The role of social networking in recent uprisings

Recent weeks have brought momentous shifts in the balance between people and governments throughout the Arab world and the Middle East. Uprisings in Tunisia, closely followed by Egypt, have left previously untouchable regimes across the region nervously wondering if they are next. Dictators, who have for decades repressed their people whilst at the same time diverting billions of pounds into Swiss bank accounts, can no longer guarantee that the fear instilled by their state security apparatus will be enough to deter the people from rising up against them

Revolutions are not unusual in countries with authoritarian governments, however these were different from the norm as these were led by the people rather than one led by a political or religious party. There were no obvious figureheads, meaning it was difficult for the security services to ‘decapitate’ the protests, and the fact that the people were in charge of the protests rather than elites within opposition parties meant that they were less open to compromise or bribery to placate them. One of the factors credited with opening up the space allowing this to happen is availability of the internet to protestors, and in particular the role of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter.

Nowhere in the world has access to the internet grown faster over the past 10 years quicker than North Africa and the Middle East, rising over 2000% more people online since the turn of the new millennium. Governments have tried, with differing degrees of success, to control access to certain websites, including social networking sites, but young, increasingly internet savvy web users have become more and more adapt at bypassing these blockades. Nations that have seen people led uprisings, such as Iran, Egypt and Tunisia, also have some of the highest levels of internet usage amongst their populations in the region. This is true in particular of Iran, which boasts over 50% of all internet users in the entire Middle East. These nations also have young, underemployed populations who feel increasingly aggrieved at the corruption and poor governance of their much older rulers. Other countries that have seen the beginning of people led uprisings have similar demographic issues. Bahrain, which is currently in its sixth day of anti-government protests, has almost blanket internet access amongst its people. Morocco, Jordan and Saudi Arabia also have relatively high levels of internet access. Syria and Algeria, whilst having smaller percentages of their population connected to the internet, have 4 and 5 million regular users respectively.

The use of social networking on the ground in Iran and Egypt has been well documented. Neda Sultan, a protestor shot in Iran by the pro-government militia, became a symbol of the uprising after videos of her death were shown on You Tube. You Tube and Twitter became important tools of the uprising, particularly because the foreign media were confined to their hotels. During this period President Obama asked Twitter to delay maintenance work on the website in order to aid protestors. In Tunisia and Egypt Facebook played an important role in organising the protests; over 90,000 Egyptians joined a Facebook group for the rallies of January 25^th, the day the protests started. In Tunisia users used Facebook for similar purposes, and shared videos of event on the ground with other users. There have even been reports that Facebook security teams fought off attempts by the Tunisian government to hack the accounts of Tunisian users. Twitter users gave constant updates on the ground of events unfolding, and in Egypt regular tweeter Wael Ghonim, a Google employee, became a focal point for many in the battle against the authorities; indeed his Facebook group ‘We Are All Khaled Said’, a memorial to a 28 year old lawyer beaten to death by Egyptian police, was seen as one of the catalysts of the revolution.

Despite this many others argue that the role of social networking has been overstated. For instance, more traditional methods of mobilising support, such as building up a momentum, and word of mouth, were more successful in getting bodies out onto the streets. Malcolm Gladwell argued, after the ultimately unsuccessful uprising in Iran, that most of the tweets originated in the West, not in Iran. ‘Why would people trying to coordinate protests in Iran be using any other language other than Farsi?’ he asked. He also argued that social networking is made up of many ‘weak connections’ that would fail to translate into participants for action on the ground, and that the lack of a heirachy would hamper such efforts

Events in Tunisia and Egypt have, in the main, disproven his arguments. While other methods of mobilising support are still a vital parto any uprising, social networking, where available, plays a vital role in providing an infrastructure for protestors to organise and gather support. Those who use social networking are often well educated young people, who speak English and who understand the importance of the role of the media in winning the public relations argument. His notion of ‘weak connections’ assume that it is the personal relationships between the protestors that binds them together, rather than the cause they are fighting for. And, as we have already discovered, the lack of a heirachy proved to be a strength for these ‘bottom up’ movements, rather than a weakness

The role of social networking is taking on increased significance in protest movements, particularly where the correct conditions exist; a ground swell o popular support against an unpopular regime, a decent level of internet access and a technology savvy youth. Countries in which these conditions apply (in particular Bahrain and Iran) will take inspiration from recent successes, and the regimes in these countries will undoubtedly be fearful of what happens next. They will attempt to tighten their censorship on the internet, and will clamp down hard on the protestors, but with the help of the internet, a little luck and a lot of bravery, the will of the people to seize the freedom and control their own destinies could prove too much for the dictatorships to resist