Today societal webs are really popular tools for people. particularly for adolescents.
to maintain in touch. portion exposures. pictures and messages. Recent events in the Middle East and Northern Africa got me interested because in the forums all around the World Wide Web people represent the controversial versions about if the Arab Spring was caused by societal media. The subject of my paper is the function societal webs play in revolutions.
In this paper I am traveling to carry on research on the function of societal media during revolutions. I particularly will see actions states take to avoid the societal media revolution such as in Arab states. The purpose of this essay is to supply information about the importance of societal media during the revolutions.Today calling kids after radical faces and heroes is non a surprise. but it is truly new for me to hear about a kid named after a societal web.
Jamal Ibrahim. an Egyptian. was so inspired by the function of societal media in recent Middle East revolutions that he gave his girl the name “Facebook” . To explicate giving such an unusual name to his girl. Jamal Ibrahim says that the Facebook played a truly great function in maintaining people connected during rebellion ( The University of Virginia Magazine. 2011 ) .
Facebook is an ordinary societal web where the user can add new friends to a friendlist. Friends on Facebook can follow each other’s stations and publications. The user of Facebook has his ain web log which can be followed by friends and endorsers. Normally the information is spread by sharing it by other users and pressing “like” button. The cardinal characteristic of Facebook is that everyone who uses it can make his ain page and be its decision maker. The decision maker can add any information he wants to his page and station web logs and other content. The user can ask for any of his friends to subscribe to this page. and so his friends can urge his page to their ain friends.
Everyone subscribed on the page can go forth their messages and do stations on the wall of the page. This is a really easy manner to link people by involvement regardless of their age. gender and ethnicity. Today it is one of the most popular methods of distributing information.Another really popular societal web is Twitter. The rule of Twitter is similar to that of Facebook. The chief difference is that on Twitter a page can non be created.
But that doesn’t make Twitter less interesting than Facebook. Most famous persons now use Twitter as a tool for linking to their friends and for doing them follow all the “tweets” they post on Twitter.“Facebook helps form people such as detailing how and where to garner physically. while Twitter is for “amplification” . enabling people in existent clip to portion intelligence and remark.
” says Rafat Ali. laminitis of paidcontent. org about the difference between two societal webs ( The Wall Street Journal Online. 2011 ) .Recent events in the Middle East and Northern Africa show us that societal networking can be a powerful tool for distributing revolution. “After analysing more that three million tweets.
Gs of YouTube content. and 1000s of web log stations. a new survey has concluded that the Arab Spring truly was fueled by societal media” .
says Kate Taylor. a journalist in BBC wireless. Most of the content posted on societal webs carried a great figure of messages about autonomy.
freedom. and democracy across the Middle East and North Africa. People holding an involvement in democracy organized political actions which were spread by societal media. Social networking became a really utile tool for freedom ( TG Daily. 2011 ) .
Khaled Mohamed Saeed. a immature 28 twelvemonth old Egyptian man of affairs. died after being arrested by Egyptian constabulary in the country of Alexandria. As described by multiple informants. Khaled was taken from an Internet cafe and so beaten by police officers who hit him and smashed him against a wall and other objects. The proprietor of the Internet cafe said that the constabulary started crushing Khaled inside the cafe . Even after the proprietor asked them to go forth the edifice.
the crushing continued in room access of the edifice across the street. The proprietor of the Internet coffeehouse says: “They dragged him to the next edifice and banged his caput against an Fe door. the stairss of the stairway and walls of the building… . Two physicians happened to be at that place and tried in vain to resuscitate him but [ the constabulary ] continued crushing him… . They continued to crush him even when he was dead” ( El Shaheed.
2010 ) .Subsequently constabulary reported that Khaled Saeed suffocated while seeking to get down a little package of hasheesh. Further they stated that Khaled was besides “wanted for larceny and arms possession” and that he “resisted apprehension. ” Saeed’s household members stated that Saeed was tortured to decease for copying a picture ( subsequently uploaded to YouTube ) of constabulary officers sharing confiscated marihuanas. By this action Khaled Saeed hoped to pull people’s attending to the corruptness of functionaries.
In fact. he did. Photograph of his mutilated cadaver spread through the Internet to online communities and societal webs really rapidly and caused bitterness of people. ( El Shaheed. 2010 ) .
Wael Ghonim. Head of Marketing of Google Middle East and North Africa. is an Internet militant who became an international figure after making the page “We are all Khaled Said” on Facebook. Ghonim was incarcerated for 11 yearss by Egyptian constabulary.
During the captivity. he was interrogated about his Facebook page. The Facebook page he created contained Khaled Saeed’s awful exposures taken in mortuary by a cellular telephone camera. The exposure became incontestable grounds of the whipping.
This grounds dispelled all uncertainties about the artlessness of Khaled Saeed. This page attracted more than 500. 000 followings. “This revolution started in June 2010 when 100s of 1000s of Egyptians started join forcesing content. We would post a picture on Facebook that would be shared by 60. 000 people on their walls within a few hours. I’ve ever said that if you want to emancipate a society. merely give them the Internet.
” Ghonim told CNN ( The University of Virginia Magazine. 2011 ) .Indeed.
SMS and societal networking are really powerful arms of forming unrest. public violences. rebellions. and revolutions.
The influence of Twitter. Facebook. and other societal media is great on dictators and absolutisms.
Peoples show their attitude to the authorities by agencies of modern communicating tools. Social media is free to utilize. Furthermore the messages and stations can be published anonymously. On societal webs people freely express their ideas about authorities: corruptness. offenses.
authorities misrepresentations. political alterations.All this undoubtedly instills in dictators the fright of losing political power. Actually they fear the freedom of information. That is why during the recent protests in Egypt. the authorities limited the use of Internet so that merely 15 % of people had an entree to Internet. Additionally they corrupted nomadic connexions to keep political control ( Technology Review. 2011 ) .
During the last hebdomad before the surrender of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak and Tunisian president Ben Ali. the rate of “tweets” about political alteration in Egypt and Tunisia significantly raised.The top 23 pictures uploaded to YouTube sing the political alterations in Egypt had at minimal 5. 5 million positions each.
In Facebook and some political web logs of the state the figure of contents posted by the resistance group dramatically increased. In Tunisia. the month before Ben Ali’s surrender from the office. merely five per centum of the web logs posted on societal webs referred to him.
but this figure significantly increased up to twenty per centum on the twenty-four hours of his surrender. As expected the chief subject for the web logs of Tunisians was the revolution.During the two hebdomads after the surrender of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt there was an norm of 2400 tweets each twenty-four hours.
In Tunisia. after Ben Ali’s surrender the figure of tweets per twenty-four hours reached the grade of 2200. “These dictators for a long clip had many political enemies. but they were fragmented. So oppositions used societal media to place ends. construct solidarity.
and organize presentations. ” says Philip Howard. an associate professor in communicating at the University of Washington ( TG Daily. 2011 ) .
This paper is traveling to be about the important function societal webs play in revolutions and the impact of Arab Spring revolutions ( which are besides called Social Media revolutions ) on other states. I will look into the ways other states try to avoid revolutions chiefly caused by the societal media.Literature ReviewDid the societal web drama function in the agitations of Arab Spring is non a inquiry any longer. From the facts and statistics it is obvious that the societal media played one of the major functions in spurring revolutions. They sparked public violences by giving people the freedom of address. Now the inquiry is how other states feel about the Arab Spring. China’s functionaries are pretty afraid of the societal networking sites. Arab Spring revolutions had a strong and obvious impact on China’s authorities.
so that Chinese functionaries made rigorous restrictions on the use of the Internet.Indeed societal webs and other telecommunication instill fright in authorities and swayers. That is why functionaries try to restrict the entree to the telecommunications. by presenting new statute laws and regulations. Fountain and Rogers ( 2011 ) concluded that China. hosting one of the most complicated online control regimes.
takes its ain lessons from the recent Arab Spring events. Writers examined all the stringency of the new regulations imposed in China sing the societal networking. Beijing blocked non merely the entree to the largest societal webs of the universe but besides it blocked Internet hunt consequences including the phrases “Egypt” . “Cairo” and “Jasmine” . Harmonizing to Fountain and Rogers. Beijing’s Ministry of Public Security ordered the constabulary to “guide public opinion” and “pay attending to hot subjects people are speaking about on the Internet” .
Fountain and Rogers claim that China. with its new statute laws imposed on Internet use. appears to hold concluded at least four lessons from the Middle East revolutions. First is that it is a blow to the economic system of the state to turn off entree to the full Internet. That’s why they merely blocked entree to the sites which are more likely to trip revolution. Second. Chinese functionaries considered that barricading merely a portion of the Internet resources is more effectual than barricading the whole entree to Internet. The simplest illustration is Cairo: when the authorities decided to turn off Internet entree.
the revolution started to turn non smaller. as it was expected. but larger. The 3rd lesson China concluded is that on-line protests may do political alteration merely if they become the consequence of the offline protests. The 4th lesson China concluded is that Chinese functionaries did everything in clip. China understood in clip that societal media can ease political alterations.Very shortly. after the oncoming of the Arab Spring rebellions and government alterations in the Middle Asian and North African states.
there was the series of Jasmine protests in China. Fallows ( 2011 ) examined them and found that the Arab Spring presentations truly affected the manner the authorities of China started to act. Chinese functionaries are evidently afraid of the possible rebellion that can take topographic point in China. Access to the Internet. as mentioned by Fallows. was the most “surprising and thoroughgoing” alteration in day-to-day life of Chinese people. The Golden Shield ( on the side called the Great Firewall of China ) . the new filtrating firewall system.
was implemented to the web-resources of China. The Golden Shield denied entree to the most popular western societal networking web-sites such as Twitter. Facebook.
YouTube. Blogger. and a clump of Google services. Alternatively of utilizing western societal webs.
the authorities required people to utilize Chinese societal networking sites. The prohibition of Facebook and Twitter significantly increased the popularity of the internal societal webs of China.But the authorities imposed new statute laws on the use of these webs. Wong ( 2011 ) examined them and found that these regulations are aimed merely on commanding the manner users post content on societal networking sites. Harmonizing to new statute law. users must register and supply their existent name and biological information. Otherwise they will non be able to post any content and public messages.
China imposed all these regulations to forestall anon. bloggers to post antigovernment messages which could beat up people and put them against the authorities. Chinese functionaries decided that protestors would be afraid of demoing their existent names. Wong besides mentioned the block of Twitter and Facebook. He found that the Chinese functionaries carefully kept path of the rebellions. which late took topographic point in the Middle East. to see what function societal media played in Arab Spring.All these incontestable facts show us that China is truly frightened of societal media.
It takes utmost steps to avoid possible revolutions in the state. China’s functionaries hid the earliest phases of Arab Spring rebellions from Chinese people. All these prohibitions and statute laws surely prevented possible revolutions that could take topographic point in China. but still it is non right determination to maintain people limited in sharing their ideas and feelings in public anonymously.
InterviewI spent a batch of clip believing who can I interview for my paper. I was non certain if any local professors could supply me with the information I truly need for my research paper. So I consulted with my instructor and decided to hold an interview with James Fallows. an American print and wireless journalist. who has been a letter writer in The Atlantic magazine for many old ages. His articles besides appeared in The New York Times Magazine.
State. The New Yorker and The American Prospect. His academic background includes such universities as Harvard and Oxford. I have used his article. “Arab Spring. Chinese Winter” in my research paper.
I wrote him a missive with the inquiries I wanted to inquire. In the missive I wrote about the subject of my research paper. I wrote about my attitude about barricading entree to societal webs during revolutions. I was surprised when the really following twenty-four hours I got an electronic mail from him. I was surprised because he is a really celebrated individual in the US and I thought he would likely hold no clip to react to me so rapidly. But when I opened the missive there was merely a individual line: “Thanks. I will seek to reply this in the following twenty-four hours or two” . I said to myself: “Well.
that is what I expected from the individual who is swamped with petitions of this kind” . So I waited for his replies. It took one hebdomad for him to reply. In the missive he apologized really courteously and thanked me for my forbearance.In my missive as an illustration of societal web prohibition I told him about the prohibition of Facebook in Tajikistan. The political state of affairs now in Tajikistan is non every bit stable as it was 5 old ages ago. Some Tajik people are non satisfied with the authorities.
They started making anti-government pages on the most popular societal networking pages in Tajikistan like Facebook. I wrote Fallows that about a month ago functionaries decided to turn off the entree to Facebook and other several Internet intelligence resources. I said that from my point of position restricting entree to Internet is non a right manner to handle people. but another job occurs here. A important portion of the Tajik population is non knowing. They are naif and believe about everything that they get from the Internet. Oppositionists normally take advantage from this and post dubious statements against the authorities.I wondered about Fallows’ personal attitude about forbiddance of societal networking sites.
sing the facts about possible airing of false information. He answered that his attitude is likely affected by his being a member of the American media. He said that this is an attitude of a “citizen of a rich state with a long-developed tradition of media freedom” . He claimed that for about all societies in about all state of affairss. it is better for the authorities non to ban any agencies of communicating. including societal media.
Governments ever claim that media will be used to distribute rumors and inflame sentiments. and of class there is that hazard. But he says from his ain experience that more frequently authoritiess are merely utilizing that instance as an alibi to command unfavorable judgment or suppress treatment that is inconvenient for them. Fallows believes that freer look.
in societies at any degree of development. leads to a healthier degree of societal interaction. trust in and esteem for authorities. and public determination devising. So his sentiment is that authoritiess should non curtail entree to societal media.My 2nd inquiry was if he can give information on.
except for China. are at that place other states that blocked entree to the societal webs. I besides wondered if the functionaries of those states did this to forestall possible revolution. Unfortunately he didn’t know plenty to give a truly good reply. But he said that besides China he knows merely one state that has done most to curtail media of all kinds. It is Burma. But in the past few months the Burmese authorities has begun taking these limitations.The concluding thing I wanted to cognize from him was if one state can trip revolution in the other by agencies of societal media.
and what is the possible benefit for that state. He said he does non believe that outside forces. agents. or militants — including those working via the Internet — can do the important difference in a country’s internal conditions. But he mentioned that.
likely over history there have been some exceeding instances where this sort of state of affairs has happened. Normally. he says. the development of any country’s political relations and authoritiess depends overpoweringly on conditions inside that state itself. When a country’s authorities comes under unfavorable judgment. it is really convenient to disregard the critics as reflecting the attempts of foreigners with insurgent purpose. He says that non merely the authorities in the United States have made that claim.
but besides did many other states. But he says. normally this is a convenient alibi for non covering with the existent concerns or ailments that have led to internal dissatisfaction.In the terminal of his missive he apologized for his holds one more clip. He said he hopes his response was helpful for me. Of class his missive was really helpful for me.
He gave me about all the information I needed for my research.Datas AnalysisI spent a batch of clip believing what information I would wish to happen to make full the spreads in my research paper. Articles that I had retrieved from academic diaries and magazines and a really enlightening interview with James Fallows provided me with about all the information I needed for my research. The lone thing I wanted to larn was the cognition of pupils and their sentiment about the function of societal webs in revolutions.
Participants in my study were largely first twelvemonth KIMEP pupils. They are all immature people with a point of position which may differ significantly from adults’ position. I chose them to be my mark audience because I wanted to cognize the sentiment of our Central Asian immature coevals on this issue. In one of our ARW II classes with our teacher we discussed some facets of my subject. The sentiment of our professor differed from that of most pupils in our category. This reminded me the words of my interviewee. James Fallows.
who claimed himself being a “citizen of a rich state with a long-developed tradition of media freedom” . Points of position of Western Countries and post-Soviet Union states are different in many instances. It was really interesting for me to do an observation on this issue.
I printed 25 transcripts of my study and distributed it to the pupils populating in the residence hall. They were Kazakhs and international pupils from Central Asia. When I got back the study I was a sort of defeated. Each of my inquiries had a subdivision where interviewees should compose their remarks.
But on more than a half of the studies these subdivisions were empty. This made me believe about reorganising my study inquiries to do them more concrete. Besides I decided to carry on an on-line study. I thought it would do people believe more deeply because they would hold more clip to pass on each inquiry.
I chose to distribute my studies via KIMEP get offing sphere @ kimep. kz. The asset of this is that you can direct letters to all the KIMEP pupils. In my missive I introduced my subject and gave a little debut of it. I started waiting. Students were non active and by the terminal of the twenty-four hours I had merely five responds.Again I was disappointed. But it took me a piece to recognize the ground for such a little figure of responses.
I understood that although I introduced my subject in the missive most of pupils do non look into their electronic mails on @ kimep. kz which is swamped with spam letters. Personally when I check my electronic mail on @ kimep. kz I normally see a tonss spam messages about pupils selling reckoners and making prep for money. This made me believe about how to do people cognizant that my missive was non spam.
The manner out came to my caput when I accidently reread the name of my subject: “The Role of Social Networks in Revolutions” . “Social webs. what can be a better manner to pass on with people? ” I thought. I made a station with a nexus to the study.
In this station I briefly wrote about my study and my personal sentiment. I was surprised that it truly worked. By the terminal of the twenty-four hours I already had 15 responds and by the terminal of the following twenty-four hours I had more than 25 filled studies. Furthermore people on Facebook started to go forth remarks to the station. showing their ain sentiments on the issue. Therefore I personally realized the power of societal webs to garner people and once more became positive that societal webs can surely be one of the chief factors of distributing revolutions.
My study inquiries were slightly similar to the inquiries I asked James Fallows in my interview. Although my study had merely five inquiries. it would supply me with all the information I need. My first inquiry was general ; I wanted to cognize if pupils believe that societal webs can trip revolution. As I expected. twenty seven of 30 pupils ( 81 % ) gave positive reply. In the remarks subdivision.
there were many different thoughts about this. The general sentiment of pupils was that societal webs are the best topographic point for people to garner virtually and portion their thoughts and dissatisfaction sing the authorities. Most of them wrote that today societal webs are the biggest tools of distributing information. Besides there were many remarks on the thought that “our coevals is stupid and really naif. so they believe every individual thing they read from the Internet” . Besides one of the dominating sentiments ( 5 of 27 ) was that Western states such as the United States are involved in the spread of revolution. One of the interviewees said that Western states “hire people to carry people” to contend against their ain authorities.
I expected this sort of remarks because mass media of Russia and the United States sometimes transfuse in people wholly different sentiments. and the Central Asiatic states being post-Soviet Union states are more likely to believe the Russian mass media.The staying three people who gave negative reply to the inquiry besides wrote their remarks.
Two of them were merely non familiar with the issue and wrote that they don’t know of any instances when societal media sparked revolution. But the remark of a 3rd pupil reminded me of my ain point of position before I started working on my research paper. He wrote that although societal media have a great influence on people. it can non be one of the chief grounds of revolution. And I was truly surprised when he gave a fact that during revolution in Egypt merely 15 % of population had an entree to Internet.
That was the fact that I used to confirm my first sentiment! I wanted to happen this cat and speak to him personally. but unluckily it was non possible.The following inquiry of my study was to happen out what audience knows about the function of societal media in the presentations that late happened in the Middle East and North Africa.
I asked if they think societal webs played a truly important function in the Arab Spring public violences and rebellions. I included remarks subdivision in this inquiry excessively. I hoped that the consequences of this inquiry could give me a general sentiment of the audience sing the function of societal networking sites in the Arab Spring presentations. Many respondents ( 20 of 30 ) answered “yes” . Harmonizing to their remarks I concluded that they know a batch about this issue. By uniting their remarks I got that two ruling societal webs ( Facebook and Twitter ) and the biggest Internet picture storage ( YouTube ) played really large function in the revolutions of the Arab Spring. Respondents claimed that the intent of Facebook was to garner people.
the function of Twitter was to maintain the citizens on path with intelligence and YouTube was the revolution-sparking tool. However there were five negative replies to this inquiry. Merely one of them left a remark on his reply.
He wrote that during the first yearss of presentations in Egypt. the Internet was turned off by the authorities every bit good as nomadic services. so people had no entree to the societal media. This remark once more reminded me of myself on the first yearss of making a research. Staying five pupils wrote they have no thought on this issue.The intent of my 3rd inquiry was to happen out if the audience has adequate cognition about what is go oning in the universe at the minute. I wrote the names of four states.
Indonesia. China. North Korea. and Ukraine and asked participants to fit the country/ies where Facebook and Twitter were officially banned. The bigger portion of respondents ( 19 of 30 ) answered right by fiting China. As I expected.
the 2nd popular reply was North Korea ( 10 of 30 ) . North Korea is a closed state. and entree to societal webs truly was restricted for a short period of clip. but it was non officially. Furthermore today societal webs in North Korea are free to utilize.
Four pupils answered Ukraine. In fact. there was a prohibition in use of Russian biggest societal web Vkontake in Ukraine about for a hebdomad. Officials of Ukraine decided to barricade Vkontakte in Ukraine because of the immense figure of antigovernment pages where people sharply expressed their sentiments about the authorities. But after merely a hebdomad they restored the entree. I included Indonesia in the possible replies merely to experiment. I wanted to cognize how many respondents would take this state.
By this I understood that at least four pupils are non maintaining on path with limitations on societal web use in modern universe.In my 4th inquiry I decided to come to the most of import thing I would wish to larn from the study. It is approximately do they believe that it is a right determination to barricade entree to the societal networking sites or non. Here. if the respondent replies “yes” he is obligated to reply attendant inquiry. In the attendant inquiry I asked to mention possible grounds for authorities to shut societal webs. It might surprise James Fallows every bit good as most citizens of the United States that 60 % of respondents ( 18 of 30 ) claimed that it is a right determination for authorities to curtail use of societal webs for the people.
They claim that authorities must close down entree to societal webs in the instance of possible presentations or public violences. Students otherwise commented their reply. The most popular remark was that the information given in the societal webs may be false. Respondents claim that resistance normally dispersed prevarications against the authorities to get down a revolution. By barricading entree to societal webs. the authorities deters resistance from deriving power.
Some respondents claim that the bigger portion of population of Central Asian is naif and easy believes everything they read on the Internet. Another common sentiment is that no state felt better after revolution. “No state deserves revolution” . says one of the respondents.
“So the authorities HAS TO take any actions to salvage peace in the country” .However 12 pupils answered this inquiry by “no” . Their common remark was that authorities can non go against human rights under any fortunes. Two respondents stuck to the sentiment that the prohibition on societal webs can be one of the chief factors of get downing a revolution. “By shuting Facebook. authorities pours oil on the fire” .
wrote one of the pupils. Personally I besides support this statement. and I was a small spot surprised because I expected more people back uping this point of position.Sing the fact that among the respondents there was a important figure of international pupils in my last inquiry I decided to inquire if there were any instances of a societal web prohibition by the authorities in their place state. Among the respondents there were 13 Kazakh.
four Kyrgyz. four Turkmen. four Uzbeg and five Tajik pupils. Eight of the Kazakh pupils wrote that there was non any instance of societal web block in their state. while another five wrote about recent presentations that happened in little town. located in the West of Kazakhstan. Zhanaozen.They said during the period of the presentations.
due to a immense sum of antigovernment “tweets” . the authorities of Kazakhstan turned off entree to Twitter. This did non look in Kazakhstani mass media and the prohibition of Twitter was non official. I heard about this instance about a month ago. The ground I did non include this in my research paper was that I had non found anything about this on the Internet. This shows that in Central Asiatic states before looking in the intelligence all the information passes through rigorous control of the authorities. Respondents from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan did non mention any instances of societal web prohibition in their state.
but all five pupils from Tajikistan wrote about recent Facebook prohibition in Tajikistan. From this I concluded that Central Asiatic states are besides “social-media-dependent” states and societal webs can instil fright in the functionaries of these states.The thing I wish I could inquire is if they were president of a state. where people would non be satisfied with their authorities. what they would make to forestall possible revolution. It could be new statute laws on societal webs use.The study consequences were truly good and enlightening. Almost all the respondents treated this instance with duty and gave exact replies.
This study gave me more information than I expected. For me the consequences of the study were surprising and someplace unexpected. I knew that the attitudes of the Western states and the post-Soviet Union states are different. but what I found is they are wholly different. I was surprised with the consequences of some of the inquiries. I thought there would be more people back uping my point of position on societal web prohibition by the functionaries. but I found that merely a few people consider societal web prohibition by authorities as a error.
I was satisfied with the consequences of my 3rd inquiry. where I asked respondents to pick the state where Facebook and Twitter are officially banned. From the consequences I found that most respondents know about official societal web prohibition in China every bit good as unofficial short-period prohibitions in Ukraine and North Korea.Do you believe it is a right determination for authorities to barricade entree to the societal networking sites?Findingss and RecommendationsThe chief intent of the current survey on “The Role of Social Media in Revolutions” was to happen out if societal webs can play a important function in revolutions and which actions functionaries of the states should take to avoid possible revolution.
I had drawn the undermentioned decisions from the present survey:1 ) The most of import determination is that societal media plays a truly great function in revolutions. Indeed it sparks the revolution. After the Arab Spring presentations some counties decided to barricade the entree to the Internet ( some of them officially. but largely on the side ) to avoid the possible mass public violences in the state.
2 ) Another really of import thing I found is that harmonizing to the interview with James Fallows and the consequences of a study of pupils the point of position of the US people and the post-Soviet Union states people on the mass media freedom are different. A immense figure of the respondents in my study claim that the authorities must barricade the entree to societal webs in instance of a possible revolution. while my interviewee. representative of the western state James Fallows. says that the authorities should non go against human rights under any fortunes. Mass media of these two sides instills in people different sentiments to do them believe the authorities.
This showsthe power of the societal media.3 ) Another of import determination is that in 2011. besides China.
four other states blocked the entree to the societal webs. and this prohibition was unofficial. They are Burma. Tajikistan. Ukraine and a little part of Kazakhstan. Zhanaozen. Officials of all these states turned off the entree to the societal webs to discourage possible revolution.
The thing that surprised me was that none of the states of Arab Spring turned off the entree to the societal webs.4 ) The last thing I found is that it is more effectual for authorities to barricade entree to a several Internet resources alternatively of closing down the whole Internet. As an illustration. the Egyptian authorities turned off the Internet in the first yearss of the revolution. It made people really angry and from societal webs they decided to travel to the streets and show their attitude towards the authorities by presenting public violences.
But the authorities of China closed entree merely to some web resources and imposed new regulations on the use of the internal societal webs by doing the users register with their existent names and passport informations.The findings of this survey have of import recommendations to see in the hereafter. 1 ) The first is that closing down the whole Internet does non forestall revolution.
Conversely. it leads to a revolution. because people no longer can show their sentiment virtually. so they pour out the wrath assemblage in the streets. what irrevocably leads to the revolution. So harmonizing to the consequences of my survey the authorities should non turn off the Internet. 2 ) Next is that enforcing new regulations and statute laws on the webs use.
as China did. is besides non right manner to handle people. Although it can give consequences and can avoid the public violences and the presentations. the authorities must non go against human rights. In order to derive trust and love of people it should non curtail their freedom. The authorities should non enforce regulations on the use of societal webs which do non let people stay confidential by doing them registry with their existent names.MentionsBady.
A. ( 26. August 8 ) . The in-between land between engineering and revolutions. Technology Review. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. technologyreview. com/blog/guest/27110/Crovitz.
G. ( 2011. February 14 ) . Egypt’s revolution by societal media. The Wall Street Journal.
Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //online. wsj. com/article/SB10001424052748703786804576137980252177072. hypertext markup languageDeath of Khaled Mohamed Saeed. ( 2011 ) . In Wikipedia. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //en.
wikipedia. org/wiki/Death_of_Khaled_Mohamed_SaeedFallows. J. ( 2011. September ) . Arab Spring. Chinese Winter. The Atlantic.
50-58. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. theatlantic.
com/magazine/archive/2011/09/arab-spring-chinese-winter/8601/Fountain. R. . & A ; Rogers. W. ( 2011. October 3 ) .
China’s Arab Spring cyber lessons.The Diplomat. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //the-diplomat. com/2011/10/03/china % E2 % 80 % 99s-arab-spring-cyber-lessons/Rathbone. E. ( 2011. March 15 ) .
Can societal networking spur a revolution? The University of Virginia Magazine. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //uvamagazine. org/only_online/article/can_social_networking_cause_revolution/Stepanova. E. ( 2011. May ) . The function of information communicating engineerings in the “Arab Spring” . PONARS Eurasia. ( Policy memo No. 159 ) . Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. gwu. edu/~ieresgwu/assets/docs/ponars/pepm_159. pdfTaylor. K. ( 2011. September 13 ) . Arab Spring truly was societal media revolution. TG Daily. Retrieved fromhypertext transfer protocol: //www. tgdaily. com/software-features/58426-arab-spring-really-was-social-media-revolutionWong. E. ( 2011. December 16 ) . Beijing imposes new regulations on societal networking sites. The New York Times. p. A9. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. nytimes. com/2011/12/17/world/asia/beijing-imposes-new-rules-on-social-networking-sites. hypertext markup language