Ted Talk Analysis

Social media has quickly emerged as a dominating force that is not only shaping culture and global trends, but influencing how others perceive the world by making it easier to access world news and public opinions. “The global media landscape in the first decade of the twenty-first century represents a complex terrain of multi-vocal, multimedia and multi-directional flows” (Thussu 376). Although social media has spurred many revolutions and brought together like-minded thinkers, it still proves to be a difficult terrain to navigate and even more difficult to harness its power for long-standing democracy. In the article "Social Media: Destroyer or Creator?" and Wael Ghonim’s TED talk, both the positive and the negative ramifications of social

media’s expansive reach are showcased in order to demonstrate its advantages and limitations. During the Arab Spring, social media contributed to the Tahrir Square revolution and the overthrowing of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, but also prompted divisiveness and “extreme polarization” (Friedman).
Maximizing freedom, to include access to social media, should always be the end goal of a developed or developing society, but there a few indicators that access to social media should be regulated or restricted.

Because the internet and social media are an aggregate of lived experiences and public opinions, it can create a polarizing environment fueled by distinct agendas that is amplified “by facilitating the spread of misinformation, rumors, echo chambers and hate speech” (Ghonim). Ghonim witnessed the internet, which was once his safe haven, become “a battleground filled with trolls, lies, hate speech” (Ghonim). This toxic environment precludes any progress towards democracy and can further destabilize an already precarious government. After Mubarak was forced to step down, “Egyptians lived in a utopia for 18 days during the revolution. They all shared the belief that we could actually live together despite our differences, that Egypt after Mubarak would be for all” (Ghonim). This euphoric atmosphere soon dissipated, overwhelmed by the polarization of the two main powers – the army supporters and the Islamists (Ghonim). “Supporters of the army and the Islamists used social media to smear each other…” (Friedman) and “on the 3rd of July 2013, the army ousted Egypt’s first democratically elected president, after three days of popular protest that demanded his resignation” (Ghonim). Social media facilitated not only the topple of Mubarak, but the topple of democracy in Egypt. Social media marginalized the democratic center (Friedman) and silenced voices like Ghonim that should have served as a voice of reason for the people of Egypt. Because of social media, Ghonim and his peers became marginalized within their own revolution instead of being the leaders of democratic change in Egypt. The reigns were swiftly taken from them because “while it's true that polarization is primarily driven by our human behavior, social media shapes this behavior and magnifies its

impact” (Ghonim).
Despite these indicators in support of social media regulation or restriction, arguments in support of free access to social media can be made from the New York Times article and the TED talk. Social media not only exposed Arabs to knowledge and connections across the globe and Egyptians aspiring for political change, it provided a platform that helped a “decentralized movement arise” (Ghonim). “I was completely apolitical until 2009. At the time, when I logged into social media, I started seeing more and more Egyptians aspiring for political change in the country. It felt like I was not alone” (Ghonim). Being connected to other Egyptians through social media encouraged Ghonim to take a political stance rather than continuing to use social media to escape “frustrating political realities” and live in a “virtual, alternative life” (Ghonim). Social media allowed Egyptians to form a collective, virtual force against injustice despite being located all over Egypt. Social media “made people realize that they were not alone” (Ghonim) and because how quickly the spread of information flows, “made it impossible for the regime to stop it” (Ghonim). Social media is the best asset for combating corrupt regimes because information is quickly reproduced and is difficult to control or manipulate once it is out on the internet. “We were calling collectively for actions, and sharing news that the regime did not want Egyptians to know” (Ghonim). Although the revolution that Ghonim began did not succeed because of lack of consensus building, with the help of social media, Egypt still experienced its first democratically elected president, even if only fleetingly. Egypt was able to experience a utopian state for eighteen days more than they would have without the revolution and the use of social media. The revolution did not usher in long-term democracy, but it still serves as an example of Egypt’s potential to become a democratic nation with the help of social media.