A response to a piece in the Atlantic, "Why Chinese People Are Getting Sick of Chinese Social Media" by Natalie Thomas.
Just as I was beginning to recover from the siege of American election media, I read this article tracing the 'ennui and resignation' of Chinese Sina Weibo users. I found myself nodding in agreement to the description of feeling overrun by reports of malfeasance. It seems that in the pre-social media era, the Chinese population had suspicions about wrongdoing, but had not been burdened by proof (proof in the 'trending on Twitter' sense). And, according to the article, pre-social media, they righteously dreamed that if they gained the freedom of speech to report corruption and criminality, then justice would prevail.
Enough. The name says it all, referencing both the focus of the campaign, anti-genocide, and the fatigue with campaigns generally. The name and platform promise that this will be the last time you will be bothered, and finally, your effort will make a difference. That's where the Chinese Sina Weibo users are becoming frustrated. Their eyes have been opened equally to the problems around them and to their relative inability to affect change in the world. The opportunities or rather the free marketplace for action lags behind the demand.
Take another example from Uganda, 'MPs Link State House to UIA's Dubious Deal'. The author writes about the how a blow was struck for transparency against corruption with tools such as written reports, testimony, and quantitative evidence imbuing neutral objects with democratic powers:
"The report observes that when the query...."The corrupt official was not literally taken down by a piece of paper nor by numbers and ratios. The presence of reports and written documentation is clearly powerful. Just as in China, social media users are witnessing events and not staying silent; they are committing their testimony to text. Having a report, a text, proof, means action must be taken; someone must be held accountable. The wheels of justice have been set in motion. But neither the Chinese nor the Ugandans seem optimistic. It is not enough to bear witness. It is not enough to quote numbers. Democracy demands citizens taking action. In both countries, the punitive measures against taking action are still very great. Hoping the flood of social media discontent will sweep away corruption or putting faith in documents without attaching an author who might face retaliation are all these citizen can do without the other pieces of a democratic system behind them.
"According to statistics, UIA is reported to have...."
The dissatisfaction is the result of unmet expectations. Theirs and ours, the Western reader of these events. Perhaps they did buy into the idea of digital empowerment; transparency as one step closer to democracy. But this interpretation supposes a Western notion of democracy. One which is built on multiple freedoms and institutions supporting our culturally ingrained ideals. As Western observers, I think we also read and interpret the unfolding events as part of a script, the first act in 'Democracy.' Stay tuned.