The event that I have chosen to research is the ongoing (still continuous) protests between the anti-mosque and pro-mosque groups in Sunshine Coast, Australia. Essentially, an Islamic community wants to set up a mosque and many people don't want that as they feel it's a threat to not only their community but to their "free country." The threats include "beheadings, the introduction of sharia law, the loss of rights for women and the undermining of the Australian way of life" (Furler). However, alongside of the Islamic community is a strong support system of young Australians that are in favor of a free, religious country. And they believe since the country is democratic, any religion should be free to practice and build where they please.
Just as a statistic, "More than 500 people converged on land near the Stella Maris Catholic Church to protest the mosque plan," (Furler) just on the September 20, 2014 date.
The obvious hoped-for outcome of the event is that each side wants their own way. The anti-mosque protestors don't want the mosque or Islamic community because of a alleged threat, and the pro-mosque protestors believe it right to let them build. A compromise where each side would get what they want would be ideal to avoid the protests, but we'll see where this goes.
Some of the event participants stated completely opposite things. A pastor that is against the mosque, Benny Tan, was "preaching" to the crowd about the group being manipulative. He said, "That's just a ploy to win us over and because they are smaller in numbers. But as they grow in numbers and in confidence, you try to stop them then," (Furler). Tan claims he knows this because he's lived in an Islamic country for over twenty years and has experienced it "firsthand."
In the video provided below, an anti-mosque protester yells to a young woman (presumably Islamic), "Why don't you go back to where you're from?" (Furler) And pro-mosque protestors yell that it's a free country and religion shall not come between equal rights.
Digital media is a large part of this social activism event and there are a plethora of devices and sources used to promote the event, support/not support the event, and/or to just put out the facts.
First off, Sarah Joseph states in her essay that "'Web 2.0' refers to Internet platforms that allow for interactive participation by users. 'User generated content' is the name for all of the ways in which people may use social media" (Joseph, 2012, 146).
There is much user generated content in this protest. First, the website and online newspaper column that I have based some of my research on has user generated content. It contains two ways for interactive participation by users. First is the "reader poll" on the page it's a poll that asks "Does Australia have freedom of religion?" and a few multiple choice answers. Secondly, there is a spot for comments. This way, people can place their opinion on the event, or add facts. For example, user name "SunMan" stated that he was at the event and posted, "I was there today and it was a very well controlled event. Thank you our Police. There were more anti-mosque supporters than I expected" (Furler).
Joseph also states, "Finally, people share information on social networking sites, of which Facebook and Twitter are among the most popular. These sites are very versatile, enabling the sharing of text, pictures, videos, audio files, and applications" (Joseph, 2012, 148).
Not only was this on websites such as blogs and online newspapers, but it was posted on Twitter. As the photo shows below, a photo was being tweeted about a sign at the protest. Though the sign had a stand point, the tweet seemed to be purely informational.
There's also a Youtube video of the event which shows the two sides fighting verbally and the police involvement.
Again, the involvement of the social media was all informational, perceptional and even opinionated. Informational when the reports stated what happened, how many people were at the event, and other factual statements that weren't bias. Perceptional because when looked at it in a rather abstract way, social media can be negative or positive, but it's really just the way the reader or viewer perceives it, the social media is just the medium. For example, one may get post a tweet about the event from a certain side that seems negative to the other, but to them it's positive or vice versa. Social media also played a role of reporting the event and even publicizing it in a way.
Thus, throughout the use of social media via many different sites and sources, whether it be photos, videos, blogs, etc., this event among many others today has been and continues to be publicized and put into different perspectives for the people who may or may not be involved in the event.
http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/videos/mosque-protesters-clash-police-watch-2/24277/
Works Cited:
Furler, Mark. "Ugly Scenes at Sunshine Coast Mosque Protest." Brisbane Times. Fairfax Media, 20 Sept. 2014. Web.
Joseph, Sarah. Social Media, Political Change, and Human Rights, 35 B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 145
(2012), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr/vol35/iss1/3
Really nice, informative post! I'm really glad to read something new and to learn more about current conflicts and issues. Thank you for the list of references. As I could see, however, there are two positions by Mark Furler - please, make sure you indicate the one you quote in your post, otherwise, I cannot tell where should I look for it :)
ReplyDelete- Tatiana, October 13, 2014