Who's Paying Attention to Darfur?

I "stumbled upon" this piece from The Onion, "Well, I Guess That Genocide In Sudan Must've Worked Itself Out On Its Own," and was struck by how little has changed in 3 years:

"I also seem to recall that this genocide was causing a massive exodus of displaced refugees, with millions starving to death while attempting to flee to neighboring nations. Since I haven't seen any petitions or heard any emotional entreaties for somebody—anybody—to please, for God's sake, do something... Well, I'm gonna guess that the major humanitarian crisis must be over. And thank God, too! The whole situation sounded really awful."

Ok, so that's not entirely true--a lot has changed. Thanks to the tireless efforts of groups like GI-Net, STAND, ENOUGH, Save Darfur, and many others, activists have rallied by the thousands to pass divestment legislation, make Darfur an issue in the presidential campaign, and focus attention on the on-going abuses perpetuated by the Sudanese government. The Save Darfur movement is distinguished in its energy and intelligence. And Darfur is covered by the mainstream media on a regular basis.

And yet the genocide continues unabated, doubly victimized by insufficient political will, on the part of the UN and other world institutions, to uphold the commitment to Never Again.

So what gives?

Here's something I've noticed, since I started writing this blog: Darfur is not really a mainstream issue, if you consider what the majority of Americans pay attention to.  I'm only just realizing this, because Darfur consumes a significant portion of my day, and lately I've been thrilled by the significant attention it's received from news outlets and bloggers. But I seek that information out--I have Darfur news and blog feeds that compile everything neatly into my Google Reader. And the coverage is substantial.

But do a Digg search on "Darfur." Not much comes up, does it? Digg is an aggregate pulse of who's-reading-what on the internet--the at-large community of "everyone else out there," and what they're interested in. It may only be one example, but it's a good example. Why isn't Darfur on the front page?

So here's my question to you (and it's not a rhetorical one): How do we put Darfur on the radar? How can we branch out of the Darfur activist community, as significant and strong as it is, and get more people to at least pay attention? How do we expand the circle, how to we shape our message to reach more people--the "Joe Sixpacks" of recent political concern?

This is not a criticism of the movement--it's a challenge. We've come so far, made such significant strides, but still have much more to do.

How do we take this to the next level?