<nettime> regulating 'social media': yes/no/maybe/a bit

[Geert Lovink <geert@xs4all.nl>]

(the profound confusion about the difference between 'social media'  
and journalism deepens. enjoy the contradictory statements of the  
institutionalized worlds of NGOs and so-called civil society! geert)
BUDAPEST, May 24, 2011 (IPS) - Social media is being heralded as a  
revolutionary weapon for the empowerment of discriminated groups such  
as migrants. But so far it is the xenophobic far right that has made  
the most of it.
The discussion about social media tends to focus around famous  
Internet platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Blogs and YouTube, but  
generally refers to any innovative or unorthodox means of communication.
In contrast to traditional media, social media is usually web-based,  
highly interactive, inexpensive and easily accessible to consumers,  
who can turn into producers without much effort.
Its enormous popularity has forced traditional media outlets to adopt  
many of the features characteristic of social media, such as open  
commentary sections and uploading of video features.
Many see signs of hope for voiceless migrants in the rise of social  
media, but what is even truer is that the far-right has benefited the  
most from the media revolution.
"Racist and xenophobic people took over first because they had not  
been allowed into mainstream media," Arash Mokhtari, a project manager  
at Quick Response, a Swedish group monitoring media coverage of  
migrants, told IPS.
"Before, they resorted to leaflets but by now they’ve become very  
media-savvy, they are very present in blogs and commentary sections,"  
he said.
One often cited example is the hijacking of commentary sections in  
terrorism-related news by xenophobes, who use this platform to  
insinuate links between terrorism and Islamic communities in Europe.
Nobody denies the potential social media holds to spread any kind of  
ideas, including messages of tolerance, but uncertainty remains as to  
how to approach it and as to its actual effectiveness.
"The anti-racist majority society needs to be better at learning from  
these groups in order to resist them. Social media is very democratic  
and I believe the situation can be changed," said Mokhtari.
The issue of how to improve migrant integration through social media  
was highlighted at a conference hosted by the International  
Organisation for Migration (IOM) and the Hungarian presidency of the  
European Union last week in Budapest, Hungary.
"Social media can be used to communicate messages to youth and  
children in a way that is close to them: Facebook, YouTube or cartoons  
can all be used to encourage migrants to participate," Anke Schuster,  
project development and liaison officer for the IOM in Brussels told  
IPS.
However, experts have not found a way to measure its exact impact:  
"New media tools such as Facebook and YouTube offer quantitative data  
on how many times material was used, but more qualitative evaluations  
are needed," Schuster said.
Also, for organisations such as the IOM or other NGOs (non- 
governmental organisations) it is hard to match the straightforward  
language that typifies far-right new media.
"Social media provides opportunities to bring our message across but  
we need to find the right language to communicate it; readers expect a  
simple, understandable language," Jurga Kievisaite, programme manager  
for IOM told IPS.
While media experts agree a simple language is desirable, some are  
concerned that down-to-earth coverage of migration issues may come at  
the expense of understanding the complex processes behind migration  
flows.
Calls for more human interest stories that connect the reader to the  
often discriminated and voiceless migrant are met with skepticism by  
those journalists who insist on the need for analysis and background  
information and who oppose stigmatising migrants and exploiting their  
emotions.
But as the still largely unregulated social media keeps booming,  
concerns grow as to whether either type of story will be written in a  
professional manner by new media actors such as bloggers.
"Bloggers can deceive and lie, they don’t answer to anybody. That may  
be freedom of expression, but it’s not journalism," Aidan White,  
former general secretary of the International Federation of  
Journalists said.
"To a part of the population what makes journalism distinctive is a  
commitment to ethical values. Journalists need to be responsible and  
accountable," he added.
Mircea Toma, president of Active Watch, a Romanian media monitory  
agency, used a more conciliatory tone: "Young people consume more and  
more new media, so bloggers will become a dominant part of the media  
landscape. As public communicators they have the ability to influence  
society, but they are also exposed to the same laws as anyone else."
Nevertheless, regulation of social media remains a controversial and  
delicate topic in which the need for professionalism needs to be  
balanced with the right to freedom of expression.
"Those suggesting regulation have been harshly attacked, it’s  
considered a dangerous precedent," Mokhtari told IPS.
"But some steps have been made towards regulations, such as the  
requirement that people register before commenting online. Anonymity  
is great but it provides a negative platform for discussion."
In any case, Mokhtari notes the scope of the new media seems to have  
changed: "Before, social media was about adopting an identity  
different from your own, now it is all about who you really are."

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org