KYHOI: New forms of Media = Shifts in Leadership Dynamics

My research has been currently focused on past revolutions (both successes and failures). My previous blog post for Mediated Cultures is my actual KYHOI proposal. I intend to further this study with the book resources that I am currently reading. Ultimately this is an update on my research and further support of my thesis.

Recently within class we have been discussing the Twitter revolution in Iran. Neda's death on camera was the initial spark for the fire of the online movement. This first video acts as a story for the actual events that took place.



And this is the real event (Be Aware: Video is blocked due to youtube flagging of inappropriate content. You will have to provide your age to view the video.)



The 2009-2o10 Iran revolution movement provoked global awareness. Twitter became the tool for revolution. Yet, it is important to discuss what the tool was actually used for. Jared Keller wrote an article stating, "But it was the critical role of Twitter as a lightning rod for international attention that established it as a tool for political communication rather than outright organization. Iran's post-election unrest was the micro-blogging service's baptism by fire as a means to observe, report, and record, real-time, the unfolding of a crisis." Keller is developing an interesting insight, and it challenges the online-offline dynamic. Is the realm of online truly a depiction of the offline movement?

Even Twitter's actual role was questioned by Charles Krauthammer, "Twitter cannot stop a bullet. There was a lot of romantic outpouring here thinking that Facebook is going to stop Revolutionary Guards. It doesn't. Thuggery, a determined regime that is oppressive, that will shoot, almost always wins." This challenges the uprisings that we are seeing today, and it provokes detailed exploration of social media and its use in social movements. Social media today has become much more dynamic. The composition of video/text/audio/mapping/real-time/etc. creates a rich equation for social movement. Yet, I argue that the focus on a leader (person or idea) establishes a focus for change.

Without a focus... are the social movements of today a result of chaos? Can a structure change if it is tossed and turned? Or does change arise from finding a weak beam within the structure and targeting a collapse (a focused change)?

Where Are the Leaders?

The major question that I have created within the Mediated Culture project deals with forging links and the ripples that arise from connections. The best approach for understanding the process of the Egyptian revolution is to study the leadership dynamic. I am attempting to understand this dynamic starting at the origin of movement. I am currently studying other social movements for comparison, and I routinely find the prevalence of a leader. Mahatma Gandhi was a prominent leader during the Indian civil rights movement (1893-1914) and struggle for independence from the British during (1915-1945). The direction of the movement was dictated by its leader in both form and goal.



The above example is just one of many. Another arises from the civil rights movement with the leader known as Martin Luther King Jr. These are movements for rights of a people, and they are not so different in purpose from the Egyptian revolution.

The medium is the major contrast between movements then and movements now. An example of a new media movement arises out of Burma VJ. This is one of the first major examples of video in the hands of the people, raw footage, real image, a lens into reality.



Burma VJ is a starting point of change in revolution. The lens of a video camera changes the focus. The definition of a leader becomes skewed, and the focus on an individual becomes more variable. Burma VJ starts with a leader (Aung San Suu Kyi) and the movement shifts to the leadership of Buddhist Monks. This shift is descriptive of the individual-to-masses movement. During the shift process, videographers are continually placing power within the people. I believe that this is the development that arises within the Egyptian Revolution. New forms of social media are placing power within the masses.

The leadership dynamics have completely changed, and they are descriptive of the development of a new medium. I have been researching the leader figures within the Egyptian movement, and one major figure is Wael Ghonim. Yet, his leadership is not manifested within the old form of discussion. He is leading through twitter and Facebook. His statements are confined to 140 characters and manipulated by the links we forge. He works for Google. He is composed of the masses.

We are truly redefining how we operate and how we make decisions. The concept of agency is changing. Everyone has a say in the choices we make, and the focus shifts from a leader to the people. Is this a beneficial dynamic? Can we operate within this new realm?

More to come on decisions within groups...

Re/Revolution

This is a trailer for my research project in a Mediated Cultures class Anth522. I would like to thank Al Jazeera for the Creative Commons video. I would also like to thank Tryad for the music titled Alone.

I have been watching videos online about the revolution within Egypt. The video that I constructed is an attempt to create a conversation starter for how new media has Re/mediated Revolution. This video is a proposal and it contemplates the questions:

• What do we touch with mouse buttons?
  
• Within the interwebs, What ripples are created by a link?
• What actions are we endorsing/inhibiting through new social media?
• How invasive is social media today? And is that a good thing?

Thought Stream:
If we know all that we know... Does that give us the ability to take action? Or do we stand idly by? While feeling act-less emotions...

The world is in constant flux, and our new media awareness resolves the ripples. Yet every ripple we try to change... another begins

(On-Off)Line

Video Research: This video does well to depict the origin of the Tunisia revolution and the rise of the Egyptian movement. There is a lot of youtube video that will be useful for our project concept. During my group library meeting today, we discussed ideas for our movie trailers. Our technique consisted of attempting to confine a research idea/interest/area into a single word or set of words. We each created the subject of our individual study, and the major themes that we developed are:

• Origin of Revolution Movement
• Use of Anonymity within Revolution
• Interview of individuals on the ground for cultural perspective and comparison to mediated perspective (What is happening offline?)
• Twitter and Technology manipulation to establish useful tools for revolution movements (How does the social movement dictate the technology?)
• Changes in brutality due to the glass dots (Revolution can be seen globally and it can be difficult to isolate)
• Mouse clicks start a revolution

Book Research: I have found a book titled "Abstracting Reality: Art, Communication, and Cognition in the Digital Age" by Mark J. P. Wolf. It does an awesome job at targeting this concept: "First, the individual has a new role, as a participant rather than mere observer, and finds himself or herself dealing with others in a similar role" (pg 183). This is an exact description of what is seen for the revolution movements. Individuals are now participating! The participation that is evident online is also occurring offline, and it establishes a new form of mediation. This book also targets how "Community-structured media does not replace audience-structured media, it displaces it, competing for a person's time, and as a venue for news, entertainment, education, and so forth" (pg 183). The acts of revolution have completely changed because of the community-structure. I am excited about this book because it is the perfect description for abstracting reality with relation to (Art, Communication, and Cognition), but it will be great for a framework of depicting the revolution movement. How does a Revolution fit into abstracting reality?