Tuesday, March 20, 2012

#Kony2012: Not just annoying, but dangerous.




Since my blog is about social marketing and the powers it may have to “change the world,” I thought I would comment on the #Kony2012 phenomenon, not really as a real bona-fide campaign (because it isn’t) but as an example of what can go wrong when the creators of a campaign completely disregard (or are ignorant of) the proven principles of social and behavior change marketing as well as the supposed benefactors of the campaign. It’s clear that Invisible Children, Inc., the organization that created the campaign, knows nothing about social marketing.  They just figured they could make a video and “make it go viral,” not bothering to ask their audiences what they needed, or wanted. I call it the “just add water” method of campaign design.

The film is about the Joseph Kony, the leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), a militant group that originated in Uganda but has moved on to terrorize neighboring countries of South Sudan, DRC, and the Central African Republic. Joseph Kony was indicted in 2005 by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and has been proved nearly impossible to capture. Ostensibly, the film was the kick-off for a campaign that focuses on making Kony “famous” enough within largely Western, pop culture/social media circles to somehow get him arrested, or it seems, assassinated.

If you’re not one of the 85 Million people who’ve seen the video in the last few weeks, here’s a link. 

Social Marketing uses commercial marketing principles to affect societal and behavior change, for the better.  Shortly after the “Mad Men” era in the 60s, it was determined by a few “Good Men” that if marketing and advertising could be used get people to buy cigarettes and Coca Cola, it might also be used to encourage positive things like wearing a seat-belt, not littering, and quitting smoking.  Although the term is used interchangeably with “social media,” it actually has little to do with social media, except that social marketing campaigns can include social media in an overall media plan that may also include print, radio and TV.  Most social marketing campaigns are heavily researched to determine what the key problem and related objectives are, along with their nuances and patterns.  Then, it’s determined what is the desired behavior and or attitudinal change to affect that problem, and who are the groups or audiences who are most likely to adopt the behavior.

After the fall-out from the Kony 2012 film, the creators appeared on CNN and other media outlets to try to explain their intentions, but this didn’t seem to help, nor did the subsequent incident involving public masturbation by Jason Russell help their cause.   How did they end up in such Kaka, if all they really wanted to do was help these Ugandan children? 

Let’s break it down into a few “Social Marketing 101” basics:

Objective: 
Who are they trying to reach and why? Clearly they were able to reach young people throughout the world who wanted to be part of something big, and who donated their piggy-bank money for the cause yes, but also to get a t-shirt.  So they raised money, to make more t-shirts, and thongs (more on that below) of all things.  But is their objective simply to raise money or to actually affect change? Are the people in power in Uganda or the ICC going to take this campaign seriously? Giving them the benefit of the doubt (and boy, is that difficult!) that they are raising this money for their programs, how are these programs specifically helping the children in Uganda now (or countries that are now feeling the brunt of the LRA’s brutality) other than getting them a ticket to America or a spot in the video?

Message: 
The key message that Jason Russell and Invisible Children tout is that they want to make Kony “famous.” Really?  Have they even looked in a dictionary to define the word famous?  Here, I’ll help: 
Famous: [fey-muhs] adjective
1. having a widespread reputation, usually of a favorable nature; renowned; celebrated: a famous writer.

At the very least they might use a word like infamous—would you call Hitler famous? It reminds me of the days I taught English as a Second Language, and I would do a comprehension check using an absurd sentence that would be sure to let me know if my students “got it.”  Bookstore: Would you buy a dog in a bookstore? Really, it seems that obvious to me.  Maybe it’s the university of reality television that has drummed into the Y Generation’s head that simply being on television defines you as “famous” and being worthy of a t-shirt, or for that matter a campaign.  Here, Invisible Children is reinforcing this idea with young idealistic philanthropists.

Messenger:
With any campaign, you must also consider the messenger.  An American guy from San Diego, CA, USA. Hmm. Doesn’t seem to be any consideration for the audience, or the intended benefactors of the campaign: Ugandans. 

Media: 
Marketers choose media and products to get their message across that also provide a “benefit” for the audience and spread the message. Invisible Children chose thongs.  Thongs, really? There are many things wrong with this, number one your audience includes children, and your intended benefactors too.  Secondly, rape, a common weapon of war, is also common weapon of the LRA.   In no way shape or form should sexuality or “sexiness” be associated with atrocities of this kind. Further, the “Che-like” romanticizing of Kony is another reason people are so pissed off and uncomfortable with this campaign. These factors are probably the most harmful of the all,  as the massive attention being paid to these images and associations by young people may have a detrimental effect on social norms, i.e. associating brutal rape with sex, and wearing an image of a brutal killer on a t-shirt seems “cool” and “normal.”

Take a campaign like SlutWalk, which was started in Toronto in 2011 by several women in response to controversial comments made by a police constable that suggested rape survivors “asked for it” by “dressing like sluts.”  Why is this campaign different? Because they are turning the problem on its head, with the idea that no matter how a woman dresses, she should never be blamed for being raped.  Because the messengers are credible, real women, the campaign stuck with women all over the world, creating a live-viral phenomenon worldwide, from Rio to Johannesburg. 

So what did Invisible Children do right? In my opinion, nothing.  No doubt they raised money, but seems to me to pay for more thong underwear and t-shirts than affect legislation, influence decision makers, or empower survivors.

There are many that agree with me, but also many that don’t, including ICC Chief Prosecutor  Louis Moreno Ocampo, who said the social media campaign by Invisible Children had “mobilised the world.” Sarah Margon pointed out in her post on Thinkprogress.org that one benefit of Kony 2012 may be the flood of attention paid to LRA and the need for action.  This may be true to some degree, but public awareness rarely translates into action, and further, the propagation of images of disfigured children “victimizes” them yet again and reinforces the social norm that this is something current, widespread, and difficult to do anything about, other than, of course, to assassinate Kony.  If some think that’s a worthy enough goal, look no further than Hitler and Bin Laden, who now share a t-shirt with Kony thanks to Invisible Children.  These men may be dead, but their legacy of hate lives on, and putting them on a t-shirt out of context only normalizes them, even if it demonizes them for a moment.

This campaign, if I were going to take it on, would be directed to the people who are most able to influence Ugandan officials—that is Ugandans. Involve them in every step of the campaign, from audience selection, to messages, to messengers.  They may not be able to donate money, but they can tell you what they would like to happen, how justice might be served, and whom should be targeted.  My guess it is not Kony (the ICC already has them on their list) but the people in power who continue to turn a blind eye and allow impunity to continue.

Some worthy reading and takes on #Kony2012:

Elliott Ross, Africa is a Country Blog  The #Kony2012 Show 

Sean Jacobs, Africa is a Country Blog  #Kony2012 The Musical 


2 comments:

Edna Gee said...

This was an interesting analysis. I agree with you, the campaign was flawed and not thought trough properly. I also think that they never thought that something going viral and basically people being over-flooded by the information might actually make them more apathetic to it.

behaviourchanger said...

Thank you so much Virginia for writing this blog!! It explicitly details many of my thoughts (as a social marketer) of what is so wrong and frankly unsettling with this campaign, including your comments about SlutWalk. It will be far easier for me now just to share this link to your blog than have continued arguments with ‘friends’ on Facebook. Really, thank you!