TIME Magazine has just posted a pleasant, if slightly condescending article, by writer Daniel Fastenberg musing "Why Is Twitter So Popular in Brazil?" The article, while intending to be optimistic and championing Twitter, comes across with empirical undertones that undervalue the true creativity of Brazilian society and brings no expert insight to the appeal and value of Twitter to Brazilians.
The TIME article asks Brown University professor James N. Green, the author of a recent and very important book, "We Cannot Remain Silent: Opposition to the Brazilian Military Dictatorship in the United States" why Twitter is so popular in Brazil. [For the record: I lived in Brasília the capital of Brazil from 1983-1984 during the throes of Diretas Já, the civil uprising to restore democratic voting (and again in the 1990s). I witnessed riots in the streets by people desperate for the right to have a voice in their government and strong suspicions about the United States role in supporting Brazil's military rule. The importance of Professor Green's book is visceral to me.]
But, Professor Green's expertise doesn't seem to have much to do with why Brazilian's love Twitter. Why they quoted Green, who does not appear to have any expertise in social or digital media, is unclear. Despite my best search efforts, I can find no Twitter account for James N. Green, professor at Brown University. A cursory Google, however, does turn up dozens of experts inside Brazil who could have contributed to this article in a meaningful way and made it much better and informative.
Translated through Green's expertise and filter, not surprisingly, Twitter's popularity is, "tied intimately to the history of the country's rise from the shadow of authoritarianism to its newfound status as a budding global power."
Green is only partially right.
It's not surprising that Professor Green would see Brazil's interest in Twitter through the filter of Brazil's transition from a military government to a democracy. What he's missing is the fact that Brazilians have always been a culture of intense innovation, passion, creativity, art and, yes, communication.
The Internet, a grand connector for creativity and innovation was, in a way, almost tailor made for Brazilian culture. Brazil has uniquely integrated cultural differences into a society that, while not without prejudice and racism, reflects the rich influence of their diverse backgrounds. Imagine the US Catholic Church condoning (or at least not condemning) concurrent African traditional mythos and mysticism, like they do in Brazil. Ask any Brazilian and they will readily admit that there are three concurrent religions in Brazil: Catholicism, Spiritism, and a third religion, Candomblé, which was brought over from Africa during the Brazilian slave trade and is still prominent today.
Technological and artistic innovation and creativity in Brazil did not begin after or even in reaction to the military rule. It has a long history predating and extending throughout the military rule. It was during military rule that Brazil took the radical step of investing in the innovative development of and wide-scale use of sugar cane-based ethanol as an alternative automotive fuel to Petroleum, which no other country has replicated.
I have been tracking for the past decades and chronicling for the past three years on this blog Brazil's amazing appetite and capacity for digital culture and digital media from Brazil's rise into Orkut, the virtual world of Second Life, to Metaplace, to Twitter and on.
Brazil's interest in digital media is much more than an appetite for change: It's in the DNA of their culture. It's truly a culture that embodies the Imagination Age.
[TIME: Why Is Twitter So Popular in Brazil?]
Also see:
Intercambio Virtual, Já!
Brazil: Second Largest User of Twitter
Favela Painting
Brazil's LAN House Revolution
No Surprise: Brazil Moves to Metaplace.
Read other articles on The Imagination Age about Brazil and digital culture.
Thanks @eric_andersen!
4 comments:
Dear Joshua, I think you really got to the point here. It's always good to read such great observations from abroad. What we need, if you let me say, is more in-depth reporting from people living in different countries, not secondary-source reporting as we're used to. Best regards. Rebêlo. (www.rebelo.org)
Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Rebêlo. I'm no expert on Brazil, but it really bothers me when reporters assume that anyone who has some familiarity with a country is an expert on all aspects of that country. In Brazil's case, I could name a dozen experts inside Brazil who could have contributed to this article in a meaningful way and made it much better and informative.
Abraços
while Green's opinion is clearly biased by its research, your opinion that the Brazilian interes in digital media is in the DNA of our culture is almost as good as nothing.
the cultural diversity present in Brazilian culture adds to its interest in digital media as a cheap and accessible form of cultural expression.
Green's argument finds its way when you come to think about the lack of both Public Radio or Public Television, as there are no other media where Brazilian citizens can freely express themselves. Green misses the economic drive towards digital media, as the cheapest technology Brazilians can have access to.
Green also misses two very important players: publicty, which pushed the drive of free access through ad-sponsored telephone connections; the LAN houses, computer centers that rent computers for internet or gaming use.
LAN houses also come as evidence of sahring culture that has its root in the lifestyle of most of Brazilian lower classes but that shows itself on middle-to-high classes p2p filesharing practices.
You make excellent points. As I said, I'm no expert on Brazil, I only lived there. We agree that TIME Magazine's choice of interviewing Prof. Green, was poor, when there were so many better alternatives to choose from. For one of the best-read magazines in the world, TIME did a disservice to its readers.
Post a Comment