About 2 weeks ago I blogged about the ever changing platform twitter has become form it's early days of a "day in the life of nobody" to now being used by political activists and gaining credibility as a source of news and sharing information. Although we seem to share the same sentiments, Morozov (2011) seems to then become very anti-American in his stance on twitter and how responsible it is in helping grass roots movements.
As stated during the tutorial twitter and Facebook are used as organisation tools that help to organise real world movements that in turn create change. There is no use having a completely online movement as the government don't seem to take notice. Morozov himself says 'the internet can be effective tool for political change when used by grassroots organisations' (2011, p1). However he then goes on to discredit places such as twitter and Facebook saying it is all about the peoples motives and rive and not the technology, which is where is argument is lost.
Bringing in Gladwell who follows his train of thought in his article Twitter, You're No Martin Luther King, claims that revolutions tend to be overlooked by the tools the activists use such as 'the role of the telegraph in the 1917 Bolshevik revolution...tape-recorder in the 1979 Iranian Revolution (highly recommend further research, it is fascinating) and fax machine in the 1989 revolutions' (Morozov 2011, p2). This I agree with in essence that activism doesn't not spring from its tools but rather activists use tools to spread their ideas. This however does not mean the tool was not vital in the act.
The final nail in this particular argument for me was when he stated 'by emphasising the liberating role of tools and downplaying the role of human agency, such accounts make Americans feel proud of their own contribution to events in the Middle East...Silicon Valley deserves a lion's share of the credit'. His ideas are truly interesting, but the fact he is so extreme in his view, makes it hard, for me at least, to take his argument criticising it heavily. After 2 pages of a well argues point, he suddenly falls into a 'screw you America' mentality. That isn't to say however that his points do not have their own merit.
Morozov, Evgeny 2011, 'Facebook and Twitter are just places revolutionaries go', 7 March, The Guardian, accessed 8/10/2011.
I really like the angle you took on this post, though I'm not entirely sure which side you took. Are you quoting Morozov and Gladwell's statements in agreement or are you showing how blind they are to the power of online platforms?
ReplyDeleteIn any case, I think the sheer large scale utility of Facebook and Twitter was proven in the days of the arabspring/mena protests. Both platforms were fully functional as a mode of organisation until the Government actually -did- realise their power, and had to shut down the Internet.
I do agree about the extreme Anti-American view in the articles. Seems a bit tunnel-visioned on an issue that affects a global magnitude.
I agree that social networking is an efficient place to organise protests. However the activism doesn't just stay online because of what you said about it not being as obvious to the government. I also agree with you that the tool of social networking was also contributing to the act.
ReplyDeleteYes the people who use social networking are the ones sending out the information but without the social networking medium it would be a lot more difficult.
I think that Morozov is a little confused. He pretty much dissed twitter in saying that it had minimal part in the Arab Spring. I believe he is wrong. Without the social networking sites like twitter and Facebook these riots would have not as been anywhere near as effective. The citizens would not have known about them. I also believe that this is not the last time that these social networking sites are going to help in political action.
ReplyDeleteYep, I'm with Lydia. Morozov argues the idea that it was the people who started the revolution, and that we should not remember the role of social networking over these people. I am all for remembering the bravery of the people who planned and arranged the revolutions, but we cannot undermine the role that these digital tools took with the Arab Spring. It is clear that these sites did not ignite the fire, but they definitely spread it to a magnitude otherwise not possible.
ReplyDelete