Thousands took to the streets in Moscow, braving not only snow but heavy security, to mourn the death of Alexei Navalny, the Russian opposition leader who died in a Russian prison last month. Navalny’s funeral drew supporters who bought flowers, candles and placards—while chants could be heard in the crowd that called for a “Russia without Putin,” “Russia will be free” and even “Putin a murderer!” Others joined in unison to call for an end to the war in Ukraine.
In another era, the funeral of such a major opposition leader may have been carefully silenced, but on Friday, Navalny’s supporters—who maintain the leader was poisoned on instructions from Russian President Vladimir Putin—livestreamed the event on YouTube.
Images and videos quickly made the rounds on social media, reminiscent of the Arab Spring of 2011. It was also 107 years ago this month that the February Revolution—named so due to Imperial Russia using the Julian calendar—began with as mass protests, but within days brought down the Russian monarchy. It began without any real leadership or formal planning.
Though it is unlikely that history will repeat itself, at least not at this point, it is increasingly clear that social media is able to show the world that opposition to Putin and the war in Ukraine remains. Just as the social platforms increasingly spread misinformation, it is clear they can also broadcast the truth even as Russia might not like such scenes to reach beyond its borders.
“While we’ve seen a lot of discussion of the challenges social media presents in international discourse in terms of spreading misinformation and degrading civility, there are also many examples of the positive effects of social media in this space,” said Dr. Cliff Lampe, professor of information and associate dean of academic affairs in the School of Information at the University of Michigan.
“One of these is that social media companies tend to be resistant to government control and have servers all over the world, making it difficult for an automatic government to control it in the same way they can mass media,” Lampe explained. “The only real solution to this is to do what China did, which is to band the services entirely from the company and develop internal alternatives. With social media, the barriers to producing and sharing information are low, enabling many people to share protest content. With that many people, publication is also distributed meaning that it’s much harder to control than one source like a radio station or newspaper.”
A Defining Moment For Russia?
It should be remembered too that the February Revolution occurred as Russia found itself embroiled in an unpopular war that was essentially in a stalemate. Russia’s economic situation is very different today, but the chants against the war can’t be overstated.
“The hope is that this public outpouring could be a turning point for Russia, though the current president seems to have a strangle hold on the judiciary, and the police,” said Susan Campbell, distinguished lecturer in the Department of Communication, Film, and Media Studies at the University of New Haven.
“From a social media movement standpoint, it certainly has the potential of changing that country deeply,” Campbell added. “It is also a good place for news consumers to test their media literacy skills, and make sure the sources they’re quoting are legitimate, and not propaganda. The Arab Spring had a similar potential, but there needs to be more than strictly shared posts and likes.”
Despots, dictators and corrupt government officials could find it increasingly challenging to quell dissent, as anyone with a smartphone and Internet access can broadcast to the world.
“Despite its well-known challenges,” Lampe continued, “Social media remains effective in sharing protest and other alternative narratives.”
