I believe social networking sites have become so popular amongst authoritarian states because it is the only medium in which risk for getting caught criticizing the government is at its lowest. Social networks are not physical, like sidewalks, which people use (at least in the U.S.) to protest happenings in their nation; unlike on a sidewalk where you can get picked up by the police, there is no online police to silence you. It is also much more difficult to silence those using social networks as outlets to speak out. In order to silence people, governments would have to block entire websites from its citizens or individual pages, which calls for time and money; on top of that, the government would have to use technology to trace whoever is posting these comments. Whereas these actions take much effort by the government, silencing people outside making their comments known in public is easy as arresting someone and taking them to jail.
I think social networking sites are being used for politics here in the U.S., but I don't believe they're being used for the same reasons as those in authoritarian states. In the U.S., people can demonstrate free speech physically almost anywhere, so citizens using the Internet to do the same is really no different. The government is not oppressive to its citizens; it does not silence them. Instead, if anything, social networks are being used to increase participation in politics. Politicians running for office may use different sites as part of their campaign in hopes of reaching a larger audience, which is completely opposite to authoritarian countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment