网络抗议有力量

    本月18日，维基百科网站（Wikipedia）为了抗议美国参、众两院提出的反盗版立法而关闭网站服务一天。但当天下午（美国东部时间），我还是能够浏览保存在谷歌（Google）缓存中的维基百科页面。完成该操作轻而易举。因此，维基百科此举并未能完全有效地阻断人们对其网站的访问。但是，它确实有效地促进了人们对上述两条法律的关注，同时激发了进一步的抗议活动。这才是重点。

    一周多之前，美国众议院提出的《反网络盗版法》（Stop Online Privacy Act，SOPA）和参议院提出的《保护知识产权法》（Protect IP Act，PIPA）开始并没有引起广泛的关注。到了18日，它们却占据了传统和社交媒体的头条。事实上，这两个法案本身并没有发生任何重大的变化，一切只是因为它们引发的抗议活动。包括维基百科在内，一大批网站都在18日暂停了服务。

    可以想见，这场网络抗议活动势必会引发种种冷嘲热讽和反击行为。“《反网络盗版法》的支持者们将无法访问Moveon.org（自由组织网站——译注），到时他们便会明白，他们等于是搬起石头砸自己的脚。”《滚石》杂志（Rolling Stone）的时政记者蒂姆•狄更森在Twitter上写道。他完全没有领会这场抗议活动的要点，而且，不明就里的大有人在。抗议活动并不是要惩罚这两个法案的支持者，而是促使人们关注这两条法律，深入了解它们的内容。【《财富》杂志（Fortune）的母公司时代华纳集团（Time Warner）也是上述法律的支持者。】

    每次发生在线抗议或启蒙运动都会出现这种情况。无论何时，当某种思潮开始在Facebook等网站上传播时，一定会在世界范围内引发类似的运动。2010年，在一场提升反虐待儿童意识的运动中，人们纷纷把自己在社交网站上的档案照片换成了他们最喜欢的卡通儿童形象。当时批评者众口一词地讽刺说：“毫无疑问，在Facebook上使用卡通照片，一定会终止虐待儿童的行为发生。”

    但是，事实上，没人敢说一定会；同样，今天也没人敢断言说眼下的网络抗议活动就能阻止国会通过反网络盗版法和保护知识产权法。（但是，鉴于人们18日的反应，抗议活动确实有可能改变这两个法案命运的因素，因为现在关注这两个法案具体内容的人已经越来越多。甚至连一些国会议员似乎也已经开始因此改变看法。）就算只有少数几个人向反虐待儿童慈善组织捐款，或者通过这个活动加深了对这个问题的认识，那就说明Facebook当时的活动起到了作用。

    依托于互联网的启蒙运动之所以容易招致冷嘲热讽，原因很可能正是在于它们依赖的平台是互联网。参与这类抗议活动的人只是静静地坐在电脑前，而非昂首挺胸走上街头游行，因此整个活动的严肃性或多或少地打了些折扣。但是，如果出发点就是要唤醒人们的意识，那么，互联网堪称当今最强大的实用工具。历尽千辛万苦并不是目的，目的是要传播信息。

    I just looked at a Google cache version of a Wikipedia page. It's easy to do that, so today's blackout of the online encyclopedia, in protest of proposed anti-piracy legislation, isn't totally effective in blocking access to the site. But it is effective in making people aware of the legislation and in spurring further protest, which is the whole point.

    A week ago, the House's proposed Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA) and the Senate's proposed Protect IP Act (PIPA) were getting relatively light attention. Today, they're dominating both the traditional and social media. Nothing significant has happened with the legislation itself -- it's simply the blackouts. Wikipedia is just one of a many sites that have gone dark today.

    Predictably, the campaign has spurred cynical retorts. "SOPA supporters wont be able to access Moveon.org -- that'll show em," tweeted Rolling Stone political reporter Tim Dickinson. He is far from alone in missing the point entirely. The idea isn't to punish supporters of the bills; it's to inform people of what's in those bills by drawing attention to them. (Fortune's parent company, Time Warner, is a supporter of the legislation.)

    This happens whenever there are online protests or awareness campaigns. Would-be world-wise types are sure to weigh in whenever an awareness meme spreads on Facebook, for example. In 2010, people replaced their profile photos with images of their favorite cartoon kids in a child abuse awareness campaign. "Oh, sure," came the above-it-all responses, "posting cartoon pictures on Facebook will definitely end child abuse."

    But of course, nobody said it would, just like nobody is saying that today's blackouts by themselves will kill SOPA/PIPA (though, given the reaction today, it really could turn out to be the thing that turns the tide -- because now many, many more people know what's in the bills. And now it appears that some congressional minds are being changed.). If even just a handful of people donated to anti-child-abuse charities, or were simply made more aware of the problem, then the Facebook meme worked.

    It could be that Internet-based awareness movements draw criticism simply because they're Internet-based. Since the people taking part in them are sitting at their desks as opposed to marching in the streets, that somehow makes the whole thing seem less serious. But if the idea is to inform people, the Internet is the most powerful tool available. The point isn't to put oneself through as much hardship as possible -- the point is to spread information.