[liberationtech] Why Bluecoat?

[Griffin Boyce]

On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kate Krauss <katie at critpath.org> wrote:

> To me, the real question is, *If* Bluecoat, why are things going so well
> for them when they are a 45 minute drive from activists in San Francisco?
> Happy to explain--off this list--what this means in terms of political
> strategy and offline, nonviolent direct action.
>
> This is definitely not an indictment of any group--there's amazing
> activism going on an a zillion fires to put out.
>
> But there are great opportunities to be explored.
>
> Kate Krauss
> (formerly of ACT UP Golden Gate, a group that successfully targeted major
> companies on the peninsula, from SF)
>

  Seconded. Cisco is based in San Jose as well, and they are certainly not
immune from criticism, given that they sell censorship/filtering equipment
to pretty much anyone.  I've stood in the street with an anti-Bluecoat
sign, but in terms of long-term damage, Cisco is probably the winner.

  From an activism perspective, it's important to pick One target and focus
all energy there.  Divided attention among the base means a higher
likelihood of failure.  You also have to pick a target where there's a
reasonable chance of success.  If five hundred activists protested in front
of Bluecoat HQ, they'd likely change their internal policies because they
are small enough that it would have a dramatic impact on their business to
*not* acquiesce.  If the same activists protested in front of Cisco, I'm
not sure there'd be much change, if any.  Geography is also a factor, as
Jillian mentioned.

  To reiterate: Bluecoat is winnable with the right strategy.

best,
Griffin Boyce

-- 
Please note that I do not have PGP access at this time.
OTR: saint at jabber.ccc.de / fontaine at jabber.ccc.de
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/attachments/20130406/ebea9bd5/attachment.html>