Our use of technology for the Everest protest is covered in a story from today’s New York Times titled Conquering the Peak Test of Technology.
Mr. Sjogren speculated that a climber could use the phone to shoot a brief video clip, process it with a P.D.A. (laptops fail at Everest heights) and then beam it directly to a Web site.
“The threshold is so low, it is very possible that someone has done it,” Mr. Sjogren said.
In late April, protesters at the base camp worked with the same kind of equipment to broadcast the unfurling of a banner against China’s control of Tibet. As described on an activist Web site, realitysandwich.com, the protesters recorded the event and at the same time transmitted it to a MacBook 20 feet away. The file was compressed, sent via satellite to another computer run by Students for a Free Tibet, then uploaded to YouTube and other sites. The protesters were spotted and detained before being expelled.
“Because we knew we were probably going to be arrested, we needed to get the footage out live,” said one of the protesters, according to the activist Web site.
Our inclusion in the article came from the reporter reading about the protest in the Reality Sandwich article I blogged about previously.
You can read the full NYTimes article here
SFT Daily News Briefing June 12 2007
1. Outcry over Tibetan herders’ eviction (The Seattle Times 06.12.07)
China is forcing nomadic Tibetan herders to settle in towns to clear land for development, leaving many unable to earn a living, a human-rights group reports.
2. Athlete Wanted Anyone??? (KPIX TV CBS5.com 06.12.07)
In late July and early August of 2008 San Jose State University will serve as the team-processing center as 600 athletes pass through on their way to the 2008 Beijing China Olympics.
SFT Daily News Briefing June 11th 2007
1. Child Labor Making Olympics Gear (International Business Times June 11 2007)
Backpacks, caps and other licensed products for the 2008 Beijing Olympics are being made in Chinese factories that use child labor and force employees to work long hours for less than minimum wage, a report released Sunday said.
2. Tibetans riot over exploitation of sacred mountain (Reuters June 11 2007)
Hundreds of Tibetans rioted in a remote, sparsely populated area of southwest China recently to stop exploitation of a mountain they consider sacred, several local residents said on Monday.
3. China forcing Tibetan nomads to settle in towns (AP June 11 2007)
China is forcing nomadic Tibetan herders to settle in towns to clear land for development, leaving many unable to earn a living, a human rights group said in a report issued Sunday.
4. Waving flags sparks ejection (Salt Lake Tribune June 10 2007)
Fans who were kicked out of an exhibition soccer game between the Chinese national team and Real Salt Lake say it was because they stirred up a political controversy by waving the flag of Tibet.
I sometimes wonder if the rulers of Chinese-occupied Tibet have read George Orwell’s 1984, as any good dictator should. If so, they’d be familiar with the concept of “doublethink,” which is “holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. … to deny the existence of objective reality.” Certainly in the 1950s, the Chinese rulers who invaded Tibet doublethought by believing that they were “peacefully liberating” a grateful Tibet from foreign imperialists, while simultaneously carrying out a military campaign to defeat the Tibetan army, supply an occupation force, and then fight a spreading guerilla resistance movement.
But given how much China has changed since the Mao years, does China still doublethink about Tibet? The answer – unsurprising to people familiar with how retrograde China’s rule in Tibet is – is “yes”.
An example of doublethink that would make Big Brother and Chairman Mao proud is how the rulers of Chinese-occupied Tibet claim to be the “protectors” of Tibetan culture and religion, while simultaneously waging a multi-pronged fight against Tibetan religion (which China sees as a continuing threat because it reinforces Tibetans’ separate national identity). Consider the contrast between two recent developments: