Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

January 26 2013

Video Advocacy Races Forward: 2012’s Dangers & 2013’s Solutions

Video is increasingly at the nexus of opportunity and danger for human rights activists. Video helps activists to document, confront, circumvent, and lobby against oppressive authorities—but it also allows those authorities to stalk them. Here's what we think will happen in 2013.

Elisângela used video against forced evictions in Brazil.

Elisângela used video against forced evictions in Brazil.

Both those using video for good and for evil made big advances in 2012. Activists marshaled video in new ways to tell their stories, share their evidence, and form their communities online. Activists in Brazil told the story of forced evictions ahead of the World Cup. Activists documented military attacks on civilians in Syria. Activists in Burma documented large-scale attacks on the Rohingya minority.

Activists used video to tell their stories—and they succeeded in raising awareness of issues that risked being lost in the cacophony of world affairs. In return, repressive governments developed new ways to use video to target activists.

2013 will undoubtedly see the next stages of this video tech race—in fact, they’ve already taken shape. Activists and their allies are developing defensive security innovations, and we’ll soon see these tools protecting activists as they use video to advance their causes.

Top Video Security Threats of 2012

1. Video as Lure for Malware

Important new video’ popped up in many Syrian Skype chats in the spring and summer of 2012. The intriguing but unremarkable message seemed to contain an innocuous pdf file, but it also came with spyware called “Blackshades.” Using video as a lure, allies of the Syrian regime could now spy through the camera’s webcam, access any file they wanted, and watch every key that was pressed–including passwords. They could use what they learned to target the activist, or to infiltrate his network. The software developer has since suspended new sales, and BlackShades can now be found and removed. But in many cases, the damage was done. Similar attacks in 2012 were waged against Uyghur activists in China, and others in Bahrain, and a fake version of YouTube was created to target Syrian activists.

Video activist Abdel Karim al-Oqda, aka Abu Hassan, was killed by Syrian government forces in 2012

Video activist Abdel Karim al-Oqda, aka Abu Hassan, was killed by Syrian government forces in 2012

2. Identification through Video

Using online videos to identify and target individuals was not a new trend—but regimes rolled it out on a larger scale in 2012, with increased effectiveness and heightened consequences. Video activists often lack the capacity and resources to effectively protect their own identity, as well as the identities of individuals in the videos they’re filming. In 2012, individuals on both sides of the camera were identified and targeted. A prominent videographer was killed; another activist was arrested merely for having the live-streaming app Bambuser on his phone. As video becomes an increasingly central battlefield, anonymity can literally be a life-or-death issue.

3. Evidentiary Failings of Video

One of the biggest threats to activist video is one you might not think of. Activists worldwide are risking their lives to record video that documents atrocities. Both judicial and journalistic bodies may be unable to use videos if they can’t adequately establish the location, the date, and the civilian status of victims, among other things. Much of it lacks the supporting evidence to stand up in court—say, at the International Criminal Court or your newspaper of choice—and the risks these filmmakers take can be in vain.

Top Video Security Solutions for 2013

1. InformaCam

Video activists who want their video to have the credibility to stand up in a court room or a news room can follow a set of guidelines. Soon, those using Android cell phones can use InformaCam. This app automatically embeds data into the video file, such as location (from GPS sensors and wifi signals), and time (from internal clocks). It also creates a ‘digital fingerprint’ to tie a video to a specific camera. Because all of this can be used against activists by the repressive forces they’re fighting, everything is encrypted to keep it safe. WITNESS and our partners at the Guardian Project are developing InformaCam, and we recently received a Knight News Challenge grant to help support the project.

2. Anonymity via ObscuraCam & the YouTube Blurring Tool

Screen Shot 2013-01-22 at 5.33.14 PMYouTube’s facial blurring tool automatically detects faces in videos, and blurs them to protect the individuals’ identities. This is a huge development—activists use YouTube far more than any other platform to share their video, and this has the potential to save lives. It doesn’t protect video before it’s uploaded, though, which is one reason that WITNESS and the Guardian Project are developing ObscuraCam. ObscuraCam also removes all identifying data stored in photos, including GPS location, data, and phone make and model. These tools can protect individuals who may not even know they’re being filmed, let alone have given their consent.

3. Platform Alternatives

Although some platforms are making efforts to protect the activists who use them, like YouTube with its face-blurring tool, there are still many vulnerabilities that can be exploited with tragic consequences. Skype, a popular tool for video chatting and also sending videos from one activist to another, has recently come under fire. So why not try an alternative? In an impressively thorough article, Lifehacker suggests Jitsi as a safer alternative to Skype. Jitsi encrypts both ends of the conversation, stores nothing online, and uses more secure protocols so “you don't need to worry about that data falling into the wrong hands.” The article also suggests safer alternatives to Facebook (Glassboard) and Dropbox (SpiderOak).

For Better and for Worse: The Revolution Will be Televised

A photo shared by the Saudi Arabia Branch of the Union of Syrian Free Students.

A photo shared by the Saudi Arabia Branch of the Union of Syrian Free Students.

“Protecting Your Account = Protecting Your Friends

A different password for each account”

Videos spread through trusted networks that, like so many things involving human rights video, are a double-edged sword. The Saudi Arabia branch of the Union of Syrian Free Students shared this message because activists’ digital security is increasingly fragile and increasingly important. Video images, social networks, and threats of violence are colliding in very powerful, very dangerous ways.

Wherever human rights issues are being fought, both sides will seek to use video technology. WITNESS will be following these issues through 2013 and beyond.

April 13 2012

British Muslims have given David Cameron an object lesson in democracy | Parveen Akhtar

In Indonesia, Cameron called for Islam to embrace democracy; the young Muslim voters of Bradford West would agree

In his speech in Jakarta on Thursday, David Cameron told Muslims in the east that "democracy and Islam can flourish together", the implication being that they often don't. Especially with a focus on Britain, these comments are not without irony. Exactly two weeks previously, Muslims in a northern city of Britain had exercised their democratic right to vote, helping to elect George Galloway as MP for Bradford West. In so doing, they highlighted that although the issues of Islam, Muslims abroad, the east and the Middle East matter to them, of equal importance is local life.

Galloway's "Bradford spring" saw politicians and journalists bandying about terms such as "biraderi", "clan" and "kinship politics". Biraderi, which literally translates as "patrilineage" is commonly used by Pakistanis to refer to networks of individuals who share a common ancestry. Kinship networks are indeed an important form of social organisation amongst British Pakistanis, a type of internal welfare system for family and blood relations. However, the biraderi politics referred to in comment pieces discussing Bradford West is a very British phenomenon. Biraderi politics in the UK refers to the practices of British politicians of using community leaders in British constituencies with significant Pakistani voters to attain bloc votes. Roy Hattersley, who held the Sparkbrook constituency in Birmingham with a large Pakistani population, once remarked that whenever he saw a Pakistani name on a ballot paper he knew the vote was his.

In Bradford West, Galloway's supporters are largely young, British-born Bradfordians of Pakistani Muslim descent. They are the children and grandchildren of postwar economic migrants: manual labourers in the textile mills and manufacturing industries of the north. Biraderi-based politics had a successful run for nearly 40 years in these areas, but the children of the pioneer generation, born and bought up in the UK, do not identify with this kind of politics. They believe that community leaders do not engage with the issues that concern them.

The whole point of patronage-based politics is that politicians don't have to work for their votes. Alienated by this system, these young people were drawn to George Galloway. Galloway's oratorical skills and abilities in public debate have led some to suggest that Bradford West was a one-off result engineered by a truly individual politician who is a "standard bearer" for British Muslims in a constituency with a large Muslim population.

Galloway is certainly regarded as a hero among British Pakistanis, because he is seen as the only politician to challenge the status quo with regards to Iraq and other issues of Muslim concern. This may have won him the election in 2005 in Bethnal Green and Bow, but it would be misleading to think that he won in Bradford West because young British Muslims are preoccupied with the war. They may have an interest in Muslim issues abroad, but international politics plays only one part in their attitudes. What really matters is the unglamorous world of local politics: street lighting, children's schools, rubbish collection, the problems of vermin and drugs, the lack of opportunities: the bread-and-butter issues of life in the UK.

In electing George Galloway, some Pakistanis made a cognitive leap and reasoned that if Galloway is speaking positively about Muslims abroad, he will also care about them here, and help fight a fight which they believe the older generation of Pakistani community leaders has abandoned, by accepting patronage roles from mainstream politicians who want to stay propped up in their constituencies.

Trying to explain the defeat in Bradford West, John Mann, Labour MP for Bassetlaw, blamed the party for having no strategy in the area. On the contrary: the party did have a strategy. The problem was that it was an old strategy, based on the belief that community leaders could guarantee the local Labour candidate a win.

What the Bradford West byelection highlighted so dramatically was that Labour, and indeed all the mainstream political parties, can ill-afford to rely on the patronage-based relationships they enjoyed with the older generation of Pakistanis. Young British Pakistani Muslims are actively participating in British democracy. Religious identity and local concerns flourish side by side. Politicians have to earn and not expect their votes. That is democracy, in east and west.

• Follow Comment is free on Twitter @commentisfree


guardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


January 17 2010

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl