[Web4lib] The value of Twitter as back channel

[Steven E. Patamia, Ph.D.]

I agree.  The fact that there are multiple techniques at the disposal of the
general population for capturing and broadcasting real time events is per se
an important development.  These have been mostly enabled by cell phones,
but a raft of other portable devices will evolve.  Of course, as in warfare
-- and in particular electronic warfare -- for every new electronic resource
a countermeasure is quickly developed.  What happened in Iran is likely to
be repeated there and elsewhere, but you should expect that opposing forces
will have countermeasures in place next time.   It is rather easy to disrupt
a cell network if you really want to -- and especially if you are a
government.   It never ends.

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Jim Cody <nohojim at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I think the technogy aspect of the Iran election protests was a convergence
> of
> Twitter, YouTube and widespread use of cell phones.  The Neda Agha-Soltan
> video got out because somebody was standing right there with a cellphone,
> somebody knew how to upload it to YouTube via a proxy server, and then many
> people spread that YouTube URL via Twitter.
>
> A repressive government can still claim that something like this never
> happened,
> but it can no longer stop the evidence from getting out unless they
> completely
> shut off the internet.  I think that is a big change.
>
> If people have a pressing need, they will hijack whatever web technologies
> are
> available, no matter what they were originally intended for.  I don't think
> the
> creators of Twitter intended it to be used for outmaneuvering a government
> or
> for back channel discussions at a convention either, but it works for both.
>
>
> --
Steven E. Patamia, Ph.D., J.D.
Personal Cell: (352) 219-6592