Manuel Castells’ chapter, ‘The Egyptian Revolution’ focuses on how social media was able to bring about a sociopolitical change in the state of Egypt at a time of political instability and uncertainty. I was assigned this reading and i was rebutting arguments in favor of the resolution. Since i always knew that i’d be presenting arguments in favor of the resolution, i read the chapter having THAT mindset. In my honest opinion, my perspective on the chapter didn’t really change much because i already agreed to everything Castells mentioned about the importance of social media the chapter.
Castells focuses on the crucial role of technology and social media platforms in what he deems the “internet age”(Castells,67). As his thesis, Castells proposes to suggest some hypotheses, grounded on observation, on the nature and perspectives of networked social movements, with the hope of identifying the new paths of social change in our time.He explores the roles that Facebook, Twitter and the internet play in disseminating information, organizing rallies, planning the occupation of public spaces, and forming collective agendas with which to address the respective movements’ goals.The occupation of public spaces organized through the use of internet and wireless technology over social media networks ultimately changed the traditional protest or demonstration into what Castells and many others call the new social movement. The hybrid nature of these movements is what made them different and arguably stronger than their traditional counterparts.
While listening to the opposing group didn’t completely change my opinion on the importance of social media to bring about sociopolitical change, it certainly did lead me to think about how in earlier times, traditional movements actually DID take place without the use of social media. There were some real life examples used by the opposition which did prove to be compelling arguments for eg. how the Chinese revolution was a massive success even though it was set in a time where social media wasn’t prevalent and how social media did prove to be a slight hindrance in the 2016 US presidential elections.
One major difference between Castells and Dean’s perspective on social media was how they viewed it. Castells believed that social networking platforms like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube were used to document the spontaneous demonstrations that erupted across the country to help spread the message for change, and to connect with fellow protesters. Using these mediums, they successfully organized the occupation of symbolic public spaces like the Tahrir Square.The combination of internet activism and thorough, non-stop coverage from Al Jazeera which worked with protesters in trading information together helped strengthen and magnify the movement. Dean on the other hand viewed social media as something that was extremely frivolous and believed that content on such sites were not taken seriously. While many social movements were touted as “raising awareness”, in reality, such movements help nothing but the egos of those running them. At best, they were hollow facades that advance nothing, and actively harm the movements they “support” at worst. By examining the flaws of the most popular social movements, it will be clear that social media was unable to effectively contribute to sociopolitical change.
In conclusion, this debate was an interesting activity that helped bring to life various contrasting views on social media and also helped expand one’s thinking horizon.