New Media in Syria

By Roschanack Shaery-Eisenlohr

Tags: Syria, Digital Natives

What is the role of the new media in this context of bought criticism? Hopes that increased globalization and advanced media technology bring about political liberalization have all but vanished. We now know that authoritarian regimes are more resilient and that economic liberalization and technological modernization are not necessarily coupled with democratic reform. The new media, especially the Internet, blogs and Twitter, have indeed created a counter public, a space where state hegemony is challenged.

How do authoritarian regimes handle criticism within their societies? There is evidence that they make use of a variety of strategies to create consensus that reaches far beyond sheer force and violence. From the East European context there is ample material about the resilience of authoritarianisms and the mechanisms they employ to create obedient subjects. Relying on this scholarship, Lisa Wedeen and Miriam Cooke show how the Syrian regime engages citizens in what they refer to as bought criticism and commissioned criticism. For example, Miriam Cooke discusses, in detail, the practice of
tanfis/tanaffus (2007, chapter 4). She describes how, in times of crisis, the regime makes a calculated decision to open the safety valves for a period of time, giving citizens the pretense of choice and freedom while the reality is that it is entirely in control of the situation. Hence the word tanfis which means breathing. The regime goes even further, according to Cooke, even finding ways to force intellectuals and artists to produce material that criticizes the regime mildly. This commissioned criticism or bought critique “is a moment for sharing unbelief and awareness of injustice; it provides pleasurable release of pent-up pressure.” (Cooke 2007:72). The danger of tanaffus, she explains, is that “it allows for injustice to persist” (Cooke 2007:72).

What is the role of the new media in this context of bought criticism? Hopes that increased globalization and advanced media technology bring about political liberalization have all but vanished. We now know that authoritarian regimes are more resilient and that economic liberalization and technological modernization are not necessarily coupled with democratic reform. The new media, especially the Internet, blogs and Twitter, have indeed created a counter public, a space where state hegemony is challenged. Opinions among Syrian dissidents differ greatly on the importance of thisplatform. Is this space part of the bought criticism or is it a real space for dissent? There is no doubt that the regime also exploits new media, using it to create the façade of pluralism by allowing some oppositional views to be expressed. While I am yet to be convinced of the authenticity of this virtual counter public or that it will lead to any substantial political opening, I do believe that the Internet has, to some extent, helped weaken the regimes’ politics of fear. This politics of fear manifests itself, and is maintained, mostly through the atomization of society and the creation of distrust among citizens which, in turn, has the effect of pushing direct policing into background. The Internet, however, has facilitated the formation of networks of citizens, previously unknown to each other, and who would never have trusted each other had they met casually. Networking and trust works against the atomization of the society and can help break the culture of fear among those privileged with access to the new media. While Syrians know that this virtual counter public is not the type of resistance that would bring down a regime they also recognize that the resilience of authoritarianism is not simply due to citizens’ fears but is deeply entwined with local, regional, and global politics and economic interest. They contribute to breaking the culture of fear with their limited possibilities and with the knowledge that the virtual counter public might just be another trick of the Orwellian regime.

References:
Miriam Cooke. Dissident Syria. Duke University Press 2007

This article is based on the forthcoming paper by Roschanack Shaery-Eisenlohr: From Subjects to Citizens? Media and Human Rights in Bashar’s Syria.

Shaery-Eisenlohr received her Ph.D from the University of Chicago. She is the author of Shiite Lebanon. Transnational Religion and the Making of National Identities. Columbia University Press 2008.

Source: Civil Society in West Asia Newsletter-Issue 1, October 2009.