# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2012, three American men launched a campaign to make Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony the most infamous person in the world. The leader of the Lord's Resistance Army, a decades-old guerrilla group, Kony had been indicted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity almost too barbarous to believe: among them, kidnapping tens of thousands of children to use as sex slaves and soldiers. The 2012 bad-publicity campaign against Kony was led by Invisible Children, a small nonprofit founded in 2004 to raise awareness of the LRA's murderous deeds. Some of the organization's tactics were time-honored: stickers, stencils, posters, wristbands. But the centerpiece of the project was a 30-minute documentary film, posted to Facebook and zealously promoted throughKony 2012-brandedprofile photos paired with fervent calls to action.

Within six days of its March 5, 2012, release, Kony 2012 had racked up more than 100 million views, making it, at the time, the most watched viral video in web history. (It has since been surpassed by videos from Psy, Adele, and Miley Cyrus.) Teenagers who had previously been numb to images of starving African children and news bulletins on faraway wars were shocked by the film's heart-wrenching footage of terrified, homeless Ugandan kids and drawn in by the relatable first-person narration of handsome white guy Jason Russell, one of the co-founders of Invisible Children. The plight of Ugandan children living under threat of kidnapping, rape, and murder was unconscionable; luckily, Kony 2012 told us, there was something each of us could do.

We could share the video with our Facebook friends. We could tweet at the African Union or celebrities such as Ryan Seacrest and Tim Tebow. We could add our names to a Stop Kony pledge that bound us to do nothing in particular. We could sign up for recurring monthly donations to "join our army for peace." If we were truly committed to helping stop Kony's child-soldier camps, we could buy the Kony 2012 signature "action kit": a $30 package that included a T-shirt, wristbands, and posters that equated Kony with Osama Bin Laden and Adolf Hitler.There was a price point for every level of concern and awareness.

Did it work? Kind of. Insofar as its aim was to raise money and awareness of Kony's crimes, Kony 2012 was a success. Invisible Children collected $5 million in the first two days of the campaign and netted even more from celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey, who gave a cool $2 million. Bill Gates tweeted the hashtag; Rihanna shared the video.

But the sea change Kony 2012 suggested we could achieve, if only we harnessed our potential as informed citizens of the world, never materialized. The Ugandan conflict continues, despite U.S. involvement that began long before Invisible Children made its video. Kony is still at large.

To be fair, Invisible Children was always relatively upfront that its main goal was "awareness," not the capture and prosecution of the elusive Kony. The group existed to raise funds to make films, which raised more funds, which it spent raising more awareness. But young supporters were surprised to learn that just a third of Invisible Children's funds went to programs that directly served Ugandans.

Those supporters had fallen prey to what we now recognize as textbook clicktivism. The Kony 2012 movement offered a cartoonish, apolitical villain; "join the movement" language; and a call to action that doesn't require the clicktivist to leave her laptop. It also distilled a complex problem to a digestible set of facts. Soon after the video went viral, three psychologists conducted a study that measured participants' levels of outrage and desire to take action after watching the original Kony 2012 film and a more nuanced follow-up video Invisible Children released in response to critics. They found that the former video's simplicity, at the expense of crucial nuance, was the key to its impact. "When a complex adverse situation is reduced to the actions of a clear enemy, this inspires moral outrage against the enemy," the authors wrote. "However, if the complexity of the situation becomes clearer, the enemy inspires less moral outrage and determination to act."

The film's oversimplification had real consequences. As Kony 2012 became a sensation, experts in the socio-political history of central Africa castigated Invisible Children for ignoring inconvenient facts about the Ugandan conflict. Adam Branch, a professor of international politics and author of Displacing Human Rights: War and Intervention in Northern Uganda, wrote that the film overlooked the complicity of the Ugandan government and the dangers of further militarizing the region.

"What is wrong with [Kony 2012's] approach: the warmongering, the narcissism, the commercialization, the reductive and one-sided story they tell, their portrayal of Africans as helpless children in need of rescue by white Americans," Branch wrote. "As a result of Invisible Children's irresponsible advocacy, civilians in Uganda and central Africa may have to pay a steep price in their own lives so that a lot of young Americans can feel good about themselves, and a few can make good money."

Kony 2012 spread because it was easy-easy to understand, easy to donate, easy to promote. It taught a generation of would-be activists some hard lessons-chiefly, that activism that begins and ends with social media posts (posting an ice bucket video, changing a profile photo to the Human Rights Campaign logo) performs more good for the doer than the cause. It tells your social network that you did this thing; you believe this thing; you are a charitable, good-hearted, aware human being, just like all of your friends who've posted the same exact thing. It's activism so quick and easy that you don't need to know much about the cause to join in, just a modicum of trust in the friend who posted it first. But when the target of a social media-driven campaign turns out to be far more complex than a prechewed nugget of share-bait suggested, those impassioned messages to Ban Ki-moon that linger on your Twitter timeline might become a source of shame. That shame may have turned some of Invisible Children's young idealists into cynics. But it taught others how to harness the power of the web for good-and how to do it responsibly.

* * *

For many young people who bought into the Kony 2012 hype and were let down as they followed the waves of criticism that soon followed, the incident was a lasting lesson in skepticism. The Kony 2012 backlash brought to the public consciousness the " white savior industrial complex" that undergirds so many seemingly well-meaning campaigns, especially overseas. Kony 2012 arrived at a critical moment when social media was becoming the primary venue for conversations around activism and identity, not just a space for personal updates and the occasional news link. Facebook's news feed had just shifted from a chronological model to one that took relevance and popularity into account, paving the way for viral media to take hold. Teens who were busy forming their identities and value systems in real life were doing the same with their online selves. Then came Kony.

Watching the movement wither under public scrutiny showed these young people the value of asking questions and looking for the telltale signs of white people making other people's suffering all about themselves. It's difficult to imagine Invisible Children's tactics flying today, just a half-decade later. The nonprofit filmed a Fall Out Boy music video in Uganda in 2007. In April 2009, at the instruction of an Invisible Children video, a couple of D-list celebrities and groups of youth activists "abducted" themselves into urban centers, where they'd stay until a celebrity or politician "rescued" them and made a statement in support of Invisible Children. The organization's website says its founders began their work on behalf of Uganda after they " traveled to Africa in search of a story." If Kony 2016 appeared today, young people wouldn't throw money at their screens. They'd be busy writing a thousand outraged blog posts about it.

Kony 2012 taught nonprofits to be wary, and young people to be skeptical, of people in power who appropriate narratives of suffering. Whatever the problems were with Invisible Children's message-and there were several-it was doomed from the start because it centered on the stories, perspectives, and altruistic deeds of Westerners. After the Kony 2012 video came out, survivors of Kony's violence told Al Jazeera that they were angered to learn that people around the world were wearing T-shirts emblazoned with his likeness, essentially glorifying him in their eyes. Some Ugandans wondered why the video focused on white American men; they questioned the motives of an NGO that uses Ugandans' suffering to raise funds for work that takes place largely in America. Branch argued that Invisible Children's blunt-force awareness blitz had no real relevance to the specific needs of Ugandans at all. "Uganda is largely just the stage for a debate over the meaning of political activism in the U.S. today," he wrote.

And yet, despite its notoriety, Kony 2012's legacy is more than just a cautionary tale. Itmade it easier for subsequent social media-born campaigns to take on the air of a "movement." A 2015 article in the European Journal of Social Psychology identified the Kony 2012 phenomenon as one of the first internet-era examples of "emergent opinion-based social identity": a way of creating an identity as part of a group that shares a certain belief, rather than a certain inborn characteristic. By making anti-Kony activism a marker of identity, Invisible Children established a crude model for other hashtag campaigns such as #NotOneMore (gun violence), #Not1More (immigrant deportations), and even #BlackLivesMatter to catch on as expressions of identity for people of a certain political leaning.

The major difference between Kony 2012 and these more recent campaigns is that the latter ones were created and led by people directly affected by the issues they addressed: gun violence, deportation, racism, and police brutality. These leaders used social media to tell their own stories in their own words, organizing online and off to come up with a series of demands that allies could support. Kony 2012 filtered the plight of Ugandan child soldiers through the eyes of Jason Russell and his cohort, who imposed their own ideas about appropriate intervention onto an impressionable population of youths. It was easy to get involved with the Kony 2012 campaign without knowing much about the Ugandan conflict; in fact, the campaign encouraged a kind of ignorance with its drastically simplified narrative. It would be harder for even the least committed slacktivist to participate in the #BlackLivesMatter and #Not1More conversations without brushing up against some hard truths about real people's struggles.

Thanks in part to Kony 2012, a hashtag can be a legitimate motivating force behind an identity group; the Black Lives Matter movement took the energy and unity a hashtag campaign can inspire and channeled it into activism informed by the people whose struggles inspired it, people who'd been traditionally left out of popular discourse about their own lives. In the case of Black Lives Matter, a hashtag became a statement of group membership and eventually turned into a movement that's changing conversations about race in the halls of power.

The creators of Kony 2012 could only dream of such influence. Still, for a campaign that's gone down in history as a punch line, Kony 2012 left a lasting mark on young people's political consciousness. That the mark has nothing to do with human rights atrocities in Uganda is a lesson in the limits of awareness pursued at the expense of truth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kony 2012 Quickly Became a Punch Line. But It Taught a Generation the Value of Skepticism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2012, three American men launched a campaign to make Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony the most infamous person in the world. The leader of the Lord's Resistance Army, a decades-old guerrilla group, Kony had been indicted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity almost too barbarous to believe: among them, kidnapping tens of thousands of children to use as sex slaves and soldiers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
12-12-12: The Concert for Sandy Relief was a benefit concert that took place at Madison Square Garden in New York City on December 12, 2012.

The concert was held in response to Hurricane Sandy, which devastated portions of the Northeastern United States, the Caribbean and the Mid-Atlantic in late October 2012 and cost an estimated $60 billion in damage in the United States. The concert was broadcast live via television, radio, movie theaters and the Internet, and released on DVD and CD. A documentary film was also made about the concert. Proceeds from the event were collected by the Robin Hood Relief Fund to benefit victims of the hurricane in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.

Many famous performers took part in the charity event, including The Who, Bruce Springsteen, Alicia Keys, Bon Jovi, Eric Clapton, Billy Joel, The Rolling Stones, Roger Waters, Chris Martin, Michael Stipe, Kanye West, Eddie Vedder, and, for the first time in eighteen years, the surviving members of Nirvana ( Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic and touring member Pat Smear) who performed together in a collaboration with Paul McCartney during his show-closing set.

The benefit concert was first announced in mid-November 2012 and that the producers behind 2001's The Concert for New York City would also produce the Hurricane Sandy benefit which quickly attracted many big names from the music industry. The venue and on sale date for tickets were announced in early December. Madison Square Garden had originally been reserved on December 12 for a New York Rangers game against the Montreal Canadiens that was one of the 510 regular season games that were canceled due to the 2012-13 NHL lockout.

Proceeds from the event went to the Robin Hood Relief Fund and benefit victims of the hurricane in areas most impacted, especially New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. More than $30 million was raised through ticket sales alone.

Tickets for the event went on sale through Ticketmaster on December 3, 2012, at noon though Chase Bank customers were allowed to buy tickets at 9 a.m. Tickets quickly sold out in minutes. The face-value of tickets ranged from $150 to $2,500, with organizers saying all proceeds would go to the Robin Hood Foundation. Like most concerts with high demands for tickets, scalpers were able to buy tickets and within minutes of the concert selling out were already available for re-sale at much higher prices on various sites, including StubHub. By December 7, 2012, tickets for the floor in front of the stage were listed for as much as $48,000 while those in the upper level were going for $525 to $3,000.

Producers of the event urged people to not buy from these secondary websites because the money no longer goes to charity. U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer sent a letter to StubHub and three other major online ticket exchanges, urging them to not allow sellers to profit from the demand for the concert stating that "Every dollar spent for these concert tickets should go to help the victims of Superstorm Sandy, not to line the pockets of unscrupulous scalpers". A spokesman for StubHub, Glenn Lehrman, said it did not have the technology to require sellers to give their profits to charity. StubHub gave its commissions of more than $500,000 to the charity.

Jacqueline Peterson, a spokeswoman for Ticketmaster, which handled the initial ticket sales, said her company had evidence that scalpers had used computer programs to snap up large numbers of tickets for resale. She said Ticketmaster had blocked thousands of sales to buyers that it identified as using these programs. Among the recipients of Schumer's letter were TicketMaster's in-house resale marketplaces, TicketsNow and TicketExchange; however, Peterson said that 12-12-12 tickets were not being allowed on those sites. TicketLiquidator, another secondary re-sale website, also said that it had declined to carry tickets for the concert.

There were also some incidents of counterfeit tickets.

The concert was simulcast live on 39 U.S. television stations, including HBO, AMC, Showtime and AXS TV and on more than 20 international television networks. It was also streamed on over twenty-five websites, including Fuse.tv, MTV.com, AOL, Yahoo!, YouTube, SiriusXM, Hulu, and Vevo and over fifty radio stations. Select movie theaters in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut displayed the concert as well. Ion Television, Live Well Network and MundoFox were the only national over-the-air broadcasters to carry the concert. Locally, the PBS consortium WNET/ WLIW/ NJTV carried it on their stations, along with CBS's WLNY (Channel 55) and WRNN-TV (Channel 48). WPSG (Channel 57) carried the show locally in Philadelphia.

Event producers James Dolan, John Sykes and Harvey Weinstein issued on December 3, 2012, the following joint statement: "The fact that so many major media companies are joining forces to distribute and stream this important event to homes worldwide will enable us to create a tremendous and unprecedented fundraising effort on a global scale to benefit the victims of this devastating storm."

While every major U.S. media company aired the benefit on at least one of their networks, none of the major over-the-air television networks including CBS, ABC, Fox and NBC aired it, and neither did the major cable-news networks of CNN, MSNBC and the Fox News Channel. Clear Channel broadcast the concert live on some of its radio stations across the country and also streamed it live on iHeartRadio, its digital-radio service, and across the websites and Facebook pages of its 850 stations. The concert also aired in conjunction with the NBA's television and online streaming broadcasts in China and simulcast live on Clear Channel Outdoor digital billboards in Times Square and locations in London and Paris.

The event began at 7:30 pm and ran until 1:20 am.

1. ^ Staff (December 4, 2012). "12-12-12 Sandy Benefit to Be Aired on 34 Outlets" Archived May 14, 2015, at the Wayback Machine. Associated Press (via ). Retrieved December 13, 2012.

2. ^ McKinliney, Jr., James C. (December 7, 2012). "Benefit's Producers Condemn Scalpers". The New York Times. Retrieved December 12, 2012.

3. ^ "INSIDE EDITION Investigates Counterfeit Tickets". Inside Edition. December 12, 2012.

4. Staff (undated). ^ "US Television Channels" Archived December 12, 2012, at the Library of Congress Web Archives. 12-12-12: The Concert for Sandy Relief. Retrieved December 13, 2012.

5. Staff (undated). ^ "Where to Watch" Archived December 12, 2012, at the Library of Congress Web Archives. 12-12-12: The Concert for Sandy Relief. Retrieved December 12, 2012.

6. Joint press release (December 3, 2012). ^ "12-12-12 Secures Distribution to Over One Billion People Worldwide". The Madison Square Garden Company and 12-12-12: The Concert for Sandy Relief (via GlobeNewswire). Retrieved December 13, 2012.

7. Giegerich, Liz (December 3, 2012). ^ "Tickets Now on Sale for 12-12-12 Sandy Benefit Concert at MSG - A Star-Studded Music Event to Raise Money for the Robin Hood Relief Fund Will Be Held at MSG nNxt Wednesday" Archived January 31, 2013, at archive.today. Patch.com. Retrieved December 12, 2012.

8. Bernstein, Scott (December 12, 2012). ^ "Watch: 12-12-12 The Concert For Sandy Relief + Live Updates". Glide Magazine. Retrieved December 13, 2012.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
12-12-12: The Concert for Sandy Relief - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
12-12-12: The Concert for Sandy Relief was a benefit concert that took place at Madison Square Garden in New York City on December 12, 2012. The concert was held in response to Hurricane Sandy, which devastated portions of the Northeastern United States, the Caribbean and the Mid-Atlantic in late October 2012 and cost an estimated $60 billion in damage in the United States.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As Latin music blared inside Pulse, one of Orlando's biggest nightclubs on June 12, 2016, a gunman forced his way inside and opened fire on the predominantly gay crowd. In the end, 49 people were dead and dozens more injured, in what was, at the time, the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

When the gunman, 29-year-old Omar Mateen of Fort Pierce, Florida entered the club with an AR-15-type assault rifle and a handgun, the nearly 300 people inside were winding down their Latin-themed night of dancing. When the first shots rang out, many described not noticing, thinking the bangs were part of the songs, until people started to fall the floor and others ran in terror. Some hid in the bathrooms.

"I heard 20, 40, 50 shots," Jon Alamo told BBC. "The music stopped."

At 02:09, the nightclub posted on its Facebook page: "Everyone get out of pulse and keep running."

As Mateen moved through the nightclub, he exchanged fire with the club's security guard and, as more officers arrived on the scene, shots continued to be exchanged. Mateen then escaped to the bathroom, where he took hostages and told the police he had explosives he was ready to detonate.

While the gunman was in the bathroom, police evacuated those still on the club's dance floor. Many tweeted or texted for help from the inside, including people trapped in the bathroom who hid in the stalls trying not to be seen. Others played dead. During the attack, Mateen called 911 to pledge allegiance to ISIS.

At the same time, officers secured the building and prepared to enter the bathroom using explosives on the outside wall of the building. At about 5 AM, the police stormed through their exploded hole, then shot and killed Mateen.

At the time of the shooting, it was unclear if this was an act of terrorism or a hate crime. While Mateen's family said that he had shown anger towards two gay men kissing the week before the attack, evidence discovered in the years after the attack shows that this may have been a planned act of terrorism and may have had a different target-a Disney complex -before Mateen got spooked by police.

Mateen had been interviewed by FBI officers twice in 2013, after making comments to coworkers about his connections to ISIS. He was questioned again in 2014 about a potential connection to Moner Mohammad Abu-Salha, an American suicide bomber who had attacked in Syria.

Seven months after the attack, Noor Salman, the Omar Mateen's wife, was charged with obstruction of justice for making contradictory statements to the FBI, and aiding and abetting for allegedly ignoring her husband's connections to ISIS. The FBI believed she may have known of his plan.

In March of 2018, she was found not guilty.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Terrorist gunman attacks Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As Latin music blared inside Pulse, one of Orlando’s biggest nightclubs on June 12, 2016, a gunman forced his way inside and opened fire on the predominantly

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Status:

This submission is currently being researched and evaluated.

You can help confirm this entry by contributing facts, media, and other evidence of notability and mutation.

6 0 255

Overview

#NotOneMore is a hashtag campaign inspired by an emotional plea against gun violence made by Richard Martinez, the father of a victim of the Isla Vista Killings, who urged Americans to contact their local lawmakers and ask for stricter gun-control legislation in a press conference held on the day after the tragedy.

Background

On May 24th, 2014, the day after the shooting near the campus of University of California, Santa Barbara that claimed the lives of six students, Richard Martinez, the father of one of the victims Chris Martinez, made an emotional plea against gun violence in a press conference:

" Why did Chris die? Chris died because of craven irresponsible politicians and the NRA. They talk about gun rights. What about Chris's right to live? When will this insanity stop?" We don't have to live like this. Too many have died. We should say to ourselves, 'Not one more.'"

Later that same day, D.C.-based Italian journalist CiancioReporter expressed her solidarity with Martinez' call for action by tweeting out the hashtag #notonemore.

Notable Developments

Richard Martinez' Tweet

On May 27th, during a memorial service for the victims, Martinez echoed his sentiment by pledging to send postcards with "not one more" written on them to lawmakers and demand stricter regulations on firearms, while asking students who attended the memorial to show their support by tweeting the hashtag #notonemore. In less than 24 hours, the hashtag was tweeted out over 30,000 times.

Postcard Campaign

Also on May 27th, American grassroots organization Everytown for Gun Safety sent out a tweet announcing the launch of their new program which allows users to enter their name and address to send a postcard with the words "not one more" to their respective legislator and governor. Within 24 hours, over 150,000 people signed up to have a postcard sent to their politicians.

Photo Trend

On May 29th, actress Julianne Moore tweeted out a picture of herself holding a sign with the hashtag #notonemore. She also tweeted out a call for others to send the "not one more" postcards to their politicians. Fellow celebrities, including Beth Littleford and Julianna Margulies, as well as survivors of gun violence, also tweeted pictures of themselves holding signs with the words not one more.

Tags

Entry Editors (1)
Request Editorship

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NotOneMore is a hashtag campaign inspired by an emotional plea against gun violence made by Richard Martinez, the father of a victim of the Isla Vista Killings, who urged Americans to contact their local lawmakers and ask for stricter gun-control legislation in a press conference held on the day after the tragedy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the middle of the night on April 15, more than 300 girls were kidnapped from their school in Chibok, Nigeria. While the horrific crime-carried out by Islamist militant group Boko Haram-went largely unreported for nearly two weeks, you've probably heard a whole lot about the #BringBackOurGirls campaign over the last few days.

Let's talk about the facts first: Why did Boko Haram attack the school? The group has been terrorizing northeastern Nigeria-a region that's half Muslim and half Christian-for almost five years with the goal of establishing an Islamic state governed by strict Sharia law. They're ideologically opposed to Western culture, as well as the education of girls, and thus coordinated the kidnapping.

Some of the girls have escaped, but 276 are still being held captive. It's unknown what Boko Haram intends to do with them; some believe they'll be sold into slavery, while others contend they'll be held for ransom. It's also unclear what the Nigerian government is doing to help the victims, which is why activists in the African country have been holding protests and taking to social media, their frustration fueled even further by Boko Haram's capture of an additional eight girls on May 5.

The United States has announced it's deploying a 200-person military and law enforcement delegation to Nigeria to help in the search, and in the meantime, people all over the world are speaking out through the #BringBackOurGirls campaign. You can see (and upload your own!) solidarity photos on this Tumblr set up by Amnesty International, and check out some of the big names showing their support below.
Share links to your #BringOurGirlsBack solidarity photo in the comments!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bring Back Our Girls: Everything You Need to Know About What's Going on in Nigeria

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the middle of the night on April 15, more than 300 girls were kidnapped from their school in Chibok, Nigeria. While the horrific crime-carried out by Islamist militant group Boko Haram-went largely unreported for nearly two weeks, you've probably heard a whole lot about the #BringBackOurGirls campaign over the last few days.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is the Ice Bucket challenge and when did it start?
The Ice Bucket Challenge is a campaign to promote awareness of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) - also known as Lou Gehrig's disease - and encourage donations for research. A person is filmed as a bucket of water and ice is dumped over the individual's head. The individual then nominates a minimum of three people to do the same thing, having only a 24-hour time frame to complete the challenge and make a donation to the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Association.

It went viral in July and August 2014, using social media as a platform to reach a worldwide audience. More than 17 million people posted videos online, including Bill Gates and former president George W. Bush. Over a two-year period, the money raised through the challenge helped fund research and development of treatment drugs.

The origin of the campaign has been attributed to Pete Frates, a Boston College alumnus who was diagnosed with ALS in March 2012.
How much money was raised?
The Ice Bucket Challenge raised more than $115 million for the ALS Association. A chart from the ALS Association shows that $77 million, or 67%, of the funds were designated to research and another $23 million, or 20%, were given to patient and community services.
How many people participated?
More than 17 million people participated in the challenge worldwide. In the U.S., there were 2.5 million participants who donated $115 million to the ALS Association.
Why was the Ice Bucket challenge so popular?
The challenge first received media attention after professional golfer Greg Norman nominated news anchor Matt Lauer in July 2014 on NBC's Today. This sparked a trend that led millions of people to post videos on social media to raise awareness of ALS.
What is ALS?
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord. It is known to cause stiffness of muscles, muscle twitching and muscle weakness, which result in difficulty speaking, swallowing and eventually breathing. The cause of this disease is unknown, but in some cases genetics may be involved. A cure for ALS has not been discovered yet.
Man behind ALS Ice Bucket Challenge hospitalized

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ice Bucket Challenge: 5 things you should know

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is the Ice Bucket challenge and when did it start? The Ice Bucket Challenge is a campaign to promote awareness of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) - also known as Lou Gehrig's disease - and encourage donations for research. A person is filmed as a bucket of water and ice is dumped over the individual's head.