A few weeks ago I launched my book Digital Contention in a Divided Society in an event here at Glasgow. A recurring theme in the discussion afterwards was whether social media made things better or worse in ‘post-conflict’ societies like Northern Ireland.

Back in August 2011 I argued that it was expedient for politicians to blame social media for civil unrest rather than acknowledge the injustices underpinning such violence. One would be forgiven for feeling a sense of déjà vu during every public order incident since. Calls for platforms to police inflammatory content online are now as inevitable as those calling for an end to the rioting. And it’s not just authoritarian regimes. Last summer French President Emanuel Macron proposed that access to platforms like Snapchat and TikTok be restricted when riots are out of control.

There is certainly plenty of evidence that social media amplify content that inflames tensions in divided societies. Sectarian violence in countries like India and Myanmar has been attributed to hate speech and misinformation hosted by online platforms. Facebook went as far as to apologise for the ‘very real human rights impact that resulted’ from the use of its services to incite violence in Sri Lanka in 2018. This is perhaps no surprise given the political economy of social media. As Siva Vaidhyanathan notes, the core design feature of platforms like Facebook is that the most controversial and inflammatory content travels the furthest and the fastest. Sites like X (formerly known as Twitter) have turbocharged the spread of mis-and disinformation that undoubtedly makes it harder to promote reconciliation in societies emerging out of conflict.

This was largely corroborated by my own research into how social media are used during contentious parades and protests in ‘post-conflict’ Northern Ireland. From the 2013 union flag protests to the 2015 Ardoyne parade dispute, online platforms were used to share rumours, mis-and disinformation that inflamed tensions during these events. These included crudely photoshopped images of protesters and false claims that An Garda Siochána had been involved in the policing of the flag protests. Dehumanising, sectarian language was a recurring feature in social media commentary that condemned loyalist flag protesters.

More recently, online platforms were said to have played a key role in the so-called ‘Brexit riots’ in April 2021.  Sky News Senior Ireland Correspondent David Blevins highlighted the role of ‘criminal cartels’ in spreading disinformation online and encouraging youths to riot, stating that “putting out the fire on the street will be difficult while someone, somewhere is pouring petrol from a keyboard”.  Indeed, anonymous social media accounts were blamed for the rioting at Lanark Way in Belfast, with messages urging loyalist youths to “earn their strips” [sic] shared widely on Facebook and WhatsApp. The Loyalist Communities Council (LCC) sought to distance itself from the violence, warning its supporters “to remain vigilant to the dangers of fake and anonymous social media accounts”.

Crucially, the impact of social media on these events was often overstated. Much of the online activity I have analysed over the past decade has followed rather than preceded protests and riots, and involved distant onlookers rather than those able to influence events on the ground. Moreover, it was hard to say for certain whether online mis-and disinformation directly caused the violence following these contentious parades and protests in Northern Ireland. Controversies over parading rights existed long before these platforms and were often highlighted by the news media. While smartphones clearly make it easier to mobilise a mob, rioting was frequently deployed as a form of violent communication during the analogue-era conflict.  Echoing Blevins’ analysis of the ‘Brexit riots’, my research suggests that social media amplify content that makes it harder to de-escalate tensions during these events. Put simply, citizens witnessing antagonistic interactions between Catholics and Protestants online are less likely to perceive the ‘other’ community in a positive light. Therefore, it is incumbent on political leaders to address the causes of polarisation, such as the unresolved issues of conflict-legacy in Northern Ireland, rather than blame Facebook or Twitter/X for civil unrest. It is they who can put out the fires, not social media.

For more information on my research on social media and conflict transformation can be found here.

The second edition of Digital Contention in a Divided Society can be purchased here.

 

 

First published: 2 May 2024

<< All resources


More information