Following the Arab uprising, a consensus seems to have been that the overthrow of Tunisian and Egyptian presidents was down largely to the influence of social media, especially in terms of facilitating communication and interaction among protesters.
Taking a leaf out of the Arab uprising, many opposition parties in Africa which have unsuccessfully attempted to dislodge long time ruling parties from state power reckoned that in internet and social media they have silent weapons to fight these intransigent ruling elites.
Recognizing that they have operated under established patterns of authoritarian practice wherein the ruling elites use state resources to destabilize them, most African opposition parties hoped to use social media leverage their appeal to the voters who are terrified to openly flirt, affiliate to, physically interact with and/or participate in opposition activities lest they offend state security agencies.
The opposition parties believed that the internet and social media presented new opportunities for organizing and participating without co-presence. The opposition parties thus, encouraged their members and well-wishers to make use of the internet and social media in pursuance of regime change.
However, what was originally anticipated to be the crown of life for the opposition has in actual fact become its Achilles heel. The internet and social media- the imagined friends of the opposition- is now threatening to turn the tables upside down for the opposition and render them almost obsolete.
With the internet and social media, citizens are afforded opportunities to express their individual political opinions unconnected to any political party. What is clearer is that many people who hold anti-government sentiments and are naturally expected to identify with the opposition, prefer to use social media to express their alternative politics.
For good or bad, state functionaries also actively use social media to get insight into the thoughts and feelings of members of the public, be it for surveillance or for providing feedback on some issues raised.
When voters receive some honest feedback from government representatives on some of the issues they raise on social media, they do get some satisfaction that indeed it works better if they directly engage with the government rather than using their political representatives as intermediaries or messengers.
This conjecture motivates the voters to make use social media platforms more than they have been doing, in the process building a solid relationship with internet and social media.
As it is normally said that relations have to be built on trust, social media has earned the respect of voters for facilitating communication with government authorities.
It is noted that in most cases, some of the concerns expressed by individuals on social media have actually been raised before by opposition parties but were ignored perhaps on grounds that they were the usual opposition wild clamor for attention.
Surprisingly, some of the concerns that have long been raised by opposition parties but had remained are now receiving serious attention from government authorities in ways that render the opposition useless.
This has tended to bolster young people’s resolve to engage directly with the government through social media. The result is a gradual disconnection from the opposition parties.
This development has seen the emergence of what we may call social media activists or social media celebrities who are very much active in expressing their thoughts on Facebook and other platforms.
These activists are essentially very inspirational celebrities who use social media in a positive way. Such activists boast of huge social media following hence do have the wherewithal to infect the public with a given viewpoint.
With a large audience and the ability to influence their followers, these social media activists have amassed a sizeable share of political space, often sharing their views in a somewhat principled, unambiguous and impartial way that appeals to people across the political divide.
The uncomfortable truth is that in spite of a few notable successes in exercising their role as a watchdog, for the most part, our opposition parties are symbols of failure. Their weak organizational capacity and propensity to flip-flop on a number of issues depending on public mood typifies a miscarriage of opposition politics.
A combination of repeated failure at the polls and relatively disjointed programs of action for dislodging the ruling party from state power means that the opposition parties can no longer lay claim to being the legitimate torchbearers of alternative politics.
Internet and social media activists have come in and they are vocal, reasonably impartial and consistent in reminding those in power about the real struggles of the man in the street.
These public intellectuals have come to play a pivotal role in raising pertinent issues with the government and continue to use social media to garner attention to a number of causes.
For instance, a local attorney who comes across as a public intellectual par excellence recently shared, among many of the issues he has been raising, his personal views about foreign domination in the poultry market and his presentation, anchored on the struggles of ordinary to penetrate the poultry market, seems to have awakened many from slumber and in no small measure stole the initiative from the opposition parties.
In related instances, government has had to rescind some of its decisions after a number of social media activists challenged some decisions. In addition to critiquing government decisions and actions, these activists do offer coherent, practical and simplified alternative ideas in a way that set them apart from the opposition that has preference for booing and hissing.
Some Facebook users have commented that this government is way too sensitive to social media gossip that it is quick to change position whenever there are objections on certain issues. This goes to demonstrate the influence of social media activists in decisions making by government.
Given that most Cabinet Ministers have become more accessible via their Facebook pages, pertinent issues raised on social media often receive immediate attention in ways that seems to render the opposition almost irrelevant.
Thus, while the rise of citizen journalism is a welcome occurrence, it has the corresponding effect of weakening the traditional opposition as the legitimate voice of the masses.
Consequently, the opposition parties are rapidly losing the moral high ground to speak for the masses. Social media activists have taken that role and unlike the opposition that becomes more visible and vocal during an election year, the activists are committed to countering and taking government to task as a matter of routine.
In spite that the opposition parties remain the lawful organs with the constitutional privilege to challenge for state power, they honestly no longer have a monopoly over the political space traditionally reserved for them.
While the opposition parties will continue to contest elections and shout at the ruling elite, they should accept that the internet and social media activists are making the role of political representatives just about redundant.
Obviously, social media activists cannot usurp the place of the opposition especially in parliament. Nevertheless, the opposition parties have to rebrand in order that they remain relevant, at least as law makers.
They must consider their role beyond just the obvious constitutional recognition for providing alternative politics.
To the extent that social media offers a direct route for people to present their concerns to government authorities without using the opposition as conveyor belts, and to the extent that government does provide honest feedback on some of the concerns raised by individuals on social media, the desire to effect regime change loses appeal and talk of alternative government becomes illogical.
This is so because people have come to strongly believe that the government is actually accessible and responsive but becomes evasive when the opposition gets into the mix.
In many ways than one, the rapid rise in the use of the internet and social media by members of the public to engage directly with the government authorities coupled with the government willingness and readiness (honest or pretentious) to react to the concerns raised on social media seems to suggest that the problem of lack of development has very little to do with a stone-hearted government but everything to do with confrontational and antagonistic party politics.
