That tyrants try to block it should tell us everything we need to know. [More]
And Twitter played a key role.
It's beyond disappointing how many stiff-necked gun owners refuse to have anything to do with social media and are voluntarily ceding an information communications tool so powerful that collectivist governments want to shut it down.
Those who do are squandering resources and opportunities.
Just because they refuse to pick up a tool doesn't mean their enemies will refuse.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but social media tools can basically be picked up at any time, and newcomers can be folded into the network almost immediately.
ReplyDeleteIn short, when a noteworthy event begins, the social media tools are available to help support it.
Meanwhile, if there is *not* a noteworthy event occuring, then the double-edged nature of the tool may mean it is best left unused at the time for some people.
Further, "social media" as described in your related Examiner article looks mighty close to the 'old media gatekeeper model', save that there are more choices of gatekeepers. More choice in gatekeepers *is* a good thing, but gatekeepers don't only function via social media.
Meanwhile, there are modern tools that allow for information aggregation and dissemination that don't rely on social media tools, such as web sites, RSS readers, and even good ol' email, all of which can be used to direct people to the tool of choice for an important event as needed.
I don't see tools as the vehicle for our salvation, rather motivated individuals seem to be the key. How the tools used to assist such individuals are chosen seems to me to be irrelevant, and it seems likely that the preferred tool will be chosen by such individuals to suit their particular shared goal.
Granted, social media tools should not be ignored when there is a job they can be used to accomplish, but merely using social media tools without a purpose seems essentially pointless. And dangerous.
-PeaceableGuy