Introduction
With the increasing number of protests mobilised through social networks, the Internet is coming to be seen either as a force of liberation or as the new generation’s “cyber-utopia”, creating unfounded optimism and hopes of emancipation. The former view claims that social networks play a key role in shaping debates about protests and in spreading democratic ideas around the globe (especially in the case of Arab Spring).The latter view advocates that the role of internet has been exaggerated in the narratives of these protests because the very working class which fuelled the revolution did not have access to these technologies. This view suggests that it is not Facebook or Twitter that has brought about these revolutionary changes but other important elements of human life like values, experiences and the political will of people.
The proliferation of access, ease of acquiring a presence, possibility of rational debate along with reasonable outreach makes cyberspace an ideal tool of advocacy. With the increasing number of protests mobilised through social networks, the Internet is coming to be seen either as a force of liberation or as the new generation’s “cyber-utopia”, creating unfounded optimism and hopes of emancipation.
Much research has been conducted on internet activism, its effectiveness or ineffectiveness in mobilizing mass protests, its power in overthrowing the ruling regimes and its role in strengthening participatory processes. The digital media has played a crucial role in planning and executing protests, spreading information about the protests, creating a sense of shared community, forming a “virtual space” beyond the regulation of the state and inspiring viewers with ideas of democracy and libera...
... middle of paper ...
...ritical Theory of Internetworked SocialMovements, Sociological Theory, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Mar., 2005), pp. 42-74, American Sociological Association.
Vikas Jha, Anti-Corruption Movement in India: Do Democracies need reinvention? Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), New Delhi, India
Jason P. Abbott, Democracy@Internet.Asia? The Challenges to the Emancipatory Potential of the Net: Lessonsfrom China and Malaysia, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 1 (Feb., 2001), pp. 99-114, Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Ibid.
Barney Warf, Geographies of global Internet censorship, Springer Science Business Media B.V. 2010, 23 November 2010 http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2376815,00.asp http://www.seattle.gov/cityarchives/Exhibits/WTO/default.htm
Barney Warf, Geographies of global Internet censorship, Springer Science Business Media B.V. 2010, 23 November 2010
The article named “spring awakening” wrote by Jose Vargas describes the impact of social media in converting the mentality of young Egyptian generations into bold and defend their inalienable rights as a citizen. This article justifies how social media can mobilize a tremendous number of people to stand up for their rights. The reasons that inspire my emotion is emerging of “Wael Ghonim” as a legendary vocal figure of action for change, revelation of social media as earthquake for change, and fundamental soci-political change.
Malcolm Gladwell’s article "Small Change: Why the Revolution Will not be Tweeted" raises a significant question about the prospective contribution of web-based social networking to the advent of progressive social movement and change. Gladwell bold declaration that "the revolution will not be tweeted" is reflective of his view that social media has no useful application in serious activism. Contrasting various elements of the “high-stakes” lunch-counter protests in Greensboro, North Carolina in the 1960’s with the “low-stakes” activism achieved through social media, Gladwell concludes that effective social movements powerful enough to impose change on longstanding societal forces require both “strong ties” among participants and the presence of a hierarchical organizations. In contrast, Gladwell characterizes the social networks as an interwoven web of "weak ties" that is inherently devoid of a hierarchy. Gladwell’s prerequisites for social movement are firmly based in strong body of sociological evidence, but his views regarding the nature of online social networks are laughably lacking in foresight and obstructed by a misleadingly selective body of evidence.
Malcolm Gladwell’s article "Small Change: Why the Revolution Will not be Tweeted" raises a significant question about the prospective contribution of web-based social networking to the advent of progressive social movement and change. Gladwell’s bold declaration that "the revolution will not be tweeted" is reflective of his view that social media has no useful application in serious activism. Contrasting various elements of the “high-stakes” lunch-counter protests in Greensboro, North Carolina in the 1960’s with the “low-stakes” activism achieved through social media, Gladwell concludes that effective social movements powerful enough to impose change on longstanding societal forces require both “strong ties” among participants and the presence of a hierarchical organizations. In contrast, Gladwell characterizes the social networks as an interwoven web of "weak ties" that is inherently devoid of a hierarchy. Gladwell’s prerequisites for social movement are firmly based in strong body of sociological evidence, but his views regarding the nature of online social networks are laughably lacking in foresight and obstructed by a misleadingly selective body of evidence.
"A Global History of Censorship." Guarding Public Morality: A Global History of Censorship. N p.g., 20 Mar. 2010. Web. 03 Nov. 2013.
Technology has had a negative impact on this generation- we have lost and forgotten many things because of it. In Malcolm Gladwell’s “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted”, he discusses the difference between social media activism and “real” activism and the loss of human connection that he has identified. He believes that with social media activism, we lack the connections a community should have because we don’t get together in person- we are satisfied with being connected through technology. He also thinks that as time goes on, we will only get worse when referring to the ideas that we are delusional because the issues we fight about (such as getting phones taken away) aren’t as important as we think.
There are over 2,405,518,376 internet users on a global scale. More than 50% of the world has a form of Internet censorship, and of those countries China, North Korea, Iran, and Vietnam heavily restrict its citizens. This recent topic has reached new heights in the US with the growing number of internet access. More and more people are debating whether the internet should be censored. Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed on the internet.
In conclusion, Carr and Gladwell’s essays have proven that the internet positive effects are outweighed by its negative effects. Carr has found he is unable to finish a full text anymore or concentrate. He thinks that the internet has taken our natural intelligence and turned it into artificial intelligence. Gladwell discusses how nowadays, social activism doesn’t have the same risk or impact as former revolutions such as the Civil Rights Movement. The internet is mostly based on weak ties based among people who do not truly know each other and would not risk their lives for their
While many people throughout the world see social media as a trendy new application in the service of personal amusement, the political upheavals in the Arab world have shown how it can change the dynamics of modern day activism. The Arab Spring Uprising interlaced social unrest with a technological revolution. Blogs, news websites, twitter feeds, and political list servers became avenues for communication, information flow and solidarity. Being capable of sharing an immense amount of uncensored information through social media sites has contributed to the success of many Arab Spring activists. Social media played a role in facilitating the events of the Arab Spring, but the main issues are rooted in a broader set of economic, political, and social factors. This paper will examine how social media impacted the Arab Spring Uprising. Specifically, I will look at how social media introduced a novel resource that helped to created internet activist communities, changed the dynamics of social mobilization and revolutionized interactions between protesters and the rest of the world.
Internet is a powerful tool that allows users to collaborate and interact with others all over the world conveniently and relatively safely. It has allowed education and trade to be accessed easily and quickly, but all these benefits do not come without very taxing costs. This is especially true when dealing with the likes of the Internet. Countries in the European Union and Asia have realized this and have taken action against the threat of net neutrality to protect their citizens, even at the cost of online privacy. Internet censorship is required to protect us from our opinions and vices. Every country should adopt Internet censorship and regulation since it improves society by reducing pornography, racism/prejudice, and online identity theft.
As this critical juncture begins to take place, there has been much debate between scholars as to whether we should be enthusiastic or wary of these new changes. In Digital Disconnect and in his lectures, McChesney observes both views in an attempt to advance the discussion. On one side, the celebrants are embracing the Internet as a medium that will change society for the better. In Digital Disconnect, McChesney says, “In sum, the celebrants reaffirm one of the most important original arguments from the 1990s, that the Internet will be a force for democracy and good worldwide, ending monopolies of information and centralized control over communication” (McChesney 8). In my opinion, this celebrant view should only be regarded as a best-case scenario because of the unexpected obstacles for society that can...
For example, in Saleem Kassim views, “As a result of the many technological advancements and innovations that have revolutionized how individuals communicate, an abundance of information has become available to everyone.” Saleem Kassim’s point is that anyone and everybody can put out information that can be seen by everyone when you are an internet user. For example, the news can tell you that there’s nothing happening in a certain country; whereas, someone from that country can post on twitter and upload videos showing anyone that decides to see the truth of what is really happening in their country. Kassim also states, “Ultimately, public information supplied by social networking websites has played an important role during modern-day activism, specifically as it pertains to the Arab Spring.” In other words, Kassim believes that digital communication has brought people together to fight for something that is a good cause. To have people aware of the truth and to have someone do something about it. Indeed it is highly likely that we bring people together for a good cause but digital communication can also cause a downside through having no censorship on what you post. When more people are brought up of current events trending they decide to hope on board to see if there is anything they can do to help. Not to mention, Graff and Birkenstein view it the same way. Like I mentioned earlier, Graff and
The Arab Spring has impacted multiple countries in northern Africa and the Arab world so far since the end of December 2010, leading to the fall of the government in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen. Among the unarmed insurrections, social media and social networking technology functioned as a new strategy that empowered the protesters to gain successful uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt and inspired grassroots movements in other Arab countries. The new media, namely Twitter, Facebook and Youtube, with online blogs and mobile telecommunications, played a significant role in the politics of connectivity, which connect, coordinate and communicate the protestors. Labeled as “Twitter Revolution” or “Facebook Revolution”, the new media to some extent engaged in the Arab Spring uprisings. By analyzing more than three million tweets on Twitter, content on YouTube and thousands of blog posts, a study led by analysts from the University of Washington finds that social media played a critical role in shaping political debates in the movements during the Arab Spring.
In mere minutes, any active user can access information and associations regarding various causes, such as the riots happening in Egypt and the Middle East. Teenagers, in the Middle East, used their Facebook accounts to campaign the “Day of Rage” in Saudi Arabia. Helping to set the Arab riots in motion, the event demanded elections, freedom for women, and the liberation of political prisoners. The activists’ goals to bring democracy to Egypt and removing Hosni Mubarak, Egypt’s fourth president from 1981 to 2011, still continue and perhaps with the assistance of Facebook they will accomplish these ambitions. The causes campaigned through Facebook have served as a fundraise...
Despite existing laws and privacy enhancing technological methods, the US is progressively taking full advantage of its dominant position not just as the home of companies like Facebook, Google and Twitter but also acknowledging jurisdiction on all websites registered in the US. Therefore, countries such Brazil, Iran, Russia, India and China “are now challenging United States hegemony of the Internet and even calling for the creation of a new governing body to oversee Internet policy” (Brooke, 2012, p.245).
Internet has been acknowledged as one of the most efficient way to collect and reflect public opinions, for that people with different classes and races can express their opinions with no obstacles in virtual network spaces. People can speak out whatever they want just by typing on the keyboard within a second. Dr. Heather Savigny mentions in her article “Public Opinion, Political Communication and the Internet” that “The expansion of the internet as a new method of communication provides a potential challenge to the primacy of the traditional media and political parties as formers of public opinion” (1). People realized that the power of internet public opinion in the focus on social issues can be used as a weapon to affect government decision-makings. However, does public opinion only brings positive effects?