Social Networks Spreading Defiance Online

 

Flightpath regularly shares the opinion that social media is exceptionally well-tailored for furthering the interests of non-profit organizations.  More than for many for-profit brands, non-profits can benefit from a strong presence on places like Facebook, Twitter and Youtube for reasons including:

  • Participants in social networks often share common interests
  • Social networks are a great forum for sharing altruistic goals
  • The immediacy of social networks allows for rapid organization and easy dissemination of breaking news
  • Tools built into many platforms allow for turnkey advocacy around issues and instant fundraising

Last month, we presented a NY Social Media Roundtable event dedicated to the topic of Social Media and non-profits.   With this background, it’s fascinating to see protesters in Iran, adopting these same media in order to meet similar needs and achieve comparable types of goals. 

Yesterday’s New York Times included a fascinating article, titled “Social Networks Spread Defiance Online,” detailing how Iran’s opposition forces are utilizing Facebook, Twitter, et al to pursue their interests.  (Required reading for anyone interested in this stuff.)  Today’s paper followed up with fascinating commentary from Thomas Friedman, portraying today’s Iranian adopters of social media as members of a virtual mosque, with the caveat that guns may still trump tweets.

While we hope for the flowering of democracy and the rule of law, it’s still unknown how things will shake out in Iran.  Nonetheless, the events of this week clearly mark a sea change in how dissidents interact with each other and with their governments via the intrinsic power of social media.   This situation is certainly being monitored by regimes the world over.  If I were one of the Castro brothers, I’d be very concerned about my future.

Comments

chris (6/17/2009 8:05:33 PM)

The Twitter 'coverage' of events in Iran has been fascinating and inspiring. As you mentioned, social networking and especially Twitter seem very well-suited for spreading immediate information, or breaking news. Twitter has left CNN in the dust on Iran (see: #cnnfail).

Trying to sort through the rumors on #iranelection, I've ended up following a few apparently reliable people on the ground (such as persiankiwi, who was mentioned in the Times article). Still, I've been wondering how we can know who to trust, or value, in large social networks?

Jessica (6/22/2009 11:25:35 AM)

Chris,

I think you bring up a good point about sorting through the rumors on Twitter. I find that while Twitter is great for "on the ground coverage" it is really difficult to parse what is real and what is not. What is propoganda and what is authentic human coverage. Without listening to NPR or other media outlets it's difficult to know what is what.

On the other hand, there are two impressive details about this coverage, regardless of authenticity:
1. Word is escaping out of Iran. What is going on there is not closed behind a government-edited curtain.
2. This forces the Iranian government to be under the eyes of other nations. The moves they make are not hidden.

With regard to mobilization and non-profits. I think social media is an impressive tool to mobilize and infuse passion into non-profit and grassroots organizations. People listen. Social media allows the conversation to happen.

Search engine marketing (8/11/2009 12:38:03 AM)

HI,
Networking is always important when it’s real, and it’s always a useless distraction when it’s fake. What the Internet has allowed is an enormous amount of fake networking to take place, and it’s so easy to be seduced by it… and it’s nonsense.

cheap vps (7/29/2010 3:24:30 AM)

Thank you for another great article. Where else could anyone get that kind of information in such a perfect way of writing? I have a presentation next week, and I am on the look for such information.

Add comment

Required Fields*


  

[b][/b] - [i][/i] - [u][/u]- [quote][/quote]