“Twitter revolution,” “Facebook revolution” — these terms became widespread during the Arab Spring rebellions at the beginning of this decade, but they are outdated now. For today’s protesters in Hong Kong and Barcelona, or for Extinction Rebellion advocates in capitals around the world, the social networks and even messenger applications run by big US corporations are becoming a secondary tool, and one not used for organizational purposes.
After protesters forced then-Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak to resign in February 2011, one of the revolution’s public faces, Google executive Wael Ghonim, went on CNN to be interviewed by anchors Anderson Cooper and Wolf Blitzer. When Blitzer asked him what was going to happen next, the following exchange ensued:
Ghonim: Ask Facebook.
Blitzer: Ask what?
Ghonim: Facebook.
Cooper: Facebook.
Blitzer: Facebook. You’re giving Facebook a lot of credit for this?
Ghonim: Yes, for sure. I want to meet Mark Zuckerberg one day and thank him, actually. This revolution started online. This revolution started on Facebook.
That was so 2011. If there is any one app that today’s protesters would want to credit, it is Telegram.
However, not even this itinerant messenger, whose team was based in St Petersburg, Berlin, London and Singapore before ending up in Dubai, plays the same kind of outsize role that Facebook and Twitter took on in previous protests, up to and including Hong Kong’s 2014 “Umbrella movement.”
With its powerful group messaging functionality and “channel” feature that allows users to broadcast information, Telegram is the central media platform for the Hong Kong protesters of today, who are now pushing for greater democracy for the former British colony.
It is also the go-to tool for pro-independence Catalans who have taken to the streets to protest the long prison sentences for leaders of the Spanish region’s doomed 2017 secession bid. There, the secretive Democratic Tsunami group uses Telegram to communicate with its 150,000 followers. It also uses a Telegram bot to collect data for an app that it created to map protest activities and street clashes.
For its part, Extinction Rebellion has been moving from Facebook-owned WhatsApp to Telegram, because the app allows bigger group chats and it has a voting tool that allows independent-minded rebels to decide what they want to do. This tool is also used in Hong Kong.
Signal, the encrypted messenger, and Mattermost, an open-source alternative to the enterprise messenger Slack, are also popular among activists.
Direct file transfers, encrypted messengers and specially created apps have become essential for spreading all kinds of material that might land its distributors in trouble — such as the fake boarding passes Democratic Tsunami sent out so protesters could get into the Barcelona airport on Tuesday last week, causing more than 100 flights to be canceled.
Of course, today’s activists still use social media platforms run by big US corporations, but when they do, it is mainly for outward communication such as with the media, not with people actively involved in the protests.
Since the Arab Spring, governments have themselves mastered the use of big commercial social media networks. Since the Hong Kong protests began, both Facebook and Twitter have complained about China’s attempts to use them for disinformation and counterpropaganda.
Besides, many protesters believe that their anonymity is not well-protected on the social networks, Malek Dudakov of the Moscow-based think tank Center for the Study of New Communications wrote in a report about the use of the technology by the Hong Kong protest movement.
Telegram, run by a nonprofit founded by Russian libertarian Pavel Durov, has a reputation for resisting government attempts at censorship and infiltration.
Russia has attempted to block the messenger for refusing to hand over encryption keys to domestic intelligence, but Telegram has fought back and is still accessible in most of Russia. Mainland China has had more success in cutting off access to it, but even on Telegram, the risk of losing one’s anonymity is a potential problem. One protest group moderator in Hong Kong was arrested in June.
Durov has accused China of trying to take his service down in Hong Kong with distributed denial of service attacks.
Those efforts contrast with concerns that big US companies are more likely to cooperate with the authorities.
Earlier this month, Apple approved a smartphone map app that Hong Kong protesters have been using for distribution in its App Store after an initial ban, but then swiftly took HKmap.live down again.
Apple chief executive officer Tim Cook said that the Hong Kong cybersecurity authority had told the company that the app was being used by criminals to “target individual officers for violence and to victimize individuals and property where no police are present.”
This episode prompted the Democratic Tsunami in Catalonia to release its own app for Android only — and not through the Google Play Store, in which most Android users get their apps.
Even though its services are blocked in China, Google has also behaved in a way that some protesters, and even some of its employees, find suspicious.
Citing an internal rule against the monetization of current events, the Play Store banned a game called The Revolution of Our Times that allowed players to act out the role of Hong Kong protesters. The game’s developers had promised to give 80 percent of their proceeds to charity.
Big Tech’s role in unrest, even if unwitting, has always looked like an aberration. Where the profit motive is involved, cooperating with governments makes more sense than facilitating those who fight them.
Now, the dust is settling on the tech revolution, and real-world revolutions need non-commercial tech tools, so protesters either design their own, or fall back on open-source apps or those developed by nonprofits.
Facebook and Twitter are where propaganda battles rage and insults fly, not where action is coordinated — and that is a natural consequence of their evolution as big businesses that attract way too much government attention.
So, if you’re wondering what comes next for all the modern-day protest movements, do not ask Facebook.
Leonid Bershidsky is Bloomberg Opinion’s Europe columnist. He was the founding editor of the Russian business daily Vedomosti and founded the opinion Web site Slon.ru. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past