The Opportunities and Threats of Facebook Democracy

Fully immersed in the DQ Top20 research, Dataquest could not cover the second edition of the Anna Hazare movement adequately. The first time around, we were one of the first magazines to put it on the cover. Of course, going with its positioning, our coverage was not so much about the politics and the political correctness of the movement but about the role technology and new media was playing.

We, of course, celebrated the new found power.

In reality, there is not much difference between the earlier movements against corruption and this one that India is still celebrating, Dataquest noted in its April cover story. Except that this time, mobilizing opinion has been far easier and faster, and it does not depend on where you are. You can be in the drawing room, bedroom, office or moving in your car. You can still join India Against Corruption on Facebook and tweet your one-liner about the Kalmadis and Rajas, it added.

The tone was not unusual for Dataquesta publication with technology at the core of its content. The reason I return to thisat a time the issue is not too hot anymoreis because I believe our responsibilities as Indias top technology publication also include pointing out the realitieseven limitationsof what we have celebrated, as I see that being completely ignored.

Let me admit it upfront. What made me realize this is my conversations with a few autowallahs, vegetable vendors, and rickshawallahs, who had joined the agitation, in front of my house, when Anna Hazare was in Tihar. The jail is a stones throw from my residence. Almost all of them spoke in a similar voice and what shocked me was how much their voice was in variance with our voicein Facebook and Twitter. By and large, in the social media, the debate is about whether Jan Lokpal/Lokpal bill is good enough for tackling corruption; whether Annas methods are right or not; or whether Annas aides were as trustworthy as Anna and so on. While some supported and some opposed, there was never any debate about what the movement was all aboutit was about corruption. And that is what Team Anna had projected it to be. But to the people on the streetthe rickshawallahs and autowallahsit was just one of the issues. And not even the top issue. Mehngai was the most repeated word when I asked what they were agitating about. Like it or not, their target was not only Congress or UPA; not even the political class; but the rich and elite in generalthe same people who were most vocal in supporting the Anna movement. For these common people, Anna is not as much a mascot of anti-corruption as he is a mascot for the common man. That is why they did not identify too much with Team Anna though they believed in his wisdomif he likes them, they must be good people.

You can never catch this voicethere may be more such voicesif you go by the Facebook postings and Tweets. I may be concluding too much speaking to just 6 people. But considering that their voices were so similar, I have every reason to believe that this is one of the voicesif not the only oneof the common people, who are not on the social media. The point is: While we (us, political parties, government) should not underestimate the power of social media, we should not overestimate it either. It is a good tool to quickly mobilize opinion and even get new ideas, but it should not be used too muchat least not as yetto take decisions in a country like India. Like many other mechanisms, it is a good tool to strengthen democracy, but it would be foolish to assume that it is clearly superior to all others.