New Media and USAID

Web 2.0 technology is becoming ubiquitous and the development community is finally catching up, albeit slowly. It is not until recently that the US government development arm (USAID) has realized that it too needs to jump on the bandwagon of social networking and web 2.0 technology to market its brands, projects, and mission. But like anything else with the US government, USAID is miles behind. It’s true that you can google USAID and find a website for each country it operates in, but its also true that the quality and accessibility of the website is leaps and bounds behind the private sector. It’s also true that some USAID programs have facebook sites and Youtube videos posted online, but they are not easily searchable, key words aren’t embedded, and the metadata is weak. USAID needs to be more aggressive and effective in its use of web 2.0 technology to make its results known. Young adults are more open to the idea of using taxpayer money to provide assistance overseas . Young adults are also the largest market currently using web 2.0 on a regular basis. In my opinion, USAID has a critical opportunity right now to make its better known, gather more support for funding, and share its message with a huge audience for a relatively low price tag.  Facebook, YouTube, Tumblr, Flickr, Delicious, Myspace, Foursquare, Twitter, etc. are tools that the US government needs to learn to use in much the same form as Word, Excel, Outlook, and email. Why? Because the old rules of marketing, PR, and branding no longer apply in this new global technological economy/society. You can no longer solely rely on press releases, TV ads, radio spots, and billboards to connect with a targeted audience. USAID needs to better communicate impact and the only way to do that effectively in todays day and age is to use web 2.0 technology.

USAID communication officers from the US Embassies around the world recently met at a conference in Washington DC to discuss how to better communicate the impact USAID is achieving in projects overseas. The outcome of the conference was to begin paving the way to use web 2.0 to market its USAID programs. But how? no one had any real answers.  In my opinion, Director Shah needs to do three things: 1) appoint someone to develop a manual to give projects guidelines on how to use web 2.0 to communicate success.  As of now, there is no standard and no good examples that are widely disseminated. The ADS completely ignores that new media technology exists! Second thing that should happen —each project needs to have a requirement for a communication specialist either in the RFA or the RFP. This key component of project staff is too often overlooked and communication is too often an after-thought. And finally, USAID should launch a huge web 2.0 campaign to garner the support of young adults and new media users. The benefits of such a campaign are enormous but the window of opportunity is closing fast…

The Living Proof Project

The TV commercial for the Living Proof Project (linked here)–sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is currently being shown on major network stations across the US ( ABC/CBS/NBC/etc. ).

This commercial is the best development communication of its kind. It is also the first time in my lifetime that I have seen a positive commercial which advertises development assistance across the globe to the American people. This is groundbreaking people! Never has there been a US-wide campaign which seeks to sponsor, justify, and captivate the success of American aid in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East.

Most importantly, this commercial is effective. The people’s faces are warm, healthy & smiling. You don’t see anyone with inflated stomachs, flies in their eyes, and expressions of depression and deep depravity –like we’re used to seeing on all of those Christain infomercials where they ask you to give a dollar a day to some kid in a poor country and you get their picture in return as compensation for your supposed generosity.

The truth of the matter is, the commercial is correct. We are making a difference. Health projects across the developing world ARE impacting people’s lives. The American Public deserves to hear that AND they NEED to hear that.

Moreover, what strikes me most about the commercial is that it fails to distinguish between public and private donors in the developing world that are providing aid assistnace. The commercial gives credit to everyone who is working to make a difference. This is awesome!

THANK YOU BILL AND MELINDA GATES…..

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/livingproofproject/Pages/video-gallery.aspx#video=/livingproofproject/Pages/we-are-living-proof.aspx&pager=0

Tobacco Use is Rising in Africa

Anti-smoking activists are racing to head off an explosion of tobacco use in Africa as the world’s major tobacco companies increasingly seek to develop markets free from the kind of limits on sales, marketing and use of tobacco products in the developed world. Smoking rates in Africa have historically remained low as a result of poverty, but the ability of tobacco companies to innovate packaging for the specific African market by allowing Africans to purchase one cigarette at a time, or single sticks, is helping drive up consumption exponentially. The unfortunate point is that, many countries in Africa do not have the social infrastructure, rule of law, or strength of institutions (as we do in the US or in the EU) to campaign against the mega multi national tobacco companies and send them running with their tails between their legs in the courts…

for more info visit Time Magazines’ website  —- TIME

Clinton: Vetting for USAID job ‘ridiculous’

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is blaming an exhaustive White House vetting process for the fact that the Obama administration has not yet named a person to run the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Six months into the administration’s tenure without having appointed someone to the agency’s top spot, Clinton told USAID employees on Monday that several people had turned down the job due to overly burdensome financial and personal disclosure requirements that she called a “nightmare,” “frustrating beyond words” and “ridiculous.”

She also said the White House had turned down her request to announce on Monday that someone — expected by officials to be physician and Harvard University professor Paul Farmer who is well known for his work in Haiti — would be named to the post soon. 

Having been through a security clearance process with the US government, I can attest to the miseries of the vetting process –but Clinton should in no way use this as an excuse for not being able to select and appoint a qualified person to direct one of the most important foreign policy arms of the USG.  Paul farmer would be an awkward fit for the position…to say the least. On the one hand he is amazingly brilliant and has done great work in his life ( I recently read his book Mountains Beyond Mountains); he has long criticized USAID and its way of doing business as ineffective and full of red tape; at the same time he is also extremely arrogant and pompous. The development community is full of pompous overpaid bureaucrats; we dont need another one. Hillary— please keep looking and stop giving poor PR excuses for the lack of movement on this front.

World Healthcare vs. the United States

Debate has increased in the last few weeks about the resiliency of America’s health care system. The House and Senate are trying to make ammends and agree on a comprehensive overhaul of one of the most corrupt health care systems in the world. I am not a public health expert by any means but I have however studied public health and worked in international public health enough to say that 1. US health care is not the best in the world and 2. we have a lot to learn from both developing and devloped countries alike.

Most of Europe has a nationalized healthcare system. Europeans get the care the need at a price they can afford. Peruvians have one of the most developed health care systems in the world. Cuba offers the highest quality care at the cheapest price…FREE. The governments of Ecuador and Brazil take healthcare to the people who live in rural communities deep in the amazon. All the while, Americans are paying a ridiculous percentage of their annual incomes for less than top notch care. There is a widespread myth that healthcare in the US is the best in the world. That is false. Medical companies such as glaxosmithkline, merk, and the ominous PhRMA lobby in Washington have unabatedly convinced most Americans that the US is the best and any change in the healthcare system is a zero sum game that equates to lower technology and a fall in America’s status as the country with the best healthcare technology in the world.

What we need is more informed debate. Somehow, we need to get the message out that there are better alternatives and we should look to other countries as an example. At the present, it seems the US government is taking a very arrogant approach to solving the US healthcare mess — assuming that all the answers lie within US borders. I am dumbfounded by the arrogancy and humbled by all that needs to be done.

The Doha Round saga continues…

The ever pending Doha round of trade talks within the WTO is doomed. Granted I am not the first person to share this opinion, but I have long held out hope and have now officially given up. 

Trade is not even on the white house website’s 24 top agenda items. Moreover, Mexico has already signed and finalized a bilateral trade agreement with the EU, and Canada is in the process of negotiating a similar bilateral as we speak. What incentive is there then for a global trade agreement if countries continue to negotiate bilaterals on a piece meal basis? The “sticky” issues of farming and agriculture remain touchy as ever. And while it is true that President Obama has a lot of political capital, he hasnt shown any signs or any intentions of using it to push a trade agenda. He is going to run into a lot of protectionism in the democratically strong congress & senate — and unless there is some political motivation to sign a bilateral deal (i.e. colombia b/c of drugs and south korea b/c of kim jong il) then the chances of America expanding on its free trade agenda and further growing its export markets are slim to none. Unfortunately this comes at a bad time when the economy most desperately needs more access to foreign markets and impetus for home grown production and innovation.

2009 U.S. Presidential Inauguration — waits for an explanation

Where’s my explanation? And my justification for the disaster of organization displayed by the security teams on the national mall on this historic event?…

As a DC resident for the past three years, I have seen special events in this big-little town come and go, but today’s inauguration was by far the most unorganized catastrophe ever to hit this city. There was an estimated 2 million or more people in town this weekend — all to witness the ever so historic event of the swearing in of President Barrack H. Obama. Without a doubt, the event and all of its side shows was by far the most moving and amazing thing I have ever encountered; however, I am still astonished at the lack of organization displayed by the security teams and the inauguration committee on this historic day.  The city and the federal government had known for weeks that this was going to be a major event and millions of people were going to come to DC to be  a part of history. The crowds should have not come as a surprise to anyone.

Given the exclusiveity of the special tickets distributed by each congressman/woman, I was lucky enough to get my hands on a purple ticket — which suppossedly granted access to the standing room zone in front of the Capital’s reflecting pool. I was thrilled at the possibility to get within camera view of President Obama and not have to stand in front of the national monument with the millions of other people about a mile away from the President to see his speech. When I showed up at the purple ticket gate this morning before the inauguration I was very dissapointed. Little did I know that the same purple ticket was also granted to tens of thousands of other people. The line to get into the security screening at the purple gate was over a mile long and about 10 people wide. The line started on First St. and Constitution Avenue and extended straight through the tunnel out into Virgina as far as the eye could see. People with tickets had been waiting in line since before 5am this morning.  It turns out that the inauguration committee and its brilliant organizers ended up issuings THOUSANDS more tickets than there were seats or standing room available. I have found out that the purple ticket holders werent the only ones to experience this dissapointment. Unfortunately, this is the efficieny and the brilliance of our government at its finest. It makes me angry. Its really not rocket science to understand that IF you have room for X amount of people, you therefore issue X amount of tickets. Today however, they issued tens of thousands of tickets (purple, blue, etc.) and they only had space for a few thousand at most. After people had been standing in line at the purple gate for 4+ hours expecting to see one of the greatest historical speeches ever delivered, we all come to find out at 11:05am that the gates are closed and they are not letting anyone else in.  This is not nearly enough time to go to the mall in front of the national monument to watch the speech from the jumbo trons because that is over 12 blocks away and we also hear by word of mouth from our fellow citizens that they are no-longer allowing people on the mall either. Ironically, the fact that they issued more tickets than they had room for is not what angers me. But what really makes me mad is the lack of respect for people, for their time and dedication, and for history by the security officials or the inauguration organizers. Not one single person was making any effort or any official announcements to all of us left stranded in front of the gate or to anyone on the streets. Not one single official had the audacity to stand up in front of the crowd and speak loudly to tell us the gates were closed and there was no more room. As soon as they shut the gates, the security officials disappeared just like rats when you turn on the kitchen lights at night. Every single secruity official, secret service agent, rent a cop, DC police person, or anyone with any kind of uniform quickly dissapeared and had no answers to our questions and had absolutely no clue about what was going on. Thousands of people just started turning around and walking in the opposite direction headed nowhere fast– it literally looked like a scene in a natural disaster movie where everyone was trying to make a mass exodus out of the city with no idea of where to go. I have never seen so many lost people in one place in my life.  All throughout the day, I heard random people talking about how they had tickets and they couldnt get in. I had expected that the News or the media would have addressed the ticket issue this evening but I am yet to hear an explanation or an official word from anyone. The lack of respect is a disgrace.

The Future of US and Latin American Relations

The Bush administration is leaving behind so much resentment around the world that President-elect Barack Obama might be tempted to put off dealing with the nation’s extremely sour relations with Latin America.

Bolivia, Venezuela, and Ecuador are only the tips of the turmoil. The next four years present a unique opportunity to improve ties with a region that shares key interests and values with the United States. And given how bad relations are right now, it will not take much more than good sense and sensitivity to make progress.

For starters, the Obama administration could gain a lot of good will by supporting more aid for Latin American countries sideswiped by the financial meltdown. Obama should aim for fair and free trade and dump the no regulation principles of the Bush administration. For the sake of American business and American credibility, Congress must pass the trade agreement with Colombia. Congress should also seek to identify and pass other bilateral trade agreements in the region — starting first with Venezuela and Cuba. Declining oil prices, should make negotiations with Venezuela favorable, coupled with the decline of Fidel Castro, it might be time for the US to re-negotiate some of its trade embargos and relations with our southern neighbors.

The repetitive failure of the DOHA rounds and the slumping global economy makes these bilateral agreements all the more important.

Additionally, it would be good to disperse some Peace Corps volunteers in these new found friends. Using the Peace Corps not just as a PR tool, but for a fundamental step in economic development and improved health and education. I would love to see USAID in Cuba. There is so much local capacity in Cuba that a little help from USAID would do wonders for the entire social system.

President Obama….we all know you have great shoes to fill and many challenges to conquer. I hope that our southern neighbors stay within your vision of importance and that over the course of your presidency, the United States is able to take some steps in the right direction when it comes to the issues discussed here.

Luanda Angola

Surprisingly it was nicer than I expected

This is not what I imagined Africa would look like. It is definitely not what I imagined the Angolan coast line would offer. Luanda is a bustling city with lots of business, crime, tons of traffic, and miles and miles of cars waiting in lines at gas stations. Goats, sheep, and chickens regularly roam the streets. Indigenous dialects are spoken right alongside the most perfect beautiful Portuguese. There is good food everwhere, and its the only city in the world where the average person lives on less than a dollar a day and prices are insanely inflated where it is no exaggeration to find that hot dogs cost $25 each and a soda is close to $5 a bottle, and housing is $10,000 a month!

USAID Bolivia

Thoughts and Notes from the field: The USAID Bolivia Communications Activity.

For the first time in the history of USAID in Latin America, there is a widespread PR campaign and promotional effort in Bolivia funded by USAID which aims to deflect any anti-US or anti-USAID sentiments distributed by the Government of Bolivia (GOB) which is led by Mr. Evo Morales.

The project is revolutional. If proven to be effective it could change the way USAID spends its money in Latin American rogue states forever; however, there are many faces which represent the challenges this specific project  and others like it will encounter.

The first of which is within USAID itself. Until now, USAID in Latin America has not paid a contractor to conduct its promotional activities and PR efforts. Normally, both the US Embassy in a given country and USAID employ several communications specialists in each bureau that are tasked to work cohesively to promote USAID, and the United States of America. When USAID Bolivia contracted these activities to an outside contractor and a for-profit American firm, many feathers were ruffled both within the embassy and the mission in La Paz because traditionally “safe” jobs were being outsourced to American firms.

Second, the US Embassy in Bolivia is appalled the US Congress would actually allocate what is supposed to be designated as development funds for the promotion of the United States and it’s foreign aid policy. The project itself is contradictory to the mission statement of USAID. PR is not development. This project and others like it will have to petition vehemently to get funding and support in the future for similar activities, the likelihood of which are very grim.

Third, internally within the project itself and others like it in the future, the local employees who participate in the design of the technical activities risk the longevity of their careers because they are working in support of the US government and against their own president. It will be hard to staff these kinds of projects and harness the necessary local knowledge it takes to make these campaigns and communication efforts effective.

And finally fourth, support for the project becomes even more contradictory becuase Evo Morales recently kicked out the DEA from Bolivia and sent the US Ambassador running back to Washington with his tail between his legs. Shortly thereafter, President Bush told the Bolivian Ambassador he was nolonger welcome in DC and ordered every single member and participating officer of the Peace Corps back to the good ol’ U.S. of A. Now that there is no existing diplomatic relationship between countries, it will be evermore difficult for not only the Bolivia Communications Activity to move forward but also all of the existing USAID projects in country. Should the Bolivian Government discover that the Communications Activity exists, it is very likely that all of the USAID projects in Bolivia will cease to exist almost instantaneously. This last point is critical because it quickly forces one to imagine what Latin America would look like if diplomatic relations were cut in the region and USAID assistance was pulled from all of the leftist-leaning rogue states within our southern borders. Simply put, our southern borders would become breeding grounds for more pronounced terrorism.

The government of Bolivia and other leftist leaning administrations in the region will pose to be one of the greatest external challenges to projects like these. Most specifically in Bolivia, since his inauguration Evo Morales has led a movement within Bolivia that denounces the American way of life, our political motives, and foreign policy. Albeit that in the last 8 years under the Bush administration, there has been a lot of American fallacies to highlight, it is with great honor that I say the US remains a stanch supporter and investor in the Bolivian people. Bolivia represents one of the highest budgets for USAID in Latin America and one of our most important focal points in the region. If Evo decides to suspend the activities of USAID in Bolivia, like he did to the DEA over the last week, there is no question that the people he so vigorously claims to stand up for, will sincerely regret his motives and decisions.

When it comes down to it, like any other politician, Evo Morales is willing to put his personal political grievances before his people. Morales is in many ways just the like the Bush he regularly denounces in the media. What would you say Mr. Morales, if your people began to suffer when you condemned the presence of the single biggest benefactor in your country? What would you say Mr. Morales when your coffee farmers lost their export market? What would you say Mr. Morales when your children had no schools to attend? What would you say Mr. Morales if the US health experts were banned from your country to leave the future of Bolivian health clinics in shambles? What would that big audacious ego of yours say now Mr. Morales…