Come Clean 4 Congo Video Contest
You’ve probably heard of “conflict diamonds.” Diamonds that come from a war zone, typically in Africa, whose export fuels civil conflict. On the one hand, it’s the funds from the diamonds that allow the participants to get the money they need to arm and pay their troops. And on the other hand, the ostensible political issues behind civil conflict are often really just a pretext for securing control of diamonds. Or, of course, other valuable natural resources. For example, in Congo—scene of a long-running and extraordinarily deadly series of conflicts—warring factions are often after metals such as tin and tantalum that are needed to make electronic devices such as cell phones.
But unlike “conflict diamonds” the phrase “conflict metals that are used in electronic devices” doesn’t have much public profile. The Enough Campaign is running an effort to raise awareness of the issue, and they’re working in partnership with YouTube. The idea, basically, is to get people to make videos about the subject. Videos like this:
Submissions will be judged by an exciting celebrity panel of Wim Wenders, Ryan Gosling, and Sonya Walger:
Design the best video that raises awareness about the link between our cell phones and the violence in Congo, and we will fly you to LA (from within the U.S.) where your winning video will be screened at a red carpet event to mark the occasion. The winning video will also be featured on the Enough Project’s websites and YouTube’s contest page.
Here’s a paper and another one if you want some more detailed information on the subject.
13 Responses to “Come Clean 4 Congo Video Contest”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
May 18th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
This looks like a contest somebody would have who’s trying to parody liberals. OK, they’ve succeeded in raising my awareness. This now goes at #6074 on my liberal care list, right below unionizing Whole Foods.
May 18th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Of course with diamonds the fact that the only reason diamonds have any value at all is because of the monopoly practices of DeBeers adds another element.
May 18th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
I don’t think it’s fair to put diamonds, whose alleged rarity is only a factor of monopoly control and the biggest marketing scam of the 20th century, on the same level as metals used in practical products. Sure we don’t NEED cell phones or other consumer electronics, and diamonds do have practical, commercial purposes. But most people that buy diamonds really don’t need them at all (certainly not a diamond vs. any other type of precious stone).
May 18th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Does anyone know what we, as consumers, are actually supposed to do about this particular problem? Not buying cell phones doesn’t seem like an idea that’s ever going to really catch on.
May 18th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
The comparison with conflict diamonds is legitimate. It doesn’t matter whether the mineral is made expensive by an oligopoly or by technological need, certainly not to the people in the areas affected.
The “what we should do” message is in the video — get companies to stop using the minerals that come from war zones. Action could also be taken through the UN (I think there have been ineffective resolutions already, though). It has taken years but a worldwide regime has managed to reduce the demand for ivory. Similarly it took years for the idea of conflict diamonds to really sink into anyone’s consciousness. I hope we can do better.
May 18th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
lakefxdan: It certainly does matter. There hasn’t been Approx. 70 years of branding 3-month worth of one’s salary of tungsten as a necessity to get married in style. Where the demand comes from is important on these issues. Tungsten etc. are commodities, but diamonds, because of branding, are a luxury item. It is a lot easier to target a luxury item, because there are enough wealthy, informed people who might be willing to give up that luxury.
May 18th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
While what you say about other natural resources is true, Matt, they are no near as fungible as diamonds. One cannot smuggle a hundred tons of tin ore to east Asia as easily as a few packets of multi-carat, uncut diamonds into Europe. Though we could significantly reduce the profitability of “blood diamonds” by breaking cartel(DeBeers) monopoly that keeps diamond prices artificially high.
May 18th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
But unlike “conflict diamonds” the phrase “conflict metals that are used in electronic devices” doesn’t have much public profile.
That is largely because there isn’t an equivalent company like DeBeers that profits from promoting its monopoly as some type of social good.
May 18th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
The problem with “conflict metals” is that the industry could be a great source of legitimate employment, but now many large industrial buyers of raw materials won’t purchase anything coming out of Africa because of these moral concerns. This means that legitimate businesses that actually pay their workers can’t be built up. Instead, the only groups that can make a profit are those with the shady connections to smuggle their minerals to somewhere else.
As with many issues in Africa, it comes down to security. It’s better to directly engage violent groups rather than to choke off all commerce as a way of fighting indirectly.
May 18th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Very interesting.
Tom, it may not be realistic to ask people to give up their cellphones, but they could help the environment by not getting a new one so often.
May 19th, 2009 at 1:45 am
Given that Sonya Walger got bumped off on Terminator by “metal”, this seems appropriate.
I can understand their point, but I also understand the point made above that killing the entire industries in those countries isn’t going to help the people involved.
Now it they do it just to raise awareness of the Congo situation, that would make some sense. But pursuing a policy of boycotting the country’s industries, at least if you can’t target the specific mines run by warlords or whatever, isn’t going to help anybody.
May 19th, 2009 at 8:40 am
I have looked into trying to make sure that the electronic products I design do not contribute to the problems, and can say with certainty that it is impossible. I specify tantalum capacitors, because they are the only technology for providing the capacitance the circuit needs over the temperature range and lifetime expected of the device. The manufacturer buys capacitors from whomever sells them cheapest this month. The capacitors are made from tantalum obtained from whomever sells it cheapest this month. Even if I wanted to specify capacitors made from tantalum obtained from sources outside Africa, there would be no way of assuring this.
May 20th, 2009 at 9:21 am
Before conclusions are jumped to in these comments, I suggest you read the Enough Project’s comprehensive plan and look at the current legislation involved. These are going to be the vehicles that actually get the job done when popular consumer backing occurs through your videos.
The goal is transparacy along the supply lines of many mineral extractions in conflict zones. Legislation in Congress has been circulated for this task for years, and corporations themselves can find out who is making purchasing decisions.
Your videos effect other minerals such as gold that fuel conflict. This is monumental.