It was not Facebook, Twitter or YouTube that brought down Hosni Mubarak. The Egyptian people did that. But this does not mean that social media and internet�based technologies played no role, or that their role was insignificant, as some have alleged. Rather, events in Egypt and countries across the Middle East and North Africa have shown in the 'Arab Spring' that internet platforms and technologies should be seen for what they are: effective tools for the conduct of political campaigns in authoritarian contexts.
This conclusion was reached in a new paper written by Tim Eaton who currently works for BBC Media Action on media development projects in the Middle East. The paper is the product of over a year of research and seeks to analyze the use of online activism in the Egyptian uprisings of January and February 2011, drawing out the lessons learned in addition to applying them to the wider context of the Arab Spring.
It suggests the following key findings:
Online activism multiplied the impact of social protest in Egypt: it made political action easier, faster and more universal. In the tightly controlled Egyptian political space, social media enabled activists to circumnavigate the regime's repressive structures to convince Egyptians in the online world into taking action in the offline one. This was its main success, for a revolution will always be won and lost on the streets.
The political uses of online platforms and technologies are extremely transferrable, and are just as clearly seen in the London riots as they were in Tahrir. The first use is as a tool for mobilising citizens by producing material designed to inspire them into action, and to organise their action once recruited. The second is to use online platforms as a medium for citizen journalism to report on the situation.
To maximise the impact of online protest it is clear that the combination of the above catalytic and scrutinizing uses is required. But the ability to do so is determined by an array of factors, including the domestic political environment and levels of internet penetration, affordability and computer literacy. It is unsurprising, therefore, that the deployment of such uses has varied across the region.
The use of online activism in Egypt and the wider Arab world has led to the growth of a new kind of political movement that reflects the plural nature of social media. This has enabled a flat leadership model that is difficult for autocratic regimes to combat: such movements are strong in the face of government interference as they are not dependent on a strong hierarchical structure to coordinate their activities.
In the Egyptian uprisings, social media became a major hub of political activity. In the advocacy of street protest, over 400,000 people were signed up on Facebook. Moreover, throughout the protests Egyptian Facebook users believed that 85 percent of Facebook usage was to organize activism, raise awareness and spread information about events. Analysis of Twitter also illustrates the extent to which the conversation was driven by political events, with mentions of the hashtag #jan25 correlating closely with total Tweet volumes.
Online mediums have proved a potent tool for pro democracy elements in the Arab world. Yet, the gains of the activists remain as reversible as they were hard fought. In Egypt, their efforts have still yet to secure a true transition of power, and the online activists of Tahrir are unlikely to become major actors in the new Egyptian parliament. Meanwhile, the Syrian opposition has yet to succeed in bringing down the regime of Bashar al Asad. Indeed, if the work of the online activists is to be supported effectively, it is imperative that its significance is better understood if it is to help prevent the Arab world's spring from turning to autumn.
Follow James Denselow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JamesDenselow
Jamie Bartlett: Extreme Frustration
Michelle Chen: Workers Hold Key to Reigniting Egypt's Revolution
Egypt's foreign policy a year after the revolution
----------------------------------------------
Perhaps they helped things move so quickly that the modern, democratic , secular folk have not coalesced- as they need to. Instead they have formed into a familiar set of left to liberal groups and parties that are so divided that power is ceded to the moderate Islamists who hold the working-class center.
The new media has bot conveyed the somewhat obvious message that if the liberal- left secular democrats want power they must fuse into one radical left political party.
Being so fragmented, the secular revolutionaries are already marginalized. They are now pressure groups, not contenders for government.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Flat leadership? I am not sure. Fragmented leadership might be more accurate.
Since the revolution, the tech-savvy middle-classes have lost ground to the old style leaders of the masses. The revolution of the well-educated has been replaced by a revolution of the ill-educated. Except, whoops! the ill-educated do not want a revolution. They want jobs, order and a conservatively managed civil society.
MB & Military will throw some development projects at the courageous folk who brought down the tyrant. But the oligarchy is NOT being dismantled. The revolution has aborted because MB and Military fear anarchy, and with good reason. Salafists to the right of them, techies to the left of them.
They hold the center with the bourgeois thieves who made good under Mubarak.
The educated have learned that flattened hierarchies get flattened by hierarchies that aren't flat.
And what are the fruits plucked? Three out four combined Salafists and Brotherhood members in Egypt's parliament now with Sharia on the way in and the U.S. has to fund this now with taxpayer's monies?
The Sinai is already Egypt's terrorpad against israel coupled with the fact that Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood categorically rejects dialogue with Israel, the group’s spokesman told an Arabic newspaper in an interview published Wednesday. Mahmoud Ghazlan told London’s Asharq Alawsat daily that the Islamist group’s position is “clear and not up for discussion.”
Unfortunately, Egypt has de facto cancelled the aspect of Sinai. It allows terrorism onto Israel from there, the free flow of weaponry into Gaza, and the blowing up of pipelines. The paper of the peace treaty matters less than the action (or inaction) on the ground. Sinai is already the new terror pad against Israel, and the wide highway for weapons for the Muslim Brother Hood's soweetchile Iranian proxy state of Hamastan..