For over seven decades the Chinese people have been kept under an iron curtain of misinformation by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP),hiding away the horrors of persecutions and political killings, thanks to a complete media blackout. As a result China’s citizens have been in the dark about the crimes committed against their fellow country men and women by the totalitarian government—That is until now, with the growth of independent Chinese language media.

Over the years the CCP has been guilty of a catalogue of human right abuses. Take for example the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners that has been recently exposed to the international media, where a mediation practice was deemed threatening by the CCP in 1999 due to its rapid spread to some 70 million followers in mainland China. Consequently branded as an evil cult and demonized in the media Falun Gong practitioners were incarcerated without trial, beaten, tortured to death and have allegedly been the victims of the state run organ harvesting programs.

Yet the Chinese people are for the most unaware of the atrocities committed against millions of people based solely on their beliefs, due to complete media censorship orchestrated by the CCP. Miss.Y, 20, who was born in China and is currently studying in Canada, describes the extent of media censorship within China. As a Falun Gong practitioner she wishes to remain anonymous in order to protect her family,

“We cannot use Twitter, Facebook, Youtube or Wikipedia. Voice of America, BBC and CNN are also censored, which blocks the important sources for learning English. People have to use software to break through the censorship or use other proxies to get over the ‘Great firewall’. Censorship in China covers almost every field in our daily life, from text message censorship to social network monitoring.”

Like many after the ban in 1999 Miss.Y and her family faced extreme persecution due to following Falun Gong, resulting in many leaving China. Out of this diaspora two pivotal media outlets were formed by Falun Gong refugees in New York; the Epoch times newspaper and New Tang Dynasty Television (NTDTV), both seeking to provide non-CCP censored Chinese/ English coverage of events within and without mainland China, including the persecution of Christians, Tibetans and unionists under the CCP as well as the grim reality of disasters such as the Sichuan earthquake of 2008.

Unsurprisingly the CCP has frequently attempted to sabotage this attempt at a plurality of information in and outside of the People’s Republic. A prime example was the sudden cancelation of NTDTV’s satellite signal by their Paris based satellite provider Eutelsat. While Eutelsat cited a technical problem evidence from within the company suggested that the corporation had conceded to pressure from the CCP, being tempted with lucrative business opportunities.

When questioned for an independent opinion on the incident Reporters Without Borders stated, “We guess a technical incident really happened, but Eutelsat used this as an excuse to remove NTDTV’s channel.” Nevertheless the Epoch Times and NTDTV have persevered in spite of such opposition. Miss.Y explained why this is so important for the Chinese people, “They [NTDTV and the Epoch Times] provide reliable and true information, giving a voice to the global Chinese community. Chinese people need such media to gain access to truth and to see the real world that has not been reformed by the Chinese government”

When asked what she would like to tell other people her about life in China, Miss.Y stated; “Chinese people have a really hard life compared to those in free societies: They don’t have free media; they can’t enjoy basic human rights, freedom of speech, belief, and some of their lives are threatened.” With regards to her hopes for how others can help out she said, “I hope kind people in free countries support Chinese people to get rid of the media censorship by the Chinese regime and get human rights back. I hope they can help Falun Gong practitioners to stop this barbaric persecution right away.”

By filling the void of censorship that exists within mainland China, NTDTV and the Epoch Times have come to be considered as beacons of hope, offering the truth to the Chinese people. By engaging with and encouraging these media outlets audiences can become aware of crucial issues in one the world’s burgeoning super powers and most importantly help young people in China to hear a voice other than that of the CCP. Although freedom of speech in China is still a long way off, the first few steps have already been taken.

Words by Crius Bloom

                          

Richard Garriott, an astronaut, entrepreneur, philanthropist and a multi billionaire who describes himself as an environmentalist, cares deeply about our planet but also harbours desires to explore new planets. We spoke the day after he’d spent an evening with Professor Stephen Hawking (who he counts as a personal friend). Garriott is a man with big ideas. He is quick to point out that people of the ‘Transition Generation’ (25-35yrs) will, in their lifetime, be able to visit Outer Space (he estimates 25% of them will do so) and quick to reference current projects such as Armadillo Aerospace who are “pushing the price of space travel ever downwards”.

Garriott is a man who is fascinated by exploration, strange lands and adventure. He made his fortune as the creator of computer game Ultima, the longest running RPG series in history. Having parents who were both astronauts, it was Garriott’s dream to follow in their footsteps but short-sightedness meant that he could never be an astronaut and so he set out on a lifelong quest to travel as a tourist in Outer Space.

Having explored the most alien and challenging terrain on Earth including regular trips to Antarctica, “The most beautiful place I’ve ever seen, a strange world of ‘specular reflecting’ and incredible heightening of senses”, he was one of the first space tourists and latterly the first human being to travel into space as a tourist twice.

Garriott is a wonderful orator. He talks of the ‘lift off’ as being beautiful, “like a ballet move”. He watches “…  the Earth grow smaller, seeing my hometown of Austin, Texas turn slowly into a topographical map before towns, forests and mountains converge to reveal the curvature of the Earth”. It was when he rose above the atmosphere and saw the ozone layer and how thin it is, how delicate – that his moment of environmental ‘epiphany’ hit. He saw the green, lush areas inhabited and the vast wastelands of desert, scrub and sea uninhabited; precious, delicate and in perfect harmony, the extraordinary fragile beauty of Earth.

When he returned from his trip he took a number of steps to become more environmentally sound. “I now live in a newly insulated house run on Solar Power and am involved with companies who manufacture electric cars”. The trip made him far more aware of his responsibilities towards our planet. Herein is the power in his story: that once someone is taken away from the myriad of confusing interactions that make up our daily lives, their attitudes is altered. And due to this they are likely to become more environmentally responsible citizens.

Standing in the way of space exploration and inhabitation are two key factors, cost and fact that human’s can’t reproduce in micro gravity. While science works on the latter, the privatisation of the ‘space race’ means the former is already moving forward at good speed. Armadillo Aerospace, for example, is aiming to run up to six flights a day into Inner Space – not quite Outer Space but good enough to satisfy the space tourists – in the next decade.

Buzz Aldrin has recently said that the only feasible way for planetary inhabitation to happen would be for people to take a one way trip to Mars, therefore halving the cost of the journey there and back. But who would want to do it? Garriott would. And, he explains, so would 80% of the people he works with, “it is not a question of if, but when”.

Garriott’s latest game ‘Tabula Rossa’ is a nightmarish battle against hostile aliens, a strange juxtaposition with his passion for space travel. But a game about taking afternoon tea with agreeable, chatty aliens just wouldn’t sell units.

Garriott is a pioneer. He exudes positivity. He is at the forefront of an industry which could change our society forever in much the same way as aeroplanes did or the internet. He would be a great loss to us earthlings as he reminds us that the starting point of a successful society should be a respect for natural resources and the fragility of existence.

Garriott finishes by saying, “30 years ago the very idea of space tourism was a joke. If you want to travel in space the time to get excited about it is now. The opportunity may well be sooner than you think”.

You can find Richard Garriott on facebook or go to www.richardinspace.com. He is involved with a space tourism company called Space Adventures. Find them here – http://www.spaceadventures.com/

Words Sean T Cannon

                          

New Media played an important role in Barak Obama’s extraordinary rise from candidate to President as he connected with large swathes of citizens who may not have otherwise voted through online campaigns. It was this untapped market of voters along with under represented black and ethnic minority voters who were responsible for his success in the pre-election polls meaning he eventually became President.

The first ever televised UK Leaders Debate took place on Tuesday evening and was watched by more than 10 million people. The millions of viewers were able to listen to the ideas of the parties and their leaders. Previously, their only opportunity would have come through Prime Minister’s Questions (and a house full of politicians shouting each other down) or through over rehearsed scripted interviews and Party Political Broadcasts. I spent the evening online, watching the debate but also monitoring and contributing to the various ‘live’ opinion polls that were being run. As the debate heated up so did the online community with tweets, status updates and votes flying in. Virtually all of it seemed pro Liberal Democrat (or pro Nick Clegg to be precise) and I don’t think I saw a single pro Conservative update or tweet in the entire time. So, how come the Conservative party are still ahead in the polls? Well, perhaps because the online community contains many people who would not normally vote and are, therefore, not part of official polls? Now they are suddenly part of it, what does this mean for British politics? I am sure the parties could have never envisaged such a reaction from the public. It is some way short of a political revolution but it is truly exciting and has unequivocally altered the political landscape in our country.

Perhaps the expenses scandal was the final straw? Perhaps the public have become so disillusioned with politicians and with politics that they are ready to embrace something completely different? Maybe they’re fed up of spin, lies, in-fighting, the rule of a wealthy elite and an outdated political system that pandas to the powerful and excludes the majority? The public are hungry for political blood and they’re hungry to regain ownership of their own democracy. If this means voting for the underdog, then so be it. It happened in the United States and it could happen here; suddenly anything seems possible.

A further example of the power of New Media came when the winner of 2009’s the X Factor (a certain sweet little Geordie fellow by the name of Joe Mcelderry) was, as tradition now entitles the winner of the X Factor, heading for the Christmas no 1 in the UK pop charts. The New Media savvy British public were offered an alternative: ‘Rage Against the Machine for Christmas No 1’ read the title of a facebook group set up to propel this controversial alternative group to the number one slot ahead of Mceldery in an act of open sabotage against Simon Cowell’s chart monopoly. And the public signed up in their millions, bought the track (Killing in the Name) and wonderfully, rebelliously and democratically it made it to number 1 ahead of The Climb by Joe Mcelderry.

So are the online British public grasping the delicious idea that they can actually change the world if they want to? And that they could change British politics forever by supporting the perennial political underdog, Nick Clegg, all the way to Number 10?

The prospect of Clegg becoming Prime Minister probably seems far less exciting to many than the prospect of New Media opening up politics to the millions of under represented people in Britain who have been largely ignored and marginalised for so long. Whoever wins this election something has indelibly, unalterably and permanently changed about the way in which public opinion is canvassed and analysed. New Media is opening up possibilities that were hitherto closed meaning the general public can affect real change and that, as far as I see it, has to be a really good thing regardless of what happens on May 6^th.

Words Sean T Cannon

                          

Superfast broadband for everyone in Britain. That’s one of the main long-term goals of the Digital Economy Act 2010. Sounds attractive, doesn’t it? Especially – you’d think – for people who make their living online. More people with broadband means a bigger audience and more customers, right?

Cory Doctorow, a novelist and copyright reform campaigner, confesses that his “whole life revolves around the digital economy”. So why did he attack the Digital Economy Act in the Guardian, claiming it would “cripple Britain’s internet” and establish “an unprecedented realm of web censorship”?

Jim Killock is the executive director of the Open Rights Group (ORG), a pressure group defending our online freedoms. What made him call the Act – then the Digital Economy Bill – an “attempt … to hijack our rights”?

And what made over 5,000 Twitter users declare, “I choose not to recognise the UK’s Digital Economy Bill,” all within the same 24 hours?

How about the fact that the Act is poorly worded, ethically dodgy and ultimately self-sabotaging?

Supposedly the point of it is to prepare Britain for a digital future. As well as the “superfast broadband for all” thing, it’s supposed to drag our outdated copyright law kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

In places it even succeeds. Before the Act passed, libraries could (in theory) be charged with copyright theft for lending out digital audiobooks and ebooks. The law didn’t hate libraries, it just didn’t understand ebooks. Clause 43 of the Digital Economy Act protects libraries from being unfairly prosecuted in this way. So far, so good.

But not enough of the Act is like clause 43.

As well as stopping copyright holders from attacking innocent librarians, the Act aims to help them find and prosecute the real offenders. Sounds fair. But to achieve this the Act places a new set of “obligations” on anyone providing internet access – from big providers like BT to small cafes offering free WiFi.

The obligations include disclosing certain details about their customers to inquisitive copyright holders, and disconnecting anyone accused of repeated copyright violation. Providers that don’t comply can be fined up to £250,000. Many small WiFi operators just aren’t able to comply. They don’t have the equipment. Their only option is to stop providing WiFi.

So much for improving people’s access to broadband.

Most worryingly, if a copyright holder finds out – using their new powers – that your internet connection has been used to steal their intellectual property, you can be immediately disconnected from the internet and fined up to £50,000. Someone else might have done the deed using your connection, but it’s not up to your accuser to prove your guilt – it’s up to you to prove your innocence, and appealing costs money you may not have.

So much for modernising copyright law.

“People’s rights are at stake,” said ORG’s Jim Killock. The Act, he added, “doesn’t require any test of evidence before harsh punishments are imposed … No punishment should take place without a trial.”

All of which is why the government had to play dirty to get the Act past Parliament.

Friday 9 April 2010 was a good day to pass bad law. Gordon Brown had called a general election, but the Queen hadn’t yet dissolved his Parliament, casting Whitehall into a limbo known as the wash-up. During the wash-up, everything Parliament was debating when the election was called is rushed to a vote without the usual cross-examination.

The Digital Economy Bill would never have survived a proper debate. It would have been dissected, reworded, maybe even quashed altogether. Instead, on Friday 9 April, it received Royal Assent and became the Digital Economy Act 2010.

Maybe five years ago the government would have got away with it. Now, though, it’s much harder to hide this kind of thing from us. The power to discover, investigate and fight unjust law is at our fingertips, in our phones, and pulsing invisibly through the air all around us. Internet access was essential to the fight against the Act. In fact, the fight proves that internet access is fast becoming essential to modern democracy.

In a weird way, the Act has actually justified its own existence. It aimed to give everyone equal access to digital services. It botched that pretty badly, so people used digital services to research it and campaign against it – making a strong case for equal access to digital services.

Clearly we need a Digital Economy Act – just not this Digital Economy Act.

Words Matt Boothman

                          

The audience is undergoing a redefinition.  Passively spectating and listening isn’t enough for them – for us – any more.  Not content with consuming culture, we’re eager to get involved with it ourselves – and artists, producers and content creators are increasingly willing to give us their blessing.

On television, that’s partially because our participation can be translated directly into revenue, via premium rate phone lines.  TV phone-ins aren’t exactly a recent innovation, but since Big Brother first aired in the UK a decade ago they’ve become all but ubiquitous.

No modern televised talent contest can be judged solely by a panel of experts; their judgements have to be sanctioned by the audience at home.  No matter how expertly informed their opinions are, ours are valued more highly.  Often one or more of the studio judges will be presented as a pantomime villain the audience can thwart by voting to overturn their “harsh” or “unfair” pronouncements.

The phone vote format is common on TV because it makes production companies lots of money; that’s no big secret.  But it’s such a successful money-spinner partly because it harnesses our generation’s deep-seated distrust of authority.  Years of unpopular political leadership in the UK – leadership, crucially, that’s been seen to repeatedly ignore the electorate’s will – have instilled in us a perception that we know better than those in power.

We knew better than Blair whether we should have invaded Iraq; we know better than Brown how to tackle climate change; by extension, we know better than Andrew Lloyd Webber who to cast as Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz.  Never mind that he’s one of the UK’s most successful theatre producers – we’ll show that authoritarian bastard who knows best!

Meanwhile on the silver screen, James Cameron wants audiences to immerse themselves in, rather than merely to observe, the 3D otherworld of Avatar and its inevitable sequels.  The box office figures for Avatar, and now Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, prove that 3D films make big bucks for the studios, which helps sustain this new immersive-3D trend; and that’s partly because we’re seduced by Cameron’s spiel.

There’s an element of escapism to any action film, but with Avatar Cameron promised total immersion in an alien world:  a chance to temporarily swap our economically and ecologically decaying planet for a verdant and plentiful one.  We bought into it even after realising the film was thunderingly morally ham-handed – because wouldn’t life be simpler if good and evil really were so easily distinguishable?

Neither television nor film, however, is redefining the audience’s role to the same extent as the theatre.

Thanks in part to gushing critical endorsement, immersive and participatory theatre companies like Punchdrunk – who often allow the audience to explore the venue, interact with performers and decode the story for themselves – are being embraced, cautiously but increasingly tightly, by the mainstream.  Then there are companies like Rotozaza, whose “autoteatro” works involve no rehearsed performers at all, only members of the public being fed lines and other instructions via headphones.

Autoteatro is still a fringe pursuit, but it’s gaining momentum as practitioners test the limits of the form.  It taps into the same anti-authoritarian attitude as phone-poll TV and the same escapist urge as 3D cinema:  we get to perform in the production ourselves instead of relying on supposed professionals, and to physically inhabit a character instead of merely watching one on the stage or screen.

Yet however inclusive it feels to participants, the usually tiny capacity of the performances makes autoteatro, to some extent, an exclusionist artform.  Likewise, it feels empowering to take part in the performance instead of silently observing – but your every action is dictated by instructions fed through your headphones, so that empowerment is an illusion, just like James Cameron’s sumptuous but insubstantial 3D moonscape.

This growing desire to transcend our conventional spectatorial role is born when our urge to act meets our tendency towards apathy.  It’s reassuring to know that, as a generation, we still possess that urge – to improve the world rather than merely cataloguing its many flaws – to the extent that we seek out culture capable of satisfying it; but it’s disheartening to know that we’d rather allow others to harness that urge in the service of their shareholders than harness it ourselves in the service of positive change.

Words Matt Boothman

                          

The crisis in the US mortgage markets sent shock waves hurtling around the world and culminated in the Northern Rock debacle. How can an economic meltdown triggered by defaulting mortgages thousands of miles away affect an established building society in the UK? This is globalisation laid bare: spiralling house prices in the US making an impact across the global economy. We are living in what Dr James Martin, author of The Meaning of the 21^st Century calls, “an interconnected world.”

It is not just the economic health of a nation that is feeling the impact of the far-reaching tentacles of globalisation. The world is increasingly interdependent, weaving a web of mutually interchanging resources. Cultural imperialism has made its mark in corporate interaction and multinational corporations are irrevocably divorced from the notion of ‘local’. The more successful the business, the bigger and more identifiable it is across the entire expanse of the world from London to Hong Kong. It has to be a global brand, a superbrand. It has to be a brand people aspire to be associated with.

From McDonalds to Coca Cola to the Beckhams, the brand is a testament to modernity, a modernity that has long been defined by the West. Efficiency, progress and the correct way of doing things became synonymous with British banks and Japanese car manufacturers soon after globalisation was born. Now multinational corporations utilise a common language and universal set of systems, a ‘blueprint’ in their approach to the day-to-day running of a company. Nurturing and protecting the brand is key.

The strength of the brand cuts across cultures. When a UK bank outsourced their call centres to India, they created an Indian work-force so meticulously trained in the language of Britishness the employees would have passed any citizenship test with flying colours. Young, educated and ambitious middle-class Indians populating the competitive metropolis of Mumbai or New Delhi strive to win a sought-after position at a call-centre and endure the rigorous training regime consisting of name-changing, endless re-runs of Eastenders, premiership football trivia and lessons in the art of exchanging banalities about the weather.

This re-defining of identity takes the notion of work superceding life to the extreme and has alarmed some who feel Indian call centre workers are programmed to lead a double life. It is rarely possible to prevent work life seeping into personal life and some reports claim social and family relationships have been adversely affected as workers become ‘westernised’. The call centre was labelled a den of iniquity by the Indian Catholic church. Bangalore’s Archbishop Bernard Moras, claimed the combination of mostly single young operatives enjoying higher than average wages and working long hours, often late into the night, in an American-style environment that encourages socialising and bonding, leads to promiscuity and drinking.

More worryingly, Indian call-centre workers are feeling the effects of the abuse they regularly receive from British or American callers impatient with their accents. Counselling has been received by many workers, and large numbers have quit, unprepared for the hostility to which they are subjected.Western cultural imperialism is a by-product of globalisation, but perhaps not for much longer. New York Times journalist Thomas Friedman heralds a new era with his theory of the flattening world, explored in his latest book, The World is Flat: ‘Globalisation is going to be more and more driven not only by individuals but also by a non-Western group of individuals. Individuals from every corner of the flat world are being empowered.

Globalisation makes it possible for so many more people to plug in and play.’ Dr James Martin also queries Western ascension, “Ten years from now China, India and huge parts of South East Asia will be as economically strong as the rich countries of the West. Hollywood is an example of Western imperialism but with the changing cost of film-making and marketing technology it will be challenged.”

With the explosion of information accessed by people via the Internet, perhaps we are beginning to see a levelling out of the playing field. The faceless brands of multi-national Western corporations are on shaky ground. Big business could lose the monopoly on influence as a new generation of individualists and non-Western businesses make their mark on the cultural and corporate practices of the future. Diversity is the future, as Dr Martin explains. “A global culture characterised by intellectual, social and ethnic diversity is the healthiest outlook we can hope for. Nature thrives on diversity, indeed is dependant upon that and in the same way, we need to encourage cultural diversity to safeguard the future of our planet.”

Words Samia Raham

                          

There are few brands in today’s cynical society that possess the cachet of integrity. With its hands-up honesty, do-gooding intent, and let’s not forget great design – Howies lays claim to being one of Britain’s most trusted clothing companies. In fact, it can probably lay claim to being one of our best companies – period.

Known for their cool streetwear and outdoor gear, over the years Howies has increasingly introduced environmental production methods, meanwhile seeking to educate and inform their customers to live life a little easier on the planet. “Howies started as an experiment to see if we could do a business and be proud of it. Do business in a good way,” says David Hieatt, one half of the husband-wife partnership behind the brand (Clare being the other half). “I’m really interested in this concept of – can we change the way to do business?”

Howies use eco dyes, organic materials and recycled fabrics where possible (their recycled denim jeans are the best around), and occasionally they give new life to textile offcuts; they keep their waste outflow and energy consumption low; many of their t-shirts bear great environmental and political statements (they just finished creating their own t-shirt printing press, which will one day be run by a wind turbine); and they create things to last, from both a wear-and-tear point of view, and also a “fashion” one. “The best thing you can do for the environment is to make something last longer,” says David, “because if you make things, you’re also part of the problem, which is hard. Man has changed the environment, so it’s now about how he can change his behaviour. Man is the problem, but he’s also the solution.”

In today’s slash and burn fashion climate (1 million tonnes of textiles are sent to landfill in the UK every year, leaching toxic chemicals into the ground, or atmosphere if burnt), it’s refreshing to find a label that’s about dependability. I personally have numerous pairs of Howies jeans and tops, collected over the years for various reasons – most of which refuse to leave my hands. This notion does put Howies somewhat at odds with the fashion establishment, but that’s not exactly a position these guys mind being in. “We lost 33 of our stockists when we decided to use organic cotton, because of the heightened cost,” David recalls, “but we did it anyway. When we’ve stuck to our principles, we’ve done better. When we’ve wavered is when we’ve failed.”

These principles bear out in the other stuff that Howies does, which is what makes them a truly friendly brand. Their website (www.howies.co.uk), is entertaining but gives worthwhile info on everything from transport pollution to farmed salmon. Their aspirational yet educational catalogue – with lush pictures of naturally beautiful and interesting people doing beautiful and interesting things in nature – is one of the best reads around. But it’s the little things these guys do that really adheres you to them. The honesty library they run, lending out their books to anyone who wants to borrow them, trusting you’ll return them in time; the reader artworks, poems and stories they include in their catalogue. All these are small things that when put together, make for a rich character of a company.

Now based in far-flung Cardigan Bay on the Welsh coast, Howies began life as a range of t-shirts, which Clare and David began creating in London, while still doing their day jobs. In search of a better – and better living – life, they eventually went full time, and over the years have expanded the range to cover everything from underwear to snowboarding jackets. They’ve had some undeniably tough times in the past 12-years, but as is often the case when you’re doing something for partly altruistic reasons, they stuck it out. “It’s all about doing the basics right,” David says. “If you create a good product, with good service, then you can change principles. You have to stay in business to change the way business is done.”

Staying in business meant that last year, Howies sold a stake of the company to Timberland. “We needed to find someone to help us grow, as we couldn’t do it on our own any more,” says Clare. “The answer was to find a like-minded company to help Howies become brilliant at being Howies. Looking around we could only find three companies around the world that do business our way. After speaking to all three, we knew who we wanted to partner with, and that was Timberland.” Saying their initial contact with the company was down to earth and honest, Clare and David made their choice based on Timberland’s commitment to be carbon neutral by 2010, their high use of solar power, environmental transparency on production, and encouragement of staff to do community work. “Our aim wasn’t to get the biggest deal, but to find the right one for Howies,” confirms Clare. The creative team behind the company remains the same, and Clare and David still have a stake in the business, but Timberland’s backing will allow them to get on with what they do best. Making damn good clothing, that’s damn good for the planet.

Howies’ first-ever store recently opened at 42 Carnaby Street, London, W1, tel. 0207 287 2345

Words Liz Hancock