone.

View post:
India is forcing people to use its covid app, unlike any other democracy - MIT Technology Review