War Against Big Brother in Iran:

The Appropriate Role of Media & Social Networking in Iran

Uncertainty over the future of Iran has turned towards uncertainty over the role that social networking, blogs, and Twitter play in the instability there.

Let’s make absolutely no mistake, any Iranian using any website (blog, Twitter, ect.) to criticize their own government is doing a very dangerous thing. I can tell you first hand what it felt like to read what may have been famous Green Movement Activist Persiankiwi’s dying words in real time after spending days and weeks reading every thought he shared. His last posts were a description of how his group was being arrested, and how he would probably be tortured. His last two posts were a prayer for martyrs. This is not a game. And that’s the point: If free thinking Iranians were able to be free speaking Iranians, then there wouldn’t be unrest in Iran today. These kinds of incidents are not new (in 1999, and in 1989, there were violent clashes between student and government forces), and the danger to those who oppose the government predates Twitter.

Which is one reason why, initially, Iranian dissidents within the country turned to Twitter in the first place. It was the easiest way to communicate and organize with people inside and outside of Iran. It was one of the few websites that slipped through government censors. But, as many writers have alluded to, Twitter became as dangerous as other forms of protest.

Which is how MANY people using the “#iranelection” hashtag on Twitter got started (for the uninitiated, hashtags are the way that Twitter codes topics so everyone can filter the noise). The Iranians who were already using Twitter ASKED US to change our location to Iran (by the way, I have no delusion that Iran can’t figure out where I actually live, but it makes it harder for them, or at least it did in the early days after the election). Then we were asked to ReTweet the information that they post, in attempts to hide the original source.

But the role of Twitter has changed significantly. Iranian protesters inside the country are using a very sophisticated system of “fluid leadership (a phrase coined by @manydrums on the comments to my previous blog,” networks of small communities that communicate with each other directly. During times of crisis (major events/protests) the pace of news out of Iran is noticeably slower than it was during the summer. According to Austin Heap, an American who is supplying the opposition with technology to beat government censors, the government is now using more complicated and varied approaches to filtering SMS and the Internet, switching between filtering (disallowing websites), white-filtering (only allowing certain websites), and actually turning communication systems off entirely. As a result, during crisis modes, Twitter has become an aggregator of first hand accounts (the few people in Iran who are on Twitter) and second hand accounts (people in Iran and people in contact with Iranians who report what is happening on the front lines). Additionally, information available on opposition websites, blogs, and other news media are collected, commented on, and synthesized into a running account of developing stories. As events die down, people return to their homes, update blogs, and post videos and pictures on Youtube and Twitter. During non-crisis modes (between protests), Twitter has become a place to share and analyze news in Iran. Many users also use Twitter to show solidarity and partnership with those who face persecution, or those who are watching their homeland self destruct.

Lately, professional journalists have criticized this aspect of Twitter because it breaks many rules of journalism. My response to that is that Twitter and other social media aren’t exclusively designed for journalism. Web 2.0 has many applications, and this means that readers have to use common sense in order to figure out the difference. Of course, if those same journalists actually read their own articles or turned on cable news, they would realize that traditional media is guilty of obvious journalistic atrocities. The difference is that when responsible Twitterers, the people who work the hardest and are cited the most, claim they’re reporting, they actually are.

The track record of Twitter/Live-Blogs is IMPRESSIVE. Much of the information that makes it on Twitter routinely finds itself confirmed by traditional media sources a few hours/days/weeks later. Don’t get me wrong, Twitter is full of misinformation, but if you know who to follow you can filter it by relying on people who are reliable.

I have two articles about Twitter as a tool for journalism. The first is about the issue of outsiders endangering the Iranians, and the second one (which is much older) is about the reliability and responsibility of Twitter and new media as information providers. Also, my extensive criticism of Josh Shahryar’s post “If You Cannot Help Iranians; Please Don’t Hurt Them” addresses this issue.

I’ve argued that Twitter/blogs/social media don’t hurt the Green Movement, but what I’ve only alluded to is that what is happening on Twitter actually helps. In the early days, I do believe that Twitter had a direct effect on the effectiveness of the opposition’s organization. When people were using Twitter to share where Iranian tanks were stationed, or where Basij were beating people’s brains in… I’ve been told by people in Iran that it helped.

I also know that Twitter’s role has changed, but it is still very important. New Media is the best way to get news in and out of Iran, mostly because traditional media has been banned in the nation. Also, one cannot possibly isolate the protests in Iran from the international pressure on Iran. Twitter, and the blogs associated with it, help keep foreign governments, media outlets, and foreign voters abreast of the situation there. Awareness breeds investment, investment will lead to international pressure, and this will inevitably lead to increased pressure on Ahmadinejad and Khamenei. I don’t know what kind of effect that will have, but I do know that disengagement would certainly not lead to political pressure on Obama (or other leaders) to rethink his positions towards Iran.

There are also many wildcards, things we just don’t know about our impact on the world.

What we learned from the American engagements with Iraq and Afghanistan is that bridging understanding between cultures, “winning the hearts and minds,” is the key to winning peace. Ideological, political, and religious ideas are being hashed out on the streets of Iran, but these ideas are also being debated by an international team of bloggers and Tweeters all working together to understand each other. I look at what I do as teaching Americans about Iran and Iranians about America, and I am fully confident that this has immediate and longterm implications for a better tomorrow.

Twitter helps, it is ONE tool for gathering and disseminating information and ideas, and it is being read by people throughout the world.