The Role Of Protest And Technology In Democracy

The Role of Protest and Technology in Democracy Your Name Your Institution of Affiliation March 25, 2018 Introduction Ever since it first started, activism has been one of the most effective avenues on which the masses could channel their own ideas and opinions with regards to public matters. Issues such as those that are usually relegated or ignored by those in power. However, while most historical forms of activism have existed in different nodes of history, scholars argue that these days, this form of resistance might have already changed. In line with this, this article would examine to seminal articles written by Gladwell and Klein, entitled “Small Change: Why the Revolution would not be Tweeted” and “Fences of Enclosure, Windows of Opportunity”, respectively. The article written by Gladwell discusses that despite changes that are brought by technological innovations, real activism that would ultimately lead to shifts in social paradigm would not come in the form of the media, or at least without other factors included. This is because of the difference in the “risks involved” between social media activism and front-line activism. The one written by Klein argues that these new tools (of mass media) act as avenues for change as break down the ‘fences’, which are erected in order to consolidate the power and wealth towards the rich. All in all, the author of this article believes that both Klein and Gladwell’s analyses of how media and technology affect contemporary activism are true. This is because while Social Activism on its own is not enough, it acts as the major catalyst for change that when added with passion and dedication for change, becomes an unstoppable force that shifts the very paradigms that we believe in. In almost any part of the world, stories of resistances initiated by the people and spread through social media have been a staple for the news. Historic demonstrations that shook the world demonstrations such as Moldova's Twitter Revolution of 2009, the Philippines People Power Revolution of 1986 and even the radical Jihadist movements of the ISIS have at least one major element in common – Technological adaptation. To put it in simple terms, these revolutions would not be possible without the use of technology to communicate, coordinate, and command hundreds of thousands of individuals to fight for a common cause. Nonetheless, these would not become possible without the existence of social media. This is because as a mode of communication, it “it easier for the powerless to collaborate, coordinate, and give voice to their concerns” (134 Gladwell). In other words, social and mass media as a form of technological innovation has bridged people who would otherwise find it hard to find each other and communicate their common cause. Social media has then removed “barriers separating people from previously public resources, locking them away, from much-needed land and water, restricting their ability to move across borders, to express political dissent, etc.” (199 Klein). From this perspective, the existence of such barriers, as the primary motivator for change, could then question the need for the social media in terms of having a successful social movement. The proponents of one perspecti...