CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
- BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
When the Arab Spring erupted in 2010, one of the first things people noticed was the very visible role social media seemed to play. Many began to call the series of political uprisings “Twitter Revolutions” and a lively debate broke out about the importance of the new technology.
The Egypt revolution started in December 2010; unprecedented mass demonstrations against poverty, corruption, and political repression broke out in several Arab countries, challenging the authority of some of the most entrenched regimes in the Middle East and North Africa. Such was the case in Egypt, where in 2011 a popular uprising forced one of the region‟s longest-serving and most influential leaders, President Hosni Mubarak from power.
The first demonstrations occurred in Tunisia in December 2010, triggered by the self- immolation of a young man frustrated by Tunisia‟s high unemployment rate and rampant police corruption. Rallies calling for President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali to step down spread throughout the country, with policeoften resorting to violence to control the crowds. As clashes between police and protesters escalated, Ben Ali announced a series of economic and political reforms in an unsuccessful attempt to end the unrest. Demonstrations continued, forcing Ben Ali to flee the country. The apparent success of the popular uprising in Tunisia, by then dubbed the Jasmine Revolution, inspired similar movements in other countries, including Egypt, Yemen, and Libya.
In Egypt, demonstrations organized by youth groups, largely independent of Egypt‟s established opposition parties, took hold in the capital and in cities around the country. Protesters called for Mubārak to step down immediately, clearing the way for free elections and democracy.
As the demonstrations gathered strength, the Mubārak regime resortead to increasingly violent tactics against protesters, resulting in hundreds of injuries and deaths. Mubārak‟s attempts to placate the protesters with concessions, including a pledge to step down at the end of his term in 2011 and naming Omar Suleiman as vice president, the first person to serve as such in Mubārak‟s nearly three-decade presidency did little to quell the unrest. After almost three weeks of mass protests in Egypt, Mubārak stepped down as president, leaving the Egyptian military in control of the country.
Although protesters in Egypt focused most of their anger on domestic issues such as poverty and government oppression, many observers noted that political change in Egypt could impact the country‟s foreign affairs, affecting long-standing policies. Central elements of Egypt‟s foreign policy under Mubārak and his predecessor as president, Anwar el-Sādāt, such as Egypt‟s political-military alignment with the United States and the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty, embraced by Egypt‟s leaders but unpopular with the Egyptian public, could be weakened or rejected under a new regime.
International reactions to the 2011 Egyptian revolution refer to external responses to the events that took place in Egypt between 25 January and 10 February 2011, as well as some of the events after the collapse of the government of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, such as Mubarak’s trial. The reactions have generally been either measured or supportive of the Egyptian people, with most governments and organizations calling for non-violent responses on both sides and peaceful moves towards reform. Whilst the protesters called for Mubarak to step down immediately, most foreign governments stopped short of this demand, at least during the early phases of the protests, due to real politik concerns about the consequences of a power vacuum on the stability of Egypt specifically and to the wider Middle East as a whole. Some Middle Eastern
leaders expressed support for Mubarak. Meanwhile many governments issued travel advisories and evacuated their citizens from the country.
The protests captured worldwide attention in part due to the increasing use of Twitter, Face book, YouTube, and other social-media platforms, which empowered activists and onlookers to communicate, coordinate, and document the events as they occur. Many countries experienced their own solidarity protests in support of the Egyptians. As the levels of meta-publicity increased, the Egyptian government stepped up efforts to limit Internet access, especially to social media. In response there has been hacktivism, with global groups attempting to provide alternative communication methods for the Egyptians.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
There is no doubt that that social media has impacted in the social and political mobilization in around the world, in the Middle East, in Africa, and other regions.
Since the Arab revolution came about in the first half of 2011, social media has been referred to as a key factor in political and social mobilization. Social media has served as a powerful to revolutionary movements in different parts of the world, mainly in Africa and in third world countries. There have been several debates on the impacts of social media on political and social mobilization, in view of these debates, this study seeks to determine whether social media has impacted on political and social mobilization.
The main thrust of this study is to take an objective view assessing the impact of social media on the political and social mobilization in Africa using the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 as a case study.
OBJECTIVE OF RESEARCH
The broad objective of this study is to assess the impact of social media on the political and social mobilization in Africa.
The specific objectives are to:
- Identify the history and role of social media in the political and social mobilization of the African people;
- Determine the extent to which social media has impacted on political and social mobilization of Egyptians and other sympathizers towards the revolution;
- Analyze the social and political implications of social media in the Egyptian revolution of 2011; and
- Identify whether social media as a factor was a major contributor to the political and social mobilization in the Egyptian revolution.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The following research questions are drawn mainly from the objectives and would guide the conduct of this work.
- What role did social media play in Africa before the Egyptian Revolution of 2011?
- To what extent was social media used to advance individual and collective interests in the Egyptian Revolution of 2011?
- Did social media impact positively or otherwise on the Egyptian Revolution of 2011?
- How important was the social media to the political and social mobilization in the Egyptian revolution of 2011?
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The main purpose of this research is to determine the impacts of social media on the political and social mobilization in Africa. This research would also help to analyze how important social media is to the mobilization of Africa; both socially and politically.
Another major significance of this research is to show how social media impacted on the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 and how it further affected political and social mobilization across Africa.
In addition to this, this study will serve as reference point to the other students and researchers that are to carry out a research on this subject matter and will also serve as a contribution to knowledge to non-academic persons as they can read it and have better understanding of what the subject matter is.
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The scope of this study will focus on the impact of social media on the political and social mobilization in Africa; a case study of the Egyptian revolution of 2011.
Furthermore, this study will adopt Egypt as its main setting in assessing the impacts of social media on the political and social mobilization in Africa, focusing on the 2011, being period in which the Revolution took place.
ORGANISATION OF THE STUDY
This research study is organized into five chapters.
The first chapter includes the introduction to the study, a background to the study, the statement of problem and the objectives of the study. This chapter also entails the research
question, the research hypothesis, the significance of the study, the scope as well as the research methodology and the operational definition of terms.
Chapter two comprises of the review of literature, theoretical frameworks as well as the conceptual clarification of terms
The following section, chapter three discusses the methodology employed for the gathering of data, both primary and secondary source of data collection; while the fourth chapter focuses on the analysis of the data obtained for the study of this research. Finally, chapter five focuses on the findings, conclusions and recommendations of this study
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A combination of secondary and primary was employed. The secondary data shall be from relevant books, journals, releases, other publications and online materials; it will also include official documents, press releases and publications from governments, all which were explored during the course of this study.
CHAPTER TWO
- LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
- CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATION
For the purpose of the conceptual clarification of this study, we are going to consider different definitions of the concepts of social media, political mobilization and social mobilization.
POLITICAL MOBILIZATION AND SOCIAL MOBILIZATION
Bealy Frank (1999) defined Political mobilization as the activity of rousing masses of people both to express themselves politically and also to undertake political action. Mobilization takes place when political elites such as politicians, party, workers, or social movement leaders reach out to members of various groups in an attempt to get groups members to undertake a particular political action such as voting in the case of a politician or attending a protest march in the case of a social movement leader.
Brigitte Needleman (1987) defined Political mobilization as the actors’ attempt to influence the existing distribution of power. A directional variable is introduced in order to define more precisely the type of relationship, which develops between individuals and parties. Three different models of vertical mobilization are then presented: two examples of models of downward mobilization, historical mobilization and the Leninist concept of the vanguard party; grass-roots or populist mobilization; and the ideal-democratic model of mobilization. A fourth model, horizontal mobilization, incorporates the possibility of internal processes of mobilization taking place within the two types of actors. These models help to analyze the present political situation as characterized by the coexistence of vertical and horizontal processes of mobilization, with an increasing predominance of the latter. It remains as a future task of mobilization research
to investigate the assertion made here that the institutionalized hierarchical relationship between individuals and parties is weakening as a result of both actors’ increasing orientation to themselves when becoming aware of and articulating interests, developing affective loyalties, and using means of mobilization.
Steven Rosenstein and John Mark Hansen (1993) defined political mobilization as the process by which candidates, parties, activists, and groups induce other people to, which includes any activities that increases the likelihood of someone participating. This definition encompasses a wide range of activities, but most studies employ a far narrower conceptualization of political mobilization focusing on what we can call canvass, meaning the direct contacts between political organizations and their representatives and citizens.
In relation to the definition of Brigitte Needleman (1987), another scholar in his book, „working class mobilization and political control‟, Charles Davis defined political mobilization as a process through which subordinate groups increase their capacity to pursue collective goals. This definition talks about how the subordinate groups in a society act against the power-ranking group to fight for their rights and what they stand for. On the other hand, Social Mobilization as defined by UNICEF is a broad scale movement to engage people’s participation in achieving a specific development goal through self-reliant efforts. It involves all relevant segments of society: decision and policy makers, opinion leaders, bureaucrats and technocrats, professional groups, religious associations, commerce and industry, communities and individuals. It is a planned decentralized process that seeks to facilitate change for development through a range of players engaged in interrelated and complementary efforts.
