Social Networking Sites - Essay Example

?Rogerian Argument Research Essay Social Networking Sites have Revolutionized Politics Social networking sites are a place where individuals can their opinions without reservation. This opinion varies from individuals who feel that a candidate-elect would make the best president to those who feel that their government is oppressive, or even that congressmen feel that passing certain bills into law would be beneficial to his constituents. Some people disagree, arguing that individuals should not use social networking sites as a forum of airing their opinions as these sites are not safe and have landed people in legal and personal problems. While these arguments are valid, people’s convictions should not be suppressed as voicing them out has created awareness on political subjects, thus revolutionizing politics. Social networking sites have been criticized as being ineffective in conducting political change as political activists form or join like-minded groups. They do not foster any action. Critics have also added that people join advocacy groups in sites like Facebook and ignore every message these groups send to them (Delany). However, these like-minded groups have taken things a step further. Levi Russell, a communications director of the Tea Party Express, said, “Facebook allows us to promote and organize events in a whole new way [...] it is one of the most targeted and flexible tools we use. Our supporters are able to really take ownership of events in their area by sharing, discussing and inviting their friends in a very visual and tangible format (Unze o3a).” Furthermore, through social networking sites, protests have been arranged that have led parliaments to be dissolved and dictatorial leaderships to step down. One of the cyber organizers of the recent Egyptian protest, Wael Ghonim, said, “I am talking on behalf of Egypt [...] this revolution started online [...] this revolution started on Facebook (Smith).” Wael Ghonim demonstrated how instrumental social networking sites are in transforming politics. It has also been claimed that the state has a powerful means of monitoring or interdicting the tools on social networking sites, rendering them inactive as a tool of change in the political scenery and as such strengthening authoritarian regimes. These authoritarian regimes, apart from scrutinizing social networking sites, have also had them shut down (Shirky 28-41). Notwithstanding, this does not stop individuals from stating their opinions about pertinent issues with their leadership. In fact, by the government shutting down these websites, the end effect achieved is that everyone is alerted to what is going on in the state, causing the news to spread faster. Also, internet shutdown allows people to be creative and use social networking sites to send coded messages, therefore still creating political awareness and enforcing political change in the long run (Feith 5). Furthermore, social networking sites like Twitter have an open API that allows other web service providers to insert a stream of tweets. This makes Twitter versatile even when there is an internet shutdown. For example, in Iran after the government shut down all internet sources people were still able to access Twitter. One tweet read “all internet & mobile networks are cut. We ask everyone in Tehran to go onto their rooftops and shout alaho akbar in protest #Iran Election (Suvillan).” This characteristic of Twitter has ensured continued expression of political opinions. Many have argued that social networking sites have led to individuals being maimed, killed or even imprisoned by dictatorial governments for expressing their opinion (Leynne). However, without sacrificial lambs that are willing to voice their opinions, politics would be nonexistent. In fact, states that embrace freedom of speech were first formed by people speaking out. The opposition also argues that social networking sites have led people to be sued by posting defamatory and indecent messages on their status updates. Therefore, these social sites may not be the best place to post opinions (Bill 38-39). Still, these social sites encourage people to offer their points of view. Whether these points of view are regarded as slanderous or offensive to the reader, it is still an expressed opinion and a way of connecting people. Updates on social networking sites keeps people who are championing for a particular cause to be informed. For example, Twitter was explicitly used in the protests against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president. The tweets passed on vital information like “safe locations for impromptu protests - building or flash mobs (Cray 16). These protests have soldiered on despite the adversary from the Iranian government. They have also gained global solidarity to refute a tyrannical rule. Some have contended that social networking sites have brought a culture of self-absorbed people who filter out what they want to hear and ignore television sites that have hired professional editors who produce quality news, in preference for social media as a mode of spreading news. For example, Brian Williams alludes this self-obsession in social networking sites when he writes: “The larger media at work is the celebration of self [...] if it has to do with you, or your life, it’s important enough to tell someone [...] but for goodness’ sake, share it – get it out there so that others can enjoy it or not (540).” However, regular posting of status updates on social networking sites such as Facebook have led statesmen to realize their dreams by gaining massive support for their candidacy. President Obama is one such candidate, as the announcement of his candidacy for presidency spread like wildfire on social networking sites, including Facebook. Furthermore, during his campaign, President Obama “was often seen thumbing messages on his BlackBerry [and] his campaign used not only Facebook and YouTube but also MySpace (Fraser).” In fact, the number of Facebook friends that President Barack Obama had correlated with the total votes he received (Phi Kappa Phi Forum 14-16). These social networking sites also equipped Obama’s campaign by collecting funds from his supporters, thus boosting his campaign kitty. Through these social networking sites, supporters can see realtime videos of political events unfold and become part of a political revolution. Daniel J. Solove, a professor of law, argues that “social-networking sites allow seemingly trivial gossip to be distributed to a worldwide audience, sometimes making people the butt of rumors shared by millions of users across the Internet (100-106).” These websites allow people who are miles away to debate on important national or global issues and to get a different viewpoint from people in different environments. In addition, Andie Wuster suggests that social networking sites have become fundamental in connecting people from all walks of life and supporting activities within our societies. He writes that “the networks foster connection and action within our physical communities too (544).” In fact, social networking sites link people with their representatives at a local level and enables them to offer their opinions about a certain crack in a road that should be repaired or a health issue or even a building that is an eyesore and should be brought down. Even local counties have “posted all its activities on Twitter (Slocum).” This facilitates change at a local level by keeping constituents of a municipal informed on the changes being made in their county. Others argue that social networking sites have become a source of harassment among the youth even to the extent of young people committing suicide. The opponents of Facebook mention that teenagers can create fake profiles on their social networking sites for the purpose of bullying a fellow teenager they do not like (Davies 259-288). However, it is the responsibility of the youth not to accept friend proposals from individuals they have not met before or they do not want to befriend. Moreover, social networking sites have been fundamental in ensuring that the youth have a say on who runs the government. For example, in the 2008 U.S. Presidential elections there was a massive turnout of young voters: “tools such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and YouTube allow individuals to become part of the larger political process [...] youth turnout has been much higher in the 2008 primaries than in recent years. In some states, youth turnout has tripled or quadrupled (Phi Kappa PhiForum 14-16).” This political process was enhanced by the quick and easy accessibility of social networking sites. It has been shown that young people who vote for the first time have repeat votes in the future. This ensures that young people are involved in transforming politics that eventually affect their lives. Some critics contend that social networking sites are not safe and that it would be easy for a criminal to hack into your account and not only steal your personal information but also distribute indecent message to your online friends, therefore making these sites not a conducive place for expressing opinions (Facebook Stalker Guilty of Hacking Into Woman’s Account –A2). However, there are privacy settings that have been put into place by these networking sites to ensure safety of their users and they have prompted individuals to use them. Social networking sites have been used in China by online activists to build pressure for the government to be more transparent. Social sites such as YouTube have enabled “online mobilizations and the use of radical tactics such as hackvistism (Goubin 33-36)” as a means of national online protests in a repressive regime. This has provided a stage for the Chinese people to air their grievances on political subjects against their government with the hope of transforming their government. The internet is a powerful source of information and an important tool for communication. With the advent of social networking sites many politicians, political activists, and the public have been innovative and have used these sites to transform the political landscape. Though social networking sites have been criticized, the critiques should be responsible when they use these sites. Social networking sites have been vital in activating protests through the Arab world, ushering presidents in the West, forcing dictatorial regimes to step down, enabling individuals to watch and participate in lively political debates, and even pressurizing corrupt governments to be transparent. Social networking sites are indeed an indispensable tool for every political participant who seeks to create awareness and enforce change within the ruling government. Any politically-minded individual who ignores these sites risks being left out of major political events around the globe. Works Cited Anonymous. “Facebook Stalker Guilty of Hacking Woman’s Account.” Virginian Pilot. Norfolk.Va; 15 Jan 2011. Pg A2. Proquest. Web. 2 Mar. 2011. Cary, Mary Kate. “Five Ways New Media Are Changing Politics.” U.S. News Digital Weekly. Vol. 2 Issue 4, pg. 16-16, 1p. Academic Search Premier. 29 Jan. 2010. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. Davies, Mark R. & Barbara A. Lee. “The Legal Implications of Student Use of Social Networking Sites in the UK and US: Current Concerns and Lessons for the Future.” Education & The Law. Sep 2008, Vol. 20 Issue 3, pg. 259-288, 30p. Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. Delany, Collin. “Has Facebook Jumped the Shark as a Political Tool?” 4 May 2008. Web. 14 Mar. 2011. . Feith, David. “Iran's Digital Underground.” Wall Street Journal - Eastern Edition. Vol. 254 Issue 35, pg. D5. 1 Black and White Photograph. Academic Research Premier. 8 Nov. 2009. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. Fraser, Matthew. Dutta Soumitra. “Barack Obama and the Facebook Election.” U.S. News & World Report. 19 Nov. 2008. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. . Guobin, Yang. “Online Activism.” Journal of Democracy. Jul 2009, Vol. 20, Issue 3, p33-36, 4p. AcademicSearchPremier. Web. 2 Mar. 2011. Halton, Bill. “With Friends Like These, You May Need a Lawyer.” Tennessee Bar Journal. Vol. 46 Issue 10, p38-39, 2p. Academic Search Premier. Oct. 2010. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. Leynne, Jon. “Egypt Protests: Anti-Mubarak Demonstrators Arrested.” BBC News Africa. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. . Phi Kappa Phi Forum. “Beyond Boxers or Briefs?": New Media Brings Youth to Politics Like Never Before.” Phi Kappa Phi Forum. Summer 2008. Vol. 88 Issue 2, pg. 14-16, 3p, 1 Color Photograph, 1 Black and White Photograph. Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. Shirky, Clay. “The Political Power of Social Media.” Foreign Affairs. Jan/Feb 2011, Vol. 90 Issue 1, p28-41, 14p. AcademicSearchPremier. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. Slocum, Warren. “Are Social Media the Future of Local Government?” Blogspot.com. 14 Mar. 2011. Web. 14 Mar. 2011. . Smith, Catharine. “Egypt Facebook Revolution: Wael Ghonim Thanks the Social Network.” The Huffington Post. 14 Feb. 2011. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. . Solove, Daniel J. “The End of Privacy.” Scientific American. Sep 2008, Vol. 299. Issue 3, p100-106, 6p, 5 Color Photographs. AcademicSearchPremier. Web. 2 Mar. 2011. Suvillan, Andrew. “The Revolution Will Be Twittered.”13 June 2009. Web. 2 Mar. 2011. . Unze, David. “Facebook Helps Movement Ignite.” USA Today. 26 Mar. 2010. Pg. -03a. Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Mar. 2011. Wuster, Andy. “Won’t You Be Friendster?” The Bedford Reader. 10the ed. Eds. Kennedy, Kennedy, Aaron. Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s. 2011. 539-541. Print. 2 Mar. 2011. Williams Brian. “But Enough About You. . .” The Bedford Reader. 10the ed. Eds. Kennedy, Kennedy, Aaron. Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s. 2011. 543-545. Print. 2 Mar. 2011. Read More