STAFF BLOG: Reproductive Justice, Activism and Social Media

The following post is from Rishita Nandagiri, WGNRR's Communications and Youth Affairs Officer.  She is blogging from the 2011 Reproductive Justice Conference: Reflections from Abortion Rights to Reproductive Justice- Building the Movement for Reproductive Freedom that took place April 8-10, 2011 in Amherst Massachusetts.

Saturday, 09.04.2011

“Moving Beyond the Blog: Advancing Abortion Rights Online”

It’s a hard task to top the inspirational bar that the Saturday morning plenary session set, but the first session I attended that day; “Moving Beyond the Blog: Advancing Abortion Rights Online” came pretty close. You see, I love the Internet and things like “Twitter” and “Facebook”; and I say things like “hashtag”, “tweeting” “@ me” on a daily basis. I believe that the Internet has incredible potential for mobilising a large group of people, for really facilitating information sharing amongst a broad cross-section, and most importantly, it breaks the monopoly of who is speaking and the information that is available- it challenges the current paradigm of a fewer set of voices dominating the conversation. So I was understandably excited to attend a workshop with three women who have successfully used the Internet in the activism and specifically so around abortion rights. The women in question were Michelle Kinsey Bruns, Steph Herold, and Erin Matson; who have all been lauded for their work in abortion rights/awareness raising (sometimes using the Internet) in the United States.

To give this post a bit of context (and a disclaimer), Twitter is an Internet platform/tool that allows anyone with an account to broadcast snippets of information to the Internet as a whole. It’s restricted to 140 characters (not words), so it forces one to be succinct and pointed in what they’re saying. The closest parallel I can draw is to say that it’s like text messaging on the Internet. It is free to use and has a very quick learning curve, so it’s easy enough to get the hang of! But the question that comes up most often is: what is the point?

Twitter acts as a space to air views and opinions, share data quickly (and as it happens), link to appropriate information channels (share websites and resources, for example), connect with other like-minded people, and interact on a larger plane. You can see why it has become such a popular tool with activists, and especially those with unfettered access to the Internet.

The wonderful activists who ran the session are:

Michelle Kinsey Bruns (@ClinicEscort on Twitter) is actually an Internet Programmer, and also works as a Clinic Escort. Clinic Escorts are volunteers at abortion clinics who walk with patients and staff in and out of the clinic, to protect them from the (often verbally and sometimes physically violent) anti-choice demonstrations that take place outside the clinic. Michelle also blogs about the ways in which anti-choice demonstrators block women’s access to abortion and other reproductive health services.

Steph Herold (@IAmDrTiller on Twitter) got involved in reproductive justice when she had to help a friend get an abortion by borrowing money and driving her to the clinic. Her Twitter account name, “IAmDrTiller” is a reference to the late Dr. George Tiller, one of the few doctors who performed late-term abortions in the United States. He was murdered by anti-abortionist Scott Roeder in May 2009.

Erin Matson (@erintothemax on Twitter) used to work in online advertising, before taking over as Action Vice President at the National Organisation for Women.

Matson began by discussing the assumption that is often made around young women by the mainstream media: that we don’t care about reproductive rights, that we are apathetic to abortion rights, and ambivalent about pro-choice activism. In 2009, Newsweek (a mainstream publication) ran a story called “Remember Roe!” subtitled, “How can the next generation defend abortion rights when they don't think abortion rights need defending?”The article asserted that this generation, the “Millennials” were not passionate about abortion rights and that they might find themselves sidelined in the abortion debate, given their apathy.  The article made these assertions without ever actually speaking with a young pro-choice woman and hearing her opinions.

I found myself nodding emphatically, as she said, “My entire experience has been dominated by people saying where are the young women?  Excuse me, we’re all right here!”This tokenisation and generalisation of young people- and young women in particular, is something that makes me unspeakably angry. I do not believe that young people are silent, I believe that they just aren’t listened to or heard. It is also especially galling to be told that young people aren’t active, and then spoken for without any representation whatsoever.

Understandably, the article infuriated Matson so much that she began an online petition, telling Newsweek that if it wanted to talk about young women and abortion- they should speak with some young women! The petition picked up very quickly, with many people signing until Newsweek got in touch with her and asked to hear her thoughts on the issue.

Matson cautioned against the stresses of today’s mainstream media, “The media does have its own agenda. Trace who is putting things out there, who’s paying the bills.”  This speaks to the idea of the Internet as an equal playing field, where one’s voice can be reflected without having to go through any other channels and be diluted by their agendas or obligations. It allows one the space to advocate and to put across their points without interference and pandering- from one direct source to one’s target audience.

Kinsey Bruns tapped into the idea that is often connected to online activism- it isn’t real activism, but “slack-tivism”. The idea of online advocacy efforts being the minimum amount of effort that people put in to feel good about doing good is one that is brandied about the activist circles a lot. However, Kinsey Bruns counters this by asking if the “offline” version of “slack-tivism” is wearing a bracelet, for example. This is a rather interesting juxtapositing of parallels between the “offline” world and the “online” world- is sending out an e-mail blast with links to a petition the online equivalent of going door to door with a piece of paper asking for signatures? Is “retweeting” (or forwarding a tweet update on Twitter) the same as awareness raising, in a way?

Kinsey Bruns then poses a burning question, “Can effective activism be done online?”

To put it quite simply, yes. “In 2011, you can do good work online.” It allows you to resist the mainstream media and to propose alternative discourse and present a diversity of voices. New Media is always resisted- television was once viewed with scepticism. It’s important to recognise that there is always a transition between media forms before it is accepted.

Kinsey Bruns went on to say that it’s important to acknowledge that online activism is what some people are able to contribute- she highlighted the ableism and urban-centred rhetoric that underlines a lot of the criticism of online activism.

Steph Herold spoke of how consciousness raising is such a large part of offline advocacy programmes and how it can be so easily translated into the Internet as well. “Sharing your stories, whether it’s through Twitter or Facebook, is a way slowly, maybe not visibly to you is a way of changing culture. Sharing stories in an ideal situation is combined with a direct action approach. Consciousness raising is part of the spectrum of activism.”

Matson, on the power of story telling, “Through the written word you have the ability to reach people who will not talk to you face to face. There's a huge power on the Internet to change peoples' mindsets through dialogue.”

Steph Herold had started a hashtag, #ihadanabortion on Twitter in November 2010. A hashtag is when you use the symbol “#” before a phrase or a word to “tag” your update with. When you search for or click on “#ihadanabortion”, it lists all the updates that are tagged with it. It acts as a way to categorise and organise tweets. When Herold started the hashtag, people began sharing their stories and releasing an outpouring of witnessing, in a way. This is consciousness raising in the online world- where women are able to share these stories and begin to tackle the stigma and discrimination that swirls around it. And having been at the Abortion Speak-Out at Hampshire College on Friday night; I can see why an “online” version would be so powerful and successful. There is a school of thought that asserts that consciousness raising isn’t a part of activism or advocacy- but of course, this is absolutely untrue! There is a real need to tackle the stigma and unless we’re talking about it and we’re sharing the stories; we’re not going to be able to do that!

The Internet has an immense capacity for organising and mobilising people in the offline world as well- this is essential to any successful advocacy and activism. Look at all the demonstrations that have been organised in cities across the world! It allows you to include people in your movement who are nowhere near you – building a movement of social activism and justice.

Online and Offline activism are NOT separate worlds- they go hand in hand. The strategies in the “online” world are exactly the same as in the offline! 1. Tailor your programme. 2. Get your participants motivated- create ownership. 3. Evaluation and post-action analysis: the principles of online advocacy… not so different from offline, huh?

As empowering or democratic a space the Internet can be; there are some major challenges we must be think about before fully embracing it without ensuring that “offline” versions exist as well. Not all activists and advocates have consistent or quality access to the Internet or electricity, or know how to use the Internet. It’s also likely that their target group isn’t using the Internet or is unable to. Language barriers are also a concern, as is the fact that a lot of these tools may compromise one’s privacy; which can be dangerous given the sensitivity of issues covered by SRHR activists. The Internet is also not fully accurate and one cannot always trust everything that is read, especially as sources are often unavailable.

In my opinion, the Internet has amazing potential; but activism on the Internet must always be informed by the context, by the purpose and most importantly, by the objectives.