To mobilize or to polarize? Social Media in Mandate 2014
As the countdown to India’s
general elections draws nearer, apart from the usual range of issues that have
dominated the political discourse, the role of social media is being keenly
debated. With over 93 million users on Facebook and an estimated 33 million on
Twitter (India's social media election battle, March 2014); the use of social
media platforms is now beyond connecting with friends and acquaintances. In the
general elections of 2009, the role of social media in mobilizing public
opinion was marginal. This time it is unprecedented and difficult to ignore. With
every political player now in the social media domain, it might even account
for being a crucial factor in the present elections. The social media space has
inevitably turned ‘political’ with major political actors in fray roping in
expert services to promote their candidates on social media. Political parties
are seen making every single attempt to stay in the electoral limelight by
‘trending’ on Twitter or ‘liking’ on Facebook. The impetus for this also seems
to be a large number of young voters who are being influenced through social
media. This is an interesting trend in itself because just a few years back the
‘political’ character of social media was debatable. Today, what we see on
social media are posts, videos, comments emerging as sources of political
knowledge. Certainly, there has been a transition in the way social media has
reinvented itself as a medium this time around. Google hangouts, official pages
of political parties, fan pages, voter awareness campaigns and voting ‘selfies’
speak much about the transition in Indian politics. However, the path ahead
remains challenging.
To a large extent, social media
has also contributed to polarizing opinions in the present political discourse.
It is on social media that political battle-lines are being drawn with heated
pro and against contentions, counter contentions and a daily dose of political
passions and emotions. It is as if the electoral battle has now moved from the
‘realpolitik’ domain to the social media space. While a basic feature of the
medium is free expression, participation and immediacy of feedback (which
contributes to the expansion of democratic debate), the current debating scene
on social media reeks of political shrill, political abuse and a kind of
intolerance for diverse opinions. Users do not stop at commenting/debating as
they express contempt and disdain for political opinions that may differ from
theirs. Openly expressing one’s affiliation to a political ideology or choice
of a particular party/candidate may invite the wrath of friends and
acquaintances who subscribe to a different set of ideas. Trolling, political
sarcasm, mudslinging, levelling of accusations has vitiated the atmosphere on
social media forums. Users have been clearly divided into ‘pro’ and ‘anti’
camps (users can be seen subscribing to terms such as AAPtards, CONGtards, Fekus, etc) with little perspective in place.
This certainly cannot be a healthy trend in a democratic set up. Though Manan
Pathak, student Tata Institute of Social Sciences disagrees, “Polarization as against mobilization is not
really an attribute of social media. The attribute of social media is to mobilize;
whether or not to get polarized is the onus of the people. Rigidity and
dynamism on part of the people determine whether polarization occurs. Social
media is a platform to inform, share, discuss, debate, express and form views,
and the views ideally should not be absolute but they should be dynamic based
on rational decision making.”
Much political shrill that is
generated on social media is leading to a loss of debate on pertinent and real
issues that an election should ideally be about. A sort of obsession with
candidates, political personalities, political camps and ideologies has
resulted into a watering down of political debate. Kirthi Jayakumar, lawyer cum
writer from Chennai says, “On the one
hand, the speed with which information is passed and the outlets that are
available reveal a clear and strong tool for the propagation and streamlining
of public opinion. But, the same is also a disadvantage in that it is beginning
to set people apart from one another through the polarisation of the masses. It
is also alarming that people are not respecting the right to choose and the
element of secrecy in a secret ballot method. Imposing voting ideas on another
individual is both, inappropriate and unbefitting.”
So to what extent can the
information being circulated in social media zones be trusted? Is it credible?
When information goes viral, how does one differentiate between facts and
propaganda? After all groups operating in social media may be no different than
interests group with a purpose. Would it be some kind of an exaggeration to
claim that what we witness on social media can claim to represent the ‘real’
voices of ‘real’ people? There are no easy answers. Undoubtedly social media
makes the political sphere a bit transparent but it is bereft of any kind of
accountability and hence the chances of misinformation do exist. Also not to be
confused is the political participation on social media and its translation
into real time voting. Kiran Bhatia, student at The M.S.University of Baroda
believes that while first time voters indeed have received great amount of
exposure towards the election process through social media, there are also
naïve and amateur users who may not care to verify the authenticity of the
information presented among the huge chunk of content in circulation. She puts
this aptly - “We should not flow with the
flow, but deliberate and decide whether the flow is genuine or not.”
Not to be dismissive of social
media’s influence on Mandate 2014, one has to admit that social media does inspire
a multi-mode channel of communication and may end up playing a more than
anticipated role in one’s choice of political representation. The positive side
is already evident through the extensive outreach of voter awareness campaigns
cum appeals – a clarion call to voters of the world’s largest democracy. Since,
the election period is a temporary one and so may be the polarization; though
one is left wondering as to what will social media debate about after May 16!
Note: This article was published on Canary Trap - April 28, 2014
Comments
Post a Comment