The power of social media to organize, incite and inform was on display during the revolt in Egypt this month. At this week’s AMP Summit Series event in Washington, D.C., political strategist Joe Trippi, State Department policy adviser for innovation Ben Scott and Huffington Post senior political reporter Amanda Terkel engaged in a discussion on what Egypt’s Revolution has taught us about social media’s potential.
Here are some of their thoughts on what makes social media such a powerful, unpredictable force in global politics:
- It replaces the need for a charismatic leader. A cause no longer needs a champion to attract followers. Certainly, there were a number of noble and courageous protesters (and some not so noble, unfortunately), but there was no single face attached to this revolution. Social media has created the possibility of what Ben Scott calls an “aggregate leader,” where the responsibility of advancing a movement can be dispersed.
- It’s impossible to control or shut down. The size and speed of a social network are too difficult for a government — or any kind of bureaucracy — to control, said Joe Trippi. Before social media, the seeds of a revolution could be stamped out, but now the seeds can be suddenly sprout up everywhere. The power of social media made certain that the government’s attempt to shut down Egypt’s wireless access would be seen for what it was — a last-ditch effort that could never be sustained. The costs of taking an entire country offline are too substantial, if only for the opportunity costs that arise when consumers and entrepreneurs can’t access the Internet, Scott said.
- Its effects are “politically agnostic.” There is no overseer that watches over, or brand that is stamped on a grass-roots social network, says Scott. The best anyone can hope for is a small say in what goes on within it. Of course, it is still important for institutions to have their say. One of the first things the Egyptian military did after President Hosni Mubarek resigned was create a Facebook page.
Were you surprised by the influence of social media on the Egyptian revolt? Do you feel the effects of social media on social activism are understated or overstated?
Image credit: oonal, via iStockphoto
Twitter
Facebook
Linkedin
RSS
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Reg Saddler, James Rivers, SmartBrief on SocMed, Kathryn Skaggs, SilentButSmart and others. SilentButSmart said: RT @zaibatsu: What #Egypt ’s revolution tells us about the nature of social media http://tiny.ly/taXs via @JamesRivers #sm #smm [...]
[...] should make the despots of the world concerned. the djinn won’t go back in that bottle now. (h/t 2 [...]
I think the power of social media with activism are only now being appreciated. Good post.
My recent post You Say You Want a Revolution There’s an App for that
[...] SmartBlog on Social Media – Best Practices and Case Studies on Social Media Marketing for Busi… [...]
I don't agree that social media when used like in Egypt replaces the need for a "charismatic leader". Still think the people need a face and voice to identify with. What I will agree with is that social media makes it easiest for the voice of a movement to mobilize and organize faster than ever before. No newspapers, flyers, phone calls or letter writing campaigns needed.
I agree that the way Egypt uses social media is NOT a replacement for a "charismatic leader". But the people do need something no matter how small or insignificant to identify with. And I also agree that the social media is the easiest way to voice a movement quickly and in some situations throughly.
I also agree with the statement that social media is not a replacement for a "charismatic leader." These people, that have been beaten down, need a hero to identify with, to look up to. The social media is just something that spreads world-wide, it cannot replace an actual person, a deity, that people want to believe in.
Though, it is indeed a good way to voice a movement quickly and throughly, some things need to take time. The media can morph things into what they are not.
totally
I think the "Individuality Age" is coming to an end and we are approaching the age of collectivity resp. multiplicity, of the wisdom of many, of the power of a collective, or of the multitude like Toni Negri and Michael Hardt named it in their book "Empire". We don't need single leaders any more, experts become obsolte. I am more with Ben Scott and the "aggregate leader", whom the people can meet in the social media. They can address to a single twitter account or a single facebook fanpage and have so a place to identify with.
[...] Story found at: SmartBlogs [...]
Hi,
What is meant by "its effects are politically agnostic" ? Does it imply that these revolts were planned with no specific political goal in mind other than the ousting of the corrupt regime?
Regards,Sandro