1 Comment

  1. ·

    I missed the event, so I wont discuss the content of net4change, but rather the discussion as a whole. If you have discussed that question at net4change, I’m sorry for being superfluous.

    My impression is that we’ve discussed the importance of social media so much that we’ve forgotten to define what be really mean by the term. I can really understand the frustration from Said, reacting to the western label “twitter revolution”, at the same time I can understand the clash between Said and Amamou, who claims social media was crucial.

    What is it that really helped the revolutions? Was it twitter? Was it facebook? Was it VoIP? Was it encrypted mails? Was it internet as a whole? Like Said, I’m having a hard time accepting that This One Service dominated the revolution and liberated the people. If we wrongly focus on this social media/internet/something that helped the rioters empower and liberate themselves, we wont be able to learn. And that would really suck, since we probably could learn a lot from these revolutions.

    Also (but besides the point) I’m often tickled by our use of time in language. This comment is written in the past sense, I think your text is written in the past sense, and much of the analyzing texts on the revolutions in the middle east are written in the past sense. Yet, they’re not nearly over. Is it us becoming so twitter-being we don’t see things as both past and present? Interesting, but hardly relevant for the discussion.

Comments are closed.