The Wikimedia Foundation has recently decided upon Alexandria, Egypt as a host city for its upcoming international conference in 2008. Alexandria was one of the finalists voted by Wikimedia’s jury. A friend directed my attention to this blogpost, where the author has lunched an all out attack against holding the conference in Alex. I posted a comment on the post and decided to also post it here for good measure.

Does anyone else find this post incredibly hilarious, if not embarrassing, coming from someone supposedly believes in and staunchly advocates free media, open knowledge and open access to and free flow of information?

I am an Egyptian student with an interest in the aforementioned issues. In fact, I founded a local chapter of the Students for Free Culture organization. My take on this post is that the author has taken some facts with varying degrees of truth, put them together and painted an unbelievably murky image of a country they have probably never been to. In other words, the author has reprocessed second hand information to produce what appears to be a dashing claim of first-hand knowledge which the author (again, probably) does not have. Certain facts with respect to human rights issues acknowledged, Egypt is not the big gulag the thoroughly ill-informed author paints it to be.

This comment is not to deny some basic facts that should be acknowledged from the outset (with reservations). The LGBT community is oppressed in Egypt. Freedom of the media is stifled (However, media multiplicity and diversity of opinion do exist). Debating the degrees of oppression of minorities, freedom of the press and other elements is not the point of this comment and would serve no significant purpose here. But take the following point were the author’s “arguments” get from the merely pathetic to the downright hilarious.

“Egypt is in too close proximity to several areas which are in a near constant war: Israel and Palestine, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan…”.

Ok, this is the whole “don’t go there because it is close to things that blow up” cautionary line that is all too familiar from those who claim esoteric world knowledge while forever cocooned within the comfortably familiar. You claim to be a supporter, even an activist, of open media, yet what you write is marked by the unmistakable signs of someone who’s source of news is the naively innocent and passive intake of canned, ready-for-consumption reports of most corporate networks.

Oh, by the way, I love the way you have put Egypt in a “too close proximity” to the hotspots in seven countries strewn across Africa, Asia and Eurasia in one lump. I applaud this ability for shameless over generalization without even glancing at the world atlas. Assuming the geographic atrocities you have committed are true, now, this is too dangerous because someone can lob a grenade in, say, Kabul and glass windows would shatter in Cairo, right? Wait, the hilarity continues…

“...not to mention holding this is the Middle East puts (for the most part) Americans at risk and the rest at risk for a prime target of violence or an attack. Was safety considered when making this decision?”

I’ve got some news for you: The “Middle East” is not another planet; it is part of the world you live in. Also, define “the rest” in the “Americans and the rest” you talk about? Does it also include people who live in the Middle East, or those just visiting, Americans included?

He ran out of arguments based on human rights issues, so he turns to the jury:

“Who are these people on the “jury”? I mean I know their names, but who are they. Are they wealthy? Travel the world frequently? Seems like it because in my opinion this place was picked because it was somewhere they decided it would be nice to visit. More than half of all wikimedians will likely NOT be able to afford the trip, in some cases from literally on the other side of the globe.”

Had it been decided that this conference be held in, say Nice, France, would you have still been of the same opinion regarding the affordability of the trip for most wikimedians? And by wikimedians, do you mean wikimedians who live in America, or all over the world? Because, you know, if Wikimania 2008 was to be held in Atlanta, GA, it would have been equally expensive for other people from elsewhere in the world to attend? What about Cape Town, South Africa which was also a candidate? It has one of the highest crime rates in the world, would you have been similarly concerned about “safety” if it won the bid? Do you expect the jury all to be biased because they all though Egypt would be a cool place to visit gratis?

Building an argument based upon such amplification of certain facts and over generalization of some issues and blatant ignorance of others is, in my opinion, inexcusable for someone who presumably considers themselves advocates of freedom of information and media. Why are you “entirely opposed” rather than “strongly concerned”, for example?

More importantly and pertinent to the subject at hand: why deprive countries that are in more in need of attention relevant to issues of freedom of media and information from such opportunities? What is the point then of having such conferences in areas that already enjoy high degrees of freedom in the aforementioned issues? Are you going to promote the free access to knowledge in the “Third World” (another one of those icky words I hate to use) by remote control? Why alienate vast swatches of activists in such areas who would otherwise never have the chance to participate in such events?

I am done here. I will end quoting the words of your fellow countryman who commented above: “…pull your head out of your ass and stop being a paranoid American.”