Esra’a Al Shafei is the Founder and Director of Majal, a nonprofit that helps build communities and digital platforms that celebrate, protect, and promote diversity and social justice. Majal focuses primarily on issues that receive little or no attention: From rights of the invisible lower income migrant workers, to the stigmatized Middle East LGBTQ community, to those seeking to express dissent through music. Esra’a has also served as a Senior TED Fellow, an MIT Director’s Fellow, and a Shuttleworth Foundation Fellow. She is the recipient of a Berkman Award from Harvard University’s Berkman Klein Center for outstanding contributions to the internet and its impact on society and has been featured in Forbes’ “30 Under 30” list of social entrepreneurs making an impact in the world.

This is the edited transcript of an interview conducted as part of the Humans of the Internet space at MozFest 2017. Browse other interviews via the Humans of the Internet playlist.

Can you start by telling me a bit about your work — beginning with a broad overview and then honing in on some projects that you’re working on now or that are of particular interest to you?

About twelve years ago, I founded an organization called Majal in Bahrain. We really wanted to live up to the potential of what the internet offered. There were limitless possibilities online and we wanted to figure out how to best use the internet, how to repurpose existing technology, and how to create new tools to amplify underrepresented and marginalized voices in the Middle East and North Africa — anything from ethnic and religious minorities to the LGBT community to persecuted, independent musicians who use music as a medium for social justice advocacy.

Majal ended up being an umbrella organization of techniques, strategies, and projects that tackle issues in completely different ways. For the most part, it was experimental. We wanted to create a space where people could go, push ideas forward, collaborate on software and projects, and figure out how to use our skills and resources to further social justice campaigns.

Thinking about this work, can you tell me about a time when you felt a sense of success?

In twelve years, there are definitely a lot of ups and downs — and, I regret to say, it’s mostly down. We felt a real sense of success when we started building tools for the Middle East and seeing how they were being repurposed and used in places like India and Mexico. One example is CrowdVoice. We built a platform to curate and contextualize a wide range of information on social justice movements around the world — doing it very visually, building infographics and timelines to help people understand the story behind a cause or issue so that they’re not just reading the latest reports, but have contextual evidence and information that they can moderate or add to.

We built a platform to curate and contextualize a wide range of information on social justice movements around the world — doing it very visually, building infographics and timelines to help people understand the story behind a cause or issue…

Crowdsourcing media reports through open source and collaborative tools was a very new idea when we started building CrowdVoice in 2009. Back then, it wasn’t popular. Crowdsourcing was still limited to Wikipedia and some niche websites, but nothing specifically dedicated to social justice advocacy in particular. The response was really amazing and it started being used by media outlets as well — The Guardian, Al Jazeera — to portray protesters in a rawer setting, to verify information, and to provide access to journalists. At the time, in Bahrain — my country — journalists were not able to enter. A lot of people were relying on CrowdVoice to figure out where the protests were happening and how many videos were being curated. A lot of media reports were out there saying that protesters weren’t being shot with live bullets, but there were videos that contradicted that.

…we saw that CrowdVoice was being used in courtrooms and in places around the world that we didn’t anticipate, such as universities. That’s one example of us building something that was self-funded from the very beginning and it really ended up working out.

That’s really when we felt a sense of success. And also when we saw that CrowdVoice was being used in courtrooms and in places around the world that we didn’t anticipate, such as universities. That’s one example of us building something that was self-funded from the very beginning and it really ended up working out.

How about an example of a challenge? It could be a persistent or recurring challenge or something that is very current top of mind.

There are two main challenges that we continuously face. Number one: People underestimate the capability of young Middle Easterners. A lot. They see a project being done by young people in the Middle East and they immediately dismiss it as something that couldn’t possibly be well-managed. That leads me to challenge number two: Funding. A lot of funding tends to go towards UK or US-based projects — especially for software and open source programs. You rarely see projects funded that are very international in scope. Or, if they are international, they’re based in the US or some place that is more “relatable”.

People underestimate the capability of young Middle Easterners. A lot. They see a project being done by young people in the Middle East and they immediately dismiss it as something that couldn’t possibly be well-managed.

That’s something that we’ve been trying to push back on to show that there are good examples of open source tools that are not built in the West — they’re built in places like Mexico, India, and the Middle East. That’s something that has been really difficult for us, trying to get through the gatekeepers of private foundations — and even individual donors — as a project that will make it to the table for consideration. Unfortunately, projects that are launched abroad, run from abroad, and run by an international team are not considered. The perception is that we can’t possibly be as good as those in the Silicon Valley bubble, that it’s too risky, or we don’t have the legal flexibility to operate something like that and actually get funding for it.

…projects that are launched abroad, run from abroad, and run by an international team are not considered. The perception is that we can’t possibly be as good as those in the Silicon Valley bubble, that it’s too risky, or we don’t have the legal flexibility to operate something like that…

This means that in the social justice and open source field we end up having a lot of the same ideas, a lot of the same projects, and a lot of the same players. The community is not huge, and people are very selective about who they support. Funding has always been a tremendous challenge for us and that’s why most of our projects are funded either directly by us — I put in my money, my deputy director and team puts in money — or we try to find pro bono developers to assist us. It’s a monumental challenge.

Obviously, there’s the risk of being in a country where everything we do is illegal. We can’t talk openly about LGBT rights — even though we run an LGBTQ platform. CrowdVoice is censored in two countries including the country where it was launched and based: Bahrain. Human rights issues are massive. We have team members based in Libya, in Palestine, and in places from where it’s really difficult to run these kinds of projects.

I come from an international development background. What you’re describing runs contrary to key values around local ownership and participation. Donors emphasize this… or simply pay lip service?

Unfortunately, we have limited funding in this space and one of the things that we’d love to do is to diversify the sources. We’re not asking these foundations to change their policies; maybe their policies are working for their particular geographic focus areas. We’re not here to tell people what to do with their money, but there’s no shortage of wealth out there. One thing we see over and over again is how venture capitalists, even Arab and Chinese investors, are so focused on Silicon Valley, funding very bad ideas $50–150 million at a time, and seeing those investments literally disappear within a quarter.

There’s so much wealth out there — yet the money isn’t being distributed to the things that actually matter or to meaningless ideas outside of the Silicon Valley bubble, the New York City startup bubble, the London bubble…

That’s more dangerous than foundations who fund the same things over and over. There’s so much wealth out there — yet the money isn’t being distributed to the things that actually matter or to meaningless ideas outside of the Silicon Valley bubble, the New York City startup bubble, the London bubble, and the next big “tech” city hype where money goes to disappear into the ether. That’s the issue that we keep running into. We say “diverse,” but we still select very expensive cities that are difficult for people to survive in, force people to move, and say, “If you want to be taken seriously, you have to be in the city.” That’s not how it should work anymore.

Related to that, you mentioned human rights issues and risks. Without getting into too much detail, how do you stay safe?

I’m not physically identifiable. At conferences, I’m always the one with the badge that says “No photos.” All my talks I give completely off the record — which is another challenge because that means that sometimes people don’t want you to talk. They want to livestream everything and they don’t want a keynote by someone who can’t be filmed because it impacts their marketing or ticket sales. That definitely keeps us outside of the radar — for the most part.

I have to be completely cautious with what I say. I’m very selective about press interviews. There are some journalists who don’t respect your privacy — they just want to push the story out, they don’t want to check with you about the impact of a quote taken out of context, and they may associate you with something you didn’t want to be associated with that could potentially endanger your life.

I have to be really careful about who I share information with and how I share it. It’s really just about figuring out the best way to protect not only myself, but also my team who are also experiencing similar obstacles.

I also tweet very selectively. Self-censorship is a massive part of my everyday struggle. There’s so much I want to say that I just can’t. I have to be really careful about who I share information with and how I share it. It’s really just about figuring out the best way to protect not only myself, but also my team who are also experiencing similar obstacles.

The interview space we created at MozFest was called “Humans of the Internet.” What, for you, is a healthy internet?

A healthy internet is an internet that reflects the actual community in the world. We had a great talk at MozFest by Anasuya Sengupta and Siko Bouterse who represent an organization called Whose Knowledge and they mentioned a very important point: “The internet is being built for a majority by a minority.” I think that’s incredibly unhealthy. A healthy internet means the de-monopolization of the web as it stands today and ending the obsession with acquisitions for further access to private data and control. We understand that from a profit-driven perspective, but it’s incredibly unhealthy that every major startup’s dream is to be acquired and accumulate wealth rather than have meaningful impact in society.

A healthy internet means the de-monopolization of the web as it stands today and ending the obsession with acquisitions for further access to private data and control.

There’s nothing wrong with being profit-oriented. Companies need to be sustainable to thrive. But we have a right and responsibility to ensure that ethics and basic privacy should be prioritized over that.

A healthy internet is a distributed internet — one that takes into account that we have to support smaller projects by diverse people. We have to support access that isn’t dictated by major companies like Facebook and Google and eventually whoever dethrones them.

A healthy internet is a distributed internet — one that takes into account that we have to support smaller projects by diverse people. We have to support access that isn’t dictated by major companies like Facebook and Google and eventually whoever dethrones them.

The last point is the most obvious one: a healthy internet is an internet without censorship by state entities and their corporate partners that is leveraged to silence political dissidents. A healthy internet promotes and enables justice and accountability, and protects those who rely on it to organize and express desires for change. We lack that today because of the collaboration between governments and internet service providers. This is an international problem, but I am mostly speaking of my experience in Bahrain.

Without fighting these threats effectively and collaboratively, there will be no healthy internet to speak of.

In all terms of use, privacy is becoming less and less prioritized even though it’s becoming an increasing concern among the people who utilize these services, and we see large-scale mining of personal data so that we may be better advertised to, and better surveilled by our state structures. Without fighting these threats effectively and collaboratively, there will be no healthy internet to speak of.

Is there something that you would point to that makes you feel optimistic for the future of the internet?

The open source ecosystem. I love to see platforms like WordPress grow and incorporate different languages; it made it much easier to take control over something that was previously very expensive or challenging. WordPress was my entry to the outside world and it gave me a new sense of creation. Anyone can be a creator and contributor. Granted, it wasn’t WordPress that started this trend, but that was my world. I used it to create my first website, and started collaborating with people from around the world on building community-centric plugins, anywhere from Uzbekistan to Indonesia. That was really exciting.

The other thing that truly excites me is the growing creativity online. One of the platforms that we run is MideastTunes.com, which showcases underground musicians from the Middle East and North Africa. I love to see how these musicians use music for self-expression and bypassing censorship and surveillance in really creative ways. There are a lot of exciting things that are happening around gamification and the LGBTQ community — ways to keep each other safe without experiencing trolling or bullying. These are the things that really excite me personally — and also something we [Majal] work a lot around.

There are a lot of exciting things that are happening around gamification and the LGBTQ community — ways to keep each other safe without experiencing trolling or bullying.

These projects wouldn’t be possible without previous, existing and ongoing open source tools and efforts. Things that are made available by people around the world, ready to repurpose for our specific needs. When we build a project and see it being adopted in Chile, Bulgaria, Bosnia, etc. — that’s the most exciting part. It shows how limitless online collaboration really is and how much we could achieve with it.

You’ve mentioned some of your concerns around the opposite of a healthy internet. Is there one thing in particular that worries you about the future of the internet?

I’m truly concerned about Google and Facebook and the current state of their algorithms. They keep getting more and more powerful. It’s a very difficult thing to solve because you can’t stop people from using these things. You yourself can’t stop using these things. We have reached the point where we’re okay with our privacy being violated on a daily basis for the sake of convenience. We complain about it constantly and often on these very platforms.

Another concern is related to who’s funding these things. The Saudi government, the UAE, Qatar through their various investment arms, have huge shares in companies like Uber, Twitter, and Facebook. That’s not okay because their end goal is control and data, not wealth or the local economy which isn’t impacted by any of these tools.

When you’re investing $3 billion in Uber, you’re going to ask for a transaction — it’s going to be mutually beneficial somehow. This is not a purely profit-oriented exchange. This is a way to buy control into the Silicon Valley and the data-driven giants that emerge from it.

Second, I completely disagree with company founders and investment committees when they say, “These are just investments with no board seats rewarded and therefore they don’t have voting rights. They can’t dictate what happens.” We know that that’s really not the case at all. When you’re investing $3 billion in Uber, you’re going to ask for a transaction — it’s going to be mutually beneficial somehow. This is not a purely profit-oriented exchange. This is a way to buy control into the Silicon Valley and the data-driven giants that emerge from it.

Only now are people slowly beginning to make the connection in light of Russia and its meddling in the US elections likely through investments from Yuri Milner and his ilk. For some people that was big news, but in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE, Qatar, and many more countries — we see this all the time. Founders aren’t shying away from it. We see companies in Texas and in San Diego that are very aware and complicit with doing business with those governments or other abusive regimes around the world because it translates to serious income streams.

We see companies in Texas and in San Diego that are very aware and complicit with doing business with those governments or other abusive regimes around the world because it translates to serious income streams.

None of them seem to mind. A lot of data driven or monitoring startups like Palantir got their start taking money from intelligence agencies like the CIA and are very open about it, and who definitely do business with oppressive regimes no matter how much they try to deny it. They’re valued at billions now and no one seems to hold them accountable. In time they might outgrow their competitors and control more and more of our data and speech online. That’s a huge risk, it’s something the international community has been turning a blind eye towards for too long, and it’s not getting any better. That’s what truly concerns me.

What led you to MozFest?

This year, Majal is one of the Open Web Fellows host organizations. We’re very excited about that. Mozilla and Ford are hosting a developer to work with us for the next ten months on some technical projects. They also have their own personal projects that they’re working on for and with Mozilla, but for the most part, this fellow is funded to be embedded in our team and build projects with us. We’re very excited about that and we’re very lucky to be a host organization.

Pre-MozFest, we had a fellows onboarding where I met my fellow for the first time. It was really interesting and we got to meet the other host organizations and ask them about their previous experiences. Apart from that, I also led a session at MozFest called “Defiance in the Digital Age” which resulted in very thoughtful discussions.

How did you come to be a host? Was it something that you heard about and applied for or did someone reach out to you?

Somebody at Mozilla reached out to us and said, “Hey, it would be interesting for Majal to apply to be a host org this year.” I met Mark Surman in 2012 for the first time because we both have a Shuttleworth Foundation fellowship. Of course, I was aware of Mozilla before and I’ve been to MozFest before, but I wasn’t truly embedded into the community until now. The CEO of the Shuttleworth Foundation is on the board of the Mozilla Foundation – Helen Turvey. That’s what got me into the Mozilla crowd, it was 2012 when it all started.

Previously I’ve been visiting several Mozilla offices and gave a talk at their San Francisco office, and I think that’s what influenced the initial contact when they said, “Hey, we know that you’re building interesting stuff in the open web. We think your organization can be a great candidate to be a host. Why not apply for this opportunity?” So without hesitation, we applied and we were informed that we were selected to host a fellow and that was very exciting.

Is there anything more that you want to tell me or anything that you want to ask me?

I think we covered most of it. I would only hope that the fellowship program continues because it makes a huge difference and I’m very excited to see that it’s very international. There’s another organization in Chile, for example, there’s us in Bahrain, and that’s important because a lot of the times, fellowships are constrained to very specific areas. That’s one thing I really appreciate about Mozilla. I think there’s a true effort within the team to try to expand internationally, to have an impact not just where Mozilla has a big presence and a pre-existing following, but to branch out, connect, and give opportunities to people that would otherwise never have that chance.

I would only hope that the fellowship program continues because it makes a huge difference and I’m very excited to see that it’s very international.

Our fellow this year is from Venezuela, and it meant the world to him to be a part of something like this, to feel embedded into a part of the wider web community. That’s something that we really appreciate and encourage other foundations to use as an example — ask how to support organizations in need, especially in regions or countries that are completely under the radar.

In Majal’s case, we needed more development resources badly, but we couldn’t afford it. But this fellowship helped lift some of these obstacles and we’re very grateful. I want to highlight how appreciative we are for the program.

Finally, it was great to see that this MozFest was a lot more diverse than the one I last went to in 2012. I hope that international growth and presence continues.

The illustration of Esra’a above is copyright Sarah Glidden.