Ahuman microphone, also known as thepeople's microphone, is a means for delivering a speech to a large group of people, wherein persons gathered around the speaker repeat the speaker's words, thus "amplifying" the voice of the speaker without the need for amplification equipment.
The speaker begins by saying "mic check". When the people near the speaker respond "mic check", the speaker knows they have the group's attention. The speaker says a short phrase, part of a speech, and then pauses. Those who can hear what the speaker has said repeat the phrase in unison, and when finished, the speaker says another phrase, then pauses again waiting for a response, etc., until the speaker's speech is complete.
If the entire gathering still cannot hear the speaker, organizers ask for additional repetitions by those at the limit ofearshot. For large gatherings, this may require two or three waves of repetition.
The use ofelectronic amplification devices, such as loudspeakers orbullhorns, may require permits for "amplified sound". The use of human microphones provides a way for people to address large gatherings without running afoul of such requirements.[1] The human microphone was first used in theanti-nuclear protests in the United States and later in the1999 Seattle WTO protests.[2]
This method of communication attracted attention due to its use byOccupy Wall Street. It was deployed at largegeneral assemblies to help ensure everyone could hear announcements, because New York had regulations prohibiting the use of conventionalmegaphones.[3]
The technique has also been used by protestors to interrupt and talk over a speaker.[4] Politicians such asScott Walker,[4][5]Michele Bachmann,[6]Joseph Lieberman,Christine Lagarde[7] andBarack Obama[8] have been targets for this style ofheckling. Using the human microphone to interrupt an electrically amplified speech has become known as "mic checking" the speaker, as in "Karl Rove ... gotmic-checked during his speaking event".[9]
Critics of the way Occupy protestors use mic-checking, including Karl Rove, have suggested it does not respect the principle offree speech and others[who?] have criticised it for producing the illusion of group consensus amongst those acting as the "amplifiers".
Sympathisers have argued the practice highlights the existence of considerable inequality in power of expression that exists between theone percent and much of the rest of the population.[10]
| Protests |
| ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Events | |||||||||||||
| Groups | |||||||||||||
| Media | |||||||||||||
| Related | |||||||||||||
