Friday
Jun182010
Iran Request: Nonsense about "Twitter Revolution". Please Stop.
Friday, June 18, 2010 at 16:09 
UPDATE 1825 GMT: Jared Keller has modified his final paragraph so it now reads, "The Green Revolution in Iran was muzzled, sadly, although the movement continues to put pressure on the Iranian regime a year after its initial protests. The Twitter Revolution, however, is far from over." He has also engaged in a productive dialogue over the original piece, noting his main intention was to establish the role of Twitter in events, correcting misconceptions, and adding, "I regret using 'totally stifled' as a rhetorical flourish [about the Green Movement]; I don't intend to make the same mistake in the future.It's been wearying to read the recent mis-interpretation of social media and its place in the post-election conflict in Iran.
There is, however, a step beyond today, as Jared Keller of The Atlantic tries to set the record straight --- for which he should be thanked --- only to walk face-first into an even worse two-dimensional error. My response:
I am grateful that Jared Keller corrects the superficial notion --- sometimes put out in misunderstanding, sometimes to grab a cheap headline --- that Twitter is the movement for change in Iran.
Twitter is a tool --- a very powerful tool --- to keep information moving in and out of Iran even at the height of represssion by the regime.
It's ironic, then, that Mr Keller seems not to have used Twitter to lead him to the information of what is happening day-by-day in Iran, more than a year after the 2009 election. Had he done so, he would not have made the assertion --- as superficial as the notion of the "Twitter Revolution" and as ill-informed --- that "the Green Revolution in Iran was muzzled, sadly, its political organs now defunct and its development totally stifled".
The movement for civil rights is still much alive, with thousands defying arrest and intimidation to show up on streets in cities across Iran last Saturday and with political pressure building against the Government on a daily basis, both from the opposition and from "battles within the establishment".
Reader Comments (8)
I've had it with those who have no idea what they are talking about, despite news credentials, budgets, and a much larger stage. I'm plum tired of the failures of the press to cover these stories adequately.
In my recent article, looking back on my last year covering Iran (from the "Twitter Revolution to my invitation to write for the Huffington Post) I say this:
"I could also argue that some members of the mainstream media, and some members of their audiences, suffer from a kind of news xenophobia (even racism) that prohibits the trusting of foreign nationals without Western corroboration, manifesting itself in such a way that unless CNN covers it, it can’t be reliable (sort of like how some people on vacation will only eat at chain restaurants). Is it so hard to believe, in an era where public trust in the media is decaying, that somebody else couldn’t do a better job?
Combined with the distortions of certain politicians and bad coverage, the American people are missing the real story. Now that the Green Movement is in marathon mode, not spint-to-the-finish mode, the lack of media coverage of the events in Iran is particularly damaging to the prospects of peace in the region."
Read the rest, share some ideas, and lets get this fight going. The media, frankly, sucks, and it's time to do something about it.
http://www.dissectednews.com/2010/06/a-year-in-the-life-of-a-new-media-journalist.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.dissectednews.com/2010/06/a-year-in-...
My response to Mr. Keller:
The coversation about the "Twitter Revolution" is really the mainstream media's conversation about how it learned about a news story that it had no idea about, and then misrepresented the reality on the ground, and now they are criticizing themselves for having no idea what they were talking about.
The problem is that they still, a year later, have NO IDEA what they are talking about.
The following is the evidence from LAST WEEK ALONE that there is a growing, powerful democratic movement in Iran. I suggest that Mr. Keller explore the current state of the Green Movement before he dismiss it so easily:
http://www.dissectednews.com/2010/06/22-khordad" rel="nofollow">http://www.dissectednews.com/2010/06/22-khordad...
I appreciate your correction, Mr. Keller (he changed some of the language to suggest that the Green Movement is continuing but still hurting, rather than dead), but this problem is systemic in the mainstream media's coverage. Frankly, you're doing a better job than most. Interestingly enough, the Huffington Post took on several bloggers, including myself, so that the coverage of Iran could be more accurate and balanced, but then much of the other content on the HuffPo, which arguably does the best job of all the mainstream media in covering this story, still gets it wrong most of the time.
Time to go back to old fashioned reporting, with sources and interviews and documents and pictures (and now videos) in order to find out what is really going on, especially in a place like Iran where the truth is, as Mr. Keller points out, buried by oppression.
Good job, team. Here is Jared Keller's reponse:
"Your points are well taken, although I would hesitate to claim that my glossing over current political activity in Iran is indicative of a systemic issue. My focus in this analysis was to discuss the role of Twitter in 2009 and how the events in Iran influenced its evolution today (hence why this post is filed in the Science/Tech channel and not International). Agreed, I was perhaps hasty to declare the formal political organs of the Green movement defunct, but my goal was not to declare the Green Movement a failure, only to dispel the notion that Twitter was the silver bullet that made the Green revolution a rousing success (which, during June of 2009, it wasn't). That being said, I using "totally stifled" as a rhetorical flourish; I don't intend to make the same mistake in the future."
Thanks for the links and the constructive criticism. I appreciate the dialogue we had on the Atlantic's comments section today.
http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2010/06/evaluating-irans-twitter-revolution/58337/#disqus_thread" rel="nofollow">http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2010...
i do know there is only a handful of iranians actually that are in iran on twitter
great article scott yes twitter is a very powerful tool to get info across the world in a mano- minute
I like how things played out, actually. I think that the resulting article is good analysis, and I think that the cooperation between the author and the discussion forum actually improved coverage of Iran, in our small little way.
One of the things that impresses me about Enduring America is that the comments are often the source of the information that gets blogged. In other words, EA has democratized journalism by having a responsible author look into the claims of people who comment. That way, Scott Lucas can be in England but still have eyes all over the world.
Isn't that exactly the kind of potential in technology that Jared's article was talking about? Isn't what happened today a prime example of this kind of symbiosis?
Now, can we get the Associated Press to buy into this idea? Let's keep working at it.
In the mean time, read my blog and let me know how I screwed up :)
[...] De verzamelde Iranwatchers op EnduringAmerica.com maken gehakt van zijn analyse, en vragen hier met klem om het woord Twitterrevolte maar helemaal te bannen. Please [...]