I have often wondered how effective email campaigns and petitions for worthy causes are. As a card carrying member of several, it is not unusual for me to receive half a dozen pleas on any particular day urging support for a pressing purpose.
Today, at the urging of AVAAZ, I made a submission to the Australian Government’s Convergence Review, stating my views in support of limits on media ownership.
I also, at the behest of GetUp, donated to an advertising campaign in continued support of effective poker reform legislation.
The funny thing with both of these is my feeling of déja vu – we’ve been down this road before, yet here we are again. Some have observed that popular ground swells in relation to certain government initiatives are noted by legislators to the extent that they will act with some sort of appeasement. When the furore has died down, they will quietly enact the legislation anyway.
It is feared that this may be occurring currently with the SOPA and PIPA legislation before the US Congress and Senate, the effect of which would seriously curtail the flow of information on the internet. The growing crescendo of opposing voices from constituents is causing some backpedalling and “shelving” of the legislation. It is already evident that the papers will remain on the shelf only until next month, when it is rescheduled for debate. By then, no doubt the legislators and their sponsors hope, the furore will have died down and everyone will have returned to the acidie of unawareness.
So there is no doubt that popular email campaigns for social and political change are effective – they have provoked counter strategies to neutralise the people power they represent.
Such campaigns rely however, not just on the easy stroke of a key to support a cause, but continuing alert to what happens beyond the initial drive and a monitoring of how promises in response to such campaigns are expedited.