I struggled quite a bit this week on what to post on my blog because there seems to be lots of interesting topics to talk about, research on, and offer up a discuss that should elicit further knowledge or research. It was hard to settle on something. But I have decided to look at Copyright laws from a rather lighter side hoping that it would be written in a simplified form by striping the heavy legal language and jargons and such as will bring further knowledge to myself and my class.

So, I have chosen a topic which is difficult and has been making the rounds on the tables of negotiators of global treaties and conventions. I thought a little bit of history might provide some better context.

Copyright has a history dating back to the 15th century. In 1662 a licensing act was established to register licensed books. Its intent was to regulate books and monitor their writings (UK). That act lasted up until 1681 when it was repealed [1]. In 1710, the Statute of Anne was enacted which gave considerable powers to copyright holders. An infringer was fined one ‘peny’ “for every sheet which shall be found in his, her, or their Custody, either Printed or Printing, Published.”[2] This, in essence made copyright a crime and a granted a fixed term of 14 years to owners of copyrighted works, 120 years for works that were already created prior to this law.

In 1886, the International Copyright Act also known as the Berne Convention [3] was instituted. This was an improvement and a codification of existing copyright laws and the beginning of international treaties seeking signatories from various countries. The plethora of protection covered by the Berne convention ranged from cinematographic works, works of architecture, to dramatic and musical works, and broadcasting rights. While the convention was initially ratified by these two countries, it was conceived for a global ascension of countries. Currently, there are a total of 164 countries that are signatories to the Berne Convention. Eight countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Tunisia, United Kingdon) were part of the initial signatories on December 5, 1887. Canada (April 10, 1928) and the United States (March 1, 1989) came in much later [4].

The Canadian Copyright Act, current to January 25, 2010 defines copyright, “in relation to a work, [as] the sole right to produce or reproduce the work or any substantial part thereof in any material form whatever, to perform the work or any substantial part thereof in public or, if the work is unpublished, to publish the work or any substantial part thereof…”[5]. It covers literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works; computer programs, and broadcast.

Civil society organizations such as the EFF[6], educations bodies[7] and certain individuals[8] claim these laws are limiting, restrict innovation and access, and benefits only certain persons other than the actual rights holders. Consumer International claims copyright is not only a business issue but also a consumer issue[9]. Some of these interventions have questioned existing copyright laws resulting in alternatives to copyright and concessions on some of these provisions. Some outcomes include initiatives such as creative commons [10], access to knowledge[11], and limitations and exceptions provisions for the scholarly (education), visually impaired and archivist. The summary of this movement, is that copyright is restrictive and reduces access to knowledge works and materials. And that there should be certain exceptions and limitations to some works for the purposes of education, research, archiving and preservation, and for visually impaired persons.

The Canadian copyright law allows for certain fair dealings provisions. Section 29 of the Copyright Act (R.S., 1985, c. C-42) allows for use of copyrighted materials in research and private study, criticisms and review purposes, and for news reporting.

Perhaps, of more importance to us in class, is the application of this to technology. Copyright infringements are linked to the ‘unlawful’ hosting of copyrighted materials online. The Digital Milennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is an extension of the US copyright law to the digital/online space. This act has a provision that enforces a “notice take down” (NTD) clause which requires that infringing content on any given website must be taken down as soon as the Internet service provider has been informed of such content. Google[12] and creative commons[13] comply with the DMCA (and the NTD clause). An interesting project that has arisen from this is the Chilling Effects Clearing House[14] which maintains a database of all notice take downs, while at the same time ensuring the fairness of the infringement process. A key component of the DMCA is the DRM clause which controls access to digital copyrighted works and also criminalizes circumventions of these works. The Open Rights Groups (ORG) thinks this is an infringements of their rights and speaks out against this (see, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kijON_XODUk).

However, there are claims that DRMs may not be the most appropriate means of protecting copyright. In fact, the ORG claims victory over its consistent campaign against DRM when Apple and Amazon decided to drop their restrictions[15].

So, I will tie this all together. Copyright has been an age old discussion that initially protected arts and literary works but is currently extended to the Internet, to music, culture, and digital products. An international organization such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) currently manages and hosts negotiations around global treaties and conventions on intellectual property and copyright which countries such as Canada and the US are signatories to. These countries have existing fair use provisions but they are not completely responsive to certain needs. Consumer and citizen organizations have been interested in the fairness of such legal provisions and it is important that such fairness extends to education, visually impaired persons and for the purposes or archiving. The push continues to extend limitations and exceptions to copyrighted works in these areas and WIPO[16] is still coordinating these global debates.

—————–
[1] http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-about/c-history/c-history-1662.htm
[2] http://www.copyrighthistory.com/anne2.html
[3] http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html
[4] http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?treaty_id=15
[5] http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/C-42/page-2.html#anchorbo-ga:l_I-gb:s_3
[6] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2004/11/wipo-eff-statement-limitations-and-exceptions [7] http://a2knetwork.org/about, aca2k is an academic research body probing the relationship between copyright and access to knowledge. It is a project funded by the Canadian IDRC.
[8] http://www.cptech.org/a2k/
[9] http://a2knetwork.org/about
[10] http://creativecommons.org/
[11] http://www.cptech.org/a2k/
[12] http://www.google.com/dmca.html
[13http://creativecommons.org/dmca
[14] http://www.chillingeffects.org/
[15] http://www.openrightsgroup.org/ourwork/successes/drm
[16] http://www.wipo.int/copyright/en/limitations/index.html

Hiedegger’s Questioning Concerning Technology starts off with an understanding of essence and ends with a profound statement, “For questioning is the piety of thought.” Between these two milestones of that discuss lie nuggets; wealth, the quest for truth, essence and being; democracy, social and environmental justice; a few mention of technology itself, but Heidegger manages to ensure that the discuss is not drawn to technology in of itself but its essence. It is important to highlight that Hiedegger uses analogies to describe his philosophies and age old tradition of using the known to peer into the immediate unknown; hydroelectric power plants, the windmill, bridges, and of course the ultimate chalice in its chaliceness. It was as if he was using concepts that his audience understood and asking them to see beyond their understanding of the same to discover what the essence of every day things could further reveal. Thus, Hiedegger starts with the questioning of their own understanding – their understanding of technology. He starts his questioning from two points; essence and truth and arrives at a discuss that puts aside the mere definition of technology as a means to an end and as a human activity to a discuss that focuses on the essense of technology itself. For it is in understanding the essence of a thing that that thing is revealed to us. And the revealing of the thing is only but a small aspect of its essence that requires further questioning. Thus, questioning does not stop as seeking essence leads to more revealing.

Hiedegger starts by stating that the existing definitions of technology as instrumental and anthropological is limiting and enframing. He would go on to argue that enframing is “the extreme danger” to technology’s essence, and that it can block all “appearing of truth.” But we understand technology today purely from its enframing. This or that tool can be used for this or that thing. An ipod is for listening to music or the mobile phone is for talking only or that tool is not appropriate as an educational technology. Or this, or that… So much that we do not see the further use of the ipod or mobile phone for other uses.

Hiedegger goes on to argue that it is the instrumental definition of technology (and I reckon, our enframing of it) that allows us the freedom to classify technology as old or new. Hence, he would discuss the difference between the windmill and the hydroelectric power plant. Old vs. new technology. In our day, we will discuss the pencil vs. the word processor; Youtube and on demand TV vs traditional unidirectional broadcast models; or the chalkboard vs. the slide projector. At one point in time, what we now use, we questioned their essence only to accept them as educational technologies much later when we knew we would miss the train if we did otherwise. The enframing of technology allowing us the freedom to classify technology makes us see technology as a means to an end and not a process. If we could only see the pencil as belonging in the era of Youtube and facebook, perhaps we will question its essence such as would lead us into the “bringing forth” of an electronic stylus or a finger enabled 6th sense pointing device which in actual fact is an extension of the pencil; which in actual fact came from the early man drawing in the sand with the tip of his finger. Hiedegger questions enframing and enframing is limiting. For us to bring forth better things and to use technology for our good we must cast enframing aside.

We must also critically look at causes and effects. For causes and effects are linear and linearity is also an enframing. If this, then that. This goes before that and that only. Hiedegger uses the analogy of the chalice to argue that the four (materialis, formulis, finalis, efficiens) causes may be limiting and that the application of the four causes to the definition of technology limits technology’s essence and that the definition of technology as defined by the four causes makes it obscure. Hiedegger argues that cause efficiens, the import of the creator of the chalice erodes cause finalis (the purpose for which the chalice is created). For cause finalis is an end in itself and defining technology with an end is limiting. It is as if to say, if we have the fisherman, we do not need the fish.

Hiedegger goes on to argue that causa efficiens comes from the verb “to fall”, cadere, which has nothing to do with post aristocratic’s bringing forth but rather, an indebtedness to its matter (hyle), its shape (eidos), its circumscribing (telos), and the logos, who is responsible for the bringing forth of the substance. In every day terms, this translates to our what, why, how, when, who where of the substance in question. If in our quest of questioning the essence of technology we could iteratively answer those questions, then we are an iterative step closer each time to finding its essence, the truth about its bringing forth and the means of making it better for humans.

Crisis in American Media and its impact on the Global scale [1] [2]

There is a crisis in the American media landscape. It is a local crisis that has global implications but the crisis levels may be different across geographic locations. Major media institutions are closing their foreign bureaus and calling home their foreign correspondents. Local newspapers are declining or completely disappearing from the newsstands. Community radios are heavily impacted by the financial crisis. Print and broadcasts media are in crisis.

For a largely geographic country and a widely distributed population such as the US, this crisis has grave implications. One of this implication is the challenge of having a national newspaper. Technology would and could facilitate the distribution mechanism for newspapers across the country, but technology may not be the solution to problems of context, culture, locally relevant news and ownership.

The US operates a federal system. This means that decisions are implemented at a state or local level. If the information channels are not available or they break down due to financial implications, as they currently are, then the result is a seriously diminished capacity of citizens to use their rights to inform decision making at the national and local levels. Conversely, the citizens fall into an info drought as the flow of information from the nation to local or state is equally affected.

The break down of information flows and the collapse of the media may not be attributable only to the financial crisis but a ferocious and constant blow that social networking and new media forms continually exert on the media landscape. Are we seeing the end of the newspaper (or traditional media) era? Is the newspaper dead?

The newspapers and its institutionalized infrastructure defined a foundation of professional journalism. Broadcast media extended the same. The ethics of unbiased investigative reporting of large media outlets becomes a challenge with the recent supreme court rulings unbanning political spending by corporations. This leaves room for large media institutions to become partisan. Is this the solution to the crisis?

In the meantime, jobs have been lost, and much more.

Local media, ie. Local newspapers and TV have been the primary sources of providing local news. The news departments used to be the profit center of any media institution. This has changed. Local media suffers from an onslaught of pressure from cable companies completely eroding locally relevant news. The media institution is consolidating, resulting in no locally owned or operated media institutions except for a few local radios that may be ailing.

On the other hand, large media institutions like MSNBC and CNN may be thriving but may also be suffering economic loses as a result of fervent competition between themselves and against their own (CNN vs. Headline News) plus, there is the Fox News effect.

The newspapers have also suffered from the Internet. The Internet has killed newspaper advertisement and has challenged traditional financial models. Craig’s List and Google have defined new ways of online advertisement that have stripped revenue from these media institutions. The newspaper will not survive today without advertisement revenue. And in response to this onslaught, the traditional newspapers lifted the ad model, priced it according to its paper version and placed it on the Internet hoping it would generate the same response. A case of old wine in new wineskin. Google redefined advertising, innovatively introducing “click throughs” rather than impressions that the traditional ad models were crafted after. Ad supported journalism is different requiring a re-definition of business models.

The public media is not spared the rod.

While this crisis has hit large media, there is a mushrooning of citizen journalism. Community blogs sprout to fill the gaps of local news. A DIY mentality to news gathering and production. The citizens have taken the bull by the horn by providing for themselves a solution to the crisis. News production has become cheap, decentralized and local. Micro-blogging such as tweeter produce instant news summaries, flickr and other online photo galleries fill in the gap for photo journalism. The birth of citizen journalism is announced and social media is exploited to fill in the gap left by large conglomerates for local news productions. We have seen these numerous times lately, the recent Haitian earthquake and the Iranian crisis where citizens blogged, twittered and flickred images even before large media could parachute their foreign correspondents where they once had bureaus. Citizen media is instant, realtime and may cover areas where mainstream media may not be interested.

Will mainstream media support this onslaught? What are some immediate solutions?

Media would need to adjust to new paradigms. Besides the possibility of public funds (in trickles) to support local, traditional media, there may be need for participatory media. A new form that allows interaction between traditional and citizen media. A volunteer model needs to be built into traditional media. Media needs to embrace open technologies models such as would encourage participation. Listeners could themselves become journalists in reporting local news. The reporter would become a part of a network of informed citizens. Participatory media will improve accountability and democracy.

But one challenge still remains, who will take the info from off the news grid and place them on the grid. Who will do the investigative journalism bit if media takes after the participatory citizen models? How can citizens uncover stories against people with deep pockets and large monies? Are institutions still needed to fulfill the fundamental role of news. Or should the formal institutional model challenged by citizens give way to more citizen decentralized institutional models?

The news industry may require wild experimentation, allow trial and error business, reporting, aggregating, distributing and content dissemination models, celebrate failure, and encourage innovation. This may be the solution in the current murky storm of a media landscape plagued by a financial crisis, social media and user generated content.

—–
[1] From an Open Society Institute panel discussion on “The Future of American Journalism”, held, in New York, January 27-30, 2010.

[2] In lieu of missing my weeklySeminar in Educational Technologies, I have made this posting in agreement with Dr. Hlinka’s recommendation.

My initial forage into philosophy takes me down Plato’s lane, to seek understanding of his future foresight in describing what did not exist in his day. Perhaps this hindsight would provide direction for the future; define tomorrow, what today may be completely senseless. Perhaps, Plato’s future is a microchip embedded in the head that mathematically analyses images it receives through the human eye and translates its meaning to the human brain in a screen like image only visible to the enlightened human brain. Sort of like a mathematical/mechanical device that takes over the natural sensory functions that happens when images are translated between the retina and the brain. Perhaps Plato was talking about a higher knowledge not now conceivable, but such as could only be translated limited by our current understanding, sight. Perhaps we are the prisoners in the cave even though we may seem more enlightened than others. Perhaps there are levels of prisoners, and what we do not quite see from Plato’s allegory is the various levels of closeness or nearness the prisoners were to the tunnel of light. Or does Plato just describes two levels of insight. You either know or you dont! And that there is no in-betweens?

“Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance…” Was he talking about rear projection systems1 for a flat panel screen? Or some form of overhead projection like in the movies? Whatever the projection, the images displayed were large enough for all the prisoners to see. They did not peer into a small box. And the happenings behind them, the objects that cast the shadows on the screen, perhaps this was the beginning of reality TV. “Spontaneous multimedia.” Indeed, we see certain forms of it in Youtube and other user generated content sites. Plato talks about, “…see[ing] anything but the shadows…” Perhaps the shadows reflect technology’s pseudonyms, pseudo-names, and the pseudonymous nature that characterizes the TV, Internet and the media of today. Maybe, “…the prison had an echo which came from the other side” reflected today’s surround sound technology2. And perhaps surround and future sound would actually be generated by a microchip embedded in our heads connected to an FM (or whatever future) signal transmission mode, connected (or not) to the source of the sound.

And when the prisoner is turned towards the light, Plato thinks they are released “…and disabused of their error.” An appropriate analogy to Norman McLaren’s “Opening speech.” Was the microphone an error? Was the realignment and refocusing towards the screen a release from prison? Does the migration from one technology towards another emancipate and liberate from one restrictive state? Perhaps today’s computers are a “prison state” of some future technology just like McLaren’s microphone.

“And if he is compelled to look straight at the light…” What compels us? Or what would? Compulsion, synonymous with a single option choice. “Take it or leave it. Sink or swim.” Is this what emerging technologies would tell us? For how long can we manage without them? How long would the policies against technology use in schools, for instance, remain with us? Would we need to be compelled by the itinerant need or would necessity compel us? And would such compulsion actually cause us pain? Pain from letting go of our comfort zones – such as compulsive use of miniature screens (mobile devices) for large flat panels? Or flat panel embedded on the palm of our hands or behind our retinas to replay pre-recorded scenes? Pain caused by the invasion of our privacy. Perhaps the forceful compulsion to see ‘light’ or the momentary blindness to reality is but itself another level of ‘imprisonment’. And that we are more imprisoned by technology now than they were a couple of years, a decade, a century ago. And that true liberation actually lie with seeing true light. And what is true light, if prisoners are only ‘prisoners in stages’?

I have been in civil society circles for sometime and one of my greatest arguments, indeed, my greatest worries is the misconception that pushes ICTs as a tool. It is not uncommon to hear statements like, “ICTs for governance” or translated, eGovernance; ICTs for Education; ICTs for Development – the field of development work we all currently engage in. The challenge of definition makes it hard for a proponent of technology solutions to culture and society to pass meaning and influence perceptions of the true meaning of ICTs to custodians and decision makers of society. For instance, you would hear the statement, “mainstream ICTs into gender or governance, or HIV/AIDs”, etc which but gives the often myopic and simplistic meaning to ICTs, hence the short changed definition of ICTs as a tool.

Of course, ICTs can be seen as a tool if the definitions of ICTs remain the way they are. D. Hlinka (2008) argues that it is more than a tool. This low level definition is usually attributed to ICTs for the following reasons:

1. The lumping of information AND communication together to describe technology
2. The assuming understanding that technology is only a medium without the necessary comprehension of the entire ecosystem (source, target, medium, content, D. Hlinka (2008) that makes up the ecosystem).

So, where does this limiting definition of ICTs come from, especially within the civil society circles? Could it be an attempt at understanding how best to effectively carry out CSO activities, objectives, goals and the breakdown of measurable indicators by which CSO work will become more visible (ie the number of computers installed in a project)? Or is it that ICTs are already an integral and inseparable part of civil society activism in a way that attempting to understand it creates a limiting definition — as a tool? Either way, it currently has a limiting focus and that must change for us to effectively carry out civil society development type work. Whether in the purely ICTs area or in what may seem to be any other area in which our now brainwhased traditional understanding would seek to separate it.

ICTs go beyond just being a tool but an integral part of our day to day workings. The TVs, cellphones, radios, pens, watches, shoes, clothes, we put on have a bit of technology to them or rather, are technology in themselves. It becomes difficult to separate them from the core undertakings we may be engaged with.

Another definition that baffles me is one that defines ICTs as a, “means to an end” and not an end in itself.

My simple argument to this has been the simple fact that the designers of goals and objectives such as the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) did not see the integral benefits of ICTs to the other MDGs and have thus led to the creation of a definition that separates ICTs from objectives and goals, creating a definition that will seek an implementation of a ‘tool’ that brings about the achievement of that particular goal. Recent adjustments to these shortcoming, especially within CSOs has led to the adoption of ICTs as a tool to achieving some, if not all of the MDGs.

Perhaps it is the fact that ICTs can ‘easily’ be achieved that makes it a goal less ’sexy’ for clear cut definitions. Easily, because, goals are set in what we may traditionally call technology and such goals are achieved compared to goals and objectives in other ‘non’ technical fields that may require the stability of other social and external factors, etc. The rapid implementation and achievement of technology goals makes it th more less challenging for proponents of society’s solutions who think a solution may be very complex for it to achieve the status of an endeavor worth carrying out. It is this ‘difficult’ definition of goals and objectives and when applied to the field of ICTs that makes it hard for a more integral and better definition of ICTs.

I have not attempted to dissect, the acronym, ICTs, for D. Hlinka (2008) did a better job of it. I have used ICTs in its lay sense, perhaps that by so doing it would appeal to the readership and would at least bring a semblance of understanding to what the reader may already be used to.

—
D. Hlinka(2008), A Conceptual and Definitional Focus of the Meaning of Educational Technology in the 21st Century.

I will attempt to describe McLaren based on the first seven minutes of his film, “Welcome” that I saw today. I have not looked at any reference, I have not googled him up before commenting on this work. In fact, I do not know if the name of the film is actually “Welcome!” I have simply decided to do this so I can evaluate my understanding of McLaren’s work as I go through my study. Perhaps I can get to understand McLaren as a proponent of technology use, back in the day. Perhaps I will see technology now and in the future if I could see what McLaren saw when he created the film. Then I will come back and correct my perceptions, …ah perceptions! The Innis Mode! I cannot bask in a point of view but to seek a deeper and greater understanding and knowledge as I dissect “smaller pieces” of McLaren’s work to gain insight into how they interrelate with themselves back then, connect with today’s technology and what understanding and insights this gives me into understanding future technology.

McLaren spoke of technology in “Welcome” as inappropriate – the medium by which you pass a passionate message may not necessarily be the best tool to do so. Technology as unsuitable and non dominant in telling “how much” (quantity) and “how much” (quality) one can actually convey. Technology may be limiting but also enabling at the same time. Technology may not be as complex as we make it to be. It may also not be sufficient to do what we intend to as we patch it up with all sorts of inappropriate solutions and try to make it work. On the overall, it may lead to a better technology but we may never be able to discover that until we have failed at some previous attempt at appropriating technology. Technology grows and becomes better when we make several attempts at it. A nip here, a tweak there and we may arrive at ‘a’ solution. Yet, that could be the basis of something more appropriate to come – a tip of the iceberg. McLaren says, there is no end to technology as it constantly evolves and calls for invention. There is no end to evolution and so will we need to appropriate technology and evolve along side it.

Now I will come back again, revisit this post and hope that what I think about McLaren at first sight remains what he truly was!

If the statistics of primary and secondary school enrollment sits at 150 pupils (in the place of thousands) in the Niger Delta, and if at the higher levels, only a few African students are ’schooled’ by professors to carve knowledge spaces for themselves in the future, then the future picture of Africa in the knowledge arena is scary.

If a recent ICT4D conference and a number of other fora where future interventions in the development area, intellectual property, education, governance, has anything to go by, where no, or perhaps one or two Africans can (or are allowed to attend due to travel restrictions, etc), then the future is bleak and worrying.

So education needs in Africa has to be looked at again. At all level, primary and tertiary, most especially. Not so much from redefining curriculum but specific attempts at changing enrollment rates, basic issues as changing the deplorable lives and living conditions of teachers and professors for the better, paying particular attention to research and development and giving support and funds to a massive Doctoral program.

Thats the pump price I paid for gas this morning in Dakar, Senegal. And it is increasing!

Last week, I paid $US40 to fill up a gas tank in North America. I would pay twice that amount to fill up the same car in Senegal.

Ok, my amazement hit the roof tops as I drove out of the gas station. I always ask for a receipt (not a usual occurence in Senegal) when I buy gas. I guess I never often paid attention to the pump price. I was keeping the receipts just for accounting purposes. Today, I looked and I was literally stunned, dazed out of my bones as it hit me that I pay more for gas in Senegal than I do in the US!

The price of everything has literally hit the tops and it sees no limits as sky rocketing costs has become the order of the day – gas included.

I pay between $400-500/2 months for electricity. I do not have the same appliances my good friend Sonnie has living in Indianapolis, US. In fact, I have far too little appliances to compare to a third of what Sonnie has in his luxurious and beautiful home. However, I pay twice what he pays for his electricity bills per month.

My day to day subsistence in Senegal has gone way through the roof. I can no longer afford the little luxuries of treating myself to a self rewarding weekend meal at a restaurant for a hard days week work, or pay for my golf club subscription (luxurious), afford gym payments (a necessity) or even insurance for my car, house and life! Not to talk about affording little indulgences such as dessert after a wonderful home cooked meal which is suppose to be far less expensive than some mass produced restaurant made equivalent.

I can’t afford to buy a house in Senegal because it a cash based society for an expat with no surety or collateral for a home loan. And houses are not cheap – renting or building one!

So, I wonder, what do I live for, in my region or country, where I am suppose to find the solace of family, and the comfort of easily affordable lifestyle, such as would make me not seek to hit the high seas on some rickety piroque in search of fools gold in the shores of some European village which I have only imagined exist?

If the cost of daily necessities are more affordable for me, a professional, in North America, why would I not jump in an aluminum piroque along with other professionals for fools gold in other shores?

Same difference, just that I may be able to afford the new lifestyle, flipping burger or ‘red-eyeing’ at Walmart. The only difference is the means by which we got there. I may have been able to afford the fare for an aluminum piroque. My friends could not.

Casablanca Airport,
Morrocco
April 8, 2007
1:45pm

Taking a trip to Moroccos was to discover myself and to find out a new meaning for my life. I found out other things. I guess I have been needing a holiday for quite sometime so the trip doubled up as a holiday too which turned out to be quite a fascinating experience. I will recount this experience in the next few lines. One thing I have learned for sure is that the African continent is endowed with so much wealth and resources that we should be self sustaining. Well, I guess I did not discover this fact on this trip, it was just reasserted. For I have seen the rubber plantation in Liberia, to the Cocoa in Cote d’Ivore and Ghana, the Cashew, nuts and pulp in Guinea Bissau to the oil in Nigeria, the fish in Senegal, Guinea, Guinea Bissau and the gold in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Ghana. Not to talk of the finished products which we have not resourced maximally. We still eat swiss chocolate, made from Ghanian cocoa, nuts from Brazil made from Bissau cashew, tires from Italy made from Liberian rubber. I guess I am alluding also to the clothes bought in Nigeria by Nigerian traders, brought to Senegal to be designed, embroidered by the rather careful and meticulous craftsmen of Dakar. This is just a few instance of inter-country trade that happens in West African – the production line between locally produced resources and finished good. Even then, the pieces of fabrics used come from outside the continent hence it is not a completely 100% ‘made in Africa’ product.

Africa’s raw/natural resources gets shipped out to other countries and then re-imported with high taxes, duties and rates that cripples the buying power of the average person. And because the average person sees this as a must have, goes to whatever length to acquire these designer goods further plunging themselves into a debt totally fabricated by the West. I have alluded before now to the fish from African’s coastal countries being sucked out to the orient in exchange for infrastructure or Liberian rubber with production factories outside the continent. It is very rare to find 100% locally produced African goods, and 100% locally consumed. I may not have paid attention but I could only discover smuggled refined petroleum products from Nigeria to neighboring Benin – the quantity of which is perhaps less than .01% of Nigeria’s petroleum export capacity. Yet African countries buy finished petroleum products from everywhere else but Nigeria. In fact it is mentioned that Nigerian petroleum smells hence cannot be consumed in Benin – such flimsy excuse! While this may be true, I reckon such issues can be dealt with during bilateral trade negotiations between these countries and of course could be on the table for discussion between Nigeria and other countries in the region and the continent as a whole.

It would be interesting to conduct a study aimed at discovering how much of locally produced goods are locally consumed. A lie is being fabricated by the West that African produced finished goods are not fit for consumption in the West as they do not meet their quality control standards. Incredible! Yet, the raw materials do! Fascinating enough is the fact that western produced goods fall within the sub standard, low African level of quality control. this is the case for cashew nuts from Guinea Bissau, which gets shipped out of that country into Brazil by shrewed Indian business men. No goods produced in Guinea Bissau can meet the QC standard of the International Standards Organisation. In fact, Guinea Bissau can never produce a QC mechanism that will meet up to international standard – so it is alluded. What QC can India produce that cannot be produced by Guinea Bissau? Or why do standards differ from country to country? Why are there shifting goal posts? Not withstanding the corruption factor, etc most of these fabrications are just but to keep Africans from playing in the global market.

Then is the solution trade amongst ourselves? As mentioned, very few cases of regional trade exists. Nigeria-Senegal traditional clothe trade aside. How much more of such exists? Indeed the Senegal tailors and fashion designers have met the standards of the Nigerian market. I hear the president of the country even wears these clothes! Was this standard defined by some international organisation? Was the standard defined locally in Nigeria? Was there a formal standards authority that defined a set of indicators/rules that should define well made Senegalese clothes for use in Nigeria? The point is that standards are relative and perhaps do not require the vetting of any international organisation. At least not within the African context. Do we then need to define rules for regional trade? Do we need to set up a formal structure for which trade must happen or should we just follow the free rules of allowing the river define its course? Should we leave the definition of these standards between the the producer and the consumer of the goods but then focus on catalysing the trade links? Initiating it such that the course for standards are defined later on? What is needed within and between our countries? What do we have and what do we need to share amongst ourselves? Perhaps then we can define rules that block the infiltration of substandard similar goods that flood our markets. These should be standards that should be created. Imagine the blockage of genetically modified canned or packaged goods from coming into the continent and the impact it would have on the West. And that being a decision made globally by the entire continent. By the way, there is food enough to feed the continent without depending on obese-causing GM foods.

Back to my Moroccan trip, I guess another very striking moment is the thousands of European license plated cars that traverse Moroccan roads. Its the holiday season in Europe, hence the ‘world’ floods Morocco. A quick glance on the license plates show an almost one for one statistics to locally numbered vehicles. These range from motorcycles to trucks. The taxi driver from the Corniche in Casablanca to the airport mentioned that there is an ‘accord’ by the Moroccan government to allow cars traverse their routes for some one or two year without matriculation What generosity!. The influx of cars from other parts of the world to Morocco – Africa makes me wonder what the reverse really is and if there is a possibility that the reverse can happen. If any government of the West or Europe has allowed or would allow an accord permitting cars with African matriculation traverse their territories. Again, a question of standards is called in. Are the vehicles on African roads worthy enough to be driven on European roads? These standards are invoked when needed for if a car can travel into the continent without a road worthiness check then it should believe that a road worthiness exist for the reverse.. This imbalanced standards are invoked as in trade issues mentioned above. A remarked observation is the rudeness expressed by these drivers of foreign numbered plates on African roads. Things they would not do in their countries. It seems that they operate under some invincible immunity clause. Thats beside the point.

Morocco exports oranges to most world countries. I have seen Moroccan oranges in Senegal. I do not know of any other African countries that import Moroccan oranges. It could be that they are not needed as most African countries perhaps produce oranges or some fruit that can be substituted for oranges. But was there a formal trade agreement between Senegal and Morocco for the import and export of oranges? Are there other goods produced in the Margreb that can be consumed in other parts of Africa and vice versa? And perhaps also take this informal trade routings and not so clearly defined standard rules of trade between the countries within the continent?

African is a popular destination for tourism. Loads of tourists flock key destinations in the continent annually and throughout the year to experience the sunshine in the continent, its beautiful waves, beaches and hospitable people. January to December sees people to Capetown and Durban in South Africa, the Safari parks in Kenya, the mountains in Ethiopia, the beaches, tranquil and lovely teranga welcome of the people of Senegal, the secluded and nicely endowed beaches of the Gambia, and the akwaaba of the Ghanaian people. Thousands visit these destinations annually. Bus loads after bus loads are emptied into hotels. Chartered flights help cope with the volume of travel at special times defined by the climate in these counties.

Another popular destination that this trip has afforded me an experience is the desert dunes of the Merzouga in South Morocco, the winding and breath taking strips of roads up the atlas mountains between windy Ouarzazate and homely Marrakech, the historic souqs of Fes and the camel ride to see the sun rise over the hills. Beaches and deserts alike are flooded annually!!! Anything in Africa is indeed a tourist attraction! Imagine the opportunities available for tourism in the deep forests in the Congo, Ghana and Nigeria. God bless the day a guided tour can be made through one of the forests! A popular tourism destination is created! And guess who it is sold to? The West of course! Marketed to the same Europeans who colonized but ensured that we remained below standard – as defined by them. Chances are, such businesses will be owned by the west themselves. Who said colonialism was over?

The bottom line here is that we may not be popular tourism destinations for ourselves, which is rather unfortunate as our continent should be discovered by ourselves well before another set of Mango Parks, Robinson Crusoes, and Vasco Da Gamas embark on another exploratory voyage of our luscious continent. I should pay to go visit South Africa, Kenya or even Cape Verde – one of Africa’s best kept secret islands , Sierra Leone and its beautiful 7 beaches before spending my hard earned ’sub standard’ cash in ‘popular destinations in Europe and the rest of the world. Perhaps we would be able to market ourselves better to ourselves, cut down the bureaucratic visa tapes that shut ourselves from visiting ourselves. That enables us to sever the links with our colonial past – God bless the day the Kenyan government would give authority to another African country to issue its visas rather than the present United Kingdom embassy in Senegal!

Moaning aside, it is tiring to see our continent being enjoyed by others when we could ourselves ‘occupy’ our residence. It seems a curse has been placed on our heads. Who said voodoo was only African? Where did Harry Porter come from? It must be something of the sort – spells and bondages imposed by witches that keep our eyes closed to very simple and basic realities. How else can one explain this quagmire we find ourselves. It must be that, or we simply cannot organise ourselves in a way that makes us use our resources for ourselves.. God bless the day we see our continent as one state. Where the boundary lines totally disappears from our eyes. Where visas are a thing of the past, where regional trade becomes a normal occurrence. God bless the day we sell our continent to ourselves. Yes, thats what we need to do. We should sell ourselves to ourselves and for once forget about the day that liberation would come from the west. We have waited 50 years (Ghana’s independence) for this to happen and yet it has not. It will never happen. Reality must hit us like a ton of bricks and we must ourselves take the battle to ourselves. It lies in the moment. My child wont do it. I will play my part and s/he will when their time comes. Just that we must seek to achieve the one goal and objective – liberate our continent and thus ourselves!

Two press centers and a cybercafe each containing approximately 50 personal computers each, a free ‘Strix wireless network’ across the entire conference facility, and a 5mbps full duplex bandwidth to the Internet provided by a local Kenyan service provider called KDN is the infrastructure set up at the World Social Forum holding in Nairobi, Kenya. Over 400 personal computers were donated by OXFAM to enable media practitioners and participants access to the Internet, blog their stories and perhaps write home on social happenings at the forum.

“Look at the trade ins. For starters, Linus is free and it is an open source software operating system. You don’t have to pay to install Linux on your computer. This is not the case with Windows. It will be very expensive to set up Windows on over 400 computers. Consider the licensing implications.” said Robert Gitau, an IT expert setting up the lab. Robert works with Job and John Kipchumba from Sodonet, a local organization responsible for organizing the forum.

“Linux is fast, portable and is not resource hungry especially considering the specification of the computers we have received. Besides its easier for me to troubleshoot and configure. Setting up the wireless Internet and the networking is simple.”

Linux has become associated with the social movement and corporates tend to shun this. This seems to be the general perception at the forum. Microsoft was shunned at the 2004 social forum held in India. Computers at the press center, during the 2004 forum ran a version of free and open source operating system on all computers.

Linux is a free operating system downloadable from several Internet sites and the flavor installed at the cybercafes and media centers is called ‘Ubuntu’, a Bantu word from Southern Africa meaning ‘ the true sense of collectiveness of people.’ Ubuntu was funded by Mark Shuttleworth, a South African philanthropist.
Robert thinks the social movement and everyone that comes in contact with the computers would have a rather level learning curve. ‘There is a perception change here. and people might leave here with a complete shift from the usual “linux is an animal” mentality to a freer, liberal “it even has a graphical interface I can use, understand and work with” mentality.

It is anticipated that over a hundred thousand persons would attend this year’s forum. Approximately 30% of this number might use the cybercafe and press centers.