DIRECT CYBER ACTIVISM

Direct cyber activism : Movements are utilizing e-technologies as a disruptive tool against some industries or global organizations. Cyberactivists have protested various corporations through electronic civil disobedience, for instance, in “virtual sit-ins” by overwhelming websites with high amounts of traffic. "Hacktivism" is a form of direct cyberactivism in which hackers appropriate or disrupt technologies for personal and political ends (Wray 1998).  Denning (2000) writes, “Government and non-government actors used the Net (in former Yugoslavia) to disseminate information, spread propaganda, demonize opponents, and solicit support for their positions.

 · Internet Access and Structure : Internet structure and access are subjects of activism. Various advocacy groups, programming innovations, and legislative initiatives aim to structure and regulate the Internet and Net access. For example, the free software movement is a set of programming efforts to keep information resources public (Lessig 1999). In terms of access, closing the digital divide is a necessary part of empowering the main victims of the information revolution and increasing their ability to form productive alliances with other sectors in contesting for broader political power. One of the most important and less visible forms of cyberactivism has been the proliferation of groups fostering computer use and skills among the underserved. The development of Community Technology Centers enable underprivileged populations to gain technological training, access to the net, and form networks and connections with other communities. The CTC network now has over 600 member organizations and is rapidly growing. Through CTCs, many less privileged youth have developed marketable computer skills, are able to go online, and some have become politically empowered.

· Online alternative community formation : Early online forums demonstrated the promise of a great diversity of “virtual communities” organized around common interests (Rhiengold 1993). A fundamental problematic is if Internet-based communities exist solely as “virtual” moments in cyberspace or do constellations of digital information have an enduring material basis for “reality.” Castells (2001) characterizes online interactions as less a space of communities (conceived as based on primary relations) and primarily extending already existing modes of relations or interests of individuals. We disagree. Wellman (2001), while agreeing with Castells on the increase in individualism in industrial societies, has extensively studied the nature of online communities and has argued that such communities, as networks of interpersonal ties are indeed “real” in terms of forming durable relations that provide an number of social rewards including sociability, identity and support networks. Social movement literatures have gradually (Klandermans 1992, Tarrow 1995) compiled a variety of incentives to engage in social movements, including individual rewards and skills building, solidaristic/social rewards, network pulls, and ideological framing.

BY MWINYIJUMA REHEMA

BAPRM III - 42686