Arab Spring: Serving an international agenda ?

How could have the world predicted that a country where is medias was extremely controlled and restricted would have become the initiator of a revolution that is also called a social media revolution?

Tunisia under the Ben Ali was a dictatorial state controlled by the army and strictly controlled by the police. An impressive fraction of the population worked in this sector and occupied positions of control, surveillance, and control at many levels of society. In North Africa, people frequently joked about the fact that there was a policeman for every three Tunisians.

The press, the internet, and digital communication networks were no exception and the government would often prohibit the expressions of political ideas against the regime.

The spectacular ousting of Ben Ali in Tunisia, Mubarak in Egypt, Gaddafi in Libya, as well as the protests in Yemen, Jordan and the current civil was in Syria all have common point. They all placed media, especially social media at the heart of their communication. There are still debates about the fact that only 5% of the population in Libya had free access to the internet during the uprising, however, thee is no question about the fact that networks like Facebook or Twitter played an important role of exposing the protests on global platforms. Professor Philip Howard from the University of Washington demonstrated in a study that it was indeed possible to predict the future protests based on the content and frequency of debates and discussions on social networks.

For many people, social networks are a leading arena to discuss politics and create democracy. Can you imagine millions of bloggers, internet users in Egypt, Jordan, and Tunisia debating in English and Arabic and sharing their ideas and political views freely, against the systems that have oppressed them and their families for decades in total impunity and with the silent collaboration of western powers.

Nobody could have predicted the existence of such a platform even in the early 2000s.

But beyond the international platform of communication that social media provides, it raises the issue of independence or the independence of the people who use social networks in order to serve a specific political agenda.  Do you know who Lina Ben Mhenni or Hamamou Slim are? They are young Tunisian bloggers erected as heroes after the deposition of President Ben Ali. Both were expected to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. They are called cyber activists, cyber dissidents. Most of them are young graduates, teachers, professors, journalists, researchers and activists like Lina Ben Mhenni, a young 28 year old English teacher.

Slim Hamanou

Lina Ben Mhenni

Their independence and impartiality has been has been questioned when a group of researchers including Oxford University professor , the controversial Tariq Ramadan in a study where he denounces the fact that many bloggers, especially in Egypt attended trainings offered by the U.S. government in Washington. They were trained to use media and the internet in order to mobilize people to non violent protests. These trainings also included teaching about the use of symbols and the importance of discipline when organizing protests. They were funded by organizations close to the US State department such as the Einstein Institute, the Freedom Institute and Google.

In this context, where the interests of the major powers and the aspirations of the peoples of the Middle East are mixed and contradictory we can ask ourselves if social media are actually reliable and do express the aspirations of Arab people in the Middle East or if they are only a way for the great powers to serve their political agenda in the Middle East.

Sources :

 http://www.jeuneafrique.com/Article/ARTJAWEB20111004092627/

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqU7ajRgdp4

Gaza: Social Media as a political tool

On Wednesday 14^th of October 2012, the Hamas military leader Ahmad Jaabari was killed by an Israeli air strike. Israel justified the attack by saying that Jaabari was responsible of the terrorist attacks on Israel these past few years.

Wednesday night the IDF (Israel defense force) announced on their Anglophone, Francophone and Hispanic twitter accounts that they were ready to "initiate a ground operation in Gaza" if necessary. 

The Israeli army also released a video showing the raid against Ahmad Jaabari and the Hamas answered  the same day on their twitter account that they opened  “The gates of hell ” by killing their leaders.

The IDF also released a picture of the Hamas leader with the mention “ILIMINATED"

Within 4 days 40 Palestinians and 3 Israeli died, more than 385 Palestinians and 25 Israelis were injured.

With both the IDFand the Alqassam Brigade(armed branch of The Hamas) tweeting about their attacks and strikes it is now an online psychological war based on influencing public opinion.

Supporters of both sides also tweet to support the hamas or the tsahal with keyword such as "#IsraelUnderFire for Israelis and "#GazaUnderAttack for Palestian‘s supporters.

Internet and social media became a new battle field, the battle field of opinions, with YouTube Facebook and Twitter on the front line.  

Israel Defense Forces colonel and spokesperson Avital Leibovich said twitter is an amazing tool that allows sharing information directly and quickly. She became the director of the “Interactive Media “ department that was created only two months ago and which employs 30 members of the military specialized in writing on the web and on social media. Avital Leibovich declared she will quit her military position to entirely commit herself to this department. Her decision shows the importance of social media and Public Relations in political affairs and how governments can use them to persuade and gather people around their cause.

“We don’t win this type of war only on the field but also by the intermediary of public opinion “says Tamir Sheafer, director of political communication at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Both parties want to increase support and show their side of the story. What was before a complex war explained by political leaders and Presidents in confusing speeches becomes now accessible and easy to understand. Everyone can inform themselves directly from the source and have their own opinion and judgment of the situation. There is no media to interfere or frame the message.

But what is the risk of this kind of closeness between the populations and military group like the IDF and the Alqassam Brigade?

Access to information and freedom of speech are fundamental rights but the risk of falling into propaganda is huge and people are easy to influence when emotional appeal is used: pictures of injured and crying men, women and children are released every minute on the net and it can lead to the rise of extremist views and the hatred between partisans of the two populations can grow even bigger.  

To make war so accessible and to let people interact, argue and fight about it online creates a risk to make it a social war in which people who don’t really understand the issues and what is really at stake will just use the social platforms to exchange insults and let their animosity take over on what is really important: the end of hostilities and a peace agreement to stop the death of innocent Israeli and Palestinian civilians.

IDF twitter account

Alqassam Brigade twitter account

Avital Leibovich twitter account

She is like me

Today I would like to write about a very strong and coureageous girl : Malala Yousafzai.

Malala is a 14 years old teenager from Pakistan. She has been writing a blog for BBC since 2009 to support girl's education in Pakistan and to denounce Taliban's threats and terrorism that are still happening in her town Mingora, in the Swat Valley, in the north west of Pakistan.

The 9th of october 2012 Malala got shot in the head and the neck by Talibans who stopped her school bus.
She was coming back from school when a man jumped into the bus, and asked other children to identify her. He then opened fire and two other girls have been injured.
A Taliban spokes man said "We do not tolerate people like Malala speaking against us," and added that they would come for her again if she survived. 

She has been transfered to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmimgham the 15th of October to receive emergency care and she is now stable. 

The Taliban General Jihad Yar said that killing Malala was legitimate "We don't have any regret for what happened to Malala, she was becoming the symbol of western ideas and to eliminate her was the good decision to make"  
He also said that her case was not important and that "Journalists never talk about the dozens of little girls killed by American drones in Afghanistan"(Big Browser/Le monde)

What happened to Malala is very serious and I admire her for standing for her ideas and fighting for her rights even when she knew that she could die for that.
She is a girl like me, writing a blog like me , and sharing her ideas like me. The only thing that differentiate us is that I grew up in a country with Freedom of Speech and where education is authorized even mandatory until the age of 16 .
Everyone on this planet, boy or girl should have the right to go to school and educate themselves. Because we, young people are the future of this world.
Malala became the symbol of this battle for education and she has all my respect for everything she achieved.
You can find on this link Malala's posts.

BBC news report :

Ikea

The 1st of October 2012 , the British newspaper METRO broke the news : the new Ikea catalogue for their Saudian stores erased every women from the pictures : 

The news made a scandal and all over the world Ikea has been criticized for the decision they made.

Saudi Arabia being a muslim country heavily influenced by the Sharia ( the religious law of Islam) they don't allow women to reveal parts of their body such as their arms, legs , breast etc..And go even further in the covering as they require women (even the foreigners) to wear a Niqab. 

Ikea quickly reacted by apologizing  “We should have reacted to the exclusion of women from the Saudi Arabian version of the catalog since it does not align with the IKEA Group values.”

But the damage was already done. 

I personally think that erasing women models from their catalogue is indeed disrespectful to women and it is almost a denial of their existence and their importance in the society.  

But I can understand their decision as a marketing choice. The Ikea Group knew that if they would have put women in their catalogues, the Saudians wouldn't have looked through the pages during family time or with their wives or husbands and it would have affected their sales pretty strongly. They adapted their strategy to their audience, and put their financial interest first.

What do you think? Smart choice or not? 

Mc Donald's

Mc Donald's is the world most famous fast food chain in the world and  they serve around 68 million customers everyday in  over 119 different countries. Being one of the biggest American symbol , everyone around the world associate the fast food chain with the United states and the value they advocate such as Fun,democracy, human rights, freedom of speech etc..

That being said let's have a look at Kandari and Gaithers' paper and their statements :

-"Arabs who have favorable attitudes to Western lifestyles might to be stigmatized as betrayers of their social standards."
-"While American popular culture is associated with futuristic fictional characters, traditional and historical symbols might resonate more with Arabs."
- "Many Arabs and Muslims strongly believe that democracy and human rights notions are pure Western inventions that instruct against the teachings of Islam."

So let's see how the American Giant approach their Egyptian audience in this 2007 commercial: 

So? ... Just by looking at the commercial we can see that once again religion is not mentionned  at any time and there is no "Arabic" way of targeting the audience, the commercial portrays a young couple fighting over a meal and they could be from any country in the world.
And it didn't stop Mc Donald's from having an amazing sucess in Egypt with around 40 000 customers everyday ( that I am sure are not considered as "betrayers of their social standards")  in over 59 restaurants around the country. ( Mc Donalds Egypt)
The commercial is funny and everyone can relate to it because let's be honest..who never fought for their fries ?

Arabs don't like change?

In Kandari and Gaither's paper "Arabs, the West and PR" the authors say :

-"The words of Allah and Muhammad, without exaggeration, perhaps represent, for Muslim Arabs,the most trusted and credible sources on earth for information (...)Arabs probably will rank whatever Allah and Muhammad say as more trustworthy than whatever parents,(...)media or others would say."

-"Using verses and stories from the Koran and Sunnah could be persuasive tools for avoiding or

adopting practices and behaviors."

And "In general, Arabs resist change"

Now let's have a look at this Egyptian commercial :

Well we can see in this campaign launched by the Egyptian public service to raise awareness about birth control and contraceptive options that not at any moment religion or Allah are mentioned.

Contraception is not mentioned in the Koran as it didn't exist at the time but any kind of abortion or interfering in another‘s individual right to die or live is forbidden. Each life is sacred and blessed from birth to natural death. The Koran says that Allah is the creator of everything, only him can create life and order death.

If we follow Kandari and Gaither's statements, we would say that the majority of  Egyptians being Muslim this campaign could offend them or create negative reactions.But most egyptian friends of mine who saw the video embraced the idea, and Nafisat, my 20 years old friend from Cairo told me " I understand that some women choose this option , i wouldn't myself but I am not offended as I don't see anything against Islam or against my beliefs"

With this video we can see that Kandari and Gaither arguments are not applicable to every campaign and therefore are not consistent and researched enough to make such powerful statements  

Sexiness for everyone, everywhere

For my first article i would like to show you a 2009 German commercial for a German lingerie brand called "Liaison Dangereuse". This retailer is looking to expand their market to the middle east and reach Arabic and Muslim women’s attention.

I love this commercial as at first we don’t expect the woman to wear a niquab as she is acting very sexy and seductive and the choice of music is very interesting as it creates a sensual atmosphere while the model and actress Miriam Wimmer is playing and almost flirting with her reflection in the mirror. The commercial  starts as a usual lingerie commercial and the end is very unexpected with the model wearing a niquab and the tag ” sexiness for everyone”.

The other interesting point is the name of the brand ” Liaison dangereuse ” which means “Dangerous affairs” or “Dangerous relationship” in French. We can from there understand the complex relationship between the modesty and reserve of Arabic and Muslim women and their sexual outward appearance and their intimate and private sphere where they are free to wear what ever they want and feel as sexy, sensual, seductive  and voluptuous as any other women.