History is written by the winners. But what happens when hashtags dictate the story?
In a country of nearly 1.3 billion people, with Twitter users numbering a little over 23 million, and Internet subscribers just crossing 350 million, that question may seem odd, even elitist. But as 2016 draws to a close, in the style of a typically Indian paradox, hashtag wars have come to define the hype, hysteria and hope surrounding political debates and public discourse in the country.
Like it or not, today, the tech-savvy vocal few can potentially influence what the rest know, think and feel. Many a story in the mainstream media takes its cues from trends in the social media. In the beginning, this was hailed as breaching the barricades, democratisation of public discourse with everyone pitching in, unmediated by “gatekeepers”.
But the reality is somewhat different. The social media is hugely useful in times of crisis, during natural disasters, in reuniting lost friends. It boosts causes and commerce in equal measure. But the interactive, inherently compelling nature of the social media is also trapping users in information and ideological silos.
As Warren Buffet famously said, “What the human being is best at doing is interpreting all new information so that their prior conclusions remain intact.”
Today, most of us hear what we want to hear. Perhaps, it has always been that way, and the hope was that the Internet would break the barriers. But the fact is that the social media is not necessarily expanding our minds. Algorithms feed us what we want, or what the computer programme thinks we want, in the name of Internet personalisation.
So where does that leave genuine diversity and freedom of thought?
In the recent Ameican elections, one saw how hashtags contributed to the dramatic shifts in public perception, in delegitimising people perceived to be “elite” or “establishment”, and fuelling the flames of public anger. A perception was created that traditional journalism was not the honest arbiter of truth but tweets were. One telling tweet from a Donald Trump supporter: “@MSM hates @realDonaldTrump tweeting because they don’t get the scoop first. I love it.” MSM is the much reviled traditional, mainstream media.
It is true that traditional media in the United States took sides, in some cases blatantly. They chose not to see the writing on the wall. But it is equally true that the social media was also patently partisan, reinforcing existing prejudices, making biases more rigid.
People followed those they wanted to follow and ignored, blocked and mocked those who had contrary views. Sometimes the diverse groups met, but only in an uber-aggressive “us versus them” spirit.
That continues.
We are seeing a repeat of the same story in India, with the same cuss words. If the American Right curses MSM and liberals, so do the right-wing trolls in India.
In 2016, the curses grew louder on all sides, and polarisation deeper.
Take demonetisation or “notebandi” as it is called in street lingo. Social media recorded 650,000 tweets in 24 hours after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the demonetisation of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes on November 8. Will history remember it as a marker of Mr Modi’s dynamism and daring or will it be remembered for the acute distress and uncertainty it triggered? The jury is out.
As I write, tweets hashtagged #DeMonetisation, #IndiaFightsBlackMoney, #RaidPeRaid, #ModiFightsCorruption are jousting with #DemonetisationDisaster. Those on one set of hashtags rarely look at the other set. When they do, it is not to listen or debate, but attack in the foulest language. Mercifully, demonetisation has also led to an explosion of jokes on the social media, some of it inspired by movies. The biting cold as many Indians continue to queue outside banks and ATMs is matched by the biting satire in cyberspace.
Demonetisation inspired one @PriyaSometimes to tweet in true filmy style: “Cash me if you can”, a takeoff on the famous Leonardo DiCaprio movie Catch Me If You Can. Then there were “Amar, Akbar, ATM-money” and “Cheque De India”, after Bollywood blockbusters which need no introduction.
Now, the focus and the hashtags have pivoted to “Transforming India” and “Cashless”.
Other hashtags which captured the public imagination in India in 2016 include #Surgicalstrike which trended after the Indian Army said it had carried out “surgical strikes” along the Line of Control on seven terror launchpads in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and caused “significant casualties”. The strikes took place soon after the terrorist attack on a military camp in Uri, Jammu and Kashmir, that left 18 soldiers dead.
Hashtag wars have also seeped into academia. The battle for the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union was bitterly fought on the terrain and in cyberspace. The virtual tug-of-war between the ideologically-opposed hashtags boiled down to #StandWithJNU vs #ShutDownJNU.
Now Twitter trolls are targeting Taimur, newborn son of Bollywood stars Kareena Kapoor and Saif Ali Khan. Hashtag warriors angrily ask why the couple named their son after an invader who killed so many Indians. But does any one person own a name? Should we boycott all Josephs because one Joseph went on to be Stalin or New Delhi’s legendary Nathu’s Sweets as the name reminds us of the man who pumped bullets into the Father of the Nation? Taimur means iron in Turkish.
A safe forecast: hashtag wars and hysteria will continue, never mind the hacking of famous Twitter accounts including that of Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi by a hacker group which calls itself Legion.
But all is not gloomy on the ground or in cyberspace. Sonam Gupta brings cheer.
In 2016, Indian netizens obsessed about a person who perhaps does not exist. “Sonam Gupta Bewafa hai” (Sonam Gupta is deceitful) was first spotted on an old Rs 10 note. Soon, the mysterious Gupta had morphed into Google India’s third most searched person. Now, post demonetisation, deceitful Sonam has resurfaced in the social media. Someone scribbled her name again on a spanking new Rs 2,000 note. And a meme was born.
Which gives me a flicker of hope. If hashtags make history, perhaps #humour can save it.
