The BBC has a story that asks why social media couldn't save Troy Davis? Despite the outcry on social media, in particular--Twitter--Troy Davis was still executed. Celebrities such as Martha Plimpton and Alec Baldwin tweeted about the case, and Outkast artist Big Boi posted photos from outside the jail to his TwitPic account. "Troy Davis", "Letter to Georgia" and NO EVIDENCE were all trending topics in the US throughout the night on social media. Yet all the angry tweets and online petitions did nothing to prevent Davis being executed at 23:08 local time in an Atlanta, Georgia prison.
The inability to turn the digital outrage over Davis into real-life action served as a stark contrast to the new realities of much of the digital world. "We are living in a 21st Century communications infrastructure, but we are still governed by a 20th Century political system," says Andrew Rasiej, founder of Personal Democracy Media, which focuses on the intersection of politics and internet culture. In an age when movies and music can be accessed instantly and a customer service issue can be resolved with a quick tweet, social media has already been cited in the success of the Arab Spring revolutions.
But the case of Troy Davis showed its limits. "I'm not sure that 1,000 twfeets or Facebook posts have the same power as one phone call," says Brian Southwell, a professor at the University of North Carolina. "We've lowered the bar for activism. Now it's a click away."
One factor could have been that all the activity on social media happened too late. Instead of starting the momentum toward clemency earlier in the process, the activity happened far too late to have any effect. One tweeter asked, "To the people yelling injustice for Troy Davis, where were you last month, six months, years ago & not just the week prior to his execution?"
Another factor, is that the action doesn't come from the force of public will, registered online or otherwise. America's execution rate has dropped by 50% since 1999 due to reduced concern about crime, a lower level of homicide, and fiscal austerity, since death penalty cases are more expensive to prosecute. Another factor is the Judges, prosecutors, and American Legal Institute, the "elites" who decided about how the death penalty functions and wrote the guidelines for death penalty legislation, publicly denounced those guidelines in 2010.
On the other hand, overall public opinion for the death penalty remains strong. A 2010 Gallup poll shows that 64% of Americans support the death penalty for someone convicted of murder, down from 65% in 2006 and 68% in 2001.
So, Social media gave the case added publicity, but there was little effect in the outcome for various reasons. Does that mean that Social media is worthless for activism? Not really, it can be used to raise awareness of an issue--particularly issues that are ignored by the Main Stream Media. Maybe people didn't know about the case and weren't involved in the efforts to save Troy Davis, but a lot more people now know what happened. Perhaps the increased awareness of the circumstances of the Troy Davis will help erode support for the death penalty.
The real bottom line is that we are not sure how Social Media will effect activism. Will it raise issues and debate to change public attitude toward social issues? Social media is yet in its infancy where activism is concerned.
Showing posts with label activism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label activism. Show all posts
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Unrest in Minneapolis
The reports of clashes with police and numerous arrests sounds more like 1968 than 2008. CNN reports that the situation is quite serious.
At least 56 people were arrested Monday after police fired projectiles and used pepper spray and tear gas to disperse a crowd demonstrating near the site of the Republican National Convention.
5,000 demonstrators marched peacefully, but as often happens, a small splinter group broke off, began damaging private property, and earned the attention of law enforcement personnel.
According to the New York Times, it was a bit more than a splinter group, and more than 56 were arrested.
Thousands of protesters, many of them demonstrating against the war in Iraq, marched on Monday through the streets outside the arena where the Republican National Convention is being held, with some smashing windows and battling with the police in clashes that led to more than 250 arrests.
Not unlike the questions which arose in the sixties, one could ask if the police in Minneapolis started the problem with their heavy-handed approach. The internet was aswarm with stories of pre-emptive raids on peaceful groups of would-be demonstrators. And if the so-called anarchists came planning to make trouble, could it not be explained by the police-state tactics of the federal government over the last decade or so? Some believe that when the government is oppressive, the people have an obligation to respond forcefully.
Daisy wrote about demonstrations on her wonderful blog, Daisy's Dead Air, which was cross posted at Feministe, where she's been a guest blogger. She concluded her account of personal demonstration experience with the following thoughts and questions.
I have seen precious little coverage of any demonstrations in Denver. Are activists saving their ire for John McCain and the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis? One can only hope. Or are demonstrations simply not the happening thing these days? Why do you think that is? Certainly, we didn’t have blogs and the internets to broadcast our POVs in those days. Climbing up on the proverbial soapbox, starting a picket line or writing commentary in alternative newspapers were our only outlets.
Well, it certainly looks like some of the activists turned out for McCain, at least according to the mainstream media. One interesting idea that came out of Daisy's post is that perhaps the activists of today are more likely to be found in front of a keyboard than on a picket line. For decades the question has been asked did the sixties activism have any lasting effect on society? Or was it inexorably absorbed and crushed by the increasingly-powerful government? Will today's anti-establishment voices be heard any better through the new media at their disposal?
What do you think?
At least 56 people were arrested Monday after police fired projectiles and used pepper spray and tear gas to disperse a crowd demonstrating near the site of the Republican National Convention.
5,000 demonstrators marched peacefully, but as often happens, a small splinter group broke off, began damaging private property, and earned the attention of law enforcement personnel.
According to the New York Times, it was a bit more than a splinter group, and more than 56 were arrested.
Thousands of protesters, many of them demonstrating against the war in Iraq, marched on Monday through the streets outside the arena where the Republican National Convention is being held, with some smashing windows and battling with the police in clashes that led to more than 250 arrests.
Not unlike the questions which arose in the sixties, one could ask if the police in Minneapolis started the problem with their heavy-handed approach. The internet was aswarm with stories of pre-emptive raids on peaceful groups of would-be demonstrators. And if the so-called anarchists came planning to make trouble, could it not be explained by the police-state tactics of the federal government over the last decade or so? Some believe that when the government is oppressive, the people have an obligation to respond forcefully.
Daisy wrote about demonstrations on her wonderful blog, Daisy's Dead Air, which was cross posted at Feministe, where she's been a guest blogger. She concluded her account of personal demonstration experience with the following thoughts and questions.
I have seen precious little coverage of any demonstrations in Denver. Are activists saving their ire for John McCain and the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis? One can only hope. Or are demonstrations simply not the happening thing these days? Why do you think that is? Certainly, we didn’t have blogs and the internets to broadcast our POVs in those days. Climbing up on the proverbial soapbox, starting a picket line or writing commentary in alternative newspapers were our only outlets.
Well, it certainly looks like some of the activists turned out for McCain, at least according to the mainstream media. One interesting idea that came out of Daisy's post is that perhaps the activists of today are more likely to be found in front of a keyboard than on a picket line. For decades the question has been asked did the sixties activism have any lasting effect on society? Or was it inexorably absorbed and crushed by the increasingly-powerful government? Will today's anti-establishment voices be heard any better through the new media at their disposal?
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)