Building on Bjola's recent analysis of NATO's online bubble, Manor looks at NATO's network.
Forget proxy metrics and studying a single Twitter list—this is what Jihadist information dissemination really looks like.
Digital diplomacy might be preaching to the choir...but is that a bad thing?
Twitter’s #PositionOfStrength, a women’s empowerment initiative launched on Friday across India to help female Internet users bridge the gender equality gap online, using online platforms to expand their reach and influence. It was previously run in Australia and India, but this is the first time the campaign arrives in Asia.
U.S. social media companies are taking steps to curb support for terrorist causes on their websites. [...] In response, the Islamic State (also known as ISIS) released a new propaganda video which threatens Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter founder Jack Dorsey.
As it stands, the international coalition is far from winning the information war against the Islamic State. Its air strikes may be squeezing the group in Iraq and Syria and killing many of its leaders, but that has not halted the self-proclaimed caliphate’s ideological momentum.
Terrorist groups may now have a harder time using Twitter as a platform for radical activities. For years, terrorists groups such as the Islamic State (ISIS) and Al Qaeda have used social media sites including Twitter and Facebook, to spread extremist messages, recruit followers, and call on sympathizers in the West to commit acts of violence at home.
Over the last few years we’ve been treated to a number of “Facebook revolutions,” from the Arab Spring to Occupy Wall Street to the squares of Istanbul, Kiev and Hong Kong, all fueled by social media. But once the smoke cleared, most of these revolutions failed to build any sustainable new political order, in part because as so many voices got amplified, consensus-building became impossible. Question: Does it turn out that social media is better at breaking things than at making things?