Toward the end of 2010 and start of
2011, the Middle East went through a period of unrest, dubbed by the world
media as the “Arab Spring”. During this
time a number of countries in the region (Egypt, Tunisia, Libya) went through
an historic transition where long standing dictatorial regimes were overthrown,
and new popular governments were installed.
Whilst this in itself is a huge news story, and perhaps belongs in a politics blog, what is interesting in relation to this week’s topic is that one of the reasons that these historic transitions are believed to have occurred is because of digital activism. The leaders of these revolutions used digital technology and social media to promote, organise and carry out mass demonstrations and other anti-government events with such efficiency and speed that governments were caught unawares, unprepared, and didn’t have time to mobilise their security forces and neutralise the demonstrators before they became too powerful (Howard & Hussein 2011).
Whilst this in itself is a huge news story, and perhaps belongs in a politics blog, what is interesting in relation to this week’s topic is that one of the reasons that these historic transitions are believed to have occurred is because of digital activism. The leaders of these revolutions used digital technology and social media to promote, organise and carry out mass demonstrations and other anti-government events with such efficiency and speed that governments were caught unawares, unprepared, and didn’t have time to mobilise their security forces and neutralise the demonstrators before they became too powerful (Howard & Hussein 2011).
When reviewing the events of the Arab
Spring, commentators are largely divided into three camps on the influence of
digital activism. The first group have
argued that without digital devices and social media, these uprisings would not
have occurred. This view is known as
the optimistic view of digital activism (Sivitanides & Shah 2011), where
digital technology is used for positive purposes and can successfully
facilitate and instigate change.
In the opposing camp are those that believe that digital activism can equally be used by those in authority to quell dissent, monitor communications and plan accordingly to disrupt dissenting voices. This is known as the pessimistic view of digital activism.
The final view is that digital technology does not provide positive or negative outcomes for users of digital technology. Rather, it has a neutral effect, doing little to change existing power hierarchies, and that power structures “persist” regardless of digital activism activities (Sivitanides & Shah 2011). I fall into this group. Whilst digital activism can play a role in facilitating social change, and help with the logistics of such an effort, human interaction is always going to be required for real, persistent change. Digital activism on its own can highlight and give voice to issues, but to solve serious human problems such as human rights abuses or corrupt governments, humans are needed, Twitter won’t do it. As Malcolm Gladwell said, “activism is tied to relationships and shared experiences – a person is more likely to protest if they know a friend will be by their side – rather than the number of people joining a Facebook campaign” (Cummings 2010).
In the opposing camp are those that believe that digital activism can equally be used by those in authority to quell dissent, monitor communications and plan accordingly to disrupt dissenting voices. This is known as the pessimistic view of digital activism.
The final view is that digital technology does not provide positive or negative outcomes for users of digital technology. Rather, it has a neutral effect, doing little to change existing power hierarchies, and that power structures “persist” regardless of digital activism activities (Sivitanides & Shah 2011). I fall into this group. Whilst digital activism can play a role in facilitating social change, and help with the logistics of such an effort, human interaction is always going to be required for real, persistent change. Digital activism on its own can highlight and give voice to issues, but to solve serious human problems such as human rights abuses or corrupt governments, humans are needed, Twitter won’t do it. As Malcolm Gladwell said, “activism is tied to relationships and shared experiences – a person is more likely to protest if they know a friend will be by their side – rather than the number of people joining a Facebook campaign” (Cummings 2010).
Sivitanides, M & Shah, V 2011, The era of digital
activism, Conference proceedings of CONISAR 2011, Conference for
Information Systems Applied Research held in Wilmington, North Carolina
Cummings, J 2010, ‘Is digital activism an effective medium
for change?’, The Guardian, 6 October, viewed 15 August 2013,
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2010/oct/06/digital-activism-facebook-twitter-gladwell>.
Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M.,
2011, 'The Role of Digital Media', Journal
of Democracy, vol. 22, no. 3, pp.36-48
No comments:
Post a Comment