Social media networks and their societal impacts

Social Media/Facebook

FACEBOOK:

A Vehicle for Political and Social Activism

Randi Zuckerberg, an older sister of the Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and a marketing director of Facebook until August 2011, told an interviewer last year that the social networking site Facebook would continue to help people around the world mobilize for activism. According to Ms. Zuckerberg, social media is in essence "democratic," as it helps people whose freedom of expression curtailed by laws of autocratic governments air their voices openly and join solidarity movements. Reflecting upon the use of Facebook as a place to organize collective action against injustice and oppression around the world, Ms. Zuckerberg said that Facebook facilitated events which would not otherwise have been possible. Facebook helps to raise money for worthy causes, recruit engaged volunteers, and most importantly, it helps to raise awareness, which, Ms. Zuckerberg said, "is an immensely powerful tool to effect social change" (Vericat 177).

Today one would hardly disagree with the points made by Ms. Zuckerberg, but in 2004, when her brother invented the future social networking giant, it would be hard to envision the global reach and impact of Facebook. It would certainly be hard to imagine the role of Facebook in facilitating the kind of changes Ms. Zuckerberg credited it for. Building a social networking tool for facilitating political activism or social change was not on the agenda of Mark Zuckerberg. An author who investigated the rise of Zuckerberg described the founding of Facebook as "a tale of sex, money, genius, and betrayal" (Mezrich). The words "activism" and "social change" did not feature in that story. And yet, Facebook, among other things, has become a venue for political activism and social change. From using Facebook to mobilize people against revolutionary terror of FARC in Columbia to organizing protests in the Middle East and elsewhere, the social networking site has become a tool for activists around the world.

But while Facebook can be used by people who yearn for better future and fight against oppression, injustice, corruption, tyranny, and other political and social ills all over the world, it can also be used by authoritarian governments and terror groups to track down the activists and punish them. Social networking, just like the Internet, can be used as much for liberation as it can for political and social control (Diebert & Rohosinski). Nevertheless, one may argue that the role Facebook played in galvanizing protests and revolutions in recent years has been significant. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how a tool designed to connect students across campus at Harvard reached different parts of the world and became a vehicle for political and social activism as well as the challenges Facebook poses in the face of authoritarian governments that are quick to adapt to technological innovations. After providing brief background information about Facebook and its global reach, the paper will discuss the role Facebook has played in recent successful and failed revolutions in the Middle East.

Facebook's global impact

Facebook is the brainchild of Mark Zuckerberg who invented it when he was a sophomore student at Harvard. Initially designed to work within the Harvard network, it allowed students to post their photos and information about their class year, gender, and music and movie interests. The project turned out to be popular and was therefore extended to colleges in Boston area and later to Columbia and Stanford. In 2005, Facebook became public and open to all users who spoke English. Since then Zuckerberg's project has grown fast, becoming a truly worldwide phenomenon within a matter of half a decade. Facebook now boasts to have more than 800 million active users. Half of the users login to Facebook every day. Facebook is available in over 70 languages and three fourth of its users are from outside the United States. On average, a user has 130 friends and is connected to 80 community pages or groups, while in general 250 million photos are uploaded to Facebook on any given day (Facebook statistics).

Researchers who have studied the impact of Facebook on American citizens have noted that exploring who uses Facebook and why may be telling in terms of political and social relations. Zuniga and Valenzuela studied the demographics of Facebook in America and found that greater number of women, African-Americans, and Hispanics use social networking than men and non-Hispanic whites. This finding attests to the empowering potential of social networking to minority groups. They also found that while the percentage of those with household income of $100,000 or more who use Facebook was 37%, the percentage of those whose income was below $100,000 was 40 to 51%. Zuniga and Valenzuela analyze these findings from the perspective of digital divide, and argue that social networking sites "could emerge as a digital tool that promotes a more balanced and democratized use of the information contained in their pages" (Zuniga and Valenzuela xxxv). In other words, Facebook may be a tool for learning more about other people and ideas for politically and socially disadvantaged in developed countries such as the United States as well.

Today, however, those with access to power and money do not ignore the power of Facebook and other social networking media either. As recent political campaigns and elections in 2008 and 2010 have demonstrated, effective use of social networking media can be crucial in modern politics. Many observers have noted that the use of Facebook, Twitter, and Meetup to post news, updates, and mobilize volunteers as well as raise hundreds of millions of dollars by the Obama team helped Obama defeat Hillary Clinton although the latter was more well-known and had stronger political connections. Republican candidates learnt a lot from that experience and in the 2010 midterm elections used social networking heavily. 74% of congressional candidates who had greater number of Facebook friends than their opponents won the elections. In 2012, both the Democrats and the Republicans may have to contend with the Tea Party activists who heavily rely on social networking in their public campaigns since it has now become "inextricably a part of the political communication landscape" (Partridge 83-84).

Like in the United States, the significance of Facebook's impact in a global scale is truly phenomenal. In his anthropological study of the Facebook effect in Trinidad, Daniel Miller finds different ways Facebook can affect the society in the small island. A marriage can break up, while a man in his sixties may return to social life thanks to Facebook. A woman may find out that seeing what you see on Facebook is truer than what you see in physical contact, while for another woman being publicly visible on Facebook allows her to remain extremely private. Miller also finds that Facebook can be used for spreading the Word of God, among many other things. For many people, Miller says, Facebook is a sort of a meta-friend to whom "we turn to when we are feeling lonely, depressed or bored, when life seems to have less purpose than usual" (Miller 171). And, of course, Facebook can be used to galvanize support for social causes as was the case when the Trinidadians responded to the catastrophic earthquake in Haiti in 2010.

One of the key issues that come up in the analysis of Facebook's global impact is the American context within which the social networking operates. It has more users from outside America now, but its core values still reflect what is taken for granted in the United States. For example, Zuckerberg and other Facebook officials have emphasized the importance of transparency and openness that are built into the system of Facebook. These may play out in different ways at various international and intercultural contexts. Both the transparency and openness of Facebook may be empowering in many cases but also lead to tragic consequences. When a conservative Saudi father found out that his daughter had been interacting with men online, he killed her. When Facebook users became increasingly active in the United Arab Emirates, by opening groups such as "Gulf Air Sucks," "Boycott Dubai's Dolphinariums," and "Lesbians in Dubai," the government wanted to ban Facebook. Likewise, a Senator in Italy unsuccessfully tried to pass a bill that would ban online content that "ignites or justifies" criminal behavior after many Facebook users publicly praised imprisoned mafia bosses (Kirkpatrick 278-280).

These and other examples show that Facebook is indeed a disruptive force. It disrupts social norms that are built into political systems, social relations, cultures, and religions. It is impossible to categorically state that this is a good or a bad thing. But one thing is for sure: Facebook and other social networking media may balance and decrease power gaps around the world since Facebook may add little to the already existing power of authoritarian governments and groups around the world, whereas it may empower the politically and socially advantaged persons in new and innovative ways. It is not surprising then that Facebook has become a venue for opposing political and social injustice in different parts of the world. As recent events in the Middle East have clearly demonstrated, Facebook is more on the side of the politically disadvantaged and the poor as they have increasingly embraced Facebook and other social media while the governments in the region tried to ban them. Many governments such as that of China do not allow Facebook primarily because they want to avert scenarios they have seen in the Middle East.

Facebook revolutions

It was in the wake of 2008 when Oscar Morales, a young man in Columbia, decided that he had had enough of FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), a Marxist group which routinely kidnaps people, keeping them as hostages for months or years, while many of the hostages die in captivity. Angry and depressed by the actions of FARC, one night he turned to Facebook which he had been using to connect with his friends and high school classmates. He used the Facebook search box for "FARC" but apparently nothing came out of that. Seeing that there was no group activism or outrage expressed against FARC on Facebook, he decided to start one. He designed a logo in the form of the Colombian flag with a caption "NO MORE KIDNAPPINGS, NO MORE LIES, NO MORE KILLINGS, NO MORE FARC," and named the group "Un Millon de Voces Contra Las FARC" ("One Million Voices Against FARC"). Although Morales at the time had around a hundred Facebook friends, his group garnered the support of 1500 people within six hours. 2500 people joined the group in the subsequent six hours.

As more and more people joined the group, many began to call for action.

Morales finally decided that he should organize a national demonstration against FARC in Colombia's capital Bogota on February 4. Morales received overwhelming support in the group's wall by people from all over Colombia as well as visitors from Buenos Aires, Paris, Los Angeles, Miami, and elsewhere. "What ensued was one of the most extraordinary examples of digitally fueled activism the world has ever seen," Kirkpatrick says. "On February 4, about 10 million people marched against FARC in hundreds of cities in Colombia according to Colombian press estimates. As many as 2 million more marched in cities around the world. The movement that began with an impassioned midnight Facebook post in one frustrated young man's bedroom led to one of the largest demonstrations ever, anywhere in the world" (4-5). The use of Facebook for mass rally against social injustice in Colombia was one of the first of its kind, also inspiring many millions of disgruntled young men and women in other parts of the world who yearned for political and social change.

It was noted in recent news coverage that government officials in Iran are increasingly wary of social networking, one official comparing Facebook and Twitter to Satanism he claimed the West uses in its war against Iran. The head of the Pupil's Basij militia, a paramilitary volunteer group established by Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979, described the expansion of social networking sites the country's 17 million Facebook users as harmful to the country's religious and cultural values. He dubbed Facebook, Twitter, the blogosphere, computer games, and films as the "most effective elements of soft war" waged by the United States against Iran, trying to undermine the core values of the country ("Iran Warns of Facebook's Soft Power"). These official statements by Iranian officials not only reflect the nature of repressive media maintained by the government but also their fear of social media's power that Iranians and observers around the world have witnessed after the elections in Iran were rigged in the summer of 2009.

When state officials proclaimed the incumbent President Mahmud Ahmadinejad as the winner of 2009 elections, many Iranians decided that they needed to act. The opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi used Twitter and Facebook to mobilize the masses against the government. The Iranian government kicked foreign journalists out of the country and the social networking media was the only venue through which international observers could learn about what was taking place in Iran. Social media allowed Iranians garner the support of outsiders. For instance, campaign "Help Iran Election," established by Topify.com's Arik Faimovich asked its followers to change their profile photos with green tint and their times zones to Tehran's, also encouraging them to retweet posts coming from Iran. At one time, Fraimovich's campaign had 160,000 followers, including high-profile U.S. foreign policy analysts. Sympathetic hacker groups attacked Iranian government websites and helped protesters to sidestep Internet filters used by the government (Burns & Eltham 303-304).

But Iranian officials also took Mousavi's twitter account offline. Mousavi's then turned to Facebook. Mousavi and his supporters used Facebook in a number of innovative ways. They posted photos showing the brutality of the policy, letting outsiders gain hard evidence against the government of Iran. Via social networking, as one analyst noted, Iranians using Facebook and Twitter provided "eyewitness accounts" of events in Iran (Alexanian). They also used Facebook to coordinate their actions, protests, and turned the Facebook page into a news hub which could be accessed by anyone. Prominent figures, including popular artists and singers posted their artistic illustrations and songs to support the movement. The page gathered 120,000 "friends" in addition to many more who regularly visited it. The followers were also highly heterogeneous, representing the views of young Westernized men and women, communists, monarchists, and others with Islamic views. Many members also protected themselves from the government officials by replacing their photos with the slogan "Where is My Vote?" (Marandi & Hughes 177-178).

The revolutionary activism did not succeed, as the results of the elections were not reversed and Ahmadinejad retained the Presidency, while the police and the paramilitary militia tracked down some activists through Twitter and Facebook and imprisoned or even executed them. Many analysts therefore warn against entrusting those who fight against repressive regimes with social media tools (Burns & Eltham). But while the danger of using social media by governments is real, the Iranian social networking revolution did not completely fail. If Facebook had been primarily used for staying connected with friends before the revolutionary attempt, more Iranians began to use it for discussing political issues. Iranians have demonstrated the power of Twitter and Facebook, inspiring like-minded people in neighboring Arab countries such as Tunis, Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Algiers.

The actions of Iranian activists were replicated in early 2011 by Tunisians who decided their dictator Ben Ali needed to go. Bloggers, musicians, political and social activists began to coordinate their civil disobedience and protest through social media. Facebook in Tunisia played even a greater role than Twitter because of more functions available in Facebook and also because there were numerically more Facebook users in Tunisia. 1.6 million people of the country's 10.4 million used Facebook (China). Thousands and thousands of Tunisians replaced their profile pictures with the flag, also posting graphic videos documenting the brutality of Ben Ali's forces, and turning Facebook into "an indispensable resource for tracking the minute-by-minute development of the situation" (Madrigal).

Like in Iran, during the revolution in Tunisia, Facebook turned from being a tool for social connections into a news hub, the center of organizational behavior, and the venue for echoing the voices of ordinary citizens. Rim Abida, a Harvard-educated Tunisian development consultant, working at the time in Rio de Janeiro, explained: "It basically went from being a waste of time or procrastination tool, to my go-to source on up-to-date information. My mom is back in Tunisia on her own, and my Tunisian network on Facebook was posting the most up-to-date info on what was happening on the ground. It was stuff the major media channels weren't reporting, such as numbers to call to reach the military and what was happening when in what specific neighborhood" (Madrigal). People's attitudes to Facebook changed as a result of the revolution which may not have been possible or at least not have been as effective as it was without Facebook. The Tunisian revolution succeeded, forcing the President to step down and allow new elections.

The revolution in Tunisia also turned out to be contagious, affecting events in neighboring countries. Egyptians, for example, took notice of what happened in Tunisia as can be seen in the following photo:

The Egyptian case was especially interesting as Facebook has been empowering the politically and socially disadvantaged groups, including women, for some years. Even before the revolution, many observers have noted women who had been spending their time at home began to learn the art of political and social activism thanks to Facebook. On April 6, 2009, female activists used cell phones and Facebook to mobilize protests against police corruption and the disregard for labor rights. Many women become more active due to Facebook because new connections and discussions they participate in broaden their political horizons and many women feel themselves empowered because they can express their voices on a variety of issues. An Egyptian woman, who began to work for a private telecommunication firm, explains: "As a woman, I didn't have much political experience and only saw popular demonstrations from a safe distance. But since I discovered Facebook and began sharing my political opinions, I have even begun joining street protests" (Morrow & Khaled).

Three years before the Egypt's revolution of 2011, an Egyptian-born reporter for Western news agencies, Mona Eltabawy, wrote a fictional story taking place in 2033 but also reflecting on the past (i.e. The present). In the story the young of the present era, which she dubs "The Facebook Generation," become the backbone of civil society in Egypt, forcing the government to change gradually and move toward parliamentary democracy. In the story Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak leaves office in 2012 and hands the Presidency to his son Gamal. In the face of growing power of civil society, i.e. The Facebook Generation, Egypt embraces major principles of democratic governance and pluralism, electing the first female Interior Minister in 2033. In the neighboring Saudi Arabia, the country's own "Facebook Generation" by the time appoint three muftis: a Sunni, a Shiite, and a woman. Eltabawy concluded the article by acknowledging that she was a dreamer and "a foolish optimist" (Elthawaby 77).

But Elthawaby's optimism was not entirely foolish. In less than three years Egypt's civil society forced Hosni Mubarak out of power through a coordinated and one of the most spectacular events in recent history. Here again, Facebook and social media played an indispensable role. The event was triggered by the murder of Khaled Said who was known for blogging about police corruption and brutality. After posting a video showing the corruption of Alexandria police, he was murdered. In response, Wael Ghonim, an Internet activist and Google executive in Egypt, opened a Facebook page which he titled "We are all Khaled Said." Ghonim also distributed the picture of Khaled Said's disfigured face through Facebook (Moore). What followed was the countrywide outrage at the actions of the government and security forces. This time, protesters gathered at the central Tahrir Square in Cairo and demanded the ouster of the President. The protesters achieved their goal.

One does not need to exaggerate the impact of Facebook and social media in these events. As many observers have pointed out, social media alone cannot destroy repressive governments. While the revolutions succeeded in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya (due to different factors in each case), they also failed in Iran and Bahrain. In the latter, the government used Facebook for further repression. The officials posted photos of protesters and called Bahrainis loyal to the government to reveal the names and workplaces of the protesters. As least, one female activist was arrested in this manner (James). One analyst argues that social media provides some form of political freedom in countries with authoritarian regimes but to succeed in destroying repressive regimes it "has to be accompanied by a civil society literate enough and densely connected enough to discuss the issues presented to the public" (Shirky 34). Facebook activism is also criticized for ineffectiveness by those who term it "slacktivism,' whereby casual participants seek social change through low-cost activities, such as joining Facebook's 'Save Darfur' group, that are long on bumper-sticker sentiment and short on any useful action" (qtd. In Shirky 37).