Check out this new search engine called ads4africa.org – take a good, hard look. Now I’m not in the business of assaulting people’s dreams, or doubting their sincerity; I get much more enjoyment out of being positive, but I find this approach questionable. One of the themes that has emerged in our work so far is that ethical transgressions can be very subtle, but it is often these that are the most sinister. These search engine promoters haven’t even left home, but they are promoting a model that is systemically flawed, and in the process potentially doing more harm than good. Here are some things to think about concerning this website (and yes, I have sent my comments to them).
On their FAQ page is the phrase “Without intervention they are helpless.” This simplistic, patronizing depiction reeks of the white man’s burden. It perpetuates a negative stereotype and an elitist approach which is part of the very cause of the issue they’re trying to address.
What they are creating is a middle man (middle person? middle entity?) which promotes market inefficiencies, and further alienates the givers of “aid” (whatever that is…) from the benefactors (if there are in fact any). They give the money they raise to Kiva, itself another middle man, adding to the already overcrowded number of aid groups (which all run at an operating cost of their own). I suppose it’s better that they give money to a group such as Kiva that has done its homework rather than the alternative, which would be to go and try to fix the “problem” in “Africa” themselves.
Look at the “progress” page. It lists “People helped”. What does that even mean? They claim to be helping people in “Africa”. Ryszard Kapuściński has pointed out that: “Only with the greatest simplification, for the sake of convenience, can we say ‘Africa’. In reality, except as a geographical appellation, Africa does not exist.” Specifics are needed. What people? Where? In what ways? Without more information this really is an empty, meaningless statement.
Go to their blog section – as of this writing, they’ve only talked about improvements made to the site; there is nothing in there about personal growth. Wouldn’t energy and bandwidth be better spent educating themselves or others about why there is a perceived need for aid in the first place?
I think endeavours like this are dangerous, because they are doing the wrong things if they wish to help. They’re doing things in the wrong order. First you get people to understand the issue, then you collaborate (with the people who need help!) to come up with a solution. You can’t fix a problem if you haven’t defined it properly, which this group hasn’t even attempted to do. They’re aware that there is inequality. Good – that’s a start. What’s needed next are concrete proposals to reduce that inequality, in partnership with those who are affected.
The main message I take from this approach is: “expose yourself and everyone in your network to additional advertisements, so you can pat yourself on the back for doing no legitimate work and avoid having to understand a problem that is several orders of magnitude more complex than adding a piece of code to a blog somewhere.”
They are right about one thing. We can have a big impact on the fight against poverty if we all do our part. If someone tells you that you should drop your Google search engine (or anything else for that matter) in favour of a more conscious choice, think twice about whether you are actually helping someone or whether you are simply appeasing your conscience in a way that could do more harm than good.