Spanish-Syrian activist and journalist, Leila Nachawati, has found herself at the center of the largest protest movements in recent years in both countries. As a veteran social media strategist — and a fluent speaker of Spanish, Arabic, and English — Leila has a unique perspective of the events unfolding in Spain and Syria, and their causes. She will join us at the Public Square Squared symposium on September 4th at the Brucknerhaus. The following interview took place over email.

DS: What has the Spanish 15 M movement achieved? What does it want to achieve?

LN: People have spoken up after years of apathy towards a political system that does not meet the needs and demands of a large part of the population. Hundreds of thousands [of protesters] spread out all over the country and spoke up against corruption, unemployment and a political structure that favors a two-party system, to demand a more representative democracy. “We’re not merchandise at the hands of politicians and bankers”, was the motto of most demonstrations. I think the most important result is that people have realized that they´re not alone and that they can get together to advance the changes they would like to see , that they can and should get involved. The 15 M movement, which has now moved to the neighborhoods, where assemblies and committees are organized, has taught traditional politics a lesson of democracy. It aims to bring citizen participation back to Spanish society (after civil society institutions were absorbed by political structures in the 80s). It also has specific goals — like changes in the electoral law that favors a two-party system, transparent lists and corruption control systems — that many in Spain would like to see implemented.

DS: Spaniards and Arabs have deep historical ties. It’s even said that 8% of Spanish derives from Arabic. But for the past decade, the relationship between Arabs and Spaniards has mostly been defined by tension around immigration policies and the treatment of Arabs in Spain. This spring we’ve witnessed new forms of collaboration, as mostly young activists on all sides of the Mediterranean have taken to the Internet and to the streets to protest against censorship and corruption. You have written on Al Jazeera that the Spanish-Syrian community — “afraid to speak for decades” — found spaces within the Spanish protest movement to advocate for greater freedoms in their native country. Do you sense a strong level of support among Spaniards for the various movements throughout the Middle East and North Africa? Have you noticed a difference in how Arabs are treated in Spain?

LN: I wouldn’t say the relationship is that tense, co-existence between people is mostly peaceful and healthy, keeping in mind that the relationship between neighboring countries with such social and economic differences tends to be complicated. There were some tensions after the March 11 attacks in Madrid, when some Spaniards started having more prejudices against Arabs or Muslims and making dangerous generalizations based on religious or cultural background. Mobilizations in the MENA region have helped portray Arab citizens in a different way, more complex and diverse. Suddenly there is more to the Arab world than what we see through traditional media, and for the first time we hear about Arab civil society, Arab peaceful resistance, Arab organization, Arabs’ efficient use of technology, Arab bloggers… we finally see some of the diversity of these societies that had been presented with very little nuances before. And as someone who is both Spanish and Syrian I’ve always dreamed of the North and the South of the Mediterranean getting closer to each other, exchanging and co-operating in more ways. They need each other.

DS: As a Spanish-Syrian yourself — and as someone who is fluent in Spanish, Arabic, and English — what have you noticed about the mainstream, international media coverage of the protest movements in Spain and Syria?

LN: There´s a big gap between traditional structures (both political and media structures) and these forms of citizen expression that we´re witnessing. Between old and new formats. That can be seen through the coverage of mobilizations in Spain, that have been mainly shared by citizens, who have made a very good use of technology, and small independent media sites like Periodismo Humano. Most traditional media have failed to understand a movement that challenges traditional formats and flows in a decentralized way, which is also the character of the Internet itself. In Syria the gap is obviously more dramatic, since the regime owns the media and the power structures try to repress every form of expression and freedom. No journalists are allowed in to cover the events and this attempt to control information takes place on digital spaces too. But for the first time we do have information coming out in spite of all of that, and that´s because digital tools like YouYube — and especially mobile phones — have allowed citizens to empower themselves and share their stories without much need for traditional media coverage.

DS: On your profile page at Periodismo Humano, where you’re an active contributor, you quote Fred Dallmayr: “Almost everywhere one looks in our world today one finds an actual state of war or the prospect of an impending war… as an antidote to these dangers, there is only one remedy: genuine dialogue.” It is an inspiring quote, but when Syrian President Bashar al-Assad called for a “national dialogue,” most protesters and opposition leaders refused to participate. Are there limits to what dialogue can achieve?

LN: Genuine dialogue can only happen between equals. What kind of dialogue can we think of, while people are been bombed, tortured and arrested for demanding freedom?

Depending on who you ask, social media and greater access to information are leading us either to liberation or chaos. In a matter of weeks, Egyptians and Tunisians organized massive revolutionary movements to remove longstanding dictatorial regimes — and to open the door to meaningful democratic reforms. However, social media also facilitated the coordination of violent rioting in London, while right-wing, extremist bloggers are said to have influenced Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik.

When San Francisco’s public transit system (BART) shut down cell phone access in response to planned protests against the fatal shooting of a commuter, local bloggers were quick to make comparisons with Mubarak’s decision to shut down Internet access during the Egyptian protests. The same week British Prime Minister David Cameron called for greater government control of social media, much to the delight of China and Iran.

Reuters’ political risk correspondent warns of a wider, forthcoming “info war,” blurring the lines between censorship and social harmony, open and closed societies.

The Public Square² symposium will examine the front lines of this so-called info war with the activists and analysts who have been at the center of the pandemonium and revolution. Tunisian free speech activist Lina Ben Mhenni and Turkish sociologist Zeynep Tufekci will explain the significance and outcomes of the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, respectively. Spanish-Syrian blogger and activist Leila Nachawati offers a comparison of the massive protest movements in both countries and how they have been portrayed by international, mainstream media.

Other nations have proven resistant to cyber-activism, despite the best efforts of the activist digerati to bring about meaningful social and political reforms. New media scholar and author Hu Yong will explain the constraints that bind citizen journalism and information activism in China. Singaporean filmmaker and blogger Tan Siok Siok will share her observations after filming “Twittamentary,” a documentary about the impact of Twitter on our lives. Markus Beckedahl will present Digitale Gesellschaft, or “Digital Society,” a new, networked organization to advance civil rights for German Internet users.

We will also be joined by the winners of the Digital Communities category of the Prix Forum, each advancing a vision of social change through networked collaboration. Please join us on Sunday, September 4 at the Brucknerhaus.

I first met Lina Ben Mhenni at the 2nd Arab Bloggers Meeting in Beirut, Lebanon about two years ago. The meeting, organized by Global Voices Advocacy and the Heinrich Boll Foundation, aimed to strengthen a regional network of Arab bloggers, online activists, and civil society organizations. Lina had been blogging from Tunisia since 2006 — frequently about freedom of speech issues — but it wasn’t until late 2009 when she became a full fledged online activist; coordinating the campaign to free Mohamed Soudani, a young Tunisian student who was imprisoned after giving interviews to international media.

Two years ago it was nearly implausible to foresee a Tunisian Revolution that would finally remove President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali after nearly 25 years of dictatorial rule. Lina was both an active participant and observer during the protest movement that led to the revolution. She has recently published a book about her experience as an activist and citizen journalist, which will hopefully soon be made available in English.

Lina Ben Mhenni will join us in Linz to offer a first person account of the Tunisian Revolution, and a timely update of where her country is now headed. I sent her some questions over email to set the context for our discussion at Ars Electronica.

DS: As an outside observer, my impression is that, at first, very few international media were covering the anti-government protests in Tunisia and then, when it reached a critical juncture, several groups such as Anonymous and Wikileaks began to take credit for the movement. As someone based in Tunisia who was heavily involved in the revolution, what were your impressions of the international media coverage?

LBM: At first few international media were covering the anti-government protests in Tunisia because, on the one hand, many of them did not understand the importance of the social movement, and on the other hand, they were not allowed to enter Tunisia because of the strict restrictions imposed on journalists by the Ben Ali regime. When it reached a critical juncture, all the media became interested in what was going on in Tunisia, some succeeded in entering the country, and others shared videos and photos recorded by Tunisian cyber-activists. But I don’t think that either Anonymous or Wikileaks played an important role in the movement. The cables released by Wikileaks came as a confirmation of what all Tunisians already knew about the corruption of Ben Ali, his wife, and their families. Later (January 2nd), Anonymous supported Tunisian cyber-activists by attacking governmental websites.

Tunisians involved in the movement understood the importance of disseminating information, and they started recording videos and taking pictures that were then broadcast all over the world.

DS: It seems that two competing narratives have emerged to explain the catalyst of the Tunisian Revolution. One focuses on youth unemployment and the suicide of Mohamed Bouazizi; the other gives more priority to free speech, corruption, and the impact of the Wikileaks cables. On Global Voices you wrote about both issues well before the English-language press paid any attention to Tunisia. Last November you detailed the anti-censorship “Launch a Blog Campaign” and Nawaat’s Tunileaks project. In December you covered the online organization of protests in response to the suicide of Mohamed Bouazizi. Which of the two competing narratives best explains the spark of the revolution?

LBM: Again I don’t think that Wilkileaks was the catalyst of the Tunisian revolution. Indeed people who took to the streets just after the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi had never heard of Wikileaks. The majority of the those who carried out the protests had never even used internet . People took to the streets because of unemployment, poverty, injustice, limitations on freedom, oppression, etc … it has nothing to do with Wikileaks.

DS: Let’s talk about where Tunisia is today, after the revolution. There were plans to elect a constituent assembly in July, but the election was postponed until October 23. Was that the right decision? Are there fears that the same old leaders from Ben Ali’s government will take control of the country again if new leaders aren’t immediately elected?

LBM: At first I was against the postponement of the elections of the constituent assembly, but with time I understood that it was the right decision. We have to take our time in preparing for these elections. As for the second part of your question, yes there fears that people who used to work for Ben Ali will once again control the country. They are actively working on this. In fact, they have already organized themselves into new political parties.

DS: Now that the Ben Ali dictatorship has been removed, I would imagine that the first step toward democracy is ensuring that Tunisians vote in the upcoming election. You have written on Global Voices that so far few Tunisians have registered to vote, which inspired young bloggers to launch the “Time to Register” campaign. Of those who do plan to vote, an early poll suggests that 54% have yet to decide who they will vote for. Has the “Time to Register” campaign made progress? Why are Tunisians reluctant to register when they fought so hard for democracy?

LBM: I think that this campaign helped a little — especially with young people who use the Internet and Facebook. The High Committee for Elections also launched a huge media campaign that asks people to register for the elections. Tunisians are reluctant because they do not understand the process. Some don’t know who to vote for; especially with the sudden emergence of more than 100 new political parties. Others do not trust the government and the way the elections are coordinated.

You can see Lina Ben Mhenni speak — and ask her your own questions — at the Public Square Squared symposium on September 4th.

Xiao Qiang called censorship “a form of violence agaist the human spirit” and offered the activism of Ai Weiwei as an example of the inherent resistance of networked, cloud-based activism. No matter how many times the Chinese government has tried to silence Ai Weiwei, his message inevitably re-appears elsewhere on the internet and his list of supporters continues to grow. Evgeny Morozov, on the other hand, claimed that the vast majority of so-called “digital activism” should actually be called “slacktivism” activism for slackers. Rather than contribute to meaningful social change, we are distracted by campaigns that ask us to change the color of our Twitter avatar or join a dozen online “causes” without providing any substantial contribution.

In the two years following their remarks we have seen ample evidence to support both positions. Xiao Qiang can point to Tunisia where the anti-censorship movement was clearly instrumental in the successful citizen-led ouster of dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. (This year we are fortunate to hear the story directly from Tunisian anti-censorship activist Lina Ben Mhenni.) But Evgeny Morozov can point to both Belarus and China as examples where authoritarian governments have been more successful at using Internet tools to surveil their citizens than activists have been at using “the cloud” to demand more rights and hold their leaders accountable.

This September 4th Isaac Mao and I will return to Ars Electronica with an all-star cast of activists and intellectuals in search of answers to two difficult questions. First, in those societies where major social uprisings have taken place this year (Tunisia, Egypt, Spain), what has been the impact and where are activists now focusing their energy? Second, in those societies that have proven resistant to proposed social change, despite the best efforts of activists (China, Singapore, Germany), how much longer should we expect to wait, and why?

We hope that you can make it to the festival to help us find answers to both difficult questions. Even if you’re not able to participate in person, the entire day’s discussions will be broadcast live on DORF TV and we’ll actively seek questions and comments via Twitter.

Click for more!

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Ten years after the premature hype of a “networked democracy”, we are indeed witnessing the emergence of new possibilities of participation, which have only become possible now that the tools themselves have lost their original novelty. We see that most people are not only able to access these technologies, which virtually led them to the physical “square” but are also able to weave links from one person to another by sharing information with each other. Let’s try to re-define this virtual and real “square” together. The “square” signifies a philosophical change in society. It’s an area that is open to everyone, where relationships develop that generate new forces to tilt the social balance that had been stable for centuries. But which new forces?

Curators: David Sasaki (US), Isaac Mao (CN)

Schedule

After the Revolution

10:30 David Sasaki (US)
10:50 Lina Ben Mhenni (TN)
11:10 Zeynep Tufekci (TR)
11:30 Leila Nachawati (ES)
11:40 Discussion
12:30 Pause/break

Prix Forum – Digital Communities

14:00 Felipe Heusser (CL), Alexandra Jönsson (UK), Tim Causer (UK), Cliff Hammet (USA)
Moderation: Beatrice Achaleke (AT)

Before the Revolution

14:50 Hu Yong (CN)
15:10 Tan Siok Siok (SG)
15:30 Markus Beckedahl (DE)
15:50 Discussion
16:20 Round Table mit den Vortragenden und Prix-PreisträgerInnen
17:30 Isaac Mao (CN)
18:00 Ende

Speakers

Beatrice Achaleke (AT) is the initiator of the World Diversity Leadership Summit Europe and the founder/CEO of AFRA, the International Center for Black Women’s Perspectives. In 2007, she organized the first Black European Women’s Congress in Vienna. In 2008, she became the first Black woman to run for a seat in the Austrian Parliament. In 2010, Beatrice Achaleke published a report on the status of Blacks in Austria.

Markus Beckedahl (DE) is a co-founder of re:publica, spokesman of Creative Commons Germany and a member of the German UNESCO Commission. Since 2002, he’s been blogging about politics in digital society at netzpolitik.org.

Tim Causer (UK) represents the UCL Bentham Project. He is a member of its research staff.

Felipe Heusser (CL) is a legal scholar and graduate of the London School of Economics. He specializes in freedom of information, transparency, and liability law.

Alexandra Jönsson (UK) and Clifford Hammet (USA) describe themselfes as a technology dabbler. As scholars in the field of media studies, they take a critical approach to socially committed media art.

Isaac Mao (CN) is a provider of risk capital, blogger, software developer, author of numerous publications about online journalism and consultant to various Web 2.0 enterprises.

Lina Ben Mhenni (TN) is one of the voices of the tunisian revolution. She’s teaching at the University of Tunis, she’s the author of “A Tunisian Girl” which is also the title of her blog.

Leila Nachawati (ES) is a spanish-syrian activist. She’s working in Social Media and writes for Global Voices and Periodismo Humano.

David Sasaki (US) is an independent consultant, cofounder of Rising Voices and former Latin America editor of Global Voices. His work focuses on using digital media and technology to strengthen civil society in Latin America.

Tan Siok Siok (SG) is a filmmaker and entrepreneur. She founded Kinetic Media, an online video enterprise that specializes in sports, music and youth culture.

Zeynep Tufekci (TR) is a sociology professor at the University of Maryland (US). She studies the reciprocal interaction of information technologies and societies. She also deals with social development, surveillance and protection of the private sphere.

Hu Yong (CN) is a professor at Peking University’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication. He is the author of “The Internet is King,” the first Chinese book about the consequences of the internet, as well as numerous reports that have appeared in such media outlets as China Daily and China Central Television.

Public Square Squared und Prix Forum – Digital Communities are broadcast live on DORF TV.