The Arab Spring began as citizens across the Arab world become dissatisfied with their political and economic situations, and fed up with their repressive government regimes . Frustrated with the high income inequality and mass unemployment, the youth decided to finally take hold of their fate and contest the status quo.
Fortunately for them, the Internet was there to facilitate these actions. Through the use of blogging, podcasts, and other social media outlets, people of the Arab world were finally free to express themselves without fear of censorship or social repercussions.
On the day of its first protest, Egypt’s government immediately shut down access to certain social media networks, including Twitter and Facebook. This hasty response only highlighted the lack of freedom that the public was initially protesting, and evoked even more ferocious protest. Without the Egyptians’ ability to express themselves via the Internet, boisterous young people were forced to communicate in more traditional ways. Increased riots were triggered in Cairo and the scenes of protest were instantly disseminated as the mass media flocked to Tahrir Square.
Technology use has become increasingly prominent in the Arab world and is altering the scope of interaction between the public and the government. Hani Albasoos, a professor at the Islamic University in Gaza, wrote in his article “Political Change in the Middle East: First Consolidated Reflections and Challenges Ahead” that “a new wave of democratization in the Middle East and North Africa has been brought about by a technological revolution.”
Social media also gives the opportunity for marginalized communities to vocalize their opinion and communicate with other concurring individuals. In 2007, Naomi Sakr, professor media policy at University of Westminster, penned the book Arab Media and Political Renewal: Community, Legitimacy and Public Life. In it, Sakr quoted Dale Eickleman, professor of anthropology at Dartmouth University, in saying that “new communications media has turned the Arab street into a public sphere in which greater number of people and not just a political and economic elite will have a say in governance and public issues.” This builds self-esteem in the individual, who gains the “ability to supersede [his or her] own status.”
However, this free-spirited interaction aroused trepidation in the hierarchal governments, who very much rely on the existing political structures to operate. The scale, organization, and effectiveness social media illustrated in assembling the public was remarkable, and left political leaders nonplussed. Traditionally, the government was able to filter content on the Internet. However, contemporary forms of media has allowed for rapid spread of information and increased political transparency.
This shed an entirely different light on the political orientation of the Arab World and put substantial pressure on the government. It has magnified the incentive for citizen activism and public engagement. Khalil Rinnawi, a lecturer at Tel-Aviv University, wrote in his article, “The Internet and the Arab World as a Virtual Public Sphere,” “the Internet de-legitimizes Arab regimes in particular through converting traditionally private conversations into public discussions.”
Media can potentially transform the relationship between the public and the state. As Sakr wrote, “media is thus understood to be the most important information source to serve as intermediary institutions between politics and citizens.”
The power of social media has been profoundly revealed. Its usage allowed the people of the Arab world to challenge the entire existence of their political order. Shared inspiration among the Arab world protesters sanctioned a widespread effort to fight for democracy, and the use of social media played a vital role in this. Its success in community building has opened the door to an entirely new discourse on the political hegemony in the Middle East and North Africa. Originating as a community-based movement, the people were, according to Sakr, finally able to dismiss being “passive recipients of authoritative discourse.” However, in order to uphold their efforts and challenge the state, they must foster their communication skills and use them to fuel a peaceful transition towards democratic autonomy.
