People love pointing to the “Arab Spring” as an example of how social media is essential, which completely (deliberately?) ignores how corporate-owned platforms being useful for organizing resistance movements is an unwelcome side-effect AT BEST.
No doubt a lot of people at Twitter genuinely believed in its value as a democratizing platform, but acting like that is its main mission statement is either disingenuous or outright deceitful.
A while after Arab Spring, scholars figured out that Twitter didn't really help the movement happen. Twitter _did_ help folks in the USA find out what was happening. So, not useless, but not _nearly_ as useful as rumored at the time.
But Jack Dorsey kept talking about how much Twitter helped, ignoring the people pointing out that it wasn't all that.
I learned this only after I'd been working at Twitter for a few months. It was pretty disillusioning.
@SasquatcherGeneral At the time things were happening, people really did think Twitter was helping. The US gov't really did care about when Twitter would go down for maintenance. And that was news.
It wasn't until later that scholars more rigorously figured out who was using X kind of communication for Y purpose. By the time they'd drawn some conclusions, Arab Spring was no longer news.
Let's also not overlook how Saudi and Qatari money entered the picture.