Over the past couple of months, the world has witnessed some unprecedented news; the uprising in Tunisia that overthrew an authoritarian ruler and now the incidents in Egypt that is well on the verge of ending a 30 year old regime. The incidents in Tunisia, dubbed the Jasmine revolution started on the streets (after the death of a vegetable trader who set himself on fire in anger at state restrictions on his ability to earn a living) but were largely fuelled by social media thanks to the new age tools that were now available – Facebook, Youtube, blogs, Twitter etc. The disenfranchised youth had this new medium to voice out, lash out unfettered and gather support. And it worked. The momentum of the movement forced out the corrupt ruler of 23 years, President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and his family out of the country.

What had happened in Tunisia has now cascaded to Egypt threatening to oust the incumbent of 30 years. This time again, social media had a big role to play in fuelling the revolution. The authorities were so worried about the repercussions that they had to resort to cutting off the Internet. Other countries in the vicinity or far off who are worried by people led revolutions have taken taking pre-emptive steps like filtering off keywords or even blocking social media websites.

So why the authorities are scared of social media and what is it about social media that makes it the media of the revolutionary? In my opinion, it is the instantaneous, distributed and amorphous nature of social media that makes it easier for the activists to reach, organize and mobilize at an unprecedented level and difficult to monitor and control by authorities.

Social media also possesses the multiplier effect, the ability to quickly cascade the voice down and activate others in the process.

Observe the illustration below that demonstrates the cascading effect…

The Activator is the dissident in the system that has reached her tipping point and wants to rebel, gather support for her cause. Activators are typically influencers, well connected within their network and use the various tools of social media to good use. The next are the Dormant Dissidents in the system that has been passive aggressive and wish to voice out; they need an Activator to charge them up but are rarely the ones to initiate it. The Dormant Dissidents provide operational support for the cause; for e.g. when the usual tools of social media is cut off, they find alternate routes.

If Activators are the spark, the Dormant Dissidents are the fuel that sustains the activism.

Then you have the Fringe Supporters who are neutral and do not wish to participate in the activism for fear of being victimized. However, if there is enough ambient support for the cause, the Fringe Supporters join in.

Finally, there are the Spoilers who are against the cause and could inject wrong information or rumours into the network throwing a spanner in the works leading to panic.

As you can see, social media can be effectively used for activism but it isn’t the panacea. For instance authorities have the ability to completely isolate the citizens from accessing the Internet as was the case in Egypt. The lesson here is that social media can be a great starting point in organizing, mobilizing support for your cause and even sustaining it, but it shouldn’t be the sole support system.

However, no one can deny the fact that social media has given voice to the masses and has levelled the playing field; rightfully the media of the masses.