“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— these terms became widespread during the Arab Spring rebellions at the beginning of this decade, but they are outdated now.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.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
Taiwan is confronting escalating threats from its behemoth neighbor. Last month, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army conducted live-fire drills in the East China Sea, practicing blockades and precision strikes on simulated targets, while its escalating cyberattacks targeting government, financial and telecommunication systems threaten to disrupt Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. The mounting geopolitical pressure underscores Taiwan’s need to strengthen its defense capabilities to deter possible aggression and improve civilian preparedness. The consequences of inadequate preparation have been made all too clear by the tragic situation in Ukraine. Taiwan can build on its successful COVID-19 response, marked by effective planning and execution, to enhance
Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has upheld the core goals of “making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous,” fully implementing an “America first” policy. Countries have responded cautiously to the fresh style and rapid pace of the new Trump administration. The US has prioritized reindustrialization, building a stronger US role in the Indo-Pacific, and countering China’s malicious influence. This has created a high degree of alignment between the interests of Taiwan and the US in security, economics, technology and other spheres. Taiwan must properly understand the Trump administration’s intentions and coordinate, connect and correspond with US strategic goals.
RSS