Click "Read more" to expand the full research paper.
Facebook: Giving the Face Back to the People
Since
the beginning of time, man has used the word to combat the sword and
to tear down tyrants. As time passed, the medium by which the word
was spread has developed and evolved. With the historic invention of
the printing press, media was born and took on a key role in the
spread of thought and the bringing about of political, economic, and
social change. The word could be shared and spread like never before.
The word and the media took leaps with the invention of the radio,
audio recording devices, and mass-producing printing presses. This
last century provided the invention of the computer and the Internet,
which has opened the doors of many more homes and minds to a much
wider world of information and words. In this last decade we have
witnessed the birth of a new form of media- the social media. The pen
of the honest seeker of peace and truth has always been yielded
against the sword of the tyrant and the oppressor, but the sword has
come a long way since the initial casting of steel and now comes in
the advanced forms of tactical weapons and missile systems. Luckily,
the pen has been keeping up and in recent years has introduced a new
counter defense system known as social media with its advanced
weapons Facebook and Twitter. These tools have been effectively used
in tearing down tyrants, spreading liberty, and publishing peace.
Why is this new form of media so powerful and what advantages does it
have over the already existing media? Social media is tearing down
barriers and opening public squares where mutual knowledge can be
shared, changing the nature of news and the engagement of the citizen
in it, and is bringing light on issues before and where the news
cameras can’t always reach, while reminding mankind that despite
nationality people aren’t so different after all. Somehow it does
all this with just a few simple keystrokes and a couple of “likes.”
Media
helps ideas be spread and understanding and agreements be reached.
Most conflicts in the world come about simply because of
misunderstanding. This misunderstanding rises from a lack of mutual
knowledge. Steven Pinker, an experimental psychologist and Harvard
College professor, has spoken on the power of mutual knowledge. He
explained once at a conference that mutual knowledge must be
distinguished from another type of knowledge – individual
knowledge. In individual knowledge, he explained, person A knows X
and person B knows X. In mutual knowledge, not only does person A
know X and person B knows X but person A also knows that person B
knows X and person B knows that person A knows X and person A knows
that person B knows that he knows X and person B knows that person A
knows that he knows X. This could, of course, go on but I think the
point is understood. This difference in knowledge he explained has
profound consequences. To help illustrate his point he proposed two
questions: Why is freedom of assembly enshrined as a fundamental
right in a democracy and why are political revolutions triggered when
a crowd gathers in a public square? He explains that people
individually at home know that they hate the current dictator or
political conditions, but what they do not know is that other people
in other homes know that they know that they hate the current state
of things. When people are allowed to assemble in the public sphere
everyone knows that everyone else knows that the dictator is loathed
and this mutual knowledge gives the group the collective power to
take down a dictator that can normally pick them off one at a time in
their divided unrest. Thus mutual knowledge provides the collective
power for a group to mobilize and make change. To better illustrate
the point, Pinker points out that Hans Christian Anderson’s
children’s story The Emperor’s New Clothes is a story
about mutual knowledge. In the short story two weavers promise an
Emperor a new suit of clothes that is invisible to those unfit for
their positions, stupid, or incompetent. When the Emperor parades
before his subjects in his new clothes, a child cries out, “But he
isn’t wearing anything at all!” Pinker shed light that when the
little boy pointed out that the king was naked, he wasn’t telling
everybody anything they didn’t already know or couldn’t see with
their own eyes. What the little boy did was change the state of
knowledge from individual knowledge to mutual knowledge because at
that moment everyone else knew that everyone else knew that everyone
else knew the king was naked. Once again this mutual knowledge gave
them the collective power to challenge the dominance of the emperor.
(Pinker)
So
what does this all have to do with Facebook and today’s social
media? Facebook, if properly used, can build virtual public squares
where people can communicate and where individual knowledge can
become mutual knowledge without requiring people to leave their homes
and face the streets. Instead, they can assemble on the virtual
public squares of their favorite social media sites where information
can be direct, clear, and a whole lot less sweaty, crowded, and
pushy, not to mention anonymous if necessary. These social networks
break down barriers and shrinks distances by constructing public
squares that span between nations and people that never could exist
before given the physical limitations of distance.
A touching example of this concept was recently covered in a featured
PBS article entitled “’We Will Never Bomb Your Country’: The
Israeli-Iranian Peace Web.” With stirring rumors of a war between
Israel and Iran, tensions have been very high between these two
nations. The article presents an example of where individual
knowledge became mutual knowledge and had profound consequences.
Ronny Edry, like numerous other Israelis, was at home with the
individual knowledge that he loved his Iranian neighbors and did not
wish to participate in the war being promoted between the two nations
by his political leaders. Many Iranians were in their own homes with
the same individual knowledge that they also loved their Israeli
neighbors and did not want to go to war against them. What they did
not know is that they both shared the same view. However, when these
two groups of people met on the public square of Facebook, the
virtual streets and squares where filled with people bearing up
banners reading “Iranians we will never bomb your country. We love
you” and “My Israeli friends, we don’t hate you, and we don’t
want war. Love and Peace.” It was brought to light that the
reported “tensions” were not as existent between the people as it
was purported to be by their politicians. These two groups, or rather
this one unified group, acquired collective power by the mutual
knowledge gained and is using this power to strike down the
threatening rumors of war and the political leaders promoting it. All
this was done without crowd control having to be called, without the
pains and confusions caused by large groups of people gathering in
one place, with individual voices actually being able to be heard
from of the crowd, and with this simple effort of a few keystrokes
and clicks. (Zilber)
Facebook
and other social media websites are changing the way in which people
receive and share news and information. Jeffrey Ghannam in an article
entitled Social Media in the Arab World: Leading up to the Uprisings
of 2011 wrote “Social media is arguably changing the nature of news
and community engagement, which continues to evolve with increased
convergence of social media and satellite broadcasts, as seen in
Tunisia, Egypt, and other countries of the region.” (23) People no
longer rely solely on the radio, television, or newspapers for their
news. Ghannam says, “The days of
government-sponsored or politically allied newspapers having a media
monopoly have been eclipsed by the advent and adoption of social
media.” (6) News, for many, no longer comes in the form of the
morning paper or the evening news, but rather it comes in the form of
a wall post of a friend with an attacked video clip or a link to an
online article. Facebook and Twitter themselves are not news
corporations, but they are quickly becoming one of the primary
mediums by which news is spread. Carrington Malin, an executive at
Spot On Public Relations in Dubai in May 2010 said, “Facebook
doesn’t write the news but the new figures show that Facebook’s
reach now rivals that of the news press.” (Ghannam 12) As the
Internet becomes increasingly available this reach will only continue
to broaden.
Not
only is the community beginning to receive their news through this
new medium of social media, but they are also beginning to use social
media to become more engaged in the process of writing it and sharing
it. Social media has changed the nature of freedom of expression,
giving an unprecedented voice to the people. Social media offers a
medium by which individuals’ opinions can be shared directly and
viewed by greater numbers than ever was possible. People can logon
onto their social networks, see the thoughts of their neighbors,
friends, and leaders on any current issue troubling them, and then
add their own voice and opinion to the issue. No longer is the voice
of the political leaders or the broadcaster the only voices being
heard or received. Ronny Edry of the earlier mentioned initiative
entitled, “Iranians, We Love You” understood this. He asserted,
“Raising your voice is easier these days, especially via social
media. We can undercut the middleman, the politicians. I'm not
addressing Ahmadinejad. Today we can reach Iran and they can reach
us." (Zilber). The voices of individuals are better heard today
by its leaders and are becoming more and more heard at the national
and international level.
Social
media transforms the user into a sort of citizen-journalist. A user
may post his or her opinions, ideas, or complaints on a Facebook wall
with an attached picture or video that he or she took only moments
before on their smartphone or digital camera. His or her wall becomes
a local newspaper for his friends and community. An article from the
Guardian, an online British news site, underlines the role of the new
citizen-journalist in the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. “Think of
the defining image of the uprisings in the Middle East and North
Africa – the idea that unites Egypt with Tunisia, Bahrain and
Libya…the defining image is this: a young woman or a young man with
a smartphone. She's in the Medina in Tunis with a BlackBerry held
aloft, taking a picture of a demonstration outside the prime
minister's house. He is an angry Egyptian doctor in an aid station
stooping to capture the image of a man with a head injury from
missiles thrown by Mubarak's supporters. Or it is a Libyan in
Benghazi running with his phone switched to a jerky video mode,
surprised when the youth in front of him is shot through the head.
All of them are images that have found their way on to the Internet
through social media sites.” (Beaumont) The news stations are no
longer an authoritative source of information. Cameras are going
places the news vans and reporters could never go. The
citizen-journalist now covers the stories the news corporations won’t
or can’t.
Several
factors including the widened freedom of assembly and freedom of
expression provided by social media has enabled Facebook and Twitter
to become great mobilizers of people and promoters of political
change. While the responsibility and credit still goes to the people
for making change in the world, Facebook and Twitter help in the
organizing and in the gaining of support of the people.
Facebook does not make the revolution. It simply creates a space for
venting the outrage from years of repression, economic instability
and individual frustration. An article discussing the
revolutionary potential of the web supports this point. “Facebook
and Twitter certainly aren’t solely responsible for the growing
wave of revolutionary ferment in the Arab world; pent-up frustrations
had been bubbling for some time. But they helped to channel that
frustration into action. The first major demonstrations in Tunisia
and Egypt were organized via Facebook and Twitter, with activist
leaders directing followers where to congregate and how to avoid
blockades. Those gatherings then snowballed, drawing in citizens from
all walks of life. “ (Sedra 1)
There
were revolutions, of course, before Facebook and Twitter,
nevertheless, the situations in Tunisia and Egypt have clearly shown
how quickly and effectively a nation’s frustrations can be
channeled into action via social media. One of the greatest benefits
of social media and reasons why it has been so effective in promoting
change is the speed at which it allows news to be distributed and
received. While phones and email have brought us long past the days
of Paul Revere when people were informed and could gathered only as
quickly as the horse could gallop, now social media has come in and
broken all the response time records set by the phone and email. “The
instantaneous nature of how social media communicate self-broadcast
ideas, unlimited by publication deadlines and broadcast news slots,
explains in part the speed at which these revolutions have unraveled,
their almost viral spread across a region.” (Beaumont)
Social networking is the web medium of choice in our age. People with
Internet access spend more time on these social networking sites than
they do on email. (Sedra 2) The throngs of users connected by social
media enable information to be passed rapidly. During the Egyptian
revolution, a citizen-journalist could post a video on Facebook that
would be shared by 60,000 people on their walls within a few hours.
What took place online soon would spill out onto the streets until
change was brought about. Facebook is not only quick to call for
revolution but also quickens the call to peace. "We physically
can't go to Iran but our message of love is there, faster than any
ambassador." said Michal when being interviewed about her and
her husbands attempt to keep the peace with their neighbors in Iran.
(Zilber) Such immediate and far-reaching forms of communication are
part of what make social networks, like Facebook and Twitter,
such powerful non-violent tools for promoting positive change and
establishing peace.
Facebook
helps people, especially of different nationalities, to see each
other for who they really are-people. Sociologists and historians
often view dehumanization, the treating or portraying of others with
non-human characteristics, as central to some or all types of war or
violence. Facebook is an excellent tool in combating the efforts of
dehumanization. Networking sites like Facebook are made to help
facilitate the building of friendships and relationships. Users can
create profiles with photos of themselves, their families, their
friends, and their pastimes. They can post lists of personal
interests, contact information, and other personal information.
Viewers can view what goes on in the lives of others and the friends
and relatives that make up their lives. Status updates keep people
posted on what others are experiencing. It is hard to dehumanize
someone against a backdrop of personal photos, especially if their
photos include photos of their family and friends. Not to mention the
difficulty in dehumanizing someone whose interest you know and share.
On Facebook people can come to know and build relationships with
people who live nations apart. The dehumanized faces of enemies can
be unmasked and transformed back into their human self, a person
deserving all the basic human rights a human should enjoy.
Ronny and Michal Edry, in creating their Facebook initiative for
peace with the Iranians, were mindful that the first step to war was
the demonization and dehumanization of the other side. Michal while
explaining their initiative stated, "The message is human beings
loving each other, as human beings. Iranians see all these Israeli
faces and say, 'Hey, that's what an Israeli looks like!'" The
success of their efforts to combat dehumanization through social
media is seen in many of the responses they received. One Iranian
responded, “I wanted to let you know that your message of love and
peace has come through. Looking at all the photos on your wall
brought tears to my eyes. Let us not allow our governments hold us
back from knowing each other. I dream of a day that you and I will be
able to meet in Tel Aviv or Tehran and catch up on all that has been
kept back for so long. I sincerely believe, that day will come. TO
PEOPLE OF ISRAEL: WE LOVE YOU, TOO!” (Zilber) Pictures of fathers
with their daughters and mothers with their sons over banners
declaring peace and love are driving back dehumanizing remarks and
calls to war and are replacing them with desires for friendship and
statements of love and peace. This is all being accomplished via
Facebook.
With
over 500 million Facebook and 200 million Twitter members and growing
in the world today, the influence of social media will continue to
leave its mark on the timelines of our world history books, marking
wars that were avoided, democracies established, and corrupted
governments removed as individuals enjoy the new voice afforded to
them by social networks. We will see true democracies arise as each
citizen acquires an active voice in their communities. We will see
special improvement in the Arab and African regions of the world. The
worldwide number of Internet users by late 2010 was expected to
exceed 2 billion users with only 40-45 million being Arab users. The
number of Internet users in the Arab world is ever increasing with
expectations to have 100 million Arabs online by 2015. (Ghannam 4) As
the Internet and social media sites like Facebook make their way into
the Arab and African nations we will see the greatest improvement in
freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and access to information
ever to be enjoyed in Arab and African history. The impacts of social
networks in countries like Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt will resonate
into the surrounding authoritarian countries and help stimulate
positive political change to today’s standards of freedom and
democracy.
Not
all authoritarian regimes will come down as easily as observed in
Egypt and Tunisia with the emergence of social media. Many nations,
such as China, have sophisticated cyber-control strategies,
censorship, and media controls to inhibit the assembly of the people
through social networking and revolution. These regimes are well
aware of the threat such freedom of speech granted by the Internet
imposes on their regimes and will go to great lengths to keep things
the way they are. With these regimes and most of the world’s
population, particularly the poor (who are most in need of
revolutionary change), still lacking access to the Internet, efforts
must be made to spread and maintain access to Internet with free
virtual expression. If social media will continue to develop its
technologies, remain free, and be promoted through out the world,
people will find their voice online and in their communities in order
invoke action to gain the freedoms currently withheld from them. The
Internet and social media has the great potential of making the world
a more unified, democratic, and peaceful place if nations will just
harness its powerful influence in non-violent means and promote its
spread into countries and regions which still don’t enjoy the
freedoms most of the world now enjoys.
Works Cited
Beaumont, Peter. "The truth about Twitter, Facebook and the
uprisings in the Arab world." The Guardian., 24 Feb 2011. Web. 9
Apr 2012.
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/25/twitter-facebook-uprisings-arab-libya>.
Ghannam, J. "Social Media in the Arab World: Leading Up to the
Uprisings of 2011." Center for International Media
Assistance/National Endowment for Democracy 3 (2011)Print.
Pinker, Stephen, dir. The Stuff of Thought: Language as a window
into human nature. Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts,
Manufactures and Commerce, Web. 22 Mar 2012.
<http://www.thersa.org/events/video/archive/steven-pinker>.
<http://www.thersa.org/events/video/archive/steven-pinker>.
Sedra, M. "Revolution 2.0: Democracy Promotion in the Age of
Social Media." Globe and Mail (2011)Print.
Zilber, Neri. "'We Will Never Bomb Your Country”: The
Israeli-Iranian Peace Web." Tehran Bureau 20 Mar 2012, n.
pag. Web. 22 Mar. 2012.
<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2012/03/feature-we-will-never-bomb-your-country-israelis-iranians-online-for-peace.html>.
No comments:
Post a Comment