|
05.11
Communication Technologies and Liberation
Movements: From Les Miserables and the Telegraph, to Social Media and the
Middle East
By Robert Colburn, Research Coordinator,
IEEE History Center
The recent events in Egypt and the Middle East
have intensified the debate over whether
information and communication technologies —
often referred to as ‘liberation technologies’ —
assist popular movements, or are used even more
effectively as a means of surveillance,
monitoring, and controlling of dissident
movements. Of all the interfaces between
society and technology, the communications
interface is one of the most crucial. Many
examples can be found to show that both uses —
the liberating and restricting — are occurring.
Yet — one argument goes— the very efforts used
to control the communication technologies are
the most persuasive proof that they are feared
by the controllers as agents of freedom. Ever
since the earliest European printing presses
were searched for and broken up by Holy Roman
Emperor Charles V’s soldiers, communications
technologies have been under scrutiny by the
authorities.
One of the earliest popular
movements in which rapid communications played a
role was the 1848 Paris uprising (the events
depicted in Victor Hugo’s novel Les
Miserables), which in turn rapidly inspired
similar uprisings in Berlin, Vienna, and Milan.
The telegraph (which at this time was as likely
to be Claude Chappe’s optical telegraph as an
electric one) spread the news much more quickly
than had been the case in previous popular
uprisings.
This lesson was taken to heart
by the Paris Communards of 1878, who made a
point of seizing control of the Paris telegraph
lines early in their uprising. The government
in Versailles, recognizing the aid that the
telegraph gave the revolutionaries, in turn did
its best to disconnect the lines and reduce
their contact with the outside world. An
editorial in the New York World
unsympathetically recognized the power of the
electric telegraph as a liberation technology
(U.S. newspapers were almost invariably hostile
to the communards) referring to “a very striking
illustration of the evils which the electric
telegraph has brought us, comingled with its
good.”
During the 1917 Bolshevik
revolution, the revolutionaries and Alexander
Kerensky’s provisional government both
recognized that communications were a vital tool
of the revolutionaries. On 23 October 1917 (5
November, new style) Kerensky ordered the
telephone lines to the Bolshevik party
headquarters at the Smolny Institute
disconnected. Two nights later, as the
revolution began, sailors from the Baltic Fleet
made the seizure of the Petrograd Telegraph
Agency one of its priorities. Their commissar,
Leonid Stark, publicized the revolution to the
rest of the world in dispatches sent over PTA
lines.
Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and other
Turkish Army officers made extremely effective
use of the telegraph in order to build
consensus, depose Sultan Abdulhamid II (April,
1909), and to create the Turkish Republic
(October 1923). In another of history’s
ironies, the Erzurum telegraph line that Ataturk
used to keep in touch with fellow officers in
Anatolia and Thrace was the line which had been
cut a few years previously by protesters to
hamper the Sultan’s forces.
During World War II, radio was
used to powerful effect for organizing the
resistance movements in occupied territories.
Many radio techniques were developed to evade
detection — such as burst transmission, and
highly-directional antennas (used for sending
the signal straight up from the agent’s set to a
circling plane).
In an interesting reversal of
history, communications technologies — which had
helped launch Lenin’s revolution — also helped
to end it. In 1991, when Soviet hardliners
opposed to Mikhail Gorbachev’s reforms, staged
their coup, they overlooked the internet as a
means of popular communication. Radio and
television stations were shut down or
controlled, fax machines were smashed, telephone
exchanges in some cities were shut down, but the
Internet — which used leased lines — remained an
important tool in the hands of the resisters.
Neil Corcoran in his article “Computer
Networks and the Soviet Coup of 1991”
wrote, “Individual reports were essential
elements… as they contained accounts of the
events and demonstrations in different cities
allowing others to know that resistance was
occurring in other parts of the Unions, and that
they were not alone.”
That same sense of not being
alone and of being able to get one’s message out
to the rest of the world would grow more
powerful as communication devices became more
personal, portable, and began to include visual
media. On 20 June 2009, the video of the
shooting in Tehran of Neda Agha-Soltan by
government troops shocked the world when it was
posted to the video hosting service YouTube®.
In December 2010, graphic videos disseminated
rapidly via personal mobile communications and
via the web inspired a popular uprising in
Tunisia which toppled the government the
following January. The Tunisian Revolution led
in turn to an uprising in Egypt, organized in
part on a facebook® page.
Nevertheless, “Reporters Sans
Frontieres” lists countries where governments
attempt to control the internet. Amazon.com
presently lists more than one hundred books on
the topic of surveillance on the internet, books
which debate whether the new communications
technologies liberate or repress. It is a
debate which is sure to continue, but one which
recent events have highlighted.

Robert Colburn is research coordinator at the
IEEE History Center at Rutgers University in New
Brunswick, N.J. Visit the IEEE History
Center's Web page at:
www.ieee.org/organizations/history_center.
Comments may be submitted to
todaysengineer@ieee.org.
|