In the debate, I was responsible for assessing the Castells’ resolution, which is “Be it resolved that social media enables socio-political change.” For preparation, I had to think about both sides of the argument, including the supporting evidence from the article and real-life examples. My role in the debate helped me to explore the reading detailedly in a neutral way, but it is clear that from the source that we are given, Castells mostly agrees with the point that social media does enable socio-political change. It was very enjoyable to listen to each team’s opinions and to compare my ideas with theirs. My perspective changed a little that I agree with the “For” team more as they are giving more and stronger supporting pieces of evidence.
In the preparation, our accessing team comes up with a list of points that the two teams would probably mention in the debate. At first, I thought the shutdown of the Internet would be a strong supporting evidence for the “Against” group as the protest movement continues without the social media platforms. However, as the “For” team brought up the question of “Why the government would shut down the Internet if it is not influential”, it suddenly becomes one of their strong points. It was a complicated task for the “Against” team to be more convincing with the Castells’ reading only. But the group did a really good job, especially in the rebuttal part. For example, they mentioned the example about Yik Yak podcasts that we’ve discussed in class, several quotes in the article about the idea that the occupation of space is fundamental, and the fact that the past revolution serves as an inspiration rather than social media, all strongly contribute to their argument.
It was also enlightening to listen to the other group’s debate. I really like the idea they brought up about the spread of misinformation, which is a common phenomenon nowadays. But the other group’s idea of verification of the information being improved with the advance of technology was also compelling. The significant difference between Castells’ and Dean’s reading is that they hold opposite opinions toward whether social media enables socio-political change in general. While Castells focuses on the relationship between social media platforms and the Egyptian revolution as well as being more specific about the event, Dean’s article focuses on the concepts and ideas such as miscommunication. As the “Against” group brings up the fact that Dean’s article was written a long time before the social media became one of the essential parts of our life as well as listening to two groups’ arguments, I agree more with the idea that social media more or less impacts the socio-political changes.