“Series of resistance exhibited by Arab people are associated with the very
own endogenous dynamics and social characteristics of the countries in the
region. Changes in political conjuncture of countries in the region such as
Tunisia and Egypt in the recent period are masterpieces of a set of instances
such as experience and ability to organize, mobilize and pioneer, putting
political intelligence into effect, practicing communicative skills, social
media literacy and internet use. Social media does not have a self-proclaimed
revolutionary aspect; it is only called upon frequently on functional terms in
communicational coordination of opposing movements.”
How Sembiotic Is
The Relationship Between Social Media and Social Movements?
(Published
in Socio Cri’ 14 / Sociolgy and Critical Perspectives On Social Movements ISBN:
978-605-9941-22-8 Pages: 209-225)
Abstract
The relationship between social
movements and communication media appears to become prominent as there
supposedly lies the potentiality of a societal transformation. It is easy to
observe that political activists utilize new media as an onset to give voice to
their discontent about public issues and mobilize thousands of protestors into
city squares and streets. In this regard, arguments towards the relationship
between digital networks and collective movements from a technological
deterministic perspective seem to became prevalent.
Keywords
Social movements, Digital activism,
Cultural citizenship, Citizen journalism, Social media
Introduction
As a socio-spatial realm, social
movements follow a temporal trajectory and can be described ‘(…) as
moments of collective creation that provide societies with ideas, identities,
and even ideals’ (Eyerman and Jamison, 1991, p.4). For these ideas, identities
and even ideals to be heard of publicly, communication media are needed. To
this effect, we can put forward that communication media historically teamed up
well with social movements serving under distinctive media forms. As of 1970s,
these media forms have underwent dramatic changes with the arrival of ICTs
which also redefined civic practices and responsibilities. To this respect,
inclusion of new terms into our daily agendas such as “digital activism”,
“cultural citizenship” and “citizen journalism” took place. Social movements
unwaveringly employ communcation technologies to facilitate organization,
mobilization and command of the course of street protests. Role of ICTs are
beyond shadow of a doubt. However, there seems to be a tendency to overrate or
even sanctify this role of ICTs. Taking into account the role of Web 2.0 which
enables social networks in mediating social movements, in this paper I will
focus on the question of to what extent social media contributes to social
movements by exemplifying recent social movements that occurred in Egypt,
Turkey, Iran and the Philippines. In this sense, the use of different forms of
social media in various social movement phenomenons and their efficiency will
be discussed.
In the first section of this paper,
the term “social movement” will be explained and the relationship between
social movements and media will be argued. Following that, concepts such as
“activism”, “citizenship” and “journalism” which are transformed by the new
media will be elucidated. Finally the strategic importance of social media in
social movements will be debated by referring to different forms of social
movements staged in different parts of the world.
- “Old-new”
Social Movements
Social
movements emerged in paralel with the history of humankind and transpired in
order for various demands to be voiced in various ways. They signal
collectivities acting with some degree of organization and continuity
outside of institutional or organizational channels for the purpose of
challenging or defending extant authority, whether it is institutionally or
culturally based, in the group, organization, society, culture, or world order
of which they are a part (Snow et al., 2004, p.11).
Though as concept social movements underscores collectivity, an individual
or an ideo-political movement itself can also take political actions for
right-claiming. On the one hand, social movements open up opportunities for
miscellaneous public spheres, on the other hand ‘as a room enabled by political
sphere, singals the existence of a facet upon which life pieces, experiences,
demands and slogans play on’ (Baker, 2012, p.20).
As a concept, social movements was first time pronounced by Lorens Von
Stein who ‘is one of the first non-socialist social scientist to have given a
critical analysis of the forces of capitalism and have predicted the social
tensions of future decades’ (Mengelberg, 1967, p.20). In this way, he
introduced paved the way for the inclusion of the notion; fight for social
prosperity into the field of sociology. However, social movements can’t be
limited to social welfare rights. In fact, they are farreaching.
It can be said that social movements may tragically vary in terms of demand
and contextual-related specificities. Nevertheless we can at large categorize
social movements as follows; feminist movements, ecological movements,
anti-nuclear movements, anti-war movements, labour class movements, anti-racism
and nationalism movements, animal rights movements and minority rights
movements.
There are myriad debates questioning the historical origins of social
movements. According to some sociologists ‘within the context of Western
societies, crux of social movements is grounded on the French Revolution and
reactions showed by crowds being in tumult, acting blindly and exceeding the
limits’ (Tarrow, 1998, p.10). Assumptions concerning origins of social
movements tend to be related to events and developments only emerging in
Western world. As a term, it is ethnocentric and literature thereof is
predominantly Western. That’s to say that ‘an orientalistic approach exhibited
towards to non-European societies and their histories. Besides, neither a
tradition of opposition nor of a resistance made mention thereof’ (Çetinkaya,
2008, p.42). None of the grassroots movements came about in non-Western
societies haven’t been categorized as social movements. It stems from a point
of view which relates dynamics of social movements only to historical events
namely modernism and industrialism exclusive to the West.
Rationale employed to explain and classify social movements pertains to
peculiar historical timeframes and unique social contexts dwelling therein. In
particular, according to a hegemonic paradigm observed before World War II, the
kernel of social movements used to be consisted of anti-capitalist ideologies
designed against pro-capitalist ideologies and its world order. For Hank and
his colleagues, these anti-capitalist ideologies were necessary for these
movements to have organized, taken action, voiced falsity and injustice (Hank
et al., 1999, p.151). These
movements also labelled as “old social movements” are right-claiming struggles
practiced under leadership of labour class with an aim to establish a
socioeconomicly egalitarian societial order which required a long haul and a
host of battering social praxis processes. These thorny struggles shaking off
bourgeoisie reap the sought benefits in the end. Yet, times came and
bourgeoisie settled the score by putting neoliberal policies in operation which
gradually took effect as of 1970s. It was accompanied by globalization process
resulted in either termination or chop of many of the acquisitions of labour
class acquired along the struggles.
Experiences
had along 1970s brought about a paradigmatic turn with respect to social
movements which lays the foundation for the birth of “new social movements”
also termed “third generation movements”
marked off
from the characteristics of earlier social movements, especially the labour
movement. Whereas the labour movement, for example sought to achieve specific
economic gains from the captalist class and to pressure governments into legislation
and policy initiatives that its leaders would benefit the rank and file, NSM
had no such calculated material outcome (Downing et al., 2001, p. 24).
Actors of
new social movements often don’t tend to see, interpret the world and public
issues in the scope of traditional political binary oppositions namely
“left/right” ideologies. Instead, they tend to perceive each and every single
public issues which they see and name to be related to their “world life” and
take action to politicise them. Here quoting Habermas, ‘new social movements
differently from “economic and social internal affairs and military security”
focus on issues such as “standart of living, equal rights, self-realization,
engagement and human rights’ (Habermas, 2001, p.849). Therefore, we can say
that new social movements are rather related with identity politics such as
“feminism, lgbt rights, antiracism, antinuclearism and ecologism”.
Hereto social movements has been attempted to clarify based on arguments
asserting a dualist “old-new” dialectics seemingly partitioned these movements
as old and new. Yet, we also need to take Klandermans’ arguments into
consideration. Klandermans claims that ‘arguing new social movements as a form
of organization differing from conventional correspondents would be a vulgar
simplification. New social movements utilize opportunities and resources
provided by old movements’ (Klandermans cited in Coşkun,2006, p.152). To put it
differently, level of success and effictuality of current movements may highly
increase by rejoicing in both theoretical and practical capital gathered in old
movements. It is also predicable that a repertoire of skills acquired along
fought movements ranging from control and organization of dynamics of civil
disobedience actions to building mobilizations of masses, to commanding
collective action with timely and rational interventions may be key factors to
keep unpredictable explosion of masses on track.
In the
hypocentre of new social movements also lies bourgeoisie and its world order as
targeted elements. Since capitalism continues to produce (new) victims under
new forms by increasing intensity of exploitation of labour, creating new
sophisticated ways to commodify hearts and minds, bodies, social relations,
natural resources and etc. Old and new social
movements don’t display a vertical breakaway and in fact they have an
inextricable relation. I believe that a repertoire of material and immaterial
resources along with default zones created respectively by these movements
nourished/will nourish each other.
