After the Revolution: Using SNA to try and understand what happens next

This past year the world was held captive by how activists in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, and Libya used social networks to mobilize and organize against their governments. The Arab Spring shouldn’t be interpreted as a movement towards modernity by a backwards and oppressed people but as what Alain Badiou calls an event —a previously unexpected moment which allows all kinds of opportunities while creating new problems and challenges (see his writings Being and Event and Logic of Worlds). Perhaps new dictators will emerge, or new Islamist movements (which have become the specters haunting the liberal West) but other possibilities also co-exist in the chaotic present. In the Arab Spring’s initial phase, in the moment of the event, we observe the successful deployment of networks to develop and present a positive and truthful alternative to the reactionary message of the governing elite. The world saw many groups (or sub-networks) join together under a common goal to help remove these regimes from power—students, unionists, lawyers, teachers, human rights activists, and online dissidents (http://www.technologyreview.com/web/38379/). Beyond both constructing and promoting an alternative message, using few resources, networks served as a medium to mobilize and coordinate resistance, both peaceful and violent.

But it appears when the moment has passed and the event has occurred, the online social persona which was the public face of change loses its influence and its voice as a force for social cohesion. Focus is lost, anarchy rises and, as in Egypt senseless and unproductive violence begins, as evidenced by attacks against the Coptic minority. This leads us to ask what should the role of networks be after the event, can it be repurposed as a force for social cohesion, can it evolve ahead of the populace which it mobilized, or is it the fate of such an online voice to be overtaken and made irrelevant by the second and following acts of social transformation.

Social Network Analysis might be able to provide some insight into the above question as well as providing the international community (both NGOs and governments) with an understanding of what will happen next and how to be most useful and helpful in helping to prevent countries from falling into anarchy.

Information Sources:

In some sense information is both abundant and hard to come by. Communications and messages between individuals will probably be the easiest to come by – looking at tweets, facebook messages, youtube media, blogs, emails, phone records etc. However, it is important to note that even in this area information will be lacking – for instance, in person communications and group meetings which in some cases could solidify connections and trust. Finding attribute data and determining which sub-network an individual affiliates with might be more difficult – since activists have had to keep their identities secret for security reasons.

Methodology:

Identifying characteristics of group members

a. Role: Does the individual post original content, or re-post information to forward the message on? Does the individual play the role of spokesperson in the international arena (interviewed by foreign news organizations)?

b. Age

c. Type of Employment, lack of employment?

d. Type of education?

e. Socio-economic class

f. Ethnic/Religious group/Race

Note: Items b-f will help identify the population make-up of the network. Is it made-up of mostly youth? Persecuted ethnic or religious groups? Large support from the entire population as a whole?

g. Language skills/ability (does the individual have the ability to communicate with people outside of their network/country?

Identifying characteristics or an issue network of each sub-network and then overlaying them.

a. Why did the sub network decide to join the greater network?

b. What is the ranking in order of importance their goals? i.e. once one goal is achieved what will be their next priority – and how does that relate to the goals (and their importance) of the other sub-networks

c. Ability of the sub-network to access resources to influence decisions regarding their issues

In a perfect world, a network analysis would have to be done on the network as a whole and on the individual sub-networks. Identifying the key influencers within each sub-network and then the bridges between each sub-network. Some questions that would need to be answered to accomplish this is:

a. Who does the person interact with both in their sub-network and sub-network?

b. Direction of ties- Are they reciprocated or just in one direction (look at this both within an individual’s sub-network and in interactions between sub-networks)? Are the leaders of the sub-networks also bridging between other sub-networks or are these different individuals?

2) Position in the network

a. Who has the most number of ties in the network? What role(s) do these people perform?

b. Who is tied to the most influential people in the network (at both the sub-network level and network as a whole)?

Several important network measures include:

1) Ego networks- Who are the key personnel in terms of facilitating these connections?

2) Network distance- This is important in terms of establishing how ties between sub-networks may be organized. In order to send communication and information, how many people does this transmission require?

3) Organizational holes – where is it most likely that the larger network will start breaking down? How can this be prevented? How large is the hole and can it easily be “patched”.

The above is just a start in trying to understand what happens after what Alain Badiou calls the event, and how, if at all possible, now and in the future after the “event” has occurred to prevent a country from slipping into anarchy.