The evolution of revolution

Free the carrier pigeon, abandon Morse code, and overlook Radio Free Europe (RFE).

The fact is, a new type of communication is at the forefront of today’s political revolutions. Today, rebellions organized via social networking sites are emerging as the newest trend in conflict initiation.

Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and mobile phone text messaging have become breeding grounds for rebel and dissident movements worldwide. Now only a click away, supporting a coup has never been so easy.

While Canadian university students use Facebook to plan birthdays, charity bake sales, and bar nights, Moldovan students have used it to plan uprisings against their Communist government.

In countries where speaking out against the government is not tolerated, many young activists have been forced to find creative avenues to pursue aggressive action for their cause.

Interestingly, many have turned to the social networking sites they know all too well as a means to articulate dissent and to orchestrate revolt.

While this may appear groundbreaking, according to the Washington Post, throughout history, “Protesters have often used new technologies to evade government attempts to stifle dissent.” The Washington Post notes, even when the Soviet Union appeared on the verge of collapse, “Dissenters used underground fax services to spread information.”

New media technologies provide vital communication links. Exploiting such communication avenues, while evading governmental interference, is the key to raising awareness for a political cause. Undeniably, this is the future of revolution.

Moldova
In April 2009, political unrest bred outright civil disobedience in Moldova’s capital of Chisinau.



Activists, expressing discontent over the Communist Party’s recent re-election victory, overwhelmed the police presence and effectively stormed the country’s parliament buildings. Upon retreat, the dissidents left the government offices in ruins and the typically heavy-handed Communist government in utter bewilderment.

According to RFE, the entire act was organized and carried out using a combination of Twitter, Facebook, mobile phone text messaging, blogs, and e-mail.

RFE reports that even as online access to news organizations and opposition parties was blacked out by the Communist government, organizers simply switched to using Facebook to plan and spread information about upcoming demonstrations. The online organization made it impossible for the Moldovan government to monitor or control the students’ activities.

Iran
In the summer of 2009, Twitter was also a major player in Iran’s ongoing political drama. In June, as Iranian President Ahmadinejad claimed re-election victory, many took to the streets in protest. According to the Washington Post, these demonstrations were entirely prearranged via Facebook and Twitter.



The Washington Post reports that Twitter’s influence on the Iranian political situation was so profound that even U.S. government officials took notice.

In turn, the U.S. State Department asked Twitter to postpone scheduled maintenance of their site, as to not disrupt communication between the dissident movement organizers and their supporters within Iran’s borders.

During the uprising, the mainstream media even grew dependent on Twitter updates as the Iranian government barred the press from entering the country. On some occasions, the Washington Post reports, “The predominant information [was] coming from Twitter.”

In light of this summer’s events, many in Iran have since coined the revolt “a Twitter revolution.”

Somalia
Terrorists, not to be left out of this new trend, have begun to use social networking technologies to their benefit as well.

The BBC reports that Al-Shabab, a radical insurgent Islamic group with reported links to Al-Qaeda, conducts all of its communication via text messages.



The group, operating within war-ravaged Somalia, reportedly organizes its troops, communicates between them, and issues threats to opposing parties using mobile phone text messaging systems.

According to the BBC, low-ranking military officers are given pre-paid phone cards by elite members of the group.

This way, the leadership of al-Shabab is allowed the disguise of complete anonymity and never even has to set foot in Somali territory.

America
The developing world, however, is not the only one getting in on the social networking action.

While hardly a rebellion, Barack Obama’s successful 2008 presidential campaign is an example of effective use of modern communication technologies.

(Segment relevant to this post starts at 1:45)


The Obama team hired Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes to promote the Democratic hopeful online.

It worked. Obama’s web campaign was revolutionary and unarguably successful in targeting the youth vote, which has traditionally been a difficult demographic to get out to the polls.

The aforementioned examples of digital activism are only a minute cross section of actual occurrences across the globe. In fact, to date, social networking sites have become a powerful political tool throughout the world.

As this technology continues to evolve, it may become better known for its revolutionary potential than its social networking capabilities.

My final project for this course is the blog The Evolution of Revolution. If you are at all interested in the field of digital activism, I encourage you to check it out. Ultimately, this blog will explore the social media revolution currently unfolding; a revolution that could craft our future world order.

As citizens unite in the digital public sphere, it appears that engagement with politics is changing. In countries where newspapers, magazines, and independent television stations are not permitted to exist freely, it seems that an especially active and engaged online population often emerges.

As the democratizing force of digital activism matures, and if the “spinternet” is kept at bay, it is plausible that those who assert themselves in the digital public sphere will see their actions transcend the blogosphere and engage a populace beyond that of even cyberspace.

While a new consciousness is unarguably emerging online, we must question whether it is powerful enough to curb citizen apathy toward political engagement. Does the digital public sphere have a future as a democratic staple? I hope to find out.

Watch what you tweet

Just this week, Russia’s envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, got himself into a little hot water over comments he posted to his Twitter account. While the international community may have grown accustomed to Rogozin’s antics at NATO’s headquarters in Brussels, which include hanging a poster of Joseph Stalin in his ambassadorial office, his latest anecdotes in the “twittersphere” are raising new concerns.

In reference to the planned U.S. installation of anti-missile interceptors in Romania, Rogozin tweeted, “The Americans and their allies again want to surround the den of the Russian bear? How many times must they be reminded that this is dangerous?”

However, Rogozin did not stop there.

“The bear will come out,” he furthered, and “kick the ass of these miserable hunters.” Undoubtedly, the “hunters” Rogozin is referring to are the United States, NATO, and their allies.

Interestingly, this is not the first time Rogozin has engaged in such tactics via-Twitter. In fact, Rogozin is infamous for tweeting insulting comments in respect to others in the international community.

On the micro-blogging site, Rogozin has consistently pointed out NATO failures, has labeled the thinking of Western leaders as “irrational,” and even called former Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko a “loser.”

The politics of Twitter are undeniable.

The New York Times reported that from PR to trash talking, many believe Rogozin’s Twitter activity is all part of a greater scheme cooked up by the Kremlin. Revaz Beshidze, the Georgian representative to NATO, is one of those who believe this is the case.

According to Beshidze, “he is implementing strict instructions from Moscow.” The Georgian diplomat implied that Rogozin’s sole purpose is to bully the West in its own institutional backyard.

David J. Kramer, the former deputy assistant secretary of state in George W. Bush’s administration described Rogozin’s actions saying, “His job is virtually to drop rhetorical bombs on NATO. As for where Rogozin’s tweets fit in, Kramer said, “His public profile runs counter to any sense that Russia is serious about improving relations with NATO.”

While Rogozin is undeniably pushing the boundaries of Twitter, there are slim to no guidelines which specify only “diplomatic niceties” are allowed.

While we struggle to understand the politics at work behind the scenes, this instance remind us that public social networking sites are always open to the manipulative forces of governments.

Haiti: Social media failure?

In last week’s post, I pondered the possibility of a new media takeover.

Typically, however, that same day I came across a particularly persuasive editorial column that debunked my prior musings entirely.

Joshua Keating’s article in Foreign Policy marks a personal moment of realization that perhaps social media is not the saviour the journalistic profession has been waiting for. Oh great.

In the article, Keating deflated the hype surrounding the social media coverage of the ongoing Haiti crisis.

While Keating praised the micro-blogging site for its profound influence on the tumultuous Iranian political scene in June 2009, which many have since coined “a Twitter revolution,” he is far less gracious in regards to this latest coverage. In fact, Keating even goes so far as to dub the Haitian earthquake reporting as the first “Twitter Disaster.”

Keating explained that while the media circus surrounding Haiti is surely an interesting phenomenon, those contributing to social networking sites today are failing to provide valuable, let alone credible, newsworthy updates.

Keating said, “Haiti-related tweets seem to consist of either expressions of personal sympathy for the victims of the quake or links to news articles from other sites.” At the end of the day, Keating explained that the sheer manpower and professional capabilities of news organizations appeared to beat out Twitter’s volunteer base in the reporting of ‘real news’.

Interestingly, this is very different than what happened in Iran.

Where, as the Iranian government barred the press from entering the country, the mainstream media grew increasingly dependent on Twitter updates. On some occasions, according to the Washington Post, “The predominant information [was] coming from Twitter.”

In light of this summer’s events, and pandering to an overeager public craving up-to-the-second coverage, Twitter made the decision to rebrand itself as a news and information source in Nov. 2009.

The site did this by a seemingly simple change. Instead of asking users, “What are you doing?” when updating their statuses, the site now asked, “What’s happening?”

While the rebranding of Twitter as a news and information source has been reasonably successful, at times, it appears as though the site cannot live up to the standards we demand of traditional media.

This is something that any regular Twitter user, who undoubtedly experiences headaches stemming from site outages on a near weekly basis, can attest to.

For example, after word of aftershocks in Haiti, I hoped to see the drama unfolding first hand via #Haiti in the early morning hours of Jan. 20. However, upon attempting to log into my own Twitter account, I received the all too familiar “whale fail” image of the Twitter over capacity page.

"Too many tweets! Please wait a moment and try again"? Traditional media certainly would never get away with such a thing.

This was precisely the point Keating was hinting at in his article.

"In the past two decades, the news cycle has gone from the daily updates of newspapers to the up-to-the-minute coverage of cable news and the blogosphere to the up-to-the-second updates of Twitter. It's possible that we may have reached a point where information is being provided faster than users can process it, and the "news" ceases to inform at all.”

The Haiti crisis proved that social media cannot trump traditional news media just yet. However, in light of this latest exposure of social media’s current limits as a news medium, we can rest assured that the field will only better itself in the meantime.