Christopher OwensIt will take a while before we can fully process the events of 2016.


Seemingly the year where everyone lost their minds, nuance and debate seemingly went out the window in favour of tribalism, claims of ‘alternative facts’ and ‘fake news’ as well as an impenetrable, impervious attitude to everything from academia through to social justice.

Of course, such attitudes have been boiling away in the background for years and it was the potent mix of Brexit and Trump that took the lid off the cauldron, so to speak. However, one can argue that that process really began in 2012 with the flag protests.

Think about it: with the ruling that the Union Jack would only fly from City Hall on designated days (thus bringing NI into line with the rest of the UK in that regard), this was challenged by a disillusioned sect of society who felt (rightly or wrongly) that their way of life was being marginalised.

Sounds familiar doesn’t it?

Of course, when you throw in the legacy of a 30-year conflict and an agreement that saw potential issues being swept under the carpet, you have a much more volatile cocktail for violence and disorder. So, while it would be difficult to place the 2012 protests in line with Brexit and Trump, there are shared circumstances.

Another factor is the use of social media, which is where Dr. Paul Reilly comes in.

Appointed Senior Lecturer in Social Media & Digital Society in the Information School at the University of Sheffield in October 2015, Dr. Reilly describes his research as focusing on:

…the study of online political communication, with a focus on three key areas: (1) the use of social media by citizens to create and share acts of sousveillance (inverse surveillance); (2) the ways in which digital media can be used to crowdsource crisis information; and (3) the use of new media to reduce sectarian tensions and promote better community relations in divided societies such as Northern Ireland.

Having already published Framing the Troubles: Online Northern Irish Groups and Website Strategy in 2011, and contributing a chapter entitled “’Googling’ Terrorists: Are Northern Irish Terrorists Visible on Search Engines” to the Information Science and Knowledge Management series, he seems like the right person to tackle such a subject. We’ve already read Paddy Hoey’s excellent tome on how ‘dissident’ republicans use social media (among other avenues) as a way of promoting their ideology, so to see it being used in a different context (attempting to control a set of events spiralling out of control), so the bar has been set very high.

Unfortunately, Digital Contention … fails to meet the standards.

Beginning by discussing the likes of Occupy Wall Street and the Arab Spring in relation to how social media was used to facilitate these protests (with very little focus on how both collapsed), and then focusing on the digital landscape in NI politics around the turn of the decade (Slugger, The Blanket, Alan in Belfast), we see that it is populated by capable writers but that it really failed to grow into something bigger and powerful (akin to The Daily Beast, as an example), due to the ubiquity of social media.

This is certainly interesting but Dr. Reilly fails to make the connection that, in this country, there is a bit of a divide between those who use sites like Slugger and the average person who uses social media to articulate their views. He does mention in the concluding segment that some might fear being “shouted down”, but it’s actually more to do with the perception (as admitted elsewhere in the same chapter) that sites like Slugger are pretty much the home of journalists and those “in the know” (so to speak).

Failing to make such connections and how they might have added to the divide is a running theme throughout this book.

For example, he notes how LAD’s FB page was more geared towards making fun of flag protestors, while the Twitter page was more for raising social awareness about certain issues, while the hashtag #fleg was used mainly by Twitter users to deride the protestors. If ever there was a clear divide between the socially mobile and the average person, this would be it. Sure, it’s the equivalent of scoring a goal when the keeper has run off, but it does demonstrate just how far the conversation had degenerated into tribalism. With cases like this, it’s easy to see why Jamie Bryson regularly rails against the “latte-drinking liberal elite” (even if his use of stereotypes is similar to how LAD would characterise ‘fleggers’ as chavs).

Coupled that with a drab writing style which regurgitates information already discussed over a few chapters (such as a supposed assault on a flag protester by PSNI officers) as well as data on tweets/retweets that don’t really tell us anything that we don’t know (should we be surprised that ordinary citizens should be tweeting about the Ardoyne protests, likewise regarding both nationalists and loyalists fact-checking claims made by the other), and what we’re left with is a book that has an intriguing premise, but really fails to properly connect with the subject in question.

With the tenth anniversary of these events fast approaching, the definitive account has yet to be written. Maybe one day.

Paul Reilly, 2021, Digital Contention in a Divided Society: Social media, parades and protests in Northern Ireland. Manchester University Press ISBN-13: 978-0719087073

⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist. 

Digital Contention In A Divided Society

Christopher OwensIt will take a while before we can fully process the events of 2016.


Seemingly the year where everyone lost their minds, nuance and debate seemingly went out the window in favour of tribalism, claims of ‘alternative facts’ and ‘fake news’ as well as an impenetrable, impervious attitude to everything from academia through to social justice.

Of course, such attitudes have been boiling away in the background for years and it was the potent mix of Brexit and Trump that took the lid off the cauldron, so to speak. However, one can argue that that process really began in 2012 with the flag protests.

Think about it: with the ruling that the Union Jack would only fly from City Hall on designated days (thus bringing NI into line with the rest of the UK in that regard), this was challenged by a disillusioned sect of society who felt (rightly or wrongly) that their way of life was being marginalised.

Sounds familiar doesn’t it?

Of course, when you throw in the legacy of a 30-year conflict and an agreement that saw potential issues being swept under the carpet, you have a much more volatile cocktail for violence and disorder. So, while it would be difficult to place the 2012 protests in line with Brexit and Trump, there are shared circumstances.

Another factor is the use of social media, which is where Dr. Paul Reilly comes in.

Appointed Senior Lecturer in Social Media & Digital Society in the Information School at the University of Sheffield in October 2015, Dr. Reilly describes his research as focusing on:

…the study of online political communication, with a focus on three key areas: (1) the use of social media by citizens to create and share acts of sousveillance (inverse surveillance); (2) the ways in which digital media can be used to crowdsource crisis information; and (3) the use of new media to reduce sectarian tensions and promote better community relations in divided societies such as Northern Ireland.

Having already published Framing the Troubles: Online Northern Irish Groups and Website Strategy in 2011, and contributing a chapter entitled “’Googling’ Terrorists: Are Northern Irish Terrorists Visible on Search Engines” to the Information Science and Knowledge Management series, he seems like the right person to tackle such a subject. We’ve already read Paddy Hoey’s excellent tome on how ‘dissident’ republicans use social media (among other avenues) as a way of promoting their ideology, so to see it being used in a different context (attempting to control a set of events spiralling out of control), so the bar has been set very high.

Unfortunately, Digital Contention … fails to meet the standards.

Beginning by discussing the likes of Occupy Wall Street and the Arab Spring in relation to how social media was used to facilitate these protests (with very little focus on how both collapsed), and then focusing on the digital landscape in NI politics around the turn of the decade (Slugger, The Blanket, Alan in Belfast), we see that it is populated by capable writers but that it really failed to grow into something bigger and powerful (akin to The Daily Beast, as an example), due to the ubiquity of social media.

This is certainly interesting but Dr. Reilly fails to make the connection that, in this country, there is a bit of a divide between those who use sites like Slugger and the average person who uses social media to articulate their views. He does mention in the concluding segment that some might fear being “shouted down”, but it’s actually more to do with the perception (as admitted elsewhere in the same chapter) that sites like Slugger are pretty much the home of journalists and those “in the know” (so to speak).

Failing to make such connections and how they might have added to the divide is a running theme throughout this book.

For example, he notes how LAD’s FB page was more geared towards making fun of flag protestors, while the Twitter page was more for raising social awareness about certain issues, while the hashtag #fleg was used mainly by Twitter users to deride the protestors. If ever there was a clear divide between the socially mobile and the average person, this would be it. Sure, it’s the equivalent of scoring a goal when the keeper has run off, but it does demonstrate just how far the conversation had degenerated into tribalism. With cases like this, it’s easy to see why Jamie Bryson regularly rails against the “latte-drinking liberal elite” (even if his use of stereotypes is similar to how LAD would characterise ‘fleggers’ as chavs).

Coupled that with a drab writing style which regurgitates information already discussed over a few chapters (such as a supposed assault on a flag protester by PSNI officers) as well as data on tweets/retweets that don’t really tell us anything that we don’t know (should we be surprised that ordinary citizens should be tweeting about the Ardoyne protests, likewise regarding both nationalists and loyalists fact-checking claims made by the other), and what we’re left with is a book that has an intriguing premise, but really fails to properly connect with the subject in question.

With the tenth anniversary of these events fast approaching, the definitive account has yet to be written. Maybe one day.

Paul Reilly, 2021, Digital Contention in a Divided Society: Social media, parades and protests in Northern Ireland. Manchester University Press ISBN-13: 978-0719087073

⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist. 

6 comments:

  1. As usual with Christopher - unafraid to call it as he sees it. I get the sense that this could have been a much more promising work but appears to have got lost along the way.
    Not just because The Blanket features in it but I found Paddy Hoey's book a masterly exploration of the field.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The unwillingness to fully explore the social media hierarchy (e.g Twitter is for the "landed gentry" while FB is for the plebs) dooms the book from the start.

      Reilly's "Googling’ Terrorists" paper was dismissed by some on the IREF as being akin to a seminar paper by an undergraduate.

      Delete
    2. Did you read Reilly's paper?
      I haven't but that is not a great recommendation!!

      Delete
  2. Read about 5 pages of it and found it very boring. It was mainly about how Google attempts to suppress page views of loyalists and republicans, unless it comes to news stories.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. and you would imagine that the topic in itself would have been an area worth developing. Opportunity missed by the author of the paper?

      Delete
  3. Indeed. I think he needs to:

    - develop a more engaging writing style.
    - focus less on statistics.
    - widen his remit to include other areas that are relevant.

    ReplyDelete