Social media give more power to the people

THINK the new social media are just about friends, fans and the fluffy side of life? Wrong. Think again.

Among others, they are increasingly being used as a cutting-edge tool by government agencies and politicians in the United States of America.Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are rapidly entrenching themselves as the communication currency of choice in state circles and on Capitol Hill.From Iran to Haiti, from the sprawling plains of Utah to the hustle and bustle of the US Congress, from face-offs with China to diplomatic frontlines across the globe, new social media tools are changing and rearranging the dynamics of engagement.Not least, the Obama administration sees it as a way of deepening democracy.During a visit to Washington DC last week, The Namibian heard firsthand from top officials about the way social media are turning ‘politics as usual’ on its head.’The world we are living in is changing very fast, we ought to be able to take advantage of those changes,’ the US State Department’s Alec Ross told The Namibian.’It’s what Secretary of State [Hillary] Clinton talks about: 21st century stagecraft.’A former inner-city teacher and campaigner for President Obama, Ross has been appointed Senior Advisor for Innovation, a new position created by Clinton since she took up tenure at State. Diplomacy is no longer just about governments talking to governments, ‘it’s people to government, government to people’, Ross elaborated. New media offer multiple opportunities to do just that. They are breaking the mould of ‘just suits talking’, he said, opening the door to empowerment and development.THE FREEDOM TO CONNECTApart from expanding people-centred e-diplomacy, new media can be used as rapid response tools.’One of the things the Secretary of State has done is place a premium on creativity, (on) doing things differently and doing things fast,’ Ross said.He mentioned ‘Text Haiti’ (90999), a text messaging service setup by the Department of State to collect donations for the people of quake-ravaged Haiti. By Monday last week, more than US$34 million had been raised.Ross referred to the world of opportunities that smartphones, for example, are helping to facilitate.He said there are now something like 4,6 billion – and counting – smartphones on the planet, and ’75 per cent are in the developing world’.’It offers extraordinary opportunities for education and economic empowerment.’ And engagement, of course, he said, noting that ‘today people organise over social media networks’.In this connection, Ross referred to Clinton’s commitment to ‘the freedom to connect’, and described blogs as functioning as 21st century samizdats (see separate explanation).The use of Twitter during post-election protests in Iran was a prime example, ‘nearly without precedent’ in Ross’s words, of busting an information blockade.The issue of Iran was also addressed by deputy US State Department Spokesman Robert Duguid.Seasoned in the ways of diplomacy, Duguid was unapologetic about the State Department’s role in asking Twitter not to close down when Iranians took to the streets in the face of a crackdown by their government.In short, it was a matter of access to information and not just getting one side of the story – that of the Iranian state.’We don’t have anyone on the ground in Iran; we haven’t since our hostages were set free in 1981. So for us just knowing the information was coming out that this real information, or at least piecemeal information that you knew was happening on the day was important,’ Duguid said during a briefing at the State Department.’It was also evident to us that without social media being available that those groups who were opposing the crackdown and opposing the election results would not have a voice. So, yes, we learnt that Twitter was going to go down for maintenance. So we talked about it upstairs at the public affairs section, and one of our number knew the folks at Twitter.’A staffer suggested asking Twitter to delay the maintenance, a move that had Secretary Clinton’s backing Duguid said. Twitter obliged. And the rest is history.TRUTH, TWEETING & TRANSPARENCYThe veteran official does have some concerns about the new social media. ‘Stories that proliferate just because people share it does not mean it’s true,’ he said. However, he added, there are new audiences and new ways of transmitting information. ‘We want to get our side of the story out.’In this respect he referred to a rumour that started doing the rounds on Twitter last year during the coup in Madagascar – that the deposed leader, former President Marc Ravalomanana, had sought refuge in the US embassy in Antananarivo.US officials sent Twitter messages denying the claims and defused a potentially explosive situation.As imperfect as aspects of the new media may be, Macon Phillips, Director of New Media at the White House, says the Obama administration sees it as an important tool in promoting transparency and accountability in government.’We look at how to amplify the message as technology is changing the way people consume information online. We are also looking at ways how we can open up the White House both in terms of demystifying how the White House works, getting people interested in the government again and fulfilling the President’s pledge to run the most transparent government in the world,’ Phillips said during a briefing at the White House.He said they want to fundamentally change the level of transparency at the White House and give people ownership of government. ‘We are looking at ways to involve people … so that they can have an impact on their government. It helps us if people understand the issues,’ he added.Phillips said that in this respect social media offers an immense, and expanded, landscape.Obama’s cyber czar said every constituent is important to them. More than that, he also pointed to the world also being a constituency at times.He mentioned President Obama’s visit to Egypt and his speech to the Muslim community, an event which saw people worldwide listening in and exchanging views through social media tools such as Facebook and Twitter.ACCOUNTABILITYSeizing the moment, Phillips used the example of the visiting journalists to drive home his point about using the web to promote transparency.He noted the administration is making public the list of every visitor to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue; the names of the journalists would also appear on the list, he said.Phillips said social media are not a solution to problems but a tool; a tool that helps in the quest for solutions, that helps people understand, that involves people, that provides a platform and that promotes connectivity.’I am convinced that technology can facilitate communication and can be used to make the world a smaller place,’ he said.’They also have a really important role in holding government accountable.’* The Namibian’s Jean Sutherland took part in a weeklong programme on the new social media in the United States arranged by the Foreign Press Centre in the State Department. In the HouseSTRAPPED for campaign funds, Jason Chaffetz, now a Republican congressman from Utah, turned to the new media to power his campaign when he decided to run for office in 2008.Chaffetz, who was outspent by more than US$600 000, used Facebook, YouTube and Twitter to reach out to voters and ended up romping across the finishing line with 20 per cent more of the vote than his opponent.He now uses social media to stay in touch with his constituents. And the Utah politician’s approach is distinctly hands on. He doesn’t leave his networking to an aide or a secretary, he does it himself – from sending out podcasts to recording YouTube videos or updating his Facebook page.’Most people think that their politicians are too far, too distant and that they are not listening. I think one of the advantages of social media is that it is a two-way street,’ Chaffetz told visiting journalists while taking them on a tour of the House of Representatives in D.C. last week.’Some of my colleagues are very resistant. I think what makes it work is that I am the one who does it.’A lot of [politicians] have staff who do that for them and people don’t like it, they recognise the difference, they understand,’ Chaffetz said.What is Samizdat?System whereby literature suppressed by the Soviet government was clandestinely written, printed, and distributed; also, the literature itself. Samizdat began appearing in the 1950s, first in Moscow and Leningrad, then throughout the Soviet Union. It typically took the form of carbon copies of typewritten sheets that were passed from reader to reader. The subjects included dissident activities, protests addressed to the regime, transcripts of political trials, analyses of socio-economic and cultural themes, and even pornography. Samizdat disappeared when media outlets independent of the government emerged in the early 1990s.