How Technology Affects Social Movements And Activists Who Work For Democracy

Johnson asserts that surveillances that are further promoted by increased use of technology for gathering data undermine the citizen’s ability and potential for democratic citizenships. As such, living in a panopticon implies that persons have limited space of independently developing themselves.

To begin with, globalization has furthered accessibility(SA1) to other groups and causes in many way. In Ariela Garvett essay “Tweets and Transitions: How the Arab Spring Reaffirms the Internet’s Democratizing Potential” Garvett argues that “as reflected in the recent political upheavals in North Africa and the Middle East, the internet is a potentially egalitarian and boundary-less structure...(174)

Technology, the advancement of knowledge and productivity through the application of tools, information, and techniques to create an effortless process, has ultimately lead to the declination of our society and our future. In “A Thing Like Me,” Nicholas Carr addresses the development of technology from the day it was created and how it initiated an immediate impact within the lives of humans leading to an unhealthy dependency. Carr establishes how technology, what was intended to be a tool, has become the “pacifier” of our generation. This “pacifier” causes a loss of freedom, not through the laws of the government, but rather with the values of freedom one holds within themselves. This freedom is the individuality that distinguishes each person from the next, and forms a desire for the development of oneself through the experiences of life and the wisdom that is acquired along the way. Technology has blinded man from this pursuit of self-enhancement and with the advancement of technology occurring daily, there is no resolution. Each day people are confined within themselves and the pieces of technology that will continually limit them in their lives. Freedom is more than just a concept of laws instilled by the government, it is the thought process found within each individual person and their “hunger” to become more. With technology, social media was created and immediately immersed within our lives. The society of today has

Gladwell sends a very strong message about how social media cannot cause a major revolution in society; likewise, Baron is sending across the same message. Revolutions continue even after the internet is shut down. As crowds gathered in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, Baron describes how they “continued to grow during the five days that the Mubarak government shut down the internet” (330). The crowds increased in size without the help of social media. Somehow, word got out and people came to support the cause. Also, Baron brings into realization that Americans are too involved in the world of social media. Americans fail to realize all of the news that they are missing because they “can’t seem to survive without the constant stimulus of digital multitasking” (Baron 330). American citizens are too busy tweeting about what they ate for breakfast to worry about the hungry that is going on overseas. They depend on social networking to tell them the news rather that picking up a newspaper and reading about what is going on in their country or maybe even overseas in a different country.

Imagine a society in which its citizens have forfeited all personal liberties for government protection and stability; Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, explores a civilization in which this hypothetical has become reality. The inevitable trade-off of citizens’ freedoms for government protection traditionally follows periods of war and terror. The voluntary degradation of the citizens’ rights begins with small, benign steps to full, totalitarian control. Major methods for government control and censorship are political, religious, economic, and moral avenues. Huxley’s Brave New World provides a prophetic glimpse of government censorship and control through technology; the citizens of the World State mimic those of the real world by trading

It’s a bright Sunday morning; the birds are chirping, the smell of fresh coffee is in the air and you turn on the tv; “Another Leak Of All Verizon Users Personal Information Out On The Web” is today's headline on the news. In our society right now; the government has the utmost power; yet they might not be using their powers in ways you’d expect. If you're a daily electronic users at Urbandale High School who spends at least 30 hours a week using online functions for entertainment or work; then you might not have heard or seen what the government's been doing recently. In an in depth analysis shows that our life we’re living right now could be seen as a dystopian universe over 50 years ago. Yet as our nation advances, its being advanced in

The advanced technology makes it possible that our government can have access to any individuals’ private information, including their daily schedules, emails, friend cycles, social network accounts, eating habits, buying behaviors, and the places they frequently visit. Solove finds that the government often uses the way of surveillance to imperceptibly control people’s lives (345). It means that the government has deprived individuals of their freedom in a way that monitors their every move. For instance, people may avoid talking about ISIS on the phone with others under the surveillance because they are afraid of whether their conversation will be taken out of context and misinterpreted by the authorities. Being watched by the government, people may choose to change their behaviors to adapt to the government’s value and interest. Living in a democratic society, people should freely choose what they want to share and what they need to hide. Thus, the government’s surveillance deprives people of their right to live their lives and share their opinions at will, keeping them being controlled by those in power.

The internet is a powerful tool for activists, but can also be utilized by the other side by promoting propaganda and mobilizing their own supporters. Networking sites have revolutionized the way people activists approach revolutions. Moreover, the internet has connected people from across the world and has caused people in the states (like myself) to become invested in a civil war occurring in a part of the world I never knew existed. The internet has empowered and enabled people by connecting like-minded people, providing access to information, broadcasting events, and creating real connections between people. Alone, the internet is not enough to bring down an oppressive, authoritarian state; but when coupled with the power and will of the people, it can create real

The Civil Rights movement in the U.S. during the 1950’s and 60’s showed how effective activism is on political issues. Under the leadership of major civil figures, most notably Dr. Martin Luther King, the organized and peaceful movement brought about major change to the civil rights of African Americans and other minorities. Moreover, this movement made historical strides in changing U.S. policy, and did so without the use of social media. Today, social media activism is merely a means to an end. Social media can share a vast amount of information, and raise awareness on a broad spectrum of issues. However, the ability to make major changes on government policy, as proven by many occurrences in history, requires high-risk activism under an organized hierarchy. I argue that social media is not an effective tool for political actions because it lacks the necessary traits to make an effective impact.

The dissertation Spring Awakening, transcribed by Jose Antonio Vargas, can be beheld by the progressive ramifications cyberspace and newfangled apparatuses have to contribute to one’s epoch. Coupled with the fixation of a singular named Ghonim who had written a “fast-paced engrossing new memoir of political awakening”, which had contributed to “Serve as a touchstone for future testimonials…” (Vargas 433); to enumerate how social media is the “connective tissue of society” (by Clay Shirky), in which we as a society can rally and amalgamate under a singular basis, such as the usurpation of an oppressive authoritarian. As a result “What had bubbled up online inevitably spilled on the streets…” (Vargas 433); subsequently further demonstrates the

Activism using the Internet and other new media is increasingly having an impact in broadening the scope of civic action in support of human rights in East Asia. Select one or two case studies of activism in ONE East Asian country studied in this course. With regard to your chosen case studies, how effective is online activism as a force for social change? How are government authorities responding to the challenge of internet activism?

John Green, and his brother Hank use their internet fame for activism. John and his brother Hank have created an organization that has been around since 2007, and is still active today. The idea of this organization, known as Project For Awesome, was to be able to give to multiple organizations. With their large following, the two brothers had the idea of letting their followers choose which organizations to donate to.

Delving deep into the history of how new media has the ability to cause the autocratic ways of governments to run into a stone wall, the infamous incident of how university students of Indonesia leveraged on the power of e-mail to overthrow the then corrupt President Suharto presents itself as an excellent illustration. Through examining more recent cases where the citizens of Tunisia and Egypt have tapped on the power of social media to help upend the existing political order, the potency of new media becomes apparent.

One of the main topics of Killswitch’s is democracy and how it is being challenged now at a technological level. The film portrays how the smaller groups that have funding are trying to control the majority through restriction of internet capabilities and more surveillance amongst

As a logical consequence, Postmes and Brunsting (2002) reasoned that the Internet is changing society because people's cognitive processes, triggered by access to information and communication, replace the strong social ties that traditionally underpin committed activism. In simpler words, in the past, humanity used the herd instinct as the main driving force behind committed forms of activism. Thanks to the Internet, we climb another step or three on the evolutionary ladder, and simply do away with the herd instinct and replace it with reason. The argument, if put this way, does not sound particularly strong. What can be taken away is that social media is still evolving, that social media changes the way we – or most of us communicate, that social media is used in social and political activism, and that the Internet increases quantitative if not qualitative access to information.