Lecture 9 Flashcards
Uprising in Iran (2009): ‘’The Twitter Revolution’’
Triggering event: the ‘’stolen’’ presidential elections in 2009
Lead to the emergence of the Green Movement with the slogan ‘’Where is my vote?’’
Outcome: violent crackdown of pro-democratic street protest
Arab Spring (2011): ‘’The Facebook Revolution’’
- Green Movement was an inspiration for the Arab Spring
- Started in Tunisia with the self-immolation of fruit seller Mohamed Bouazizi
o Protests were triggered because of him setting himself on fire, because he was not allowed to earn money - There are five phases that lead to the Arab Spring, besides Bouazizi:
1. Preparation of early tech-save activists who start sharing grievances and building community
2. Ignition: incident/triggering event
3. Street protests
4.International buy-in
5. Climax: win or lose moment - Arab Spring lead to more protests all over the world
All contributed to the conception of social media as pro-democratic force
Upspring in Iran (2009) and Arab Spring (2011)
Key questions:
1. Why mass protests suddenly took place in non-democratic countries that had been stable for such a long time?
Classic theories: discontent, grievances, dissatisfaction
o These stem from certain societal conditions (economy, demography): youth bulge, declining economic productivity, rising wealth concentration, high unemployment, low quality of life
- Did digital media play a role?
- Skepticism: there is nothing new here
- Enthusiasm: digital communications have revolutionized everything
Different opinions Upspring in Iran (2009) and Arab Spring (2011) : optimism vs pessimism
- Bennett & Sergerberg (2012) are cyber enthusiasts
o Old logic: collective action
o New logic: connective action
Key point argument: fully explaining and understanding such action and contention (digitally networked action) requires more than just adjusting the classical social movement collective action schemes
Collective Action Problem
People benefit from collective goods, even if they don’t participate/contribute
- Free rider problem: people have an incentive to not participate
- Mancur Olson: in a large group in which no single individual’s contribution makes a perceptible difference to the group as a whole … it is certain that a collective good will not be provided unless there is coercion or some outside inducements that will lead the members of the large group to act in their common interest
Solution of collective action problem: connective action
- Bennet & Segerberg: digital media have fundamentally changed the dynamics of action
- Connective action: protests based on personalized content sharing across social media networks
Two changes that lead to new type of collective action:
- Communication technology takes over the role of organizations
o you don’t need a leader anymore to lead the protests
o Mass public self-expression of grievances/feelings, cascading through social networks → putting pressure on policy-makers and politicians.
o “Leaderless”: little or no organizational coordination, no
involvement of formal organizations. So this is a fundamental extension/change of “Resource Mobilization Theory” . - Political content in the form of easily personalized ideas
- Inclusive of different personal reasons for contesting a situation → less restrictive, less demanding.
o “In contrast to personal action frames, other calls to action more clearly require joining with established groups or ideologies” (p.746)
- Self-motivating participation (a desire to express one’s feelings) →participation is not a cost anymore.
o “Taking public action or contributing to a common good becomes an act of personal expression” (p.752)
Personal action frames: evaluation of argument
- Personal stories/frames are easier to share nowadays, but:
o Is there a clear difference between personal and collective action frame?
o If an expression is solely a personal problem or opinion, how are protesters connected? grievances should be shared
o Collective identity is still important - The act of personal expression is an individual benefit of participation in collective action, but:
o Is this really a new individual benefit for action? This expressive motive exists since a long time - Digital media makes organizing and mobilizing supporters easier and faster, but”
o New forms of communication have appeared before in history
o What makes digital communication technology so special? Is there a fundamentally new logic, that requires new theories?
Shift from cyber-optimism to pessimism
Morozov (SCEPTIC): story about idealistic young people, seeking to promote democracy and media reform in the former Soviet bloc with help of the internet
o Noticed a significant pushback from the governments they challenged
o Experimenting with censorship, some went even far enough to start aggressively engaging with new media (paying bloggers to spread propaganda and looking for information on those in the opposition)
Tools of authoritarian regimes: the 3Fs
Friction: censorship: authoritarian governments can try to block opposing content online
o Shutting down the internet or particular pages/platform
o Surgical removal of social media posts
o Algorithmic manipulation of search results
Flooding: create content: authoritarian regimes can overflow the internet with regime propaganda
o Social bots, sock puppets, trolls
o Disinformation, fake news
Fear: intimidate and arrest civil society actors
o Inciting fear is a classic tool of authoritarian regimes
o Authoritarian regimes use digital tracking in order to imprison opponents who voice their claims on social media
Consequence of repression/fear:
preference falsification: hiding your own personal views because you do not know what is going on in public and how others think
o People are afraid of speaking up and protesting (repression).
o They do not share their private (anti-government) beliefs.
o Discontent people (majority) believe they are a minority.
o On social media platforms, people can speak up more or less
anonymously/freely, trying to break pattern of preference
falsification.
Bandwagon effect
o People don’t want to be the first ones to go on the streets.
o When a critical mass (small group of initiators) is already on the streets, individual repression is less likely.
o This can set in motion a sudden self-reinforcing snowball effect: people join protests because they see already many other protesters
Conclusion of Howard & Hussain:
- Countries experiencing the most dramatic political protests are among the most wired in the region and have large, tech-savvy, civil society groups
- Countries with the most tech-savvy civil society groups removed their dictators, while the countries with the weakest technology infrastructure were locked down in protracted civil wars
Conclusion of Wolfsfeld et al:
Skepticism: many (scholars) seem to overemphasize the centrality of social media in protest
Politics-Media-Politics cycle:
o A political change leads to media change
o Media react to changes in the political environment rather than initiate them. Social media are facilitators or amplifiers of protest, rather than causes
- Wolfsfeld et al are more convinced of the ‘’classical approach’’ (grievances) & ‘’political opportunities’’
The nature of the political environment affects both the ability of citizens to gain access to social media and on their motivation to take to the streets
Cross-country findings: how to explain different conclusions? (Wolfsfeld vs. Howard&Hussain)
Difference between:
- Extent of Facebook/internet use: broad access for general public (Wolfsfeld)
- Unrestricted, unrepressed online civil society (activist groups) (H&H)
- Level of surveillance and control varies across countries
o E.g. Libya: strict control
o E.g. in Egypt, activists had established online ties, government promoted internet usage among citizens. Political outcomes of Arab Spring movements differed because the media systems and strategic options varied by country
Note that focus of the “outcome” variable can differ!
- Political change in long-term (e.g. democratization, dictatorship removed) vs. Sudden outbreak of large-scale protest events
Social media impact on what exactly? Different targets/goals of social movements
Reach a wider audience
o Influence the public debate, achieve media visibility, spread their message
o Try to convert the public into ‘mobilization potential’
Inform and mobilize supporters / sympathizers
o Building of collective identity
o Turn sympathy into resources and action
Influence on political leaders and policy
o Achieve real impact on political decision-making and society
Be aware of the ecological fallacy! (country-level)
There could still be a positive relationship (between social media use and protest participation) on the individual level within each country
