This is not a new phenomenon, nor unexpected. For example, many pro-Israeli commenters and letter writers have been working from a shared template generated by propagandists and lobbyists for a long time, with journalists such as Robert Fisk bearing the brunt of much of this. The same is probably true to a lesser or greater extent for many communities, especially those involved in political or social conflict.

This may yield common phrases, but we should not assume this makes then necessarily inauthentic. Influence, as well as sockpuppetry and darker arts, might explain the use of common text.

Also, is it different for a state, for example, to “use” bloggers to push a message than for ad-hoc groupings of individuals to join together to push a message in pursuit of socially beneficial aims? The UK and US governments (as well as China, Russia and others) have long “used” journalists and media to do what the 50-cent party do, and they are probably “using” blogs too. New tools, same old battle for hegemony.

A (wonderful!) site like GV can sit anywhere on the spectrum of editorial oversight between a neutral POV aggregator like Techmeme and a publication like the Economist. Exactly where it should sit is an interesting question, but as an amplifier of voices around the world, it should expect to carry some pieces which are wrong or perhaps even inauthentic. Better to err on the side of allowing more voices and be clear and honest about those pieces that you have doubts about, than to only carry those voices you can completely verify. There is no objectivity in media, only intersubjectivity. We can make our own minds up about what to take seriously.

I used to be production editor on YugoFax, which became the IWPR, and this publication aggregated independent (often small) media from around the region as a counterpoint to increasingly separated media landscapes. On the whole, I think it did a good job, but even there, the line between authentic opinion, political positions and propaganda became slightly blurred sometimes, especially when some writers went on to become leaders of new states.

In an upside-down world where one of the best examples of genuinely independent media (Al-Jazeera) is actively targeted in conflict zones by the US military, whilst at home Fox viewers ironically believe A-J to be terrorist propaganda, it is important to avoid any mechanism to judge the validity or authenticity of individual voices on blogs or in MSM. After all, who can claim to be objective enough to do that, and how do you address the fact that (for example) many people in China have legitimately different views of what constitutes “truth” from independence-minded activists or writers in Tibet.

Intersubjectivity is the best principle we can apply here, and GV is a great example of that in action.

Registration for the event is here: http://africaserieswebcast-affiliate1.eventbrite.com/

The one-day symposium “The Social and Economic Dimensions of HIV/AIDS in Africa” will examine the complex linkages between HIV/AIDS and reproductive and sexual behaviors, as well as the implication of HIV/AIDS on the economic well-being of communities, households and individuals in Africa. Presentation and discussion on the symposium will focus on range of topics from links and gaps in knowledge to the effectiveness of interventions and policies in Africa for HIV prevention. The symposium will also explore the scope and experiences in terms of the roll out of anti-retroviral therapies, with an emphasis on service delivery and behavioral responses among vulnerable groups, their children, and their communities to address the economic and social costs of HIV/AIDS.

Memetics is not yet science…it’s uhmm, blogging!

Evaluating the authenticity of blogs, comments on blogs, and related influential social media will probably become more relevant and difficult as political influence gets increasingly tied into ubiquitous advances in technology.

We might want to consider the blogger’s level of transparency. Are the posts anonymous or written by people who are verifiable. The downside of the transparency in this case is that voicing one’s opinion in many parts of the world will lead to trouble.

Further one could consider endorsements. For example, a noted credible blogger could vouch for someone having an authentic perspective.