Dispatches from the religious left

by Frederick Clarkson

  In the examples below, we take the perspective of an organiza tion or an individual wishing to communicate with an audience. From this starting point, activists can create an effective online strategy to promote the larger vision of a diverse and engaged Religious Left.

  One of the advantages of new media is that it allows the Religious Left to counter the influence of the conservative media. We already have examples to prove it. Blogs like Daily Kos and The HujJington Post have audiences that rival that of Fox News. Exciting new technologies will soon make it possible for anyone to watch Internet video on a normal television set. Many social networking sites (as we'll see below) are extending their reach onto cell phones and other mobile devices. Another advantage is that new media provides opportunities for users of different ages, faiths, and backgrounds to share ideas and build relationships.

  In this essay, we provide a brief introduction to the exciting range of new media tools available to the Religious Left, with examples of specific services which organizations can use to get started, as well as describing some of the most important characteristics of each service. We've also divided new media into two categories-content-creation tools and content-promotion tools. To some extent this is an arbitrary distinction. You could argue that all of these tools can be used for both content creation and promotion; but each has, particular strengths in our experience, and that is why we organize them as we do, as a guide for people thinking about crafting a balanced communications strategy.

  CONTENT-CREATION

  • Blogs. (Tools: Blogger and Word press)

  Blogs are popular because they are easy to set up and administer (although a successful blog requires a significant investment of time spent updating content and networking with other bloggers). They are also easy for readers to access (all that's required is Internet access and a computer), and allow readers to communicate with one another and with the author through comments. Group blogs are websites that allow multiple users to create blogs, as well as comment on and rate one another's blogs. Usually a group blog focuses on a specific topic, providing a gathering place for participants with shared interests. A great example of this is Street Prophets where writers from many different faith traditions discuss progressive politics.

  • Podcasts and vlogs. (Tools: iTunes, Miro)

  Podcasts and vlogs are similar to blogs, in that they are chronologically-organized, regularly-updated displays of content, with a space for comments. In the case of podcasts, the content is an audio file; in the case of vlogs, the content is a video. With software like iTunes or Miro, the audience can easily subscribe to such lists. When listeners subscribe to podcasts, they can download the latest video or audio file onto an iPod, and play it at any time, such as during their morning and evening commute.

  • Content management systems. (Tools: Drupal,.Joomla, and Plone)

  A content management system is a software product which allows you to easily edit the content on your website. Thanks to free, open source content management systems, it is possible to deploy and frequently update a sophisticated website at a very reasonable cost.

  • Text messaging and microblogging. (Tools: Twitter)

  The cost of cell phone text messaging has fallen drastically in recent years, allowing Twitter subscribers to receive a constant torrent of text messages at low cost. Since the limitations of cell phone technology restrict such text messages to around 160 characters, messages usually sent via Twitter, known as "tweets," tend to be very short and have a spur-of-the-moment, personal nature. Twitter can also be used to simply update readers of new content on your blog or podcast.

  CONTENT-PROMOTION TOOLS

  • Social networking sites. (Examples: Facebook, MySpace, and Friendster)

  Social networking sites allow users to maintain a personalized home page, or "profile," establish online friendships with others, and share information with one another. It is common practice for organizations, candidates and book authors to create profiles on social networking sites, and to encourage their members, constituents, and fans to connect with those profiles. In fact, Facebook recently launched functionality specifically geared to this practice. Organizations may now create "Pages" and Facebook members may become "fans" of these pages. Online relationships of this sort allow Facebook users to promote a cause to their friends. They also provide organizations with a way to find and communicate with prospective members.

  • Social bookmarking. (Examples: Digs Stumble Upon, andDel.icio.us)

  On a social bookmarking site, users create accounts and keep track of sites they like. While the primary purpose of these sites is to keep track of one's favorite websites, articles, and other online media, these sites also allow users to establish friendships with one another, like social networking sites. Users may share their accumulated bookmarks with friends, and discover interesting sites their friends have marked. These sites can be also be used by an organization's members to send organizational messages to their friends and colleagues.

  • Media sharing sites. (Examples: YouTube and Flickr)

  These sites allow users to upload photos, video, or other multimedia content, share it with other users, as well as rate and comment on the material. Moreover, users can establish online friendships, and can browse the content their friends have posted or ranked highly. Finally, users can display content from a media sharing site anywhere else on the web, without worrying about the cost of storing and maintaining that content. This allows an organization to communicate a compelling message in a rich format, as well as receive rich media, like videos and photographs, from their members.

  • Political networking sites. (Examples: DFA-Link, Party Builder, and MyBarackObama)

  There are a small number of social networking sites that are specifically designed to support the work of grassroots political organizers. These sites make it easy for activists to gather into local groups, plan and promote events and meetings, send email to one another, share documents, raise money, pressure politicians, gather petition signatures, and do many of the other important tasks required for effective political organizing.

  CRAFTING A STRATEGY AND KNOWING WHAT TO EXPECT

  You may notice a striking similarity among these tools. All of them feature dynamic, user-generated content. Most have a low start-up cost. Accounts on Blogger, Facebook, Twitter, and other services are free. And almost all of them require only a low-level of technical skill. Still, organizers will want to ensure that people know the basics before assuming that they will use these tools. Therefore, some training may be required.

  More than that, we should emphasize that these tools are interactive, helping people learn from one another, share information and analysis, debate and more. These are also tools for political mobilization. Indeed, some are already in use by many organizations large and small, as well as by candidates for public office.

  Since this sounds so promising, you may be thinking, "Great, Monday I'll start my blog, Tuesday I'll set up my Facebook account... and by Saturday, my media empire will be complete and the donations will start rolling in... " However, while almost all of these new media tools have a low barrier to entry and facilitate action, creating a successful promotion effort in any one of them requires a significant investment of time spent creating new content and networking with users.

  Thus, we recommend starting small. Learn to use one or two tools well, devoting time to consistently adding new content through those tools, and responding to user feedback. It may make sense to have one tool (such as a blog) where you put your primary content and accept feedback from constituents; and a second tool (such as Facebook or StumbleUpon) that you use to reach additional users and promote the primary content. Different tools will work for different organizations, naturally; there's no "one size fits all" solution. To devise a good online communication strategy, you need to start by identifying your core goals, determine who your audience is and how they can be reached, and choose tools that allow you to mobilize your constitu
ents to meet your goals. Along the way, expect to get feedback, and don't expect it all to be constructive and positive. (Or even correctly spelled.) But do listen carefully to what people are saying-and respond. Interactive media provides a learning and skill building environment, and the feedback and advice you get can be invaluable.

  In closing, it is simpler than you might think to compose a successful online strategy using these tools-and to contribute to how the Religious Left as a whole uses new media to create progressive change.

  THE RELIGIOUS LEFT'S LONG-TERM

  FUNDING CHALLENGE

  REV. PETER LAARMAN

  I will first state the challenge as succinctly as I can, then turn to the broken conversation between progressive religious leaders and (mostly) secular progressive funders, and then offer a menu of capacity-related vehicles that merit sustained funding. What I mean by "capacity" is the institutional and financial infrastructure that undergirds the work of any organization over the long haul. The strength of this infrastructure ultimately determines whether an institution or network of institutions can carry out a mission that is greater than the sum of short-term, albeit worthwhile, projects.

  Here then is a core problem for the Religious Left: Much of the funding that is currently available puts at risk the mission, integrity and long-term transformational capacity of worthy and hard-working organizations. I refer to the well-documented reality that while progressive religious social justice groups can sometimes get funding for specific short-term projects relating to the donor's agenda, they are almost never funded to build their long-term organizational capacities. Because most Religious Left groups-and I mean groups that bring a sharp progressive critique of the distribution of wealth and power-are small and under-resourced to begin with, they can fatally weaken their existing capacity by chasing unattainable money or by agreeing to serve a particular funder's agenda in ways that compromise their core mission. Chasing the available money can also confuse and alienate their core individual supporters and boards of directors.

  Project-related grants normally support one-or two-year projects and allow a maximum of 15 percent in "overhead" for the support of the group's administrative costs. Secular funders can be particularly vigilant in scrutinizing the overhead portion, because the last thing they want to be doing is supporting "religion" per se. Many leaders of grant-seeking groups I have interviewed believe that the allowable overhead in project grants should move toward the 40 percent level in order to nurture and not retard organizational development.

  Before I turn to what I call the broken conversation between secular funders and Religious Left organizations, let me clear away some possible misunderstandings.

  1. I am necessarily generalizing in this essay. I do not mean to disparage those secular funders who already see the strategic value of supporting progressive religious organizing and who do, in fact, make capacitybuilding grants to progressive religious groups.

  2. Leaders of religious non-profits who are ineffective fundraisers are often too quick to blame the funders; or worse, to impute an anti-religious bias even when there is zero evidence to support such an imputation.

  3. I'm not discussing the funding of faith-based community organizing in this essay. For three decades, secular and religious funders have poured many millions into the organizing efforts of Saul Alinsky's three institutional progeny: the Industrial Areas Foundation, the Gamaliel Foundation, and the PICO National Network. These groups enjoy a relatively strong fund ing base, but in my view they are unlikely to become a strong public voice for major social change. They tend to stay under the public policy radar, focusing instead on winning small concrete victories for poor communities-a worthy activity but not a prophetic one.

  4. I am also not addressing the funding of traditional denominational structures, seminaries, and parachurch organizations that may have a progressive tilt but that are not primarily focused on politics and public policy. My focus is on funding for what I would call "outsider" organizations, not inside players.

  Turning now to the broken conversation:

  Many secular funders are unable to distinguish adequately between foam-at-the-mouth Fundamentalism and a reasoned progressive faith. Those who have drunk deeply at the wells of Sam Harris or Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins tend to be contemptuous of all people of faith. To them it's all dangerous hokum.

  On the other side of the broken conversation are Religious Left leaders who may be equally mistrustful and may also feel that the importance of their work is so self-evident that there is no need to make a case for long-term funding. Everyone knows of small progressive religious groups that waste time and postage sending poorly-framed proposals to major foundations, only to take the lack of response as evidence of ignorance or bias or both within the grantmaking community.

  We can begin to fix the broken conversation by focusing on work being done by the Religious Left that intersects the primary concerns of progressive funders. For example, Religious Left activists recognize and deplore the decay of healthy civic discourse and the measurable decline in civic participation over recent decades. Like progressive funders, Religious Left leaders seek to counter corrosive cynicism while still acknowledging and even highlighting the nasty reality that much of contemporary politics boils down to well-heeled interest groups gaming the system to their own advantage and profit.

  Here are some ways by which the Religious Left helps revitalize a democratic politics:

  • Progressive religious groups equip people to engage issues in the public square and do so in a respectful and potentially persuasive way-in a way that is antithetical to the shouting of both the Religious Right and also of some parts of the Secular Left.

  • Progressive religion is not an "interest group": its "interest" is in achieving a healthy, functioning, society with opportunity for all. In this it differs sharply from the justly-loathed interest groups that show no concern for the commonwealth.

  • Progressive religious groups have a deep understanding of the need for separation of church and state woven into their DNA. These groups are uniformly against so-called "faith-based initiatives" because of the way these subsidies to religious groups lead to religious and or gender/sexual discrimination. Because they have religious reasons for opposing such state subsidies and all theocratic currents, they cannot easily be dismissed as "godless secularists" and the spawn of Satan.

  • Because progressive religious groups renew people's hopes and replenish their energies even while taking a realistic view of entrenched evil power, they provide a strong antidote to despair and cynicism wit in the common culture.

  Another area of important convergence: progressive funders are focused today on complex social issues-survival issues-that cannot be solved in the absence of the kind of deep-level cultural change that the Religious Left seeks to catalyze. Three (among many) such issues are climate change and sustainability, the U.S. military-imperial stance toward the rest of the world, and the corrosive "culture of distraction" represented by proliferating junk media and unchecked consumerism-a culture that fatally undermines the educational system and threatens the health of democracy itself.

  • Progressive religion brings to bear a profound critique of the notion that twenty-first century Americans are somehow entitled to lives of unlimited consumption. As Chris Hedges has written, belief in God may not be essential but belief in "original sin" is in fact increasingly essential in order for Americans to start recognizing limits to their consumption and also start recognizing the crucial difference between a truly good life and a life stuffed with goods. More than this, progressive religion contains within it a strong critique of unjust wealth that readily lends itself to a sweeping critique of free market dogma. This critique of market fundamentalism matters strategically at a time when people are finally seeing how so-called free trade has mainly benefited economic elites and entrenched corporate interest while leaving everyone else worse off and contributing greatly to the looming environmental c
atastrophe.

  • Progressive religion is uncompromising in teaching that it is not just particular wars but the entire war system (a system rooted in patriarchy, misogyny, imperial hubris, and bad religion) that now needs to be scrutinized and transformed. In particular, progressive religion supplies a much-needed tonic against the delusional and dangerous idea that the United States enjoys a special divine providence and is thus exempt from having to explain itself or show respect for other peoples and cultures. Progressive religion shatters the myth of America's "original innocence" that has led to so much folly and caused so much grief and suffering over the centuries.

  • Progressive religion militates against the culture of distraction by creating intimate spaces in which people can help each other escape both the false consciousness of consumerism and the shrill sloganeering and hucksterism of the corporate media-what Robert Jay Lifton once called "the thought-terminating cliche."

  I have sketched the convergence of core interest between secular funders and Religious Left organizers. Funders rightly want to know exactly how good social outcomes can result from this convergence. They want to see some vehicles for turning the Religious Left's righteous passion into righteous performance.

  Here is a brief listing of potentially potent vehicles and tools that are mainly missing from the progressive religious armamentarium today-vehicles that, if fully funded, would make that armamentarium much more strategically effective.

  • Web-based resources. Growing numbers of progressive faith bloggers and a few decent web sites are out there now, but there is nothing with anything close to the depth, scale, and reach required in this thoroughly wired era. We need something approaching the richness and speed of The Hujjington Post-something with breaking news, commentary, blogs, humor, and lots of culture criticism.