Review Draft

Social Media, More Than What It’s Worth

Ever since the day when social media was established with the help of the ever-famous World Wide Web, its popularity and demand has continually been growing along with the people, from generation to generation.  It is known very well, as a way of interacting, sharing ideas, and connecting virtually with the presence of modern technology. By reading three articles based upon the issue on whether or not, social media carries an effective role to the society, specifically for social and political transformation, I was able to distinguish which among them shows the most convincing view. Although they all have provided unique claims, Watkins’ argument appears to be the most effective because of his comprehensive presentation of the evidences and refutations to prove his claim; the two other writers, Mainwaring and Sharma, failed to address other testimonies aside from their own justification, which made their arguments a bit biased and less persuasive than that of Watkins’.

            In S. Craig Watkins article “Social Media Have Been Powerful Tools in Organizing Egypt’s Revolution,” he argues that social media has indeed, been effective tools in systemizing the protests in Egypt. He points out that although social media is not the root cause for all these social movements that happened Egypt, it has served as a big help for propelling the people with power and their rights to speak freely. In this statement, he is capable of not only acknowledging the refutations, but also by giving out an absolute evidence. Another statement in his article says, “Twitter and Facebook did not start the revolution, but they did help generations of Egyptians realize a world that not that long ago would have been impossible to imagine.” I think that the use of these social media tools have somehow provided a great advantage to the people of Egypt, especially during those social and political campaigns. With these social networking sites, people get to connect with other people, share videos, and increase more awareness. Even though he has not witnessed the uprising, nor was he part of the regime, he assumes that there is, in fact, a huge role of social media based on his own perspective, which I find to be true as well. Watkins makes his point by including relevant data and evidence such as the estimated number of Facebook accounts in Egypt, as well as relevant data for other related social networks. He doesn’t just base his argument through his own judgments, he actually uses outside sources that give out a much wider perspective on the issue of whether or not, social media has been an effective tool for social movements.

            In addition, Watkins also conducted an interview with a man from Tahir who has witnessed the uprising. According to his findings, “Facebook emerged as an efficient way to coordinate and organize protestors.” This statement provided by an outside source makes his argument appear more convincing and authentic than the others because he is not only speaking based on his own assumption, but also from other people’s experience on the issue which the other two writers seemed to be lacking. In my opinion, I think that these protesters should take advantage from social media because it is one way of raising awareness and for other people around the world to reach out to them or share their insights to the condition in Egypt. Not only do they contribute to the demand for transformation, but also lessen the violence caused by protesting on the streets.

      The other articles done by Mainwaring and Sharma didn’t show much proof to effectively convince their audience. In an article “Social Media Empower People” by Simon Mainwaring, he argues that the uses of these social-network tools are without any doubt, the fundamental part of people’s power to overthrow the Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak. Another article by Parves Sharma claims that social media wasn’t the main cause for the Egyptian revolution, especially because of the lack of technological knowledge in the country. Their arguments may be agreeable however, I think that these two writers based their arguments only through their own perspective – disregarding other refutations that come along the way. “A pretty substantial number of them have NEVER used the Internet and do not have email accounts. The complicated mechanisms of self-promotion and information gathering and sharing on social networks are not a part of their lives.” I find this statement on Sharma’s work to be very one-sided. He only assumes these pieces of information based on what he knows, and it doesn’t provide specific evidence. To me, I don’t think it’s fair to say that this revolution is only limited to those living in Egypt, and that it should take an abundant number of people to ignite a protest through social media. He doesn’t show efficient rebuttals or even objections in his argument which makes his work the least convincing among all three.

      Watkins talks about the role of Twitter in the Egyptian revolution, how one person could take a stand, inform others about the events that were taking place, and how Twitter served as a way for other people to follow along and communicate. He mentions, “a twenty-one year old woman who goes by the Twitter name @alya1989262” created a hashtag purposely for the Egyptian protests. Interestingly enough, Watkins was able to provide a more specific detail as to how this social and political uprising benefited from the presence of social media. More evidence was shown, thus making his work more unambiguous than those of Mainwaring and Sharma’s works.

     Simon Mainwaring’s claim seems efficient and I do agree with his statement that, “social media provides a complex and deep infrastructure perfect for the activist processes of social transformation.” However, I don’t think he was able to come up with a more concrete reason to refute a counter-argument, opposing his claim. He only identifies one obvious reason which is the fact that social media enables an “infinitely scalable connectivity” and that’s it. He could have provided more relevant evidence and reasons to prove his argument. Although he acknowledges the importance of social media to the protesters, he could have done a better job in proving his claim.

      Among the three columns, Watkins’ work emerges to be the most convincing of them all because of his effective reasoning and absolute refutations. I think that social media does contribute to the people wanting social and political transformation. In a technologically-dependent world, we are all entitled to these social media tools that haven’t even existed twenty years ago. Some people would say that it isn’t effective enough as compared to campaigning and protesting on the streets, but I think that these tools are made to improve our ways of connecting with the world. It is one way to raise more awareness about a nation, even from people at the other side of the world we are living in.