On January 4th, 2011, the democratic political movement called ‘Arab Spring’ was triggered by the action of Mohamed Bouazizi who died at only the age of 26. He burned himself to death for the protest to the government who stole his food for living on December 17th 2010.
His brother Ali Bouazizi exposed the photos of the incident on the Internet straight away. With his action as a start, the movement spread to the entire Tunisia, resulting in collapse of the long-term government. The movement continued to spread to each Arab country. As anti-government demonstration organisation kept contacting each other by using Facebook and Twitter, it is clear that the Internet or social media were profoundly involved with Arab Spring from its beginning to its end.
At this point, however, I got a question come up with. Why has confusion in Arab countries been still continuing even though the movement had achieved the aim for overthrowing the long-term government? Moreover, the most doubtful question is why social media which successfully contributed to the revolution did not contribute to use of democratisation government?
It is certain that social media gives people a way to speak out. In other word, it helps them bunch up together and make a move to accomplish their final goal. But, what exactly does it mean? Would we encounter more and more revolutions in the future? Or, would the speed of the media get faster and be easily transmitted to outside? It is considered that social media is only a tool that boosts a current condition so the beginning of an action can always be triggered by people and their feelings.