5 page essay

Fan

Menghuan Fan

Eng 100 section LL

Paper 3 rough draft

March, 23rd

Political Activism and Technology Comment by Maolong Zhou: What’s the impact

Impacts of technology on society has been a controversial debate for the last decades. While some people think that the rise in technology may significantly affect human existence, techno-optimists hold onto the belief that technological advancement has a promising future to the entire humanity. Ian Bremmer discusses in his article, “Democracy in Cyberspace: What Technology Can and Cannot Do for Us” on the role of technology in democratizing nations and the way the world is changing the internet. Besides, Malcolm Gladwell, in his article titled “Small Change,” argued on how social media can bring about significant social change. Although the use of social media has elevated communication, it has not been successful in bringing people in society together. Technology serves the two purposes of bringing people together and also causing isolation. For instance, people staying miles away from each other can connect through video calls. On the other hand, people seated together can be isolated from each other if everyone concentrates on their phones without holding conversations. Bremmer’s argument on how technology promotes democracy supports the idea of Gladwell that social media is not an enemy of the status quo. Comment by Maolong Zhou: You still need to answer my question to form a thesis. This thesis really doesn't answer the question.

Technological advancement has promoted freedom because it has enabled people to communicate instantly with each other anywhere across the world. According to Bremmer, “As advances in communications technology -- cellular telephones, text messaging, the Internet, social networking allow an ever-widening circle of people to easily and inexpensively share ideas and aspirations, technology will break down barriers between peoples and nations”(86). Technology not only allows people to communicate easily and in a recreational manner but also to connect with their colleagues, friends or relatives who are separated by miles. Besides, social media has received too much credit from the digital evangelists and techno-optimists for the effects it has on society. Likewise, Gladwell seconds that “With Facebook and Twitter and the like, the traditional relationship between political authority and popular will has been upended, making it easier for the powerless to collaborate, coordinate, and give voice to their concerns”(2). People used to can only watch the governments to do their things and accept their decisions. And now have a place to share their ideas and speak out their concerns.This implies that people with the same views collaborate in social media and share their comments before voicing their opinions. Comment by Maolong Zhou: "break down barriers" can be "close read" Comment by Maolong Zhou: How can strong ties and weak ties be used to further democracy? Each body paragraph needs to relate back to the answer to that question.

Even though technology cannot create a social change desire, it promotes the process where there is a desire for change. Political activism is more effective when carried out physically rather than in social media that only creates a satisfaction of participating while in reality, it is more of spectating than participating. Even though social media facilitates communication, it cannot help in the protest against authoritarianism or the fight for democracy. When people meet physically, they give each other adequate support and generate morale within the group where everyone will be willing to protest and make sacrifices for democracy. Unluckily, only a few people are willing to participate in such exercises. However, in social media, many people feel it is easy to participate because the only requirement for them is to join an online group. According to Bremmer, “If technology has helped citizens pressure authoritarian governments in several countries, it is not because the technology created a demand for change. That demand must come from public anger at authoritarianism itself” (89). In this statement, it is evident that democracy does not strongly correlate with technology. It only happened that way because currently, technology is widely embraced in democratic regions. Social media reemphasizes social norms but does not change the status quo. Additionally, Gladwell highlights that “the sit-in spread to those cities which had preexisting ‘movement centers’—a core of dedicated and trained activists ready to turn the ‘fever’ into action.”(8). These “sit-ins” spread to regions that were ready to act and likewise, democracy will only reach to places that desire for change. Thus, the ideas of freedom cannot be planted by freedom, but they come from within. Technology and social media are rarely used in spreading democratic views to places where there is no pursuit for change by people. In simple terms, technology helps in promoting but does not create social change. People are interested in what entertains them and are less concerned with how they are governed. Comment by Maolong Zhou: You need a better transition sentence. Ex. Gladwell, on the other hand, describes "strong ties." Comment by Maolong Zhou: Once you have a thesis that answers the question, relate this paragraph back to it.

The spread of democracy across the world depends on the concern of the majority of the people. Likewise, technology will be useful in bringing change depending on how people utilize it and the priorities of those in power. Bremmer points out that “they are a megaphone, and have a multiplier effect, but they serve both those who want to speed up the cross border flow of information and those who want to divert or manipulate it”(88). The technological advancement is like a double-edged sword as it allows people to communicate effectively irrespective of their distances apart, and at the same time, the government monitors information shared and may manipulate them. Besides, the impact of technology relies on those who are in control of it; thus, political activism that seeks to challenge the status quo should be strong. Although everyone is entitled to the right to privacy, the companies often infringe these rights because they are after profit. This notion is validated by Bremmer when he argues that the BlackBerry technology company depicts some of the organizations that seek to protect their market shares by carrying out some business deals that help the authoritarian governments to spy on its people (91). BlackBerry company has shown that it is not ready to spread democratic ideals of freedom and equality because if it was the case, it could not allow the authoritarian governments to monitor the moves of its citizens. Their faint-hearted behavior and concern for profits made it easy for the authoritarian governments to manipulate it. Gladwell refutes the claims made by Mark Pfeifle that “Without Twitter the people of Iran would not have felt empowered and confident to stand up for freedom and democracy”(Gladwell, 2). This notion implies that Iranians protested against communism mainly due to social media influence. Though the whole event was covered up through tweets, most of them came from the people in the West who were merely speculating and not taking anything productive towards the cause. Therefore, social media has played a role in social activism, but it is not as influential and powerful as people try to put it. Comment by Maolong Zhou: I think you need a topic sentence that tells the reader the limits of "weak ties" because that is what paragraph is about. Then you can add a sentence to the end of your thesis where you tell the reader about the limits of this technology--why it doesn't always work to spread ideas of freedom. Comment by Maolong Zhou: this is a cliche, an overused expression!

The whole idea of technology is to make life easier in various ways. Technological advancement has been a breakthrough in communication, especially in connecting people from great distances. Additionally, the use of media has seemed to be a medium of challenging status quo and promote equality and freedom. However, the role of technology in social activism is overhyped. As stated by Bremmer and Gladwell in their articles, social media does not create democratic views, but it facilitates the development of these views where people desire democracy. In contrary, authoritarian governments have misused technology by using it to spy and manipulate their citizens. Fostering freedom and equality across the globe does not require faint-hearted people but rather need discipline, coordination and support. The status quo can be challenged through a desire of the majority to create change coupled up with a significant motivation. Social media alone cannot create the change that is deserved because of its “weak ties.” Therefore, the “strong ties” and “weak ties” of social media and technology guides on how effectively these platforms can be integrated with the search for freedom and equality as stated by the authors, Bremmer and Gladwell. Comment by Maolong Zhou: this is more of Bremmer's views. Gladwell is more a fan of strong ties. Comment by Maolong Zhou: Maybe if you get rid of the writers' names, this is the start of your thesis statement, since it answers the question better than the thesis you have. Then add a sentence about the limitations.