With the growth of Internet in the world (I would not say developing world) social media are playing important role in political movements. In the recent events in Egypt in Tunisia protesters used Facebook and Twitter to organize supporters. Millions of fans join the Facebook page "We are all Khaled Said".
On the other hand the Abderrahim Foukara, chief of television network Al Jazeera's Washington bureau said that although social media were important during the protests, they could not have succeed alone, adding that other media also played an important role.
"There were a lot of young people using Tweets and Facebook, and they still are, to convey a sense, in the case of Libya, of the atrocities being committed against civilians. But in the case of Egypt for example, you needed a television medium, whereby Egyptians can have a conversation with each other in real time in a way that put what was going on in Egypt in context, not just for people in Egypt but also for other people around the region," he said.
Another view of the situation was posted by the Egyptian journalist and blogger Mona Eltahawy saying that those calling the Middle East movements Facebook or Twitter revolutions are not giving the credit where it is due.
"Facebook and Twitter did not invent courage. And I think we owe it to these incredibly courageous people. I mean look how many people are being slaughtered in Libya, to recognize that this courage has been there for decades, whether people outside of those countries saw it or not. Facebook allowed you to see it. Facebook allowed them to connect. But at the end of the day, it's their courage to go out on the street and topple those regimes that must be saluted, before we salute anybody else," she said.
"Facebook and Twitter did not invent courage. And I think we owe it to these incredibly courageous people. I mean look how many people are being slaughtered in Libya, to recognize that this courage has been there for decades, whether people outside of those countries saw it or not. Facebook allowed you to see it. Facebook allowed them to connect. But at the end of the day, it's their courage to go out on the street and topple those regimes that must be saluted, before we salute anybody else," she said.
So what kind of role does new media have in the time of revolution and battle? Where are the limits to how much the recent unrest can be attributed to social media platforms?
Sources:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Social-Media--117312843.html
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Social-Media-a-Critical-Tool-for-Middle-East-Protesters-117202583.html
In my opinion new media or in this case social networks/media had 2 important functions: first they made information about the situation/revolution in the Middle East more visible, transparent and vivid, because the traditional media weren't showing all the tragic happening and representing all the information, so with the new media we could see what's really going on there; second, new media were a good platform for people gathering and sharing the information about the protests - so much more people got actively involved in the protests.
OdgovoriIzbrišiBut it is true that Facebook or Twitter didn't make protesters braver; in this case they were just communication channels for faster distribution of information. The real change and courage lies, as was already said, in the real "analog" people.
As I see it, social media gave people the opportunity to express their opinions and show their perspective on events. But they didn't create the revolution. People are the ones who can make change and were the power generating revolution and changes. Social media worked as very useful and effective supporting tool.
OdgovoriIzbrišiI agree with you two that the social media is only a channel, it can not fight for itself. But in this case the protesters and media are somehow interconnected. If it wasn't for the information on internet their voice will stayed local. If it wasn't for the people the revolution would not have existed.
OdgovoriIzbrišiAnother thing that we have to think about is the freedom of the media. It is not useful only for the protesters but for the government to. So the fight has also a software platform :)
I have to agree with all of you, I think that technology helped people to gather, but we have to move away from technological determinism and realise that actually people are the ones on the street making the revolution.
OdgovoriIzbrišiYesterday I was reading these opinions (for Slovenian students only) http://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/facebook-in-twitter-sta-le-sredstvo-revolucije-se-dogajajo-na-ulicah/252462 where Sandra Bašić Hrvatin and Jernej Prodnik from our faculty are commenting on current situation. What I found very interesting is the mentioned confusion of the political leaders due to the new technologies: Bašić said that "they don't know who's behind this revolution and politics can't accept the fact that there is no political party behind this, but accumulated people, expressing their wishes"
As already mentioned, Facebook and Twitter helped people with same goals to connect. They also helped leak the information about the situation in Middle East.
OdgovoriIzbrišiSometimes the "openedness" of new media - especially the posibility of anyone contribution almost everything - helps avoid the filters traditional media have, due to their responsibility to owners, shareholders or politics.
Is New Media liberating in that sense?
Would the story of Iranian girl Nada, killed on the streets during demonstrations in Teheran be otherwise heard?
And then the other side: is it a reliable source of information? Has it got quality?
And what is our task as public?