What happens when the square is closed but the screen is open? How have the streets of chanting turned into silent arenas where protests are conducted from behind glowing screens?
Over the past decade, the Middle East and North Africa region has experienced a significant shift in the landscape of protest and political activism, evolving from traditional public spaces to digital platforms. During the 2011 revolutions, known as the Arab Spring or Democratic Spring, social media emerged as an unprecedented tool for mobilisation, organisation, and communication. An Egyptian activist at the time summarised this role, saying, ‘We use Facebook to schedule demonstrations, Twitter to coordinate, and YouTube to communicate our message to the world.’ While these platforms did not ignite the protests, they empowered individuals to document violations, disseminate information on a large scale, and amplify the voices of protesters like never before. Young men and women realised the power of these digital tools to break the barrier of fear and challenge the censorship of traditional media, effectively turning their smartphones into portable megaphones that transmit the streets’ chants to cyberspace.
Digital-Flavoured Censorship: When Repression Moves Online
This shift from the street to the screen has presented a few serious challenges. On one hand, ruling regimes have been rapidly minimizing the digital space as merely an extension of traditional protest spaces. Amidst the internet’s growing role in mobilisation, we have witnessed regimes deliberately shutting down internet services to suppress movements. The most notable example of this occurred in Egypt during the January 2011 revolution, when the authorities shut down the entire internet and arrested bloggers in a desperate attempt to silence protesters. A few years later, Sudan employed the same tactic during the 2018–19 revolution. The authorities repeatedly blocked social media platforms and then implemented a total internet shutdown in conjunction with a bloody crackdown on protests in June 2019. According to Access Now, this was one of the largest internet shutdowns globally. Such actions demonstrate that regimes view the digital space as a new battleground that must be controlled in order to curb any political threat.
Besides internet shutdowns, overly broad laws have been enacted to suppress digital freedom of expression. Under the pretense of combating cybercrime or fighting cyberterrorism, several governments in the region have adopted vaguely defined legislation to turn peaceful political activity online into a punishable offence. Accusations such as ‘spreading false news’ or ‘inciting sedition’ have become ready-made tools to criminalise any online dissent. For example, in 2023, Jordan introduced a cybercrime law that criminalises so-called ‘spreading false news’ and ‘inciting strife’ online, which are vague and broad terms that can include any criticism of the authorities. In Saudi Arabia, terrorism and cybercrime laws have also been used to prosecute online activists for a mere tweet or post. In Egypt, after effectively criminalising street protests with the 2013 Gathering Law, the 2018 Cybercrime Law has also been used to prosecute the remaining critical voices online. Overbroad legal provisions have become a sword of Damocles that threatens any dissenting digital activism, with authoritarians using them to turn opponents into “criminals” at the push of a button/ with one click of a button.
Digital repression has also evolved to encompass more sophisticated techniques and methods that transcend the legal framework. (Arab) Regimes have developed a ‘digital repression kit’ comprising intensive electronic surveillance, hacking activists’ accounts, systematic smear campaigns, and online armies to disseminate counter-propaganda and disinformation. Many cybersecurity experts and digital rights organisations have confirmed an increase in incidents of online surveillance of dissidents and malware attacks on their personal devices. Even activists in exile have not been spared this cross-border cyber-oppression. Authoritarian governments are using the internet to target opposition organisations and diaspora communities abroad by spying on their communications, threatening them and their families, and blackmailing them. “Hardly a day goes by without a phishing email in my inbox,” says one Iranian journalist in exile, referring to the barrage of hacking attempts he and others have experienced. These tactics aim to spread fear and suspicion among digitally active communities, pushing dissidents into self-censorship and silence under persistent pressure.
Content under Siege: Tech Companies in the Firing Line of Criticism
In parallel to state repression, digital protesters face a different kind of challenge: the social media companies themselves are clamping down on political and dissenting content. Following years of celebrating the role of sites like Facebook and Twitter (now X) in empowering the Arab Spring movements, many activists have been complaining about what they describe as the platforms’ double standards when it comes to human rights content in the region. For instance, Syrian activists launched a campaign in 2020 to protest Facebook’s removal of thousands of accounts and pages that documented the Syrian regime’s war crimes since 2011 under the pretext of ‘combating terrorist content’. Likewise, Syrians complained that YouTube deleted recordings documenting atrocities committed in the war, and they described this action as an attempt to erase part of their digital historical memory.
In the Palestinian territories, posts advocating for Palestinian causes have often found themselves facing the scissors of the algorithmic censor. Dozens of Facebook accounts of Palestinian journalists and activists were suspended in a single campaign in 2020, while Twitter suspended the account of a well-known Palestinian news network on the flimsy pretext of alleged links to terrorism. Jerusalemite activist Mona Al-Kurd expresses this paradox by saying that social media has become “the only remaining means to communicate our voice and bring attention to our cause” in light of the silencing of other mouths, ‘Every post, tweet, and video makes a difference and reaches large audiences around the world.’ Nevertheless, Mona Al-Kurd and others acknowledge that these platforms (that were once considered as liberation arenas) have sometimes become part of the problem by blocking Palestinian and human rights content, in a phenomenon of ‘digital apartheid’, a description used by organisations such as Amnesty International to describe the bias of algorithms against Palestinian human rights content… Thus, the digital activists find themselves trapped between the jaws of government restrictions on the one hand and non-transparent corporate policies on the other, both of which lead to silencing critical voices or limiting their spread.
‘Echo Chambers’: The Internal Challenge of Digital Activism
Additionally, digital activism itself faces an internal challenge exemplified by the phenomenon of ‘echo chambers’ and the effects of algorithms that confine users to their own intellectual bubbles. Communication platforms are designed to entice attention at any cost, and users — including activists — often receive content that matches their preferences and echoes their own views while marginalising dissenting voices. The internet’s potential as an open space for dialogue and information exchange has become a counter-reality that amplifies societal divisions. The initial casualties of echo chambers are diversity and freedom of expression. They reproduce closed spaces, making them more closed and radical, which suppresses people’s freedom of expression and limits their access to information that challenges their views. Analytical studies demonstrate that communication platforms encourage the repetition of similar views, reducing opportunities for genuine critical dialogue. In a political context, digital activists may find themselves confined to constant interaction with an audience that already agrees with them, with little success in reaching wider groups or persuading neutral individuals. This reduces the practical impact of their campaigns and can sometimes turn them into a kind of internal dialogue. Digital polarisation may also provide authorities with a pretext to demonise these movements as closed groups that do not represent public opinion.
Digital Tools, New Tactics
Despite these challenges, digital activism has produced effective tools that have reshaped the landscape of political opposition in the region. These tools provide new alternatives for collective action and solidarity, transcending the constraints of the imposed reality. The most notable feature of digital platforms is arguably their ability to mobilise large, decentralised groups at speed. With the click of a button, an appeal can reach thousands in a matter of minutes, bypassing geographical barriers and the fear of hierarchical organization. In 2019, Mohamed Ali, an Egyptian contractor living abroad, sparked unprecedented protests in Egypt by releasing a series of videos in which he accused the state leadership of corruption. Within days, a hashtag calling for people to take to the streets had gone viral, and thousands did indeed demonstrate in Cairo, Alexandria, and elsewhere, only to be met with a heavy-handed security crackdown. Although these protests were quickly suppressed, this incident proved that a digital spark can break the silence and confuse the authorities, even if only temporarily, by mobilising people swiftly and rapidly, which may take the security services by surprise. Similarly, popular movements began in Lebanon shortly after the announcement of a tax on WhatsApp in 2019. Calls to protest spread rapidly through WhatsApp, then spread widely to Facebook and Twitter groups, and unprecedented demonstrations spread across all sects and regions in a spontaneous and decentralised manner. This showed that instant communication allowed people to seize the opportunity of public outrage and turn it into real action on the ground before discontent cooled down.
This shift was not only cyber-based in the medium, but strategic in the very essence of the organisation itself; the movement moved from hierarchical structures to more decentralised and flexible forms. The charismatic leader at the top of the demonstration is no longer the primary factor of mobilisation; the digital platform has become the collective leader, and everyone has become both a player and an organiser. This dispersed structure posed a challenge to the security services, which used to target traditional leaders to quell protests. It became difficult to ‘decapitate the movement’ because it is simply… headless.
In conjunction with rapid mobilisation, digital advocacy and hashtag campaigns have emerged as a new and effective lobbying tool. The hashtag (#) has evolved into a rallying point for advocates, drawing media and decision-makers to a cause. To show an example, in May 2021, #SaveSheikhJarrah played a pivotal role in shining a global spotlight on forced displacement in Jerusalem; the hashtag spread across multiple countries and languages, generating unprecedented media and diplomatic momentum in favour of the Palestinian cause at the time. Similarly, the #Ana_Zada (I am Zada) campaign in Tunisia encouraged women to speak out about their experiences of sexual harassment and violence in 2019, inspired by the spirit of the global #MeToo movement but with a bold local flavour. Other contexts have seen similar attempts that used digital hashtags to bring hidden issues into the public sphere, contributing to a broader societal dialogue. These campaigns demonstrated how innovative digital narratives can break taboos and shift the public agenda. The power of virality and engagement enabled previously silenced issues to become the talk of the town, compelling authorities to address them under the pressure of digitally shaped public opinion.
From Documentation to Accountability
A further crucial advantage of digital activism lies in its capacity to document violations in real time and broadcast facts and truth directly. Violators can no longer function in obscurity as they had in previous decades; every citizen with a mobile phone is a potential field journalist, broadcasting what is happening around them to the world in live or recorded video. Through the years, we have seen how this instant documentation has helped hold those involved accountable and expose false official narratives. As an example, during the first Arab protests (2010s), activists documented horrific cases of violence committed by security forces with their phone,s and the footage went viral on YouTube, ‘raising the awareness of the world, especially the Arab world, of what was happening on the ground in Egypt, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere. In Lebanon in 2015, footage showing the security forces’ repression of protesters of the You Stink campaign against the garbage crisis went viral, prompting investigations – albeit pro forma – under public pressure. In a more serious context, online documentation of crimes has played a pivotal role in achieving international justice: Organisations led by Syrian activists in exile have collected hundreds of thousands of photos and videos proving torture and abuses in regime prisons and submitted them to European courts, which recently led to the first conviction of a Syrian official for crimes against humanity in a German court. This example highlights how the mobile phone camera has become a tool for accountability that transcends state borders. The digital recording has become an archive of collective memory and a witness that is difficult to erase – even when regimes attempt to erase evidence, as they did with the deletion of videos, as someone always keeps a copy and republishes it.
Cross-Border Solidarity
The influence of digital activism extends beyond documenting local violations to creating cross-border solidarity among people and causes. The online sphere has made it increasingly easy for grassroots activists to connect with each other and with international supporters, breaking their national isolation and finding moral and material support that transcends geographical borders. For example, during the Sudanese and Algerian uprisings in 2019, we witnessed remarkable solidarity from activists in other Arab countries. Slogans and drawings from Algerian revolutionaries were spread in the sit-in square in Khartoum, while demonstrators in Algeria waved Sudanese flags and banners saluting the Sudanese struggle. Similarly, Palestinian digital campaigns – especially in the diaspora – were supported by widespread solidarity from activists in the region and the world, which increased the momentum and pressure on governments. One Palestinian activist describes this interconnectedness: ‘Through our posts, we reach the masses of people and governments around the world.’ A hashtag from Gaza, Damascus, or Beirut can turn into a global trend and embarrass decision-makers in major capitals. The effectiveness of this online solidarity was demonstrated through the involvement and engagement of Arab communities in the diaspora in support movements, the organisation of simultaneous protests, and the use of the same hashtags, as seen in solidarity demonstrations with Gaza and the Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhoods from Sydney to London to New York. Technology has dissolved time and space divides, making the digital space a shared global arena of struggle where everyone can raise their voices from wherever they are.
As a result of this digital interconnectedness and the free flow of information, opposition movements have been able to exert real political and media pressure on governments that would not have been possible through traditional means. Online street opinion has been an element that leaders have to reckon with, especially when it becomes headline news. Hashtag campaigns have prompted many media outlets to adjust their narratives or cover issues that had been overlooked. One study explains that hashtag activism is a transformative opportunity to ‘inject new narratives or change the way we do things’ into mainstream media. We saw this in the massive solidarity campaign for Omar al-Radi, who was arrested in 2019 after a tweet that went viral with the hashtag #FreeRadi, sparking a wave of international pressure that led to his subsequent release through a royal pardon. The capacity of digital activists to impose their agenda on public opinion through constant media pressure has allowed them to extract concessions that were previously not possible; from releasing detainees here, to withdrawing a restrictive law there, or even just creating a broad societal debate on fundamental issues.
Narrative as an Act of Resistance
Finally, the digital activism arena has yielded innovations in tactics and narratives that have bolstered the resilience of social movements and enabled them to maneuver in the face of repression. The use of encrypted chat apps and campaigning through decentralised or less censored platforms has become widespread, and activists have become adept at exploiting every technological loophole available. If a country blocked a protest coordination website, for example, activists would immediately set up another website or Telegram channel to take its place. If a Facebook page was shut down, people would go to Twitter or Instagram to continue the campaign. Some have even resorted to highly creative tactics: For example, they used dating apps to spread awareness when other channels were blocked, or created simple video games with political messages that appealed to young people.
In terms of narrative, activists have relied on the power of visual and interactive symbols to grab attention amid an overwhelming amount of content. Political cartoons, satirical songs, and memes that cleverly criticise reality went viral. During the 2011 revolution, for example, Yemeni activists used helmets made from loaves of bread to make a humorous statement about police violence, turning the ‘bread on the head’ scene into a viral meme that boosted protesters’ morale. This constant modernisation of tactics — from drawing on folklore to harnessing the latest technology — has kept digital activism alive and enabled it to adapt to changing battlefield conditions.
Internet as a Right … Not Just a Tool
Ultimately, it could be argued that the digital space has become an integral part of the struggle for rights and freedoms in the Arab world and is just as important as traditional public spaces. While the form and methods of protest have evolved, the essence has remained the same: a collective endeavour to resist and raise awareness of injustice. While capitals’ streets have been transformed into besieged areas by soldiers and repressive laws, online spaces have emerged as havens where citizens can gather, express themselves and effect change. This reality forces those concerned with rights and freedoms — activists, journalists, international partners, and supporters — to reconsider the concept of freedom of assembly and expression, extending it to encompass the digital realm.
Safeguarding the right to protest means protecting not only people’s right to gather in public spaces, but also their right to launch a campaign hashtag without fear of arrest, broadcast videos documenting violations without risk of deletion or blocking, and create virtual communities that can freely exchange ideas without arbitrary censorship. The future of opposition and the civil movement in our region is closely linked to the extent of internet freedom and openness. The more virtual spaces narrow, the more important they become as an outlet and engine for change.
This comes with difficulties and challenges, but experience has proven that the voice of the people always finds a way — if the doors are closed, it sneaks in through the windows. This is the case now: If the squares are closed, the screens will speak.
Defending internet freedom must become an integral part of defending the right to peaceful assembly and expression. The battle for a freer and fairer tomorrow now includes a new arena: the internet. This must remain an open and safe platform for people’s voices, and a cornerstone for exercising their fundamental rights without fear or intimidation.
Protecting the internet by default protects everyone’s right to freedom of assembly and expression in the 21st century. It also guarantees that the journey from the street to the screen will continue, bringing us closer to achieving the dignity and justice that people of the region seek.
