Willful participants in a ‘social media revolution’ – learnings series 1
12. Apr, 2011 
7 Comments
We’ve all experienced the frenzy surrounding ‘India Against Corruption’ episode led by Anna Hazare. Among other things, it has also been termed as the coming of age for social media in India. I think if anything at all, then, more than ever, it highlights my fears of possible misuse of the medium.
The possible misuse, as I put it, is not merely the ability to manipulate public sentiment (as against influence) but also willful participation by a large mass of (well meaning) people, carried away, possibly without understanding the depth, consequences of an issue they appear to be supporting.
Here are a few symptoms that I notice from this particular episode.
Jingoism rules
We have found someone who is going to get rid of corruption. Anna Hazare is the new Mahatma – it doesn’t matter that Mahatma’s principles are forgotten in practice by all of us, but it feels so good that we have found a new hero.
While we are at it, let’s also see how this compares with recent revolution in Egypt – it makes me appear like a global citizen in front of my friends and peers overseas who read my feeds. It doesn’t matter that India is already the largest democracy in the world.
Tweet before you read
I wrote about dumbing down of social media sometime ago:
Not so long ago comments were the benchmark of participation on social media channels – first on blogs, then on social networks. Comments, however, take thought, intelligence and, of course, time – you’ve got to read the post, fill in your personal details etc. Therefore, while a comments help build conversations, perspective, and, depth, they are not ‘scalable’.
It’s far easier to simply click a button to participate – it doesn’t matter whether you read the content or not . It helps further that the said unit of engagement helps share the content with his/ her universe of readers/ followers/ friends.
Enter the now ubiquitous ‘Like’ button, or, even the ‘Retweet’ button on Twitter (my belief is, it will also eventually be called the ‘Like’ or ‘Share’, for that’s what it does anyway).
Research shows that penetrating the organic time-line of a user has the most influence on his/ her universe of followers, and ‘Likes’ let you do that painlessly.
In this whole cut-and-paste, twitter happy economy, who has the time to read, understand the issue? Few, very few of us, bothered to read the proposed ‘Lokpal bill’. Of course corruption has to end, the bill is being touted as the solution, hence it must be ok to support the bill.
Easy as 1,2,3
Anna Hazare’s fast enters another day.To express solidarity with him, can we all change our status message to support a MAN who is fighting for us, to bring a stronger Anti Corruption Law in the country?If “YES” please make this your status.If “No” God Bless us!!
The digital equivalent of giving alms, a status update on Facebook or Twitter acts as a balm for the aggrieved conscience. We must do the right thing and what a painless way to do it – virtual actions make participating in protests so easy.
Am a celebrity, the new change agent
These self-proclaimed change agents feed collective frenzy through their Twitter feeds; in this episode some even claiming to the custodians of the very issue of corruption itself. One went to the extent of the suggesting that he can finally stop writing about corruption, heaving a sigh of relief. Corruption is over, tackled successfully.
Err, I have a little errand to run overseas. Keep the next issue ready, I will be back.
Herd mentality
That social media is an extremely viral medium is well understood – word travels really fast and the collective frenzy thus achieved is infectious. Before we know, we are a herd – the few speaking contrary to popular voices are treated as black sheep.
Like I said at the beginning, this post is not about Anna Hazare, or the current episode, but an attempt to understand collective behaviour in times of social media.
You have highlighted very relevant points.
Contributing digitally seems to imply that the necessary corrective actions have been taken.
The point to consider is that these actions seem like shortcuts.
http://futurechat.in/experiences/outsourcing-of-a-revolution-will-not-work/
Like instant food mixes, we now have instant opinions. There used to be a time when we were told, “No investigation, no right to speak.” Long gone are those days.
Well written 🙂 and if I may confess, I do too at times retweet before I read! Im careful before I tweet though. Reason being, when I retweet, I take no ownership of the content. Its easier that way 😛
Your point on celeb power – all i want to say here is that the “quality of their intent” was really good. And ditto for the Aam aadmi. That is what we are expected to provide – support for a good cause.
What comes of it though is not in our hands. Only time will tell…
Interesting post. I think you have summed up the collective angst that all of us involved with the medium have. However, I have some counter points (questions, actually):
a. why should social media be any different than the real world, where jingoists, farcical celebrities and people with ‘herd mentalities’ exist in abundance?
b. why do you find it hard to believe that the people who use the ‘like’ and ‘RT’ options know very well, the limited usefulness of it in eradicating corruption, but still do it because they feel strongly? Why judge their intellect?
c. I dont subscribe to the view that you have to be an expert on things that you criticize. Just like you dont have to go to film school to say a film is bad, I dont think you need to read the lokpal bill in entirety to criticize or support it. Yes, you need to understand it conceptually to get the drift, but why isnt that enough?
Also, it is a “ReTweet” button and not a “Yes, I have read this and understood fully. I would now like to share this” button, no? 😉
@Karthik:
a- totally agree and hence the need to agree that social media will not change the world. It only is as good/ bad at bringing social change, as our actions.
b- not judging the intellect of the people, but the nature of the medium accessories like the Like/RT – which make the job of participation mindlessly simple.
c- Agree only partly. Somethings have larger consequences than others but frenzy makes all seem equal.
Yes, hence I have a vision for an RT, Like and Dislike button Twitter 😉
Thanks for the inputs Karthik.
I don’t agree people use like/rt mindlessly. You are on a social platform and your every action is viewed by many around. Every action is subject to acceptance/ rejection. No body wants rejection from anybody. When i do a ‘click’, it is quite thought and through decision. Only thing here is the ease of medium which makes it look individuals are doing it without being aware.
Also look at it from a different perspective where i am not aware, social media is making me aware of certain events and i am sharing my view on same. There is no obligation for me to be absolutely correct. Those who agree with me will support. This particular episode of ‘Anna Hazaare’ atleast informed people about something like lokpal bill. If not all, few read it, discussed it and created further awareness.
This will hold true for anything under the sun.
It will be very subjective to say what are correct ways to use this medium.
I believe many a time you become a part of a social revolution by pressure instead of by choice. It’s like if our peers are commenting and supporting a cause, so should you. Even if you believe in it or not. And since you have taken the example of Anna Hazare, I won’t shy away from sharing by experience, my status update or tweet did not say anything about lokpal initially because I wanted to read about it before I actually support but still I was pinged at least thrice and sent a private message on Twitter twice that why am I not supporting the cause!