Tweet
THE FIFTH ELEMENT: FACEBOOK AS A BINDING LINK BETWEEN MEDIA AND SOCIETY DURING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
VOTE 2013 | 22.02.13 | 14:18
By JULIA HAKOBYAN
ArmeniaNow Deputy Editor
The extensive exchange of information through instant messages, video
materials and thousands of statuses updates on election violation
alerts has became a distinctive feature of the February 18 presidential
elections, when the social network Facebook for the first time widely
served as a unique and the most convenient platform of news making
both for the electorate and oppositionists.
Enlarge Photo Samvel Martirosyan
Armenian journalists and media experts say that during the recent
elections Facebook, as an alternative source of information, has
compensated to considerably extend access to information in Armenia,
where 18 out 18 national TV channels are controlled by the government.
Experts note that Facebook played a significant role in the campaign
of several presidential candidates and nowadays analyze how Facebook
could, in fact, affect the course of the campaign, and perhaps even
the election's outcome.
One presidential candidates, Hrant Bagratyan made the first ever
announcement on his nomination via Facebook; another candidate, Vardan
Sedrakyan limited his election campaign to Facebook 'statuses', where
he has got about 5,300 "likes". (A marginal candidate, Sedrakyan got
less than 1 percent of votes in Monday's election.)
"Sedrakyan is the best example of someone who exclusively used Facebook
for publicity, even the word 'eposaget', which describes his occupation
(expert in epic studies) cannot be found in any dictionary, because
it was generated by Sedrakyan and then spread via Facebook," says
Samvel Martirosyan, a veteran blogger and expert in IT security.
Raffi Hovannisian, the official runner up in the election, is the most
active user of Facebook among candidates; Hovannisian's campaign was
actively covered on Facebook, and through the election day, his page
had reported on numerous violations, recorded by his team.
"The "likes" on Hovannisian's page at one point has sharply grown,
reaching about 20,500- nothing to compare to other candidates' page;
even Paruyr Hayrikyan's page, after the assassination attempt saw no
drastic growth. (Even though, in general, people expressed sympathy
to Hayrikyan after the attack, when he was shot and hospitalized)
"It is hard to say how Facebook influenced the outcome of elections,
but the interesting fact is that Hovannisian has got more votes in
the presidential elections (539,672) than the leader of opposition
Levon Ter Petrosyan in 2008 ( 351,222) and this perhaps is partly
conditioned by the fact that Hovannisian got a substantial support
of young adults thanks to Facebook."
Facebook, in fact, was not widespread during the 2008 presidential
elections. To compare, in 2010, when Facebook began to gain popularity
in Armenia there were about 60,000 Armenian users, now the number is
six times more (reaching almost 400,000). In 2008 there were only a
couple of thousand users, who, Martirosyan says, in fact really did
not know how to use such platform for political purposes; the largest
groups in Facebook had counted only 200-300 supporters.
"During the 2008 elections, there was observed an active use of the
blogosphere in Armenia, whereas there were only 200 or so bloggers in
all, but blogs had become a very important factor, since the bloggers'
posts were a real source of information, especially, after the state
of emergency was imposed in the country and the press was banned.
Notably, it did not refer to blogs, perhaps because the blogs were
not known to the large audience, from the other side it was not clear
whether the blogs belong to press or not, and for a certain period of
time people within the country and outside were reading only blogs,
to learn information other than state propaganda. "
Laura Baghdasaryan, the Director of Region Research Center, which
is implementing studies of 2013 presidential elections coverage
on Facebook, says the recent presidential election clearly showed
that Facebook, played a huge role in formation of discourse in
the process of presidential elections. (Early in January, ahead of
the presidential campaign start, the center has published a study
"Facebook as a campaign platform in Armenia", comprising the results
of monitoring of the pages of candidates, political figures, and
supporters of certain political forces in Facebook. Another report
is to be published next week.)
"We cannot directly link the Facebook factor with the outcome of the
elections, but the fact is that Facebook is gaining more popularity
with each day and all the controversy and the diversity of opinions
that exist in today's society, has a mirror and immediate reflection
on Facebook," Baghdasaryan says."Our studies have shown all the topics
that appear on the political agenda and scene, are on Facebook and
around those topics, there appear discussions, debates, which sometimes
turned into information battles between two camps."
Baghdasaryan notes that only a limited number of opposition-related
events are covered by the local TV channels, and gives the example
of the latest protest by the civil society activists, who broke into
the February 19 press conference of the OSCE / ODIHR observers to
read their own assessment of elections.
"Public television did not cover this event all, which I think was
ill-advised, since such behavior from the authorities only aggravate
the informational vacuum that exists in out television."
However, both Baghdasarian and Martirosyan believe that Facebook as
well as other alternative sources of information in Armenia ( such
as Youtube, Twitter, Civilnet online channel and others) have played
a significant role in the freedom of speech in the last couple of
years and appeared as a message to authorities of the senselessness
to withhold information.
VOTE 2013 | 22.02.13 | 14:18
By JULIA HAKOBYAN
ArmeniaNow Deputy Editor
The extensive exchange of information through instant messages, video
materials and thousands of statuses updates on election violation
alerts has became a distinctive feature of the February 18 presidential
elections, when the social network Facebook for the first time widely
served as a unique and the most convenient platform of news making
both for the electorate and oppositionists.
Enlarge Photo Samvel Martirosyan
Armenian journalists and media experts say that during the recent
elections Facebook, as an alternative source of information, has
compensated to considerably extend access to information in Armenia,
where 18 out 18 national TV channels are controlled by the government.
Experts note that Facebook played a significant role in the campaign
of several presidential candidates and nowadays analyze how Facebook
could, in fact, affect the course of the campaign, and perhaps even
the election's outcome.
One presidential candidates, Hrant Bagratyan made the first ever
announcement on his nomination via Facebook; another candidate, Vardan
Sedrakyan limited his election campaign to Facebook 'statuses', where
he has got about 5,300 "likes". (A marginal candidate, Sedrakyan got
less than 1 percent of votes in Monday's election.)
"Sedrakyan is the best example of someone who exclusively used Facebook
for publicity, even the word 'eposaget', which describes his occupation
(expert in epic studies) cannot be found in any dictionary, because
it was generated by Sedrakyan and then spread via Facebook," says
Samvel Martirosyan, a veteran blogger and expert in IT security.
Raffi Hovannisian, the official runner up in the election, is the most
active user of Facebook among candidates; Hovannisian's campaign was
actively covered on Facebook, and through the election day, his page
had reported on numerous violations, recorded by his team.
"The "likes" on Hovannisian's page at one point has sharply grown,
reaching about 20,500- nothing to compare to other candidates' page;
even Paruyr Hayrikyan's page, after the assassination attempt saw no
drastic growth. (Even though, in general, people expressed sympathy
to Hayrikyan after the attack, when he was shot and hospitalized)
"It is hard to say how Facebook influenced the outcome of elections,
but the interesting fact is that Hovannisian has got more votes in
the presidential elections (539,672) than the leader of opposition
Levon Ter Petrosyan in 2008 ( 351,222) and this perhaps is partly
conditioned by the fact that Hovannisian got a substantial support
of young adults thanks to Facebook."
Facebook, in fact, was not widespread during the 2008 presidential
elections. To compare, in 2010, when Facebook began to gain popularity
in Armenia there were about 60,000 Armenian users, now the number is
six times more (reaching almost 400,000). In 2008 there were only a
couple of thousand users, who, Martirosyan says, in fact really did
not know how to use such platform for political purposes; the largest
groups in Facebook had counted only 200-300 supporters.
"During the 2008 elections, there was observed an active use of the
blogosphere in Armenia, whereas there were only 200 or so bloggers in
all, but blogs had become a very important factor, since the bloggers'
posts were a real source of information, especially, after the state
of emergency was imposed in the country and the press was banned.
Notably, it did not refer to blogs, perhaps because the blogs were
not known to the large audience, from the other side it was not clear
whether the blogs belong to press or not, and for a certain period of
time people within the country and outside were reading only blogs,
to learn information other than state propaganda. "
Laura Baghdasaryan, the Director of Region Research Center, which
is implementing studies of 2013 presidential elections coverage
on Facebook, says the recent presidential election clearly showed
that Facebook, played a huge role in formation of discourse in
the process of presidential elections. (Early in January, ahead of
the presidential campaign start, the center has published a study
"Facebook as a campaign platform in Armenia", comprising the results
of monitoring of the pages of candidates, political figures, and
supporters of certain political forces in Facebook. Another report
is to be published next week.)
"We cannot directly link the Facebook factor with the outcome of the
elections, but the fact is that Facebook is gaining more popularity
with each day and all the controversy and the diversity of opinions
that exist in today's society, has a mirror and immediate reflection
on Facebook," Baghdasaryan says."Our studies have shown all the topics
that appear on the political agenda and scene, are on Facebook and
around those topics, there appear discussions, debates, which sometimes
turned into information battles between two camps."
Baghdasaryan notes that only a limited number of opposition-related
events are covered by the local TV channels, and gives the example
of the latest protest by the civil society activists, who broke into
the February 19 press conference of the OSCE / ODIHR observers to
read their own assessment of elections.
"Public television did not cover this event all, which I think was
ill-advised, since such behavior from the authorities only aggravate
the informational vacuum that exists in out television."
However, both Baghdasarian and Martirosyan believe that Facebook as
well as other alternative sources of information in Armenia ( such
as Youtube, Twitter, Civilnet online channel and others) have played
a significant role in the freedom of speech in the last couple of
years and appeared as a message to authorities of the senselessness
to withhold information.