Mark Pfeifle, writing for the Christian Science Monitor, pens an op-ed in which he advocates the Nobel Peace Prize for Twitter and its creators. Mr. Pfeifle’s no slouch. From 2007 to 2009 he was the deputy national security adviser for strategic communications and global outreach.

In his piece he argues,

Neda became the voice of a movement; Twitter became the megaphone. Twitter is a free social-messaging utility. It drove people around the world to pictures, videos, sound bites, and blogs in a true reality show of life, dreams, and death. Last month’s marches for freedom and the violent crackdowns were not only documented but personalized into a story of mythic tragedy.

When traditional journalists were forced to leave the country, Twitter became a window for the world to view hope, heroism, and horror. It became the assignment desk, the reporter, and the producer. And, because of this, Twitter and its creators are worthy of being considered for the Nobel Peace Prize.

K. Ryan James elaborates on his own blog,

Without Twitter and other social media, the world would have never known anything more that one candidate accusing another cadidate of election shenanigans. Without Twitter, we would have likely never had the opportunity to know about this YouTube video. Because of this, I agree with Mr. Pfeifle – Twitter is deserving of consideration.

When I was at Personal Democracy Forum 2009 last week in New York I sat in on a panel discussing the impact that social media had in Iran. The impact is real, although Frank Rich of The New York Times, also appearing at PDF, was a bit annoyed at the obsession with social media. There are some 80,000 bloggers in Iran and social media – from blogs to Facebook to Flickr – are influential tools in reaching the elite sectors of Iranian society. It also allowed for participation. People could do everything from identify proxy servers to change their profile pictures.

Previously, fellow blogger, Ms. Adverthinker, and I discussed the role that social media was playing in the immediate aftermath of the elections in Iran.

Tagged with:
 

When Government Shuts Out the Press

Howard Chua-Eoan, writing for TIME, has an essay which he titles, “What the World Didn’t See in Tehran.” He notes that yesterday, amidst protests and gunfire, Iranian state television broadcast soap operas, news that Rafael Nadal was going to skip Wimbledon, and Pakistan’s efforts against the Taliban.

He observes,

As a journalist, I cannot say that what I have read and seen today is the whole story: everything is too piecemeal, too unconfirmable, too one-sided. But experiencing the raw feed of history has been chilling. As we try to carve out the truth from the speculation and relentlessly repeated reports of outrage, the overall impression is one of immense sadness and tragedy, of a country seeking to preserve itself by destroying itself.

Noam Cohen of The New York Times asseses the value that Twitter may or may not be playing in Iran. He writes,

But does the label Twitter Revolution, which has been slapped on the two most recent events, oversell the technology? Skeptics note that only a small number of people used Twitter to organize protests in Iran and that other means — individual text messaging, old-fashioned word of mouth and Farsi-language Web sites — were more influential. But Twitter did prove to be a crucial tool in the cat-and-mouse game between the opposition and the government over enlisting world opinion. As the Iranian government restricts journalists’ access to events, the protesters have used Twitter’s agile communication system to direct the public and journalists alike to video, photographs and written material related to the protests.

This was the topic of our final SWIM session on Friday. Here’s my perspective on the role of social media in Iran.

UPDATE: Here’s more on this topic from The Washington Post.

Yet for all their promise, there are sharp limits on what Twitter and other Web tools such as Facebook and blogs can do for citizens in authoritarian societies. The 140 characters allowed in a tweet are not the end of politics as we know it — and at times can even play into the hands of hard-line regimes. No amount of Twittering will force Iran’s leaders to change course, as supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made clear Friday with his rebuke of the protesters, reportedly followed by the security forces’ use of tear gas, batons, water cannons and gunfire to break up demonstrations yesterday. In Iran, as elsewhere, if true revolution is coming, it must happen offline.

From before: An Arkansas perspective from Jessica Dean and Mark Elrod.

Have you been following the role that Twitter is playing in the aftermath of the Iranian presidential election? I hope so. Today, Lev Grossman of TIME, files a story on the role Twitter is playing in mass communication (and the steps to which the government is trying to suppress it).

So what exactly makes Twitter the medium of the moment? It’s free, highly mobile, very personal and very quick. It’s also built to spread, and fast. Twitterers like to append notes called hashtags — #theylooklikethis — to their tweets, so that they can be grouped and searched for by topic; especially interesting or urgent tweets tend to get picked up and retransmitted by other Twitterers, a practice known as retweeting, or just RT. And Twitter is promiscuous by nature: tweets go out over two networks, the Internet and SMS, the network that cell phones use for text messages, and they can be received and read on practically anything with a screen and a network connection.

NYU professor and New Media guru Clay Shirkey participated in a TED interview on Twitter and Iran. The entire interview is worth a read, but pay close attention to this:

I’m always a little reticent to draw lessons from things still unfolding, but it seems pretty clear that … this is it. The big one. This is the first revolution that has been catapulted onto a global stage and transformed by social media. I’ve been thinking a lot about the Chicago demonstrations of 1968 where they chanted “the whole world is watching.” Really, that wasn’t true then. But this time it’s true … and people throughout the world are not only listening but responding. They’re engaging with individual participants, they’re passing on their messages to their friends, and they’re even providing detailed instructions to enable web proxies allowing Internet access that the authorities can’t immediately censor. That kind of participation is really extraordinary.

Twitter is playing such a huge role that the U.S. State Department contacted the social networking service and urged them to delay scheduled maintenance on the site. “We highlighted to them that this was an important form of communication,” said a State Department official of the conversation the department had with Twitter officials.

Thomas Friedman, in his column in The New York Times today, writes,

What is fascinating to me is the degree to which in Iran today — and in Lebanon — the more secular forces of moderation have used technologies like Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, blogging and text-messaging as their virtual mosque, as the place they can now gather, mobilize, plan, inform and energize their supporters, outside the grip of the state.

Naturally, I was concerned when none of this made into our local newscasts yesterday. However, today I did note this from Jessica Dean of KATV, via Twitter,

I really want to do a story on the effect Twitter is having in the #iranelection. Anyone involved? I need a local angle.

This is the largest social movement in the history of the world that has a substantial and vital online component.  The ABC News headline from last night’s broadcast is illustritive of this point, “A Political Protest Wrapped in a Technological Revolution.” By magnitude alone it is affecting all of us, and particularly US foreign relations (There is an Arkansas connection in the State Department, if I recall). Like the Tiananman Square protests of 1989, everyone, even in Arkansas, should know about it.

Additionally, if you’re in Arkansas and you have access to a computer and an Internet connection you can engage and participate in what’s happening. As Ms. Dean notes, you can follow #iranelection for updates. You visit the growing presences on Facebook, including that of President Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khamenei. You can watch video on YouTube and share it with others. You can read Iran-based blogs. You can sign up for text messaging updates, although text messaging has been shut down in Iran. Many Arkansans (@markaelrod, for example) are doing this.

In our technological age the world is truly flat. As a result, international affairs can come to life on your laptop even if they’re happening a million miles away. Roadblocks to participation have been eviscerated. It’s time to go to school. Local news can play its part by informing. History, after all, has no geographic limitations.

UPDATE (via Twitter): Jessica Dean notes that the story will be one of three Choose Your News options beginning tonight at 6:00 p.m. You can vote here.

UPDATE II: It looks like the voters have spoken and the Iran and Twitter story will be the story of the day.

UPDATE III: Ms. Adverthinker and I will talk about Twitter and its impact on social and political movements tomorrow at SWIM. Please check it out here.