| 37 | march 2011 | SPIDER

C OV E R S TO RY Ammar Yasir

Understanding what social media can andcannot do in case of a revolution

Debunking the mythAt a local gathering, a groupof people was asked if theyblogged, they shook their

heads in disagreement. They werethen asked if they changed theirFacebook statuses or shared videos,articles etcetera on social media; tothis, they enthusiastically agreed inunison. Not many of them knew thatusing social media – albeit for statusupdates, moderate sharing of websitelinks and videos – is micro-blogging,which makes them all bloggers. Thesocial media cloud is now so powerfulthat a teenager in a small town ofNoshero Feroz can address anaudience in New Jersey; but it allcomes down to the message oneintends to convey.

The Iranian elections in 2009 are oftenreported as a case study, being the firstglobal event where the world witnessedthe potential of social media as apropaganda jukebox and a platform forcyber-activism. The day the election resultswere announced, anonymous Twitterhandles were created; these became themain sources of information from Iran tothe rest of the world. These anonymoususers asked the global audience to changetheir current location to Tehran, theirdisplay pictures to green (Pakola fan,anyone?) and share every news item thatcontained the hashtag #iranelections. Notsurprisingly, the US State Departmentasked Twitter to suspend its scheduled

down time maintenance that would havedisrupted the ensuing drama. So did arevolution take place? None whatsoever.You can blame the fake Twitter ids forpainting the wrong picture, the globaldigital divide that kept a significantpopulation out of the loop, or the Iranianresidents who were indifferent to the so-called ‘green revolution’. Whoever youblame, the fact remains that the revolutionnever came.

A couple of revolutions did, however,take place two years later. They triggered adomino effect in the Arab world, withautocratic regimes in Tunisia and Egyptcrumbling down, and the setting off ofuprisings in Bahrain, Libya, Jordan andmany more. Mainstream news channels

like Al Jazeera, field reporters, journalistsand activists on ground took up social mediatools to create awareness and spread theword. The impact (of social media) becamesuch that the revolution in Egypt was being

dubbed as the revolution of theFacebook generation. So we must askourselves: Is it inevitable for socialmedia to be responsible for futurerevolutions in the modern world?

Online activism can be divided intothree main categories:Awareness/advocacy,organisation/mobilisation, andaction/reaction. In this article, we willtry to debunk some of the myths ofsocial media activism, based on theaforementioned categories.

Awareness/advocacy:Social or free media empowers ordinary,non-partisan individuals to publiciseissues that otherwise don’t make it to

the mainstream media (local andinternational) for numerous

reasons. Alternate and socialmedia allow issues such aschild abuse, gender-basedviolence, bureaucratictransgressions etcetera – which

the mainstream media isreluctant to address – to receive

the attention they deserve.

What worksHere, it would be appropriate to mentionTake Back the Tech, an initiative taken touse technology to create awareness aboutwomen issues, and to educate women onhow to protect their online presence. Thecampaign encourages women to usetechnology for their benefit, and highlightscases where technology was misused forgender violence. The success of thiscampaign lay with the women and men (yes,you read that right) who came together forthe cause. They had a common goal, adirection and most importantly a strategy.Though the campaign is mainly advocatedon social media and mostly coverstechnology related issues, all personsinvolved sit together from time to time tobrainstorm ideas and execute a strategy.

What does not workMisinformation coming from an unidentifiedsource, no matter how exhilarating orseemingly-correct, can create confusion anddamage the cause. How many times havewe received and/or forwarded textmessages or e-mails that eventually turnedout to be a hoax? Last year’s blanket ban onFacebook stands as a valid example, as thiswas when text messages and e-mails werecirculated to disseminate all sorts oferroneous updates and information.

Organisation/mobilisationAuthor and public speaker Malcolm Gladwellmade waves and enemies with his article inThe New Yorker, titled ‘Small changes: Whythe revolution will not be tweeted’. Thoughhe was widely criticised by cyber-activists forhis theory, he made some valid points.According to Gladwell, acquaintances thatwe make online are weak compared to thebonds of friends and family in the real life.He also opined that, when online, people puttheir minimum at stake, to accomplish goalsthat are achieved putting in minimum effort.

What worksFund raisers, donations, relief efforts servingthe common goal with little or no riskinvolved. The flood relief efforts organised byPakistani civilians and NGOs is an example

C O V E R S T O RY

| 38 | march 2011 | SPIDER

of successful mobilisation usingsocial media. As members of sucha team, this writer and his peerswere able to collect aid of over amillion rupees in two days, usingFacebook, Twitter, e-mails and textmessages. Worth mentioning is thefact that when people distrust thegovernment, they are more open (todonate money) to people they knowvia social media. Hence, real-worldties versus social-media ties arecase-specific.

What does not workSince social media gives every user anequal opportunity to speak, it is a double-edged sword. “So how do you make difficultchoices about tactics or strategy orphilosophical direction when everyone hasan equal say?” asks Malcolm Gladwell.

As there is no defined leadership structureor hierarchy, it can be quite difficult to reachconsensus and prioritise goals. Also, sincethere are no defined rules of engagement,social networks can be the eyes and ears ofthe enemy.

Exhibit A: Wael Ghonim, a prominentEgyptian internet activist and currently theHead of Marketing of Google Middle Eastand North Africa, gives much credit to socialmedia; but in Egypt’s case, the country wasalready united behind a common goal: Getrid of Mubarak.

Exhibit B: Notwithstanding theoverwhelming yet disproportionate role oftechnology, religious parties in Pakistanhave always been able to pull in bignumbers in their rallies in comparison to thetech-savvy liberals.

Action/reactionConditions, cultures and traditions vary fromone nation to another. In the past, tohighlight the importance of their dedicationto a cause, activists marched on the streetsand caused traffic on busy roads. Now, thereare other, more civilised yet radical ways toadvocate a cause. Some activists turn tohacktivism to propagate their politicalstance; they take down websites by usingDenial of Service attacks, upload Trojan

viruses and send out mass e-mails (e-mailbombs) to create annoyance and disruption.

What worksSetting up of websites, e-petitions, blogposts, podcasts, Facebook pages and livecoverage of events on Twitter etcetera oftenworks. However, their effectiveness variesfrom case to case. Some issues garnermore attention than others – irrespective oftheir importance.

What does not workRelying solely on social media for numbersis not a good idea. When the FormerPresident of Pakistan, Pervez Musharaf, wasasked why he thought he was popularamong the Pakistanis, he credited his300,000-plus fans on Facebook. However,when it came to on-ground support, hardly athousand gathered to demonstrate theirsupport for him.

At the end of the daySocial media is an excellent tool to raiseawareness and promote social causes. Butwhen it comes to toppling down anautocratic regime, one has to do more thanmerely check-in a protest via Foursquare.

C O V E R S T O RY

| 39 | march 2011 | SPIDER

U.S. State Department speaks toTwitter over Irantinyurl.com/UStwitteriranNew Yorker: Small changetinyurl.com/ny-smallchangeFrom power to politicstinyurl.com/PMpower

The Sites