Social Media, A means of organised dissent.

Delving into social media and its political and social movement capabilities can branch into numerous different areas, however the two most important aspects are the idea of organisation and communication, as well as implication.

As suggested by the title Social media is a crucial tool for organising dissent. The organizational abilities essentially boil down to themes explored in previous posts, particularly, Global networks and the information age. Crucially social media as a tool allows for mass communication to a grand audience.  Messages are swiftly spread through cyberspace through twitter, Facebook and YouTube.

This access to a swift and global communication tool works in two organizational ways. Firstly, it accommodates communication within citizens of countries.  Secondly it allows for external input from exterior countries.

For example, the 2010 Arab Springs movement (arguably the most prominent use of social media as a revolutionary tool) featured the use of Facebook and twitter to organize rallies.

The organizational aspect of these social media sites is phenomenal, particularly when used as a means of dissent.  Social media was used during the Arab Springs not only to organise rallies and protests, but was used as a conduit for outsiders to view and contribute to the conversation. Ramesh Srinivasan of Al Jazeera writes that western social media users had a large impact on events such as the Arab Springs. Most contributions are through Twitter and video streaming sites such as YouTube and Vimeo.  Often this western influence takes the form of pressuer of governments to intervene, however there is some circumstances of direct benefit. The Speak to Tweet twitter account allowed for communication between Syrian citizens and westerners as well as a means of communicating amongst themselves.

Overall social media is more than a means of slacktivism.

 

Bibliography

Srinivasan R. 26 Oct 2012, Taking power through technology in the Arab Spring, Al Jazeera, Viewed 3^rd October 2014. <http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/09/2012919115344299848.html>

Found Out I’m Gay

Homosexuality and equal rights has been a prominent issue within Australia recently, Melbourne sketch comedy group Aunty Donna addresses this issue with the video ‘Found Out I’m Gay’.

(Warning, the video has EXTREME sexually suggestive material)

The video was produced by Aunty Donna on December 6^th 2012 as a segment of their show ‘Aunty Donna’s Rumpus Room’. It is found primarily on YouTube on Aunty Donna’s official page under the title ‘Found Out I’m Gay’, also as a segment of ‘Aunty Donna’s Rumpus Room! SWEETLOVE’ the latter is also available on ABC’s iview.  The text was not created with the intention of reaching a specific audience, however, the humour used by the group may most be associated with a younger adult audience.

Shock humour is not a new tactic in sending a message; its application in this text is useful in gaining an audience due to its comedic nature.  The video itself has roughly 97 000 views, whilst the ‘Rumpus Room’ video it features in has over 179 000 views.  The text employs a contrast between the harsh sexually explicit material during the middle of the video, to the discussion of a normal seeming relationship between two men.  The Authors use this contrast to highlight the difference between a certain preconceived idea of a homosexual relationship and something closer to actuality.

Interactions between the producers and the audience do not influence the reading of the text greatly, however, other videos by the group such as ‘Aunty Donna’s Rumpus Room! LION’ provide a contextual framework in which audiences may use to reinterpret the original message.  Videos such as ‘LION’ and ‘Found Out I’m Gay’ feature grotesquely sexually violent and explicit content, therefore audiences familiar with the work of the group may not be as shocked by the message due to exposure to this kind of material.  Furthermore, the content near the end of the video discussing building relationships, may be relatable to some of the audience, therefore strengthening the bonds with the audience whilst also reinforcing the original message.  This interaction influences an audience’s interpretation of the messages.

Interesting questions to be raised about this text include questioning the use of comedy. Does the video use comedy to send a message about homosexuality, or use homosexuality to make comedy? Does this question matter, as long as the message is being sent? Does the average audience interpret the negative aspect of the text as the original message or the positive? Therefore does the message help of hinder the same sex couples drive for equal rights? Is this shock comedy tactic the best way of sending the message, or is there another form of comedy that would be more effective?  Does the use of comedy destroy the credibility of the message?

Conclusively, although the text does not reach a wide audience, it’s use of shock comedy, aids the message of same sex equal rights. The producer’s use of contrast and relatable material influences the decoding of the message.

Hope

Arguably the most iconic representation of the United States 2008 presidential election, Shepard Fairey’s ‘HOPE’ poster swept across America and is still recognised and sought after today.

Fairey was commissioned to create the image following the popularity of his earlier street art critical of the George W. Bush government. He chose to create this image because “[Obamas] power and sincerity as a speaker would create a positive association with his likeness.” Originally the poster was to have the tagline ‘Progress’ with Fairey’s signature ‘obey’ star, however this was changed due to concerns of negative connotations of the original wording.

Originally the text was created solely for the 2008 campaign, however as Laura Barton from The Guardian states “[the image] acquired the kind of instant recognition of Jim Fitzpatrick’s Che Guevara poster, and is surely set to grace T-shirts, coffee mugs and the walls of student bedrooms in the years to come.” Due to this instant recognition idea, the association of this text is no longer exclusive to a poster for the 2008 election.  The image can now be found on T-Shirts and various other merchandise.

Arguably there isn’t one single producer for the image, rather the whole 2008 Obama Election team are the producers whose goal is to push the ideas of Barack Obama. Obama secured his reputation as a powerful and sincere speaker throughout his political career. He gained a rapport with the American audience, Fairey utilised this rapport and Obama’s speaking skills as the basis of his ‘Hope’ poster.  The connection between the producers and the American audience is vital to the understanding of the text. Without Obama’s speeches and general social interaction, the text would have little to no meaning to the target audience.  Furthermore, Obama’s speeches often centralised around three key ideas: change, “yes we can”, and hope. As Hope is a crucial idea throughout the campaign, using it in the poster reminded audiences of the key statements of the campaign. The simplistic nature of the image has also allowed for many people to create satire of the image, effectively turning consumers into producers.

An audiences interpretation of the text raises some important questions, however the image raises more responses than questions.  Questions raised through and about the text include; why does the simplicity of the text appeal to the audience? What makes the text so iconic that it acquires an instant recognition? Why is the text still talked about today? Would the text have had the same effect if it stuck with the original ‘Progress’ instead of ‘Hope’?  Was Obama’s sincerity and power essential to the poster or would it work for anyone else?

In conclusion, the iconic ‘Hope’ poster was an effective text for the 2008 presidential election, which still has contemporary uses. The connection between the producers of the text and the audience allowed for satirical images to be made thereby connection producers and consumers. Lastly, as with most artwork, the text raises many different questions.