 Hello, welcome everyone, welcome everyone. I can see some of you just logging in at the moment. So we briefly introduce myself. My name is Dunia and I'm one of the lecturers at SOAS Center for Global Media and Communications. It's my pleasure to tell you a little bit more about or sort of focus today within that center at SOAS. Because we have a particular expertise in media and communication, political communication, also digital humanities. Some of my colleagues also sort of have more expertise applied to media and development, as well as to the field of journalism. Today I was honored to present some of the topics, one specific topic, to be fair, that you will have the chance to study, you know, if you join a community. Or students usually sort of look into a range of different topics that have to do with the question of power, basically how much empowerment, you know, can we get? You know, experience from the media. Alternatively, how much control does the media has on us, you know, like looking into the power structure behind the media and sort of how it intersects with the sphere of politics. So, you know, typically these are the kind of sort of general themes that you might be interested in. If you come from literary studies or if you come from political sciences, sociology, even if you have a background in development. And you're sort of interested in looking into sort of questions like digital divide or the new forms of digital divide as we see technology evolving and sort of how, you know, how we will sort of navigate the challenges that might come with new media. And what are the new forms of kind of inequalities and social gaps that, you know, have that may be kind of widened as a result of the development of these new technologies and the ways in which they might be commodified in the future. And these are kind of a very broad range of questions that we will explore within the field of media. And today, I have the opportunity to choose one specific topic that, you know, could be kind of interesting to explore with you during the session. And I decided to look more specifically into the sort of question of digital activism. You know, it has been kind of a question that was very kind of trendy within the field of political communication a few years ago, specifically in the early 2010s, because at that moment there was this assumption that, you know, social media would sort of help access, you know, help sort of facilitated access to education to, you know, information that it will be a more interactive way to sort of debate and as a result that it could be considered as potentially as a more inclusive form of communication when sort of, you know, ensuring criticism within the public sphere. These were typically the kind of assumptions that you would hear in the early 2010s. And even back in the early 2000s, that was the very beginning of the internet and people were experimenting then with, you know, like typically kind of blogs and, you know, like very kind of basic type of web pages. And there was this argument that apparently also in the kind of anti-globalization movements of the late 90s, you know, these early form of kind of communication had also supported anti-globalization movements, that facilitated the logistics of the protest and so on and so forth. So, you know, it's kind of funny because every 10 years or so, you hear that sort of argument that, wow, a new wave of protest and civil movements seems to be, you know, like sparking everywhere. And arguably you could say that back in 2019, it was still the case, you know, more recently because we saw, for example, protests in Hong Kong, Lebanon, Nigeria and Sudan. So there was a range of different protests again sort of happening in many different countries and obviously, you know, because a civil society and political dissidents have to come up with very creative ways to use the media. So it's always really interesting to see sort of what's the most emergent type of technology that they would be using and what is the most creative form of communication that would be using to kind of consolidate that counter-discourse and make sure that they can sort of circulate their voices which are kind of more kind of that appear to be, you know, an alternative to the mainstream, if you will. You know, they're kind of refreshing, they come to a hegemonic, you know, in that sense that they are kind of innovative and creative in that sense. And arguably the same applies, if you think about the ways that they actually, that these movements use technology, apply technologies in different contexts. Now what is really interesting is that as much as this, you know, like was kind of a very, you know, like prevailing argument in the communication literature in the early 2010s, it seems as if, you know, like in recent years, that idea has kind of been on the decline, you know. Almost as if we've seen sort of technology evolve, evolving recently and, you know, now there's kind of a lot of kind of more of a dystopian view of technology because we see how obviously along with social media, people have been debating and engaging with the local chambers, arguably, you know, that, you know, there's also the issue of filter bubbles online that people remain within their own sort of communities very often. And, you know, and a counter argument came up more recently, specifically in political communication that suggested that, you know, as a matter of fact, these technologies can also be detrimental to counter a hegemonic voices because it could be that. The possibility is exposed to too much polarization. Obviously, you also find dominant political voices, leading parties, you know, populists, elites that can also use these technologies to spread their own message. And in that sense, we see that it's almost as if digital technologies like social media, even encrypted platforms seem to have emerged, seem to have evolved in a similar way as the traditional mass media that you know, from years ago. Decades ago in the past. So obviously, like we found ourselves in this kind of context where people are very anxious about this information, you know, like conspiracy theories, whether the information they have access to now is reliable or not. There is this huge debate at the moment, and it's almost kind of making us feel very disillusioned with the idea that these technologies can be still used occasionally in very creative ways to facilitate sort of the consolidation of counter discourse, organized protest, and, you know, sort of support a more kind of bottom up grassroots type of mobilization. So obviously, like all of these concepts that you find, you know, like, I'm not going to dive in too much in that because I want to give you more of a general overview of these questions. I want to, I want you to feel basically how, you know, within the field of communication and navigate these broader questions of, you know, like, what's our relationship with technology, you know, like do we control technology or does technology control us kind of a very broad question, which as a matter of fact, it's, you're not going to, you know, some of you may be very interested in questions about sort of see the movements and political dissent and so on and so forth. Others might be more interested in sort of the top down perspective looking into the political economy of the media and how, you know, like the elites, the, you know, like the state the national discourse can use also the media how it can be used as a form of propaganda. There are very different sort of perspectives to apply, but across these different sort of topics, the different subjects that are all part of the field of communication. You know, I want to sort of give you an overview of some of the questions that come up so that it kind of sparks your curiosity and you want to, you want to sort of further explore that. There's a range of different concepts that come up that seems very kind of pedantic because, you know, they're framed in this very academic way and they can be quite intimidating sometimes. But you, you will find that very often it's quite straightforward once you dive in, if you're interested in general with, you know, about your interest in the intersection between sociology, you know, like social movements you interested in that particular sort of political sciences, for example, you find that it's actually quite straightforward and we've, you know, the literature from the early 2010 so the main question there is how much do this new sort of age, you know, of the media, how much does that change, you know, the way we communicate in politics and so on and so forth. And so the emphasis is placed then on information. And it's about the information, how it still plays, as well as the network itself, that it's very much about the network and who can capitalize on its network, who can build strong linkages within the network. And that is something that will be leveraged, whether it is in politics, or even if you think about it from the first step from an economic perspective you can think about it as you know, you know, linkages that are modified typically as it has been the case in social media, for example, right. So if you think about influencers, you know, you can, you sort of campaigning as well as marketing practices that have moved over the last 10 years, you, I'm sure you can relate to what I'm describing that sort of idea of a network society, the attention economy, that's another concept that, you know, you might have heard this idea that now we capitalize on attention, sort of about who can sort of leverage as much as as much attention as possible. And in that context, what is really sort of fascinating is that we see the media and these new technologies that, you know, appear to be at first, you know, at first sight quite interactive. And it's almost as if they are a double H sword, right, and that it's always kind of the power dynamic is always kind of shifting and on the one hand you see obviously sort of leading political voices that are well established in the public sphere that have already potentially gone through on the traditional mass media, or, you know, that sort of, you know, obviously I am keeping it very big so you can relate to different examples but you know it's about sort of those who represent, you know, shareholders in the mass media who are, for example, sort of have a monopoly in terms of ownership over over the media in general, who have strong ties with the companies, for example, who can regulate the media in terms of the legal framework in terms of in terms of media freedom of the press, for example, sort of those leading voices may as well obviously use the media in their advantage, you know, obviously, you may think about the case of censorship, you may think about the case of surveillance state surveillance online, for example, and you can also, I'm sure relate to, for example, situations, obviously the Cambridge Analytica scandal is the most obvious case because it has been sort of extensively documented and discussed in recent years, but this obviously introduces a large broader range of cases that we know of in a number of countries where obviously governments and particularly to me again access to information that should be basically preserved because it's part of users' privacy and infringements of users' privacy, right? So that's one way to look at it, you know, like that, again, I'm coming back to this image of the double-edged sword that, you know, there's one side of it that is threatening, that represents that control, that sort of potential infringements to individuals' privacy and so on and so forth, freedom of the press. On the one hand, there's also that sort of more kind of empowering side of the media that suggests that, you know, again, if we sort of use it in sometimes more playful interactive way, if it's truly bottom-up, then it can be more inclusive and sort of it can be used to draw attention to a cause and sort of shift the narrative in a different direction. So we've seen different cases of that obviously. I mean, perhaps one of the most recent case for those of you who are potentially interested also in the context of the media list is the sort of mobilizations online dating back from May 2021, sort of around the sort of Palestinian mobilization in East Jerusalem, and sort of the fact that even though there was strong censorship, you know, of the Palestinian mobilization online, you know, there were still sort of ways because arguably you will find that sort of the Palestinian diaspora and those who were somehow very much active within the cause and also very much active in terms of relaying information, you know, in a media environment that is arguably very repressed still and very sort of, you know, that sort of has experienced limitations in terms of the local communication infrastructure and how to identify territories, for example. So you see how over yours generations, if you will, of constraints, repressions and limitation in terms of freedom of expression and digital rights, you know, there has been sort of the creativity that came up amongst the diaspora, and they found ways to, for example, to prevent, you know, sort of the censorship in some cases of the media blackout in other cases, and still sort of kind of draw attention to those digital rights violation to these sort of extensive sort of application of censorship of the Palestinian content online. So that was, that's an interesting case that is fairly recent. You know, here, for example, you have sort of an image that displays the, you know, the Palestinian watermelon, which is a symbol of Palestinian resistance because the four years the Palestinian flag was not allowed to be displayed so it became that sort of alternative so that substitute, if you will, for the Palestinian flag. But then, you know, what is interesting is that this in and of its own, whether it has to do with the technology or with the message itself. It shows how resilient some communities can be in terms of expressing a message that otherwise be muted, censored or repressed. So I think, yeah. I mean, I think again, I'm just like, keeping the discussion very sort of broad so that you can, again, maybe relate to different examples you're more familiar with. But this is typically like sort of how you want to navigate this ambivalence in terms of the media, you know, like looking at it on one hand as a tool for control and corrosion and so on and so forth and sort of. It's a form of what we call typically in sociology, you know, like discursive power, you know, it's like how you what we call discursive power it's like how you gain power by shaping the public discourse by sort of imposing a particular representation of the world as the dominant one as a prevailing one right. And so what is interesting is that over history obviously there has always been attempt that sort of kind of, again, we should be reappropriating these narratives, kind of making sense of it in a different ways, opposing it to alternative representations of the world alternative views of the world that sometimes also grant a voice so, you know, sort of convey the voices of those who have otherwise not been heard. So, you know, obviously, you know, as much as this has been extensively discussed in political communication, we also have, you know, another tradition like a control studies, you probably have heard of studies before, typically if you're interested in media studies, it's kind of a subfield which is also kind of very relevant to the study of the media. That was partly also initiated by scholars at Sturthole, very famous scholar, and some of these, so typically these, these sort of researchers, they've also initiated a different sort of approach to the study of the media looking into the audience itself, you know, so they bring this kind of bottom up perspective and they want to sort of look into how the audience navigates the meaning of the message, you know, like once you're exposed to a message online, do you really sort of take it at face value, do you make sense of it differently? You know, obviously, we tend to think about popular culture as something that is usually not so empowering because it's manufactured, it's kind of, you know, it's sort of commodified heavily, you know, it's sort of the culture of the masses. And historically it hasn't been viewed as, as something that is, you know, empowering that allows people to have a voice to feel included and so on and so forth. You find a number of stereotypes typically in popular culture, so that is perhaps the most sort of negative take on popular culture in general and how the media contributes to it. Again, you look at it in terms of how, you know, cultural studies, you know, sort of approach popular culture, what they tend to say is that actually, yes, popular culture is in many cases the culture of the working class, it's the culture of the masses, but in terms of how it's received and how it is reinterpreted and how it's kind of reappropriated, you know, people actually can still find agency with it, you know, whether it is, you know, like music, soap opera, sort of, you know, all sorts of, even if you think about it in terms of street art and more alternative forms of popular culture, you know, like very often sometimes, you know, it has also enabled people to find a voice in a new way in an innovative way. And I'm bringing this as well, I'm sort of raising that question because I think that there's an interesting angle there to keep in mind if you look at it aside from, you know, online activism. There are forms of experiences of the media that are sort of explicitly political, and then you find other situations where the audience consumes the media, and if it's close to me to the media, and find sort of its own experience of empowerment, but in a more informal way, right, so it's about sort of just enjoying popular culture and appreciating it and sort of maybe, you know, sort of developing a taste for popular culture that is somehow a bit subversive that kind of challenges the norms of what you find in popular culture and that can also be quite empowering. So just kind of, you know, just telling you about another sort of angle within media studies that can be typically very interesting if, for example, you want to approach that bottom up and look into sort of how it can be used, whether it is activism, or in sort of the representation of minorities or inclusion of minorities more specifically, whether it is in terms of kind of diaspora media, for example, and sort of how they, they change the way we think about sort of the, you know, how we typically want too many, you know, one way stream, traditional form of communication in mass media. So, you know, that these are all sort of questions that you might want to explore at some point. At the same time, going back to the question of digital activism in general, I wanted to sort of draw your attention to another question which is came up very, very quickly after 2011, 2010. Remember, this was the time of the Occupy Wall Street protests, the time of the Indian Alice protests in Spain, the time of the Arab Spring, and at that time precisely was when there was that strong assumption that technology had played a role. And then later on, you find this kind of colonial critique that came up, and they looked into sort of the whole assumption around the world of technology, the sort of the affordances of technology, potentially, and they say, well, as a matter of fact, you know, we tend to focus too much on technology, because we see technology as a driver because it kind of, you know, it evokes this, this, this sort of trope of industrial progress of scientific progress that comes back from the or representation of modern societies. But that is a very Eurocentric way to look at it, you know, sort of that's that's how this post-colonial critique comes up with the, you know, sort of challenging this idea that that technology plays a significant role and they sort of shift the focus away from the from the technology itself, from the medium to, to sort of draw attention to the, to the, the social dynamics themselves, the social parameters, you know, it's very much about the communities and how they reinvent the media, you know, and that is, that is really interesting because it really allows you to think about media in a very broad generic kind of way, you know, we tend to think, okay, media is TVs, radio is the internet, but it's not, it's not just that, you know, media is, you know, you have to think about it in terms of any medium that is used at some point, you know, to kind of, you know, gain a voice within the public debate, feel included, sometimes even as a space of political dissent, when the other sort of public spaces would be highly repressed, and that can be sometimes in places that you might not expect, you know, you might usually not sort of consider to be a media or at least a medium for for public engagement. So, I mean, I'm sure that you can all think of specific examples, but I mean, even today, like for example, more recently in 2019, if I was to refer back to one of the movements I mentioned. Nigeria, for example, was the, you know, the Iraq, which was a sort of a sustained series of weekly street mobilizations to protest against the military regime. And what happened was that, you know, obviously, the media, you know, was, you know, potentially phone texting than, you know, maybe at some point, you know, some phone apps did play a role but it didn't seem to be really sort of the key of the agenda in Iraq in terms of its logistics and its sort of in terms of how protestors wanted to organize and facilitate the mobilization. Mostly it was about making sure that people were on the streets, you know, sort of demonstrating peacefully on Fridays. And that allowed them to sort of really maintain that sort of weekly gathering over, you know, almost two years, you know, I think the other half, at least, in a number of different cities where people from different generations from different demographics just walk in the streets meet together together. And that is interesting because today we tend to exclude, you know, offline spaces as a space for mobilization as a media in and of its own. But it is nevertheless, you know, like, if you can reappropriate in the online space, sorry, offline space, you can meet in the streets, gather together, meet and sort of share your ideas by circumventing the gatekeeping processes that you would find otherwise in the media. Then you basically reinventing the street as a new media. And this is really interesting because, you know, it gets you to think much more creatively about media, civic movements, activism in general, and sort of how you can leverage different communication practices to sort of facilitate these kind of, you know, different types of activism in general. So yeah, that's just something that I wanted to sort of talk about in general and show you how, in a sense, like, even if we start rethinking the ways in which people protest today, like that brings us back to this postcolonial critique that came up after 2010. And we see that, yes, indeed, it's not so much about the technology. As we usually think about it's not so much about digital media, or, you know, like social platforms, even it's not so much necessarily about the crypto platforms. As we have seen recently, you know, even in crypto platforms are sometimes exposed to regulations, surveillance in a number of countries, it's not always clear how much sort of these different tools protect users' privacy. So I think that, you know, it's also good to sort of maybe think about alternative spaces. And it's really hard, arguably, to think about different spaces because nowadays with COVID and the ways in which we interact, we increasingly dependent on digital technologies, but still especially at SOAS where we tend to focus on a number of different environments and contexts where, for example, access to technology is not always available, and where offline sort of environment of social interactions are still very important for social capital, for example, then you know that it's even more important than to kind of, in a sense, build on that kind of postcolonial critique and sort of show that communication is not exclusively about the technology itself. So, yeah, I think I mean there's a lot that you can relate to. I mentioned a number of different examples, typically the Algerian Kiraq, the Palestinian, the recent Palestinian mobilization online, and I think I'm sure that, you know, looking into a range of different examples, you would find sort of, in other countries, sort of creative ways that people have used to sort of relay their voices when the prevailing media was securitized or controlled. So, of course, like if you kind of go beyond this idea of technological determinism, it's not so much about the technology. Once you kind of move beyond this idea, you also have to consider social parameters that, you know, sort of play a role besides the media itself. And this is where, you know, the media studies become fascinating because you realize that it's also about the sociology of it. It's about sort of who are the people who can reinvent the way that we interact, the way we communicate. And how experimental is the media that is the case, for example, for a new technology and new media or an emergent type of media. You know, sort of what is the, what are the demographics that are involved and how much would they be, you know, represented otherwise in other types of media. If you sort of have more of a sociological sort of, sort of take, take on the question of the media, that's something that probably interests you. And also if you have a background in political communication, you start sort of looking into different social structures. You know, grassroots civil society organizations, for example, sometimes, you know, more specifically looking into the sociology of journalism, the press, you know, how they organize, how they operate, how they, how they kind of make sure that they can operate within the sort of norms of the ethics of journalism, but also what conditions the political economy of the media on a broader level. I think, I mean, ultimately, you know, all of these questions. The reason why I think that they would always somehow be quite topical and they would bring you to sort of look into very topical cases is because it has to do with the way that we engage questions around, you know, pluralism, but also how we think about, you know, typically there are a number of very loaded terms and concepts that constantly, you know, they somehow everywhere in the, in the, in social sciences, typically the concept of democracy, how you think about democracy in terms of communication, who has a voice, who is in the debate, who is able to ship the debate, things like that. So, you know, you get to really rethink these definitions, sometimes challenge them. Based on very recent examples, so, you know, typically nowadays there's a huge question around sort of populism, right, the rise of populism, and, or even sort of the conspiracy theories, for example, and sort of how a very often governments want to further regulate the media space. And so the main question is, what would be the implications of that debate, you know, elsewhere in other parts of the world where, for example, society do not already, you know, they don't have the same sort of guarantees for freedom of expression. And so, you know, you, you constantly sort of have to navigate these big sort of questions, okay, what is populism, what is an elitist sort of view of the media. You know, like, what are, you know, how can you sort of guarantee inclusion in the debate, you know, sort of who has a voice who is legitimate to have a voice who is shaping public opinion. So these are very big questions and arguably, you know, it's everywhere today, you know, in talking public policy, I think it plays a very big role sort of how you regulate the media, how you fact check information today. Who should be included in that process in terms of the legitimate representatives of civil society. So these I think that typically if you're interested in development in media development, I think these are really key debates that you want to be part of. And, and I think that it's also still to come back to the post colonial critique I mentioned about above. It's more about the ways in which you want to demystify a number of assumptions that are still based on a very Eurocentric experience of the media. And prevailed still today, whether it's in the political discourse or in the academic literature. So, you know, you would find sort of this idea that, you know, okay, scientific and technological progress is the key. There was strong emphasis on internet and that's been a strong emphasis on blockchain technology more recently. Now there's a, you know, obviously, it's, it's funny because you know you see sort of a number of governance for example, sort of trying to navigate issues about this information. For example, deep fakes, which is sort of, you know, content that you that you would find online and sort of how you can maybe sort of credit the media with with more of a sense of credibility and make sure that the information is reliable. As everyone sort of tries to make sense of these big questions. The problem is that there's, there's still this idea that the media needs to be centralized and, and further regulated in the current context, even when that's an argument that can be easily challenged in other parts of the world, right. So, this is why I think that it makes even more sense today to have these big discussions at so as it has, it has, you know, it has even more value for you to have these big discussions with with sort of other members of so as an academic community, interact with students from all over the world. And obviously just realize how much sort of empirical evidence you can bring into the literature sort of say okay well that case has not been studied everything tends to center on the US or the European sort of countries, what if we kind of look into that other sort of place and sort of show that that concept of this information for example doesn't work there or has its own limitation, how can we bring more neurons to this discussion and sort of make it a more multi-layered sort of representation of how the media works in different environments whether it's political environments, right. So, that's why I think it's really exciting to sort of be part of this discussion here. And so, I mean I think that overall it kind of brings us to the question of, you know, digital activism. More recently today, how does it work. There's been a lot of discussion if you read for example the work of spotters like to take key. And I mentioned her because she's quite popular even, you know, beyond the academic community. You have read her group, Twitter and tear gas. And so, so scholars like that for example they kind of become increasingly skeptical with online activism and they say well you know it is heavily commodified you know there's an agenda within the industry and the processes for which it's regulated if you look into content moderation for example it's you know it's it's very tends to be very biased. You know, I think you would find out so the work of other scholars like social noble for example she she she writes. She wrote a book called the algorithms of oppression that you know, talk specifically about algorithm bias. You know it really raises very important crucial questions about sort of how, how much representation there is when it comes to the tech industry itself for example and how these new, you know the technologies of tomorrow would be developed and you know, this, for example plays out in the market of the data and so on and so forth so you know, again I'm kind of, you know, bringing up a range of very different very broad questions here, but mostly to spark your curiosity and sort of show how crucial it is to make sense of these big questions now, because, again, if you look at it from this very holistic kind of angle, then there's a lot you can do with media expertise, you can do, you can bring it in terms of, you know, advising and literacy in terms of kind of making making sense of how the media should be regulated in different contexts. You can bring this into journalistic practices. You know, for example fact checking content today. Kind of thinking in a more creative way about the media market itself, for example if you're interested in entrepreneurship and sort of try to think about an alternative model for the media, you know, for investigative journalism so there's so much that can be done, especially if you call to it that sort of typically more alternative, kind of sometimes also postpone your perspective that gives you a fresh sort of sort of angle on some of these big questions that I mentioned. But yes, I mean typically so on the one hand you hear a lot of theories now it's almost like as if we hear the tip side of the coin, you know, in terms of the arguments of the early 2010s. Others have said that you know now digital media activism has its limitation of course that because it remains a double edged sword. It's hard to, you know, arguably consolidate a movement that, you know, remain sustainable and can bring long term, you know, long term political change. So, of course it's a big question then you would be encouraged probably if you start exploring these questions would be encouraged to sort of kind of think about how, how the media, you know, kind of inter intercept with other practices of political activism in civil movements, and sort of whether, you know, there's a whether the social dynamics that social parameters basically, you know that play out beyond the question of the media, whether, you know, these are sort of the crucial sort of part that explains the sustainability of civil movements their long term, you know, kind of benefits. How whether they're able to change society to sort of advocate for structural changes in question, you know, especially around questions of inequalities. So these are, you know, some of the very broad sort of topics that you will have the chance to to research and explore. So I'm going to, I'm going to conclude right now and sort of invite you to ask questions and maybe sort of share some ideas, and we'll react or comment on anything that I've said or, you know, feel free to just come up with your own input. If you don't be shy, feel free to raise your hand or even just post on the chat. If you're too shy and this stage. So it's nice to hear your voices because I feel less lonely in the zoom session but whatever's comfortable for you. So feel free to drop a message into the chat box if you'd like to raise a question or alternatively, you can always do the raise hand function. And then we'll know that you want to ask a question and we can invite you to unmute yourselves. Always hard to be the first person to ask a question. I want to see one question that has been posted in the chat from Neha. Hi, I'm Neha from India. How can we look at COVID-19 from a de-westernized perspective. Okay, so thanks for the question. If you were to look at it in the context of the media, I think I mean what is fascinating and these are typically some of the discussions we've had recently with students that are currently finishing the program this academic year. It's very much about like some of the main focus was very much on sort of how COVID-19 seems to have sort of slowed down some of the mobilizations that you know, seen in other parts of the world. I mentioned sort of Lebanon and GRS, you know, Sudan is a kind of started the time frame was a bit different arguably but but then you can also, I suppose also, you know, mentioned the case of the farmers protests for example India so I think what is really sort of problematic with COVID-19 on one hand is that, you know, it's sort of creating, especially with, you know, concerns which, you know, obviously are legitimate concerns about conspiracy theories in some parts of the world but at the same time also sort of create more grounds for further regulations in environments where the media is already very centralized, if you will. So it's always about sort of making sense of that conundrum and sort of how, you know, typically terms like disinformation for example or conspiracy theories and sort of, you know, for example, the epidemic, the case in the case of the epidemic, you know, this has led to a new term in communication that was used recently which is infodemic. So the fact that obviously there was an, you know, the idea was that it was an epidemic of disinformation if you will. So obviously now communication scholars are very sort of interested in that sort of idea of an infodemic. So challenge is to make sense of that conundrum where in, you know, in some parts of the world obviously the regulation of and decentralization of the media may be, you know, legitimate, you know, it kind of makes sense and if you sort of place it back into the context of the rise of the far right, the rise of populist rhetoric on the one hand, but then in other parts of the world it might also kind of be detrimental to, you know, civil society. So, so this was typically something that was extensively discussed and debated, you know, in our group discussions with students. And I think it was, it was really fascinating to hear from everyone's input because as you can obviously imagine as you know, you know, we have this very international community and everyone comes up with, you know, evidence from everywhere across the world. So, yeah, we had students from, typically from Myanmar, from Peshmer, from India as well, you know, so it's really fascinating to kind of really compare and contrast these different perspectives. You're welcome. So again, I know it can be a bit intimidating but if anyone else wants to ask a question feel free to post something again in the chat or just raise your hand. It's just fine. All right, so I see another question here from Bonnie, thanks. I'm interested in online activism and emotional mobilization on social media. May I ask, is that the PowerPoint, yes, of course, yes, the PowerPoint I'm happy to share the PowerPoint. This is, you know, it just gives you some references to a range of different sort of theories, you know, that talk about it. But obviously it's not, you know, it's not always most relevant to your own interests. And that's what's really great starting next year, hopefully, you know, like, if you get to really start with a program, you can start, you can sort of tailor your own case studies in different sort of assignments. And that gives you the opportunity to personalize your approach to the subject and just decide, okay, I want to look into this country or this particular campaign or I will compare those two places and then you get to really narrow down your focus to the key sort of sources and references that might be interesting for you or most relevant for you. And let me just read your next question. So. So how do you think the rationale that deliberation, which features the classic public sphere now could fit into the social media with active so that's a brilliant question really brilliant question. I didn't really enter the specifics of that debate because I don't know how familiar everyone here is with with these big concepts. But yeah, there is that sort of typically more classic Eurocentric notion of the public sphere. And we're going to briefly sort of acknowledge that this exists and that this prevails in the literature simply because obviously you would come across that sort of notion and it is, you know, arguably it's everywhere in the debate is everyone that nowadays typically if you read about what we see makers right about disinformation and how they plan to tackle it and how they sort of define it, you know, in the, from the sort of perspective in terms of, you know, gaining legitimacy as the sort of source, you know, the more sort of official source the the sort of expert knowledge on a number of subjects, for example, sort of even when it comes to the mainstream media sort of reclaiming its own credibility and legitimacy, everything that you read today arguably will bring you back to that notion that there is a public sphere in the media is central to that public sphere and you know, very much about sort of intellectuals and well informed people and journalists qualifying journalists that provide you with reliable information. And what is really interesting is, if you actually look beyond the Eurocentric model, you look into sort of countries where you have informal communication networks that are much more important to the social capital because there's more credibility there and people kind of the fact check the news in a very organic way by relying on each other by sharing information from one another in this and even interpersonal communication on that And so, you know, I'm sure that when it comes to activism in general, whether it's social media activism or whether it is, you know, other forms of activism that, you know, amongst other things includes social media. You know, you have to think about it this way, you know that sometimes that sort of these informal networks this sort of community based sort of networks where information circulates that that some sometimes it creates more sort of sense of public trust. And it's, it's fascinating to contrast to that with what we usually hear about when it comes to the classic public sphere. Hopefully, you get to explore further next year and maybe in your own readings. Amazing. I'm happy you enjoyed. So, I think we want to have 10 minutes left, but feel free. If anybody else wants to maybe share some thoughts or, you know, if that triggers a reaction to something that, you know, something you feel, wow, we didn't, you know, we didn't mention that we didn't talk about that. I think it's important to me. I just want to share this. Feel free to do so. And so, so your own space, obviously, so it's nice to to hear your, your contribution. And otherwise, I mean, if you feel that, you know, that was kind of kind of if you feel that covered enough for today. I'm happy to conclude the session, but I just want to make sure that you have an opportunity to ask a question. Yeah, we probably have time for at least one more question. So do feel free to either add it into the chat box or simply raise your hand and we'll be able to invite you to unmute yourselves. So, are you asking me my own thoughts? Are you asking everyone else to sort of share their thoughts on the topic or this question of digital society? I mean, typically, I think that the quote that I posted in my presentation from Castel, you know, like this was a, this was a time back in the early 2010 when, you know, this concept was initially, you know, Castel came up with this concept, this notion of, you know, more specifically the network society, right? Network society and sort of how now everything seems to be sort of articulated and sort of designed around this notion of a network society. Yeah, in a sense, I think that it's still the case arguably, but it can be sometimes useful to think about it outside of digital media, right? It's not necessarily specifically digital media. It's your next question. So how did the leadership worldwide handle this on social media in terms of their communication and governance? I think, yeah, I think in a sense that kind of relates back to, you know, what I mentioned just briefly earlier, sort of how now there's this sort of intent to further regulate, centralize the debate, you know, sort of people are being warned in sort of awareness campaigns about disinformation about conspiracy theories. You know, it hasn't, you know, arguably, yes, it hasn't had a very critical impact on the epidemic. You know, people came up with this concept of infodemic, for example, which is worth sort of tackling in one way or another. But at the same time, you know, in other parts of the world, it has also been used to further securitize social media. And so, and so the real question is, is that of public trust, right? That's also something else we're going to talk about typically in this program is sort of what type of information do people trust? And if we're in the context of public distrust, what is it that causes this public distrust? What are the real factors? Because you could argue that in a sense nowadays, there's a big sort of intention to sort of tackle issues around disinformation, for example, conspiracy theories, and that has been the case in the context of the epidemic. And then at the same time, you know, there's also a sense that causes of public distrust have not always been appropriately, you know, properly addressed in different contexts. And then I'm just reading your post. So I wanted to know whether you think there's a difference between media and journalism today. This is actually a very common discussion here in India about the Indian media moving to its institution, structures, business interest. I would love to know your take on this. Yeah, it seems to be a typical question that looks into the political economy of the media, which I mentioned. So I think, yeah, that's actually a big part of the discussion media communication. So what's the media ownership concentration in one country, you know, sort of is the ruling elite that has more control over the media. Are there a number of different actors that have sort of monopoly over the media market, the local media market. You can find a number of indicators that, you know, typically, sort of human rights advocates or, you know, organizations that work here in terms of advocacy around freedom of the press. So to these specific parameters in a number of different countries sort of what's the degree of media ownership concentration. So that's really something you can look you could sort of explore in India. And how much does this sort of control public opinion how much is this shape public opinion in particular context in favor of the ruling elite. And also, obviously, how detrimental is it to the independent media sphere. What what places left for the for the independent media or sort of local sort of media that may not rely on the same sources of funding, for example. So, so this is a, this is sort of very big debate typically in media and development and have the opportunity to study that I guess. But it's definitely very relevant to the, the program overall. So I think that kind of reaching the last two minutes of the session. And just to conclude, I just want to say that it was my pleasure to present you kind of a teaser of the module. I mean, the range of modules that we teach. And thank you for your for your questions and your reaction it was really nice to to sort of stimulate some some kind of interest and a range of different questions to make your curiosity on the topic. Thank you again and hopefully meet you in the other circumstances. Thank you everybody for listening in today, and we will have some follow up sessions coming in the next couple of months so do look out for emails around those sessions and of course we did record today session. We will be sending links to that out in case you want to rewatch the session, or in case you weren't able to join at the start of the session today.