Monday, April 17, 2017
The Role of Social Media in the Arab Revolts
Much has been written about the Arab revolts of 2011 and one of the central themes has been the potential role of social media. Mainstream media, ever desperate to 'get with the youth,' has been especially active in inventing catchy labels, such as the "Twitter Revolution" or "Facebook Revolution." For this week's structured response, I want you to think critically about this supposed importance of social media in the 2011 revolts. Using what you know about social movement formation, what would have been different without social media? Was social media a necessary factor for the revolutions to happen, or would they have happened regardless of Twitter and Facebook?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Social media is an outlet that is increasing in both popularity and power and can be used to both inspire and organize. Because social media is very accessible in most countries and its use has become a social norm, many people rely on it for the communication of ideas. In college, social media can be used by clubs to organize events, and in the Arab revolts of 2011, social media was used to both unite civil societies with a common cause and send a message to the world. In the revolts, social media was used as a mobilization structure because it was an outlet where citizens could organize and coordinate ideas. It was also a successful collective action frame because--thanks to the popular and readily available nature of social media--it was able to attract large numbers of people in an accessible way. Social media can also inspire people from around the world to be aware of and show support for a country, which can in turn lead to a better understanding of a revolution and even intervention from the outside. In Egypt, viral pictures of Khaled Said, a 28 year old Egyptian man who was beaten to death by police, led to the creation of a Facebook page titled "We Are All Khaled Said," which eventually helped to inspire an uprising that led to President Mubarak's resignation ("Spring Awakening" NY Times). This goes to show social media's widespread power and ability to spread a message to people who would otherwise not sympathize with or understand a revolution.
ReplyDeleteHad there been no social media, revolution would have been difficult because it would've lacked collective action and a common unifying message, and broad, far-reaching organization would've been difficult to achieve. Despite this, I do think that revolution would have still been possible without social media--as there have been successful revolutions before the technological age (such as the Iranian Revolution of 1979)--so I would not argue that social media was a necessary factor for the revolutions to happen. However, social media was very beneficial and influential for the revolution and will continue to be an important mobilization structure for revolutions in the years to come.
Edit: Although social media can be very helpful in some cases and can be considered to be vital tools of revolution, namely in Egypt and Tunisia, social media's success is not guaranteed (Khondker). The effectiveness of social media is stronger in some cases and varies based on type of regime because authoritarian regimes are "more resilient than imagined" (Shaery-Eisenlohr). Despite this, however, social media can be beneficial to the civil society in countries with these types of regimes as they help to inspire citizens, break a regime's culture of fear, and create a connected world (Shaery-Eisenlohr, Axford).
ReplyDeleteThe political upheavals in the Arab world during 2011, were driven by social media outlets. Social media played a imperative role in the success of the Arab revolts because these outlets were used as organizers and helped citizens share their ideas and ban together to overthrow the government. Scholars say “social media carried a cascade of messages about freedom and democracy across North Africa and the Middle East, and helped raise expectations for the success of political uprising”. Social media became a critical part of freedom. During the week before Egyptian president Hosni Mubaraks resignation, for example, the total rate of tweets from Egypt and around the world pertaining to political change in that country went from 2,300 a day to 230,000 a day. Videos featuring protest and political commentary went viral. The amount of content produced online by opposition groups, in Facebook and political blogs, increased dramatically also. Twitter was able to provide a window into a broader community of digital conversation, which helped organizers connect with more people and be so successful in over throwing the government.
ReplyDeleteSocial media was a huge factor for the success of the revolutionary in both Tunisia and Egypt. I personally think that they would not have been as successful without these outlets because of how twitter and Facebook became organizers connecting people together making the revolutionary ultimately stronger. In the case of both Tunisia and Egypt revolutions, in just the first two weeks after Mubarak resignation, there was an average of 2,400 tweets a day from people in neighboring countries about the political situation in Egypt. In Tunisia after Ben Ali resignation, there were about 2,200 tweets a day. This kept the conversation going in the discourse community which made it easy for citizens to ban together and become so successful with their revolution.
I completely agree that the Arab revolts of 2011 would not have been nearly as successful without the help of social media. Although I believed that before reading your response, the numbers that you brought in really backed up that fact. It's very interesting, the surge of tweets after the resignations of Mubarak and Ben Ali, but I think that's very important because if there were to be another revolution, clearly the people still understand the importance of social media and they know how to use it to their advantage.
DeleteThe Arab revolts were the result of year of oppression by dictators and corrupt government systems that favored the rich while forgetting everyone else. The sentiments on which the revolts were based had been in the air for years, but it took the right context for real action to be taken. I believe the social media was an important part of this context, but should not be credited for the success, or failures, of the revolts themselves. Social media was used to publish information about where protests were happening, and how people could help in the movements. However, it is important to note that many of the countries in which the revolts happened are very high context with many interconnected webs of people. If enough people from these networks came together, information would have spread with just as much ease as with social media. Social media certainly made it easier to do this, but communication styles were already very efficient. Another aspect that social media has credited for was the videos of the violent actions taken by police. I would credit this more to mobile phones, and the access to cameras. These vidoes were then shown on conventional media all over the world. The vidoes were also spread through social media which in coutries with high levels of censorship, was a way to keep up with what was happening if the government wasn't showing it on the news. Although social media made the Arab revolts more accessible I believe that there were other more important parts of the context that made it the right time to revolt. This includes the weakening of leadership, stifled economies and levels of education. Social media played a large role in the revolts, but the revolts would have happened anyway due to other factors.
ReplyDeleteThe observation that MENA societies exist in a high context culture is an important one, as this shapes not only the perspectives of those posting to social media (and thus the posts themselves), but also the interactions that low context individuals such as westerners have with the media posts. While familiar cultural symbols represented within MENA social media during the revolts were used to draw individuals together, the same symbols may have been non-representive and utterly unfamiliar to western viewers resulting in cultural miscommunications about the opinions and end goals of democratization movements.
DeleteI don’t think that the importance of social media in the 2011 Arab revolts should be undermined at all. As we discussed in class, the video of Mohamed Bouazizi was clearly the catalyst of the revolutions in Tunisia. Without social media like Facebook and Twitter, this incident could have easily been repressed. When the Arab Revolts began, many rulers of the states controlled radio airwaves, television broadcasting, and newspaper publications, thus rendering them able to control what the citizens saw and to create propaganda in favor of their regimes. Although in recent years, privately run newspapers and news stations have arisen, the government was still able to censor most publications. Social media was not only used a means to provide information about the corruption of the government and rally people for a revolution; it was also used to organize and publicize protests against the government. Many citizens were forced to rely on foreign news stations like Al-Jazeera for information because their own countries had blocked all available news stations. Although social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter were used to support both the revolutionaries and the regimes they were trying to overthrow, social media ultimately helped the demonstrators create a stronger revolution. People used social media to transmit information on demonstration information, medical requirements, essential telephone numbers, and the satellite frequencies of Al Jazeera. The amateur, graphic quality of photographs and videos from social media posts gave an added psychological strength and impact to the revolution and contradicted the professional pictures used as propaganda by the ruling regimes. In all, social media galvanized citizens throughout MENA and across the world during the Arab Revolts. While many argue that the role of social media is overstated in the revolts, I don’t think so. I think without the help of social media there still would have been revolts and demonstrations but I don’t think they ever would have been as successful, lasted as long, or gotten as much support and strength as they did without the help of social media to both gain support throughout the state and across the world and to provide instructions for demonstrations, thus creating a more cohesive and strong revolution.
ReplyDeleteSocial media was an important factor in the 2011 Arab revolts in my opinion; it brought individuals together within an easily accessible forum in which they could voice their opinions, government sanctioned or otherwise. Plans for protests and demonstrations could easily be broadcast to any individuals with a smart device and an internet connection. However, some may argue that social media has simply connected the larger world to areas of conflict in which social movements have begun to broadcast their efforts to democratize using nonviolent, and sometimes violent, means. This can be seen in the Egyptian revolution and subsequent overthrow of the Mubarak regime; for every post that connected individuals on the ground within Cairo, there was another that documented the movement's struggle that was sent around on Facebook, Twitter, etc. Even still, the Mubarak regime deemed the unifying effects of social media to be too detrimental to the maintenance of its authoritarian rule as it shut down all internet and digital media communications in an attempt to consolidate its waning power.
ReplyDelete