The Influence of Media on Protest Activities in post-Soviet semi- Authoritarian Regimes
|
1. Introduction 3
2. Literature review 8
2.1. Political Participation 8
2.2. Political mobilization 11
2.3. Protests as a form of political participation 13
2.4. Protests in semi-authoritarian regimes 18
2.5. The role of the media 23
3. Mass protests in the former Soviet Union 30
3.1. Case study approach 30
3.2. Successful cases 32
3.2.1. Ukraine 2004 and 2013/2014 32
3.2.2. Kyrgyzstan 2005 and 2010 37
3.3. Unsuccessful cases 41
3.3.1. Russia 2011/2012 41
3.3.2. Belarus 2010 and 2017 46
4. Research method and questions 50
4.1. Expert interviews 50
4.2. Identifying interview partners and conducting the interviews 51
4.3. Analytical questions and clustering of the material 53
4.4. Limitations of this study 54
5. The media and protest activities 56
5.1. Protest mobilization 56
5.2. TV versus social media 60
5.3. Changes to Press and Internet Freedom 63
5.4. Long-term outcome of the protests 71
6. Conclusion 76
7. Bibliography 83
8. Statement 88
9. Appendix 89
2. Literature review 8
2.1. Political Participation 8
2.2. Political mobilization 11
2.3. Protests as a form of political participation 13
2.4. Protests in semi-authoritarian regimes 18
2.5. The role of the media 23
3. Mass protests in the former Soviet Union 30
3.1. Case study approach 30
3.2. Successful cases 32
3.2.1. Ukraine 2004 and 2013/2014 32
3.2.2. Kyrgyzstan 2005 and 2010 37
3.3. Unsuccessful cases 41
3.3.1. Russia 2011/2012 41
3.3.2. Belarus 2010 and 2017 46
4. Research method and questions 50
4.1. Expert interviews 50
4.2. Identifying interview partners and conducting the interviews 51
4.3. Analytical questions and clustering of the material 53
4.4. Limitations of this study 54
5. The media and protest activities 56
5.1. Protest mobilization 56
5.2. TV versus social media 60
5.3. Changes to Press and Internet Freedom 63
5.4. Long-term outcome of the protests 71
6. Conclusion 76
7. Bibliography 83
8. Statement 88
9. Appendix 89
In the early months of 2017 alone, five countries located in the former Soviet Union experienced waves of protest and unrest. In response to reports about dismal labor conditions, demonstrations occurred in Georgia in February 2017 . Several protest actions were held across post-Soviet States in March of this year. After a popular oppositional leader was arrested in Kyrgyzstan, hundreds of his supporters took to the street in the capital Bishkek . All major Belarussian cities saw rallies against the so-called “parasite tax”, requiring the unemployed to pay a fee . Demonstrations opposing corruption were held in Russia’s biggest cities in March as well . In Moldova’s capital Chisinau, protesters gathered in the middle of May 2017 to voice their discontent with controversial changes to the electoral system .
Protests are common international occurrences in the 21st century. The number of protest actions in Western democracies has increased dramatically since the 1970s. But with the so-called Color Revolutions in Eastern Europe and Central Asia in the early 2000s as well as the Arab Spring in the early 2010s, protests have become more widespread even in authoritarian regimes. In light of this, it is interesting to analyze the challenges protest movements in authoritarian regimes have to face and how the media may influence the mobilization of protest participants, specifically in post-Soviet states.
A lot of research focusing on the strong mobilizing effect of social media has been conducted in regard to protests against authoritarian regimes in the Arab world. Numerous scholars even refer to the large-scale demonstrations in Egypt (2011) and Tunisia (2010/2011) as “Facebook Revolutions”. Concerning recent mass protests in post-Soviet regimes, a similar research focus can be observed. Stephen White and Ian McAllistster focus on whether Russia had a so-called Facebook Revolution of its own in 2011 . However, the results of this Master thesis do not fully support a hypothesis that this was the case, as will be shown in chapter five. Each of the post-Soviet protest waves discussed in this study featured different media outlets instrumental for the mobilization of their participants. Thus, this Master thesis will argue against the common research trends highlighting the importance of social media in protest mobilization and will state that other media outlets such as TV, newspapers, calls and text messages via mobile phones and even word-of-mouth can be just important, if not even more crucial to protest mobilization in post-Soviet states.
Seven protest waves in four post-Soviet countries will be analyzed in this study: The Orange Revolution (2004) and Euromaidan Revolution (2014) in Ukraine; the Tulip Revolution (2005) and the Second Kyrgyz Revolution (2010) in Kyrgyzstan; the Russian mass demonstrations in 2011/2012 and the Belarussian protests in 2010 and 2017.
Furthermore, the usage and influence of the media in these protest cases will be discussed. In detail, recent levels of Press and Internet Freedom in those four countries, changes to these levels caused by the protest waves, the most influential media outlets during protest mobilization, usefulness of access to traditional media (especially TV) and the outcome of the protests will be examined. Eight semi-structured expert interviews were conducted, which deliver valuable insights into the role of the media in relation to these protests. Two experts for each of the four countries were interviewed to collect more balanced and in-depth views. Namely, four researchers and four journalists shared their deep knowledge on the seven protest waves, media spheres and political structures of Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Belarus. Seven of the eight interviews with those experts were conducted via Skype in either English, German or Russian. Upon request, one expert answered the interview questions in written form on Facebook. All of the interview transcripts can be found in the appendix of this study. To keep the volume of the appendix as small as possible, only the English versions were included.
With the data gathered from these interviews, the following research questions will be answered in this Master thesis:
RQ1: How did the media play a role in mobilizing the protest waves of the countries analyzed and which kind of media (traditional or social) was more influential?
RG2: Would television coverage of protests be beneficial to a protest movements, so that large-scale demonstrations could be mobilized or is social media sufficient enough for that?
RQ3: What is the current situation of Press and Internet Freedom in the countries analyzed and did the protest waves cause any changes to this situation?
RG4: Did the protest waves bring about long-lasting political changes and democratic reforms or did they completely fail to initiate a democratizing process in the countries analyzed?
Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Belarus were chosen as case studies for this analysis for several reasons. Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan both experienced a color revolution and then a “follow up” revolution just a few years apart. Thus, it is interesting to evaluate if the media outlets used to mobilize participants differed from each other. Russia and Belarus were selected because they are more repressive compared to the other two and usually swiftly suppress any protest attempts. Therefore, it is fascinating to investigate which media outlets were capable of mobilizing participants on a larger scale despite those repressions.
As for the chronological framework used to analyze those seven protest movements in four post-Soviet hybrid regimes, a period between 2004 and 2017 was selected. This timeframe is attractive to look at because two so-called color revolutions took place during this time, as well as several failed attempts at such a government overthrow.
In terms of scientific literature, the following books and article were most helpful for this study to explain how protests develop in general and in authoritarian regimes in particular and what the media’s role is in protest mobilization. The theory of social movements is one branch of Sociology research, which especially examines protest actions. In their chapter of the book “Social Movements and Networks”, published in 2003, Pamela Oliver and Daniel Meyers used diffusion and network approaches to explain protest cycles. Graeme Robertson explains in his book “The Politics of Protest in Hybrid Regimes” (2011) what unique challenges protest movement have to overcome in semi-authoritarian systems. Lastly, Anita Breuer, Todd Landman and Dorothea Farquhar discuss in their article “Social Media and Protest Mobilization” published in a scientific journal in 2015, how the media in general and the internet and social networks in particular can help with mobilizing protest participants in semi-authoritarian regimes.
This theoretical framework will be explained more in detail in the literature review of this Master thesis, which will serve as an introduction into the topic of protests as political participation and the media’s role in protest mobilization. In chapter three of this study, the case study approach used will be outlined and background information on the seven protest waves analyzed will be given. Chapter four introduces semi-structured expert interviews as a popular research method, details how the eight interviews for this paper were conducted and explains the research questions of this study. In the fifth chapter, the data gathered from the interviews will be discussed and the research questions will be answered one by one. Lastly, the results of this Master thesis will be summarized and put into a broader research context in the concluding chapter of the paper.
Protests are common international occurrences in the 21st century. The number of protest actions in Western democracies has increased dramatically since the 1970s. But with the so-called Color Revolutions in Eastern Europe and Central Asia in the early 2000s as well as the Arab Spring in the early 2010s, protests have become more widespread even in authoritarian regimes. In light of this, it is interesting to analyze the challenges protest movements in authoritarian regimes have to face and how the media may influence the mobilization of protest participants, specifically in post-Soviet states.
A lot of research focusing on the strong mobilizing effect of social media has been conducted in regard to protests against authoritarian regimes in the Arab world. Numerous scholars even refer to the large-scale demonstrations in Egypt (2011) and Tunisia (2010/2011) as “Facebook Revolutions”. Concerning recent mass protests in post-Soviet regimes, a similar research focus can be observed. Stephen White and Ian McAllistster focus on whether Russia had a so-called Facebook Revolution of its own in 2011 . However, the results of this Master thesis do not fully support a hypothesis that this was the case, as will be shown in chapter five. Each of the post-Soviet protest waves discussed in this study featured different media outlets instrumental for the mobilization of their participants. Thus, this Master thesis will argue against the common research trends highlighting the importance of social media in protest mobilization and will state that other media outlets such as TV, newspapers, calls and text messages via mobile phones and even word-of-mouth can be just important, if not even more crucial to protest mobilization in post-Soviet states.
Seven protest waves in four post-Soviet countries will be analyzed in this study: The Orange Revolution (2004) and Euromaidan Revolution (2014) in Ukraine; the Tulip Revolution (2005) and the Second Kyrgyz Revolution (2010) in Kyrgyzstan; the Russian mass demonstrations in 2011/2012 and the Belarussian protests in 2010 and 2017.
Furthermore, the usage and influence of the media in these protest cases will be discussed. In detail, recent levels of Press and Internet Freedom in those four countries, changes to these levels caused by the protest waves, the most influential media outlets during protest mobilization, usefulness of access to traditional media (especially TV) and the outcome of the protests will be examined. Eight semi-structured expert interviews were conducted, which deliver valuable insights into the role of the media in relation to these protests. Two experts for each of the four countries were interviewed to collect more balanced and in-depth views. Namely, four researchers and four journalists shared their deep knowledge on the seven protest waves, media spheres and political structures of Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Belarus. Seven of the eight interviews with those experts were conducted via Skype in either English, German or Russian. Upon request, one expert answered the interview questions in written form on Facebook. All of the interview transcripts can be found in the appendix of this study. To keep the volume of the appendix as small as possible, only the English versions were included.
With the data gathered from these interviews, the following research questions will be answered in this Master thesis:
RQ1: How did the media play a role in mobilizing the protest waves of the countries analyzed and which kind of media (traditional or social) was more influential?
RG2: Would television coverage of protests be beneficial to a protest movements, so that large-scale demonstrations could be mobilized or is social media sufficient enough for that?
RQ3: What is the current situation of Press and Internet Freedom in the countries analyzed and did the protest waves cause any changes to this situation?
RG4: Did the protest waves bring about long-lasting political changes and democratic reforms or did they completely fail to initiate a democratizing process in the countries analyzed?
Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Belarus were chosen as case studies for this analysis for several reasons. Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan both experienced a color revolution and then a “follow up” revolution just a few years apart. Thus, it is interesting to evaluate if the media outlets used to mobilize participants differed from each other. Russia and Belarus were selected because they are more repressive compared to the other two and usually swiftly suppress any protest attempts. Therefore, it is fascinating to investigate which media outlets were capable of mobilizing participants on a larger scale despite those repressions.
As for the chronological framework used to analyze those seven protest movements in four post-Soviet hybrid regimes, a period between 2004 and 2017 was selected. This timeframe is attractive to look at because two so-called color revolutions took place during this time, as well as several failed attempts at such a government overthrow.
In terms of scientific literature, the following books and article were most helpful for this study to explain how protests develop in general and in authoritarian regimes in particular and what the media’s role is in protest mobilization. The theory of social movements is one branch of Sociology research, which especially examines protest actions. In their chapter of the book “Social Movements and Networks”, published in 2003, Pamela Oliver and Daniel Meyers used diffusion and network approaches to explain protest cycles. Graeme Robertson explains in his book “The Politics of Protest in Hybrid Regimes” (2011) what unique challenges protest movement have to overcome in semi-authoritarian systems. Lastly, Anita Breuer, Todd Landman and Dorothea Farquhar discuss in their article “Social Media and Protest Mobilization” published in a scientific journal in 2015, how the media in general and the internet and social networks in particular can help with mobilizing protest participants in semi-authoritarian regimes.
This theoretical framework will be explained more in detail in the literature review of this Master thesis, which will serve as an introduction into the topic of protests as political participation and the media’s role in protest mobilization. In chapter three of this study, the case study approach used will be outlined and background information on the seven protest waves analyzed will be given. Chapter four introduces semi-structured expert interviews as a popular research method, details how the eight interviews for this paper were conducted and explains the research questions of this study. In the fifth chapter, the data gathered from the interviews will be discussed and the research questions will be answered one by one. Lastly, the results of this Master thesis will be summarized and put into a broader research context in the concluding chapter of the paper.
This Master thesis started with an overview on the literature about protests as a form of political participation. Due to the vast political and social changes during the 1960s and 1970s, citizens’ political involvement increased. Their interests and opinions, including any negative feelings, were now seen as part of the scope of political participation. Protest actions as a vehicle to express these negative feelings with political or social issues were called “unconventional” as they did not conform with the social norms at that time.
In Western democracies, the shape of political participation has shifted considerably over the last few decades. For example, the number of citizens regularly engaged in protest activities has increased significantly since the 1970s. Many researcher have therefore proclaimed “social movement societies” or “demonstration democracies”. Any actions carried out by groups of citizens to make appeals to the government are seen as forms of protests. This includes a wide range of actions, such as strikes, sit-ins, occupations, blockades, marches and demonstrations.
However, this Master thesis analyses countries within the post-Soviet space, which are considered as semi-authoritarian or hybrid regimes. Such a regime type is positioned in between full democracies and totalitarian systems. It usually does not fulfil one or several conditions of a full democracy. Compared to the other regime types, there are several unique difficulties which protest movements have to face in hybrid regimes. In accordance with the rights to Freedom of Association, social movement organizations are technically allowed to operate in hybrid regimes, but not without restrictions: comprehensive observation by the state, obligatory registration and threats of foreclosure. Also, Freedom of Assembly may be affected by repressive measures like coercion, bodily harm and imprisonment. These are the reasons why an opposition’s or a protest movement’s ability to organize is severely restricted.
Here is where the media comes in. Within hybrid regimes, it is hard for protest movements to mobilize participants for their actions in large numbers, because the state exercises a monopoly over public discourse. Generally speaking, the traditional mass media is used by the regime through censorship and threats to fight against any negative attention. The internet and especially social media are difficult to control, though. This provides the protest movement with a window to share injustices and complaints and potentially get the attention of a wider audience. Similarly, citizens may freely express their opinions and enter in discussions with the protest movement. This may inform and mobilize more protest participants.
In the second chapter of this Master thesis, background information on the countries and protest waves analyzed and the reasons for choosing those cases were given. Seven protest waves in four post-Soviet countries were discussed, divided into successful and unsuccessful cases to systemize and distinguish them. The Orange Revolution 2004, which brought Viktor Yushchenko, head of the oppositional “Our Ukraine” coalition, into the presidential office and the Euromaidan Revolution 2014, which forced President Yanukovych into exile were chosen as successful protest movements for the case study of Ukraine. Kyrgyzstan had two successful revolutions in recent years, the Tulip Revolution 2005, which brought Kurmanbek Bakiev, leader of the oppositional “People’s Movement of Kyrgyzstan” into power and the second Kyrgyz Revolution of 2010, which in turn ousted Bakiev again. As for the cases that did not achieve a change in leadership, three protest movements in Russia and Belarus were chosen. In 2011/2012, mass protests broke out in Russia against fraudulent parliamentary elections and Vladimir Putin’s and Dimitry Medvedev’s presidential “job swap”. In 2010, people took to the streets when the president of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko, was re-elected for a fourth term. In 2017, widespread protest in Belarus started in response to the so-called “parasite tax”. Neither protest wave achieved any change to the political leadership of Russia or Belarus.
These countries and protest waves were chosen to be analyzed in this Master thesis because of several reasons. Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan went through both, a color revolution and then a “follow up” revolution a few years later. Thus, it is interesting to discuss why these revolutions occurred so close together and if the media outlets most influential in mobilizing the demonstrations differed from each other. Russia and Belarus were chosen because they are more repressive compared to the other two. Yet, despite the usual serious crackdowns on any protest attempts, several protest waves could be mobilized there in recent years. Therefore, it is compelling to investigate how this was possible and which media outlets were used to mobilize the participants.
In the third chapter, the research method utilized and the research questions formulated to analyze media use in those four countries and seven protest waves were laid out. To gain more balanced and in-depth views for the analysis, two experts for each country were interviewed. In total, eight semi-structured interviews were conducted with journalists and researchers either native or foreign to the countries analyzed were conducted at the end of April 2017. For analyzing the data gained from the interviews, four research questions were constructed according to which the information was clustered. Each question was then answered one after the other in the final chapter of this Master thesis.
First, the answer to the following research question was provided: How did the media play a role in mobilizing the protest waves of the countries analyzed and which kind of media (traditional or social) was more influential?
Each of the seven protest waves were mobilized via different media outlets. The Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004 utilized traditional mass media to inform and recruit participants: the independent TV channel “Kanal 5” and newspaper “Ukrainskaya Pravda”. However, the Euromaidan Revolution in 2014 heavily depended on Facebook and online livestreams as communicational and informational tools. During both revolutions in Kyrgyzstan, the protest movements used calls and text messages on mobile phones to spread information about meeting points of demonstrations. In Russia 2011/2012, Facebook was by far the most widely used social media outlet. However, online media such as lenta.ru also played a role. Interestingly, media was not a part of protest mobilization in Belarus 2017. They were organized through word-of-mouth.
Next, the second research question was tackled: Would television coverage of protests be beneficial to a protest movements, so that large-scale demonstrations could be mobilized or is social media sufficient enough for that?
Most experts agree that access to TV would help a protest movement to mobilize more participants. In all the countries analyzed, most citizens still get their information from television. So, a foothold of the protest movement on TV could potentially reach a large portion of the population all at once. Also, traditional mass media enjoys an element of objectivity more so than social media, where information is filtered through friends and acquaintances of the users. TV, however, gives information an air of universality, truth and a “we”-ness for large groups of citizens. On the contrary, one expert says that internet would be sufficient for mass mobilization if popular search engines would list articles about protests in their search results. In Russia, this is prevented by employing some kind of algorithm. Another expert states that TV can also become obstructive to a protest movement, if it is used by the government for counterpropaganda.
Research question number three was then explained: What is the current situation of Press and Internet Freedom in the countries analyzed and did the protest waves cause any changes to this situation?
According to the two experts for Ukraine, the formal criteria for Press and Internet Freedom were improved after the Euromaidan Revolution. However, self¬censorship and biased reporting in favor of the Ukrainian side is now a huge issue, especially with coverage of the ongoing military conflict in Donbas. In Kyrgyzstan, the situation got significantly worse in the period between the two Revolutions in 2005 and 2010. Critical journalists were harassed, imprisoned and even killed in some instances. After 2010, however, things made a turn for the better. The only state TV channel was converted into a private one and some independent online media outlets and blogs managed to establish themselves. In Russia, the level of Press and Internet Freedom has decreased after the protest waves. New laws allowing the state to prosecute people who have expressed opinions considered “extremists” and requiring bloggers to register their websites as official media were passed recently. Belarus is placed in the bottom half of the Press Freedom ranking of “Reporters without Borders”. Independent media in Belarus are subject to intense harassment and won’t be officially registered by the state. Therefore, all activities by their journalists are considered illegal.
Lastly, the fourth research question was resolved: Did the protest waves bring about long-lasting political changes and democratic reforms or did they completely fail to initiate a democratizing process in the countries analyzed?
In Ukraine, there were some positive effects by the Euromaidan Revolution such as Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly and Ukraine’s integration into common European values. The country’s self-esteem, national identity and values have also been strengthened by the revolution. However, these achievements are now in jeopardy because of the war in Donbas. As for Kyrgyzstan, the country was considered an island of democracy and Press Freedom in Central Asia for a few years after the Revolution in 2010. However, the country is still suffering from economic hardship and corruption. This is why discontent is currently on the rise again. In Russia, the protest wave of 2011/2012 has failed to initiate any reforms to the political systems. However, it has politicized groups of people who had not been politically active before the protests. Different local activist groups have been able to establish themselves in the regions, taking part in local elections and protest campaigns. Belarus has also not seen any kind of political reforms through the protest waves in recent years. However, the protest movement of 2017 has at least achieved a suspension of the “parasite law”.
There are several surprising results garnered from the expert interviews regarding the influence of the media on protest mobilization in post-Soviet countries. A lot of research has been recently conducted on how important social media was in mobilizing mass protests against authoritarian regimes in the Arab world, proclaiming the emergence of “Facebook Revolutions”. Concerning recent mass protests in post-Soviet regimes, a similar research focus can be observed. However, the results of this Master thesis do not fully support this, neither for Russia nor for the other countries analyzed. Each of the seven post-Soviet protest waves discussed in the period between 2004 and 2017 featured different media outlets instrumental for the mobilization of their participants. Of course, Facebook played a big role, as most experts agree that the opposition and politically active citizens in post-Soviet countries use this outlet for communication. However, traditional mass media, online news portals, cell phones and word-of-mouth have turned out to be equally important, depending on the protest wave analyzed. Most experts also agree that access to mass media, especially TV, would be immensely beneficial to a protest movement to mobilize participants on a large scale. In pretty much all of the post-Soviet countries, television is still the most widely used medium. Mobile devices and internet access are not always available or affordable in some remote regions of the countries analyzed.
As far as any outcome of protest waves is concerned, it is important to see the whole picture. Simply classifying a protest movement as successful if it managed to foster change in the political leadership of a country is too shortsighted. A protest movement might succeed in improving the level of Press and Internet movement or encourage the establishment of more online media or blogs, but problems of harassment by the regime, self-censorship or getting official registration and accreditation might still persist long term. In some cases, analysis of the level of Press and Internet Freedom in the years after protest waves have ended, showed that it has only gotten worse if the government reacted by passing more restrictive media laws. Politically, an initial success by protest movements of ousting incumbent presidents or partial successes of politicizing previously inactive parts of the population or of axing an unpopular law do not equate to any positive long term changes to the system. Economic decline, growing divisions between culturally diverse regions within a country, no change in the way a society thinks and in some cases even a wave of repression, might still follow in the aftermath of a protest wave.
In conclusion, revolutions and protest waves - doesn’t matter in which regions of the world they occur - are always unpredictable and difficult to analyze. In most, if not all cases, their real effect on the media and political spheres of a country might not be known for years or decades to come.
In Western democracies, the shape of political participation has shifted considerably over the last few decades. For example, the number of citizens regularly engaged in protest activities has increased significantly since the 1970s. Many researcher have therefore proclaimed “social movement societies” or “demonstration democracies”. Any actions carried out by groups of citizens to make appeals to the government are seen as forms of protests. This includes a wide range of actions, such as strikes, sit-ins, occupations, blockades, marches and demonstrations.
However, this Master thesis analyses countries within the post-Soviet space, which are considered as semi-authoritarian or hybrid regimes. Such a regime type is positioned in between full democracies and totalitarian systems. It usually does not fulfil one or several conditions of a full democracy. Compared to the other regime types, there are several unique difficulties which protest movements have to face in hybrid regimes. In accordance with the rights to Freedom of Association, social movement organizations are technically allowed to operate in hybrid regimes, but not without restrictions: comprehensive observation by the state, obligatory registration and threats of foreclosure. Also, Freedom of Assembly may be affected by repressive measures like coercion, bodily harm and imprisonment. These are the reasons why an opposition’s or a protest movement’s ability to organize is severely restricted.
Here is where the media comes in. Within hybrid regimes, it is hard for protest movements to mobilize participants for their actions in large numbers, because the state exercises a monopoly over public discourse. Generally speaking, the traditional mass media is used by the regime through censorship and threats to fight against any negative attention. The internet and especially social media are difficult to control, though. This provides the protest movement with a window to share injustices and complaints and potentially get the attention of a wider audience. Similarly, citizens may freely express their opinions and enter in discussions with the protest movement. This may inform and mobilize more protest participants.
In the second chapter of this Master thesis, background information on the countries and protest waves analyzed and the reasons for choosing those cases were given. Seven protest waves in four post-Soviet countries were discussed, divided into successful and unsuccessful cases to systemize and distinguish them. The Orange Revolution 2004, which brought Viktor Yushchenko, head of the oppositional “Our Ukraine” coalition, into the presidential office and the Euromaidan Revolution 2014, which forced President Yanukovych into exile were chosen as successful protest movements for the case study of Ukraine. Kyrgyzstan had two successful revolutions in recent years, the Tulip Revolution 2005, which brought Kurmanbek Bakiev, leader of the oppositional “People’s Movement of Kyrgyzstan” into power and the second Kyrgyz Revolution of 2010, which in turn ousted Bakiev again. As for the cases that did not achieve a change in leadership, three protest movements in Russia and Belarus were chosen. In 2011/2012, mass protests broke out in Russia against fraudulent parliamentary elections and Vladimir Putin’s and Dimitry Medvedev’s presidential “job swap”. In 2010, people took to the streets when the president of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko, was re-elected for a fourth term. In 2017, widespread protest in Belarus started in response to the so-called “parasite tax”. Neither protest wave achieved any change to the political leadership of Russia or Belarus.
These countries and protest waves were chosen to be analyzed in this Master thesis because of several reasons. Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan went through both, a color revolution and then a “follow up” revolution a few years later. Thus, it is interesting to discuss why these revolutions occurred so close together and if the media outlets most influential in mobilizing the demonstrations differed from each other. Russia and Belarus were chosen because they are more repressive compared to the other two. Yet, despite the usual serious crackdowns on any protest attempts, several protest waves could be mobilized there in recent years. Therefore, it is compelling to investigate how this was possible and which media outlets were used to mobilize the participants.
In the third chapter, the research method utilized and the research questions formulated to analyze media use in those four countries and seven protest waves were laid out. To gain more balanced and in-depth views for the analysis, two experts for each country were interviewed. In total, eight semi-structured interviews were conducted with journalists and researchers either native or foreign to the countries analyzed were conducted at the end of April 2017. For analyzing the data gained from the interviews, four research questions were constructed according to which the information was clustered. Each question was then answered one after the other in the final chapter of this Master thesis.
First, the answer to the following research question was provided: How did the media play a role in mobilizing the protest waves of the countries analyzed and which kind of media (traditional or social) was more influential?
Each of the seven protest waves were mobilized via different media outlets. The Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004 utilized traditional mass media to inform and recruit participants: the independent TV channel “Kanal 5” and newspaper “Ukrainskaya Pravda”. However, the Euromaidan Revolution in 2014 heavily depended on Facebook and online livestreams as communicational and informational tools. During both revolutions in Kyrgyzstan, the protest movements used calls and text messages on mobile phones to spread information about meeting points of demonstrations. In Russia 2011/2012, Facebook was by far the most widely used social media outlet. However, online media such as lenta.ru also played a role. Interestingly, media was not a part of protest mobilization in Belarus 2017. They were organized through word-of-mouth.
Next, the second research question was tackled: Would television coverage of protests be beneficial to a protest movements, so that large-scale demonstrations could be mobilized or is social media sufficient enough for that?
Most experts agree that access to TV would help a protest movement to mobilize more participants. In all the countries analyzed, most citizens still get their information from television. So, a foothold of the protest movement on TV could potentially reach a large portion of the population all at once. Also, traditional mass media enjoys an element of objectivity more so than social media, where information is filtered through friends and acquaintances of the users. TV, however, gives information an air of universality, truth and a “we”-ness for large groups of citizens. On the contrary, one expert says that internet would be sufficient for mass mobilization if popular search engines would list articles about protests in their search results. In Russia, this is prevented by employing some kind of algorithm. Another expert states that TV can also become obstructive to a protest movement, if it is used by the government for counterpropaganda.
Research question number three was then explained: What is the current situation of Press and Internet Freedom in the countries analyzed and did the protest waves cause any changes to this situation?
According to the two experts for Ukraine, the formal criteria for Press and Internet Freedom were improved after the Euromaidan Revolution. However, self¬censorship and biased reporting in favor of the Ukrainian side is now a huge issue, especially with coverage of the ongoing military conflict in Donbas. In Kyrgyzstan, the situation got significantly worse in the period between the two Revolutions in 2005 and 2010. Critical journalists were harassed, imprisoned and even killed in some instances. After 2010, however, things made a turn for the better. The only state TV channel was converted into a private one and some independent online media outlets and blogs managed to establish themselves. In Russia, the level of Press and Internet Freedom has decreased after the protest waves. New laws allowing the state to prosecute people who have expressed opinions considered “extremists” and requiring bloggers to register their websites as official media were passed recently. Belarus is placed in the bottom half of the Press Freedom ranking of “Reporters without Borders”. Independent media in Belarus are subject to intense harassment and won’t be officially registered by the state. Therefore, all activities by their journalists are considered illegal.
Lastly, the fourth research question was resolved: Did the protest waves bring about long-lasting political changes and democratic reforms or did they completely fail to initiate a democratizing process in the countries analyzed?
In Ukraine, there were some positive effects by the Euromaidan Revolution such as Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly and Ukraine’s integration into common European values. The country’s self-esteem, national identity and values have also been strengthened by the revolution. However, these achievements are now in jeopardy because of the war in Donbas. As for Kyrgyzstan, the country was considered an island of democracy and Press Freedom in Central Asia for a few years after the Revolution in 2010. However, the country is still suffering from economic hardship and corruption. This is why discontent is currently on the rise again. In Russia, the protest wave of 2011/2012 has failed to initiate any reforms to the political systems. However, it has politicized groups of people who had not been politically active before the protests. Different local activist groups have been able to establish themselves in the regions, taking part in local elections and protest campaigns. Belarus has also not seen any kind of political reforms through the protest waves in recent years. However, the protest movement of 2017 has at least achieved a suspension of the “parasite law”.
There are several surprising results garnered from the expert interviews regarding the influence of the media on protest mobilization in post-Soviet countries. A lot of research has been recently conducted on how important social media was in mobilizing mass protests against authoritarian regimes in the Arab world, proclaiming the emergence of “Facebook Revolutions”. Concerning recent mass protests in post-Soviet regimes, a similar research focus can be observed. However, the results of this Master thesis do not fully support this, neither for Russia nor for the other countries analyzed. Each of the seven post-Soviet protest waves discussed in the period between 2004 and 2017 featured different media outlets instrumental for the mobilization of their participants. Of course, Facebook played a big role, as most experts agree that the opposition and politically active citizens in post-Soviet countries use this outlet for communication. However, traditional mass media, online news portals, cell phones and word-of-mouth have turned out to be equally important, depending on the protest wave analyzed. Most experts also agree that access to mass media, especially TV, would be immensely beneficial to a protest movement to mobilize participants on a large scale. In pretty much all of the post-Soviet countries, television is still the most widely used medium. Mobile devices and internet access are not always available or affordable in some remote regions of the countries analyzed.
As far as any outcome of protest waves is concerned, it is important to see the whole picture. Simply classifying a protest movement as successful if it managed to foster change in the political leadership of a country is too shortsighted. A protest movement might succeed in improving the level of Press and Internet movement or encourage the establishment of more online media or blogs, but problems of harassment by the regime, self-censorship or getting official registration and accreditation might still persist long term. In some cases, analysis of the level of Press and Internet Freedom in the years after protest waves have ended, showed that it has only gotten worse if the government reacted by passing more restrictive media laws. Politically, an initial success by protest movements of ousting incumbent presidents or partial successes of politicizing previously inactive parts of the population or of axing an unpopular law do not equate to any positive long term changes to the system. Economic decline, growing divisions between culturally diverse regions within a country, no change in the way a society thinks and in some cases even a wave of repression, might still follow in the aftermath of a protest wave.
In conclusion, revolutions and protest waves - doesn’t matter in which regions of the world they occur - are always unpredictable and difficult to analyze. In most, if not all cases, their real effect on the media and political spheres of a country might not be known for years or decades to come.
