You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Connected Learning Alliance Logo
  • About Connected Learning
  • Who we are
  • Resources
  • Publications
  • Blog
  • Get Connected
October 3, 2013

Pepper Spray and Penguins: Analysis of Turkey’s Social Media-fueled Gezi Protests

Author

Zeynep Tufekci
Categories: Civic Engagement, Digital Citizenship
protest sign in the air and hand holding iphone during turkey protest

The Gezi protests took everyone, including the protesters themselves, by surprise. “This wasn’t what I had planned to do in June at all,” said a man in his early 30s to me as we sat in the small grassy area in front of his tent where he had been staying for more than a week. His wife nodded as she fiddled with her smartphone. I asked her what she was looking at. “Twitter,” she said, “I’m just getting the hang of it.”

The protesters in Gezi were also getting the hang of being tear-gassed – as we would be later that day. Over the last few years, watching online, I had seen innumerable protesters – from Occupy in New York or Oakland to Bahrain and Tahrir in Egypt – attacked with tear-gas. This time, I was the one tweeting about it, and the international fraternity of the tear-gassed responded with sympathy and advice.

While each movement in the wave of protests we have seen since 2011 has had its own characteristics, they also share many elements that feature in both their success and failure.

Unlike their western counterparts, Gezi protesters were not focused on austerity (although corruption came up often). This is because the AKP government has bucked global trends and actually expanded the reach of social services in Turkey during its 11-year reign. Although critics say this expansion often works as a form of indirect patronage, whereby taxpayer-financed services are presented as AKP largesse, Turkey is not Greece or Spain, and it’s certainly not dismantling its social services. This was not a typical Middle Eastern movement either: while growing authoritarianism is a concern, Turkey is not ruled by an unelected autocrat like Egypt’s former president Mubarak.

More than anything, the protesters in Gezi were yearning for those elusive institutions – an independent judiciary, the rule of law, a free and critical media, equal protection – that take centuries to develop, remain hard to define, and are never perfect anywhere, but in whose absence democracy is hollowed out.

“Erdoğan may have won an election,” I heard over and over again in Gezi Park, but “he rules like a king rather than a prime minister.” So it wasn’t a mere coincidence that the Gezi protests started over Erdogan’s plans to transform this rare bit of green in an overbuilt city into a replica of the Ottoman barracks that had once stood there – complete, he proposed, with luxury residences and a shopping mall. His ambitious, personalised agenda for what should have been a local matter symbolised his growing overreaching and the weakening of rule of law.

Plans for the shopping mall/barracks were perpetually in flux, apparently contingent on Erdoğan’s whims. The public were shown a cartoon animation of how great the new Taksim would look. Yet a leading figure from the neighbourhood organisation that had mounted significant court challenges told me that no detailed plans for transforming one of Istanbul’s most significant squares had been forthcoming, despite repeated attempts to obtain copies from the government.

In the preceding year, Erdoğan had issued proclamations on issues ranging from how many children women should have to the advisability of caesarean sections and abortion. The parliament had just passed a sweeping alcohol law that mixed some sensible regulations with other, more vague restrictions that seemingly outlawed events such as wine-tastings. For many in Gezi, it wasn’t the alcohol or the park as much as the feeling that a person and a political party – a popular one, many acknowledged – was ruling without checks and balances. Over the past few years, the judiciary has become increasingly tainted and almost all mass media have made accommodations with the Erdoğan government. Also, because of the peculiarities of the electoral system designed by the plotters of the 1980 military coup, the AKP’s representation in parliament is greater than its (already substantial) proportion of the vote. Under this coup-flavoured electoral system, which the AKP has refused to reform, parties with less than 10 per cent of the vote achieve no parliamentary representation. This electoral barrier has led to a fossilisation of Turkey’s incompetent and fractured opposition as new and potentially more effective challengers find it very difficult to build up support and make it into the system.

If there was a flashpoint for the Gezi anger, it was the media. Almost every mass-media outlet in Turkey is owned by the same large conglomerates that also do significant business with the government and vie for the lucrative urban renewal, energy and construction projects which have fueled Turkey’s economic growth. These outlets rarely publish anything critical of the government and have been known to come out with identical (government-friendly) headlines on certain critical days. The last newspaper to publish a story on economic corruption by the AKP was hit by a surprise, multi-billion US-dollar tax fine – which was later “forgiven” by the government after the paper moderated its coverage.

Hence, when the initial few dozen protesters trying to protect the trees in Gezi from demolition faced the bulldozers, pepper-spray, water cannons and tear-gas, they turned to Twitter rather than traditional media to get the word out. As the situation escalated, citizens who turned on their televisions to see the news about ongoing clashes in the middle of the central square of the most populous city in Turkey instead saw … penguin documentaries and cooking shows. Many protesters who ended up pitching their tents in Gezi came initially because they were struck by the contrast between numerous eye-witness accounts – accompanied by pictures, videos and live footage flowing into their computers and phones – and the extreme, blatant censorship by the country’s media channels. “It was like they were ridiculing us,” I heard repeatedly. “We hadn’t planned this, but when we saw this media censorship and police repression, we felt like we had to act.”

This ability to mount a significant protest without planning or organisation is both a potent source of strength and, frequently, the Achilles heel of social media-fueled movements. The internet’s ability to enable collective action without pre-existing infrastructure means movements can emerge without an organisational capacity or a collective leadership. However, this lack of this capacity often becomes a hindrance in the days after participants have been in the streets for a while. Many of the protesters I spoke with in Gezi did not know what their next step would be, how it would be organised, and what political steps would follow, if any. When the government forcibly dispersed the occupation a few days later, many protesters retired to neighbourhood parks. Here, fervent discussions continued, but still without any organisational structure capable of making decisions or mounting a political challenge. The AKP government, meanwhile, looked forward to the elections in 2014, when its superior organisation, resources and strategic savvy will almost certainly deliver it another electoral victory.

Banner image credit: Rasande Tyskar http://www.flickr.com/photos/rasande/8987813845/

This article was first published in Juncture, a UK think-tank policy magazine, and can be accessed in its original form here.

Related Posts

March 15, 2023 Mobilizing Teen-Centered Research Findings for Teen-Oriented Storytelling

March 7, 2023 Call for Proposals Now Open for the Sixth Annual Connected Learning Summit

February 13, 2023 Code for What?

Categories

  • Civic Engagement
  • Connected Learning
  • Critical Perspectives
  • Digital Citizenship
  • Digital Learning
  • Edtech
  • Educational Practice
  • Equity
  • Featured
  • HX
  • New Trends
  • Research
  • Youth Well-Being

Blog Archive

  • 2023
    • February 2023
    • March 2023
  • 2022
    • January 2022
    • February 2022
    • April 2022
    • May 2022
    • June 2022
    • July 2022
    • August 2022
    • September 2022
    • October 2022
    • November 2022
    • December 2022
  • 2021
    • January 2021
    • February 2021
    • March 2021
    • April 2021
    • May 2021
    • June 2021
    • July 2021
    • August 2021
    • September 2021
    • October 2021
    • November 2021
    • December 2021
  • 2020
    • January 2020
    • February 2020
    • March 2020
    • April 2020
    • May 2020
    • June 2020
    • July 2020
    • August 2020
    • September 2020
    • October 2020
    • November 2020
    • December 2020
  • 2019
    • January 2019
    • February 2019
    • March 2019
    • April 2019
    • May 2019
    • June 2019
    • July 2019
    • August 2019
    • September 2019
    • October 2019
    • November 2019
    • December 2019
  • 2018
    • January 2018
    • February 2018
    • March 2018
    • April 2018
    • May 2018
    • June 2018
    • July 2018
    • August 2018
    • September 2018
    • October 2018
    • November 2018
    • December 2018
  • 2017
    • January 2017
    • February 2017
    • March 2017
    • April 2017
    • May 2017
    • June 2017
    • July 2017
    • August 2017
    • September 2017
    • October 2017
    • November 2017
    • December 2017
  • 2016
    • January 2016
    • February 2016
    • March 2016
    • April 2016
    • May 2016
    • June 2016
    • July 2016
    • August 2016
    • September 2016
    • October 2016
    • November 2016
    • December 2016
  • 2015
    • January 2015
    • February 2015
    • March 2015
    • April 2015
    • May 2015
    • June 2015
    • July 2015
    • August 2015
    • September 2015
    • October 2015
    • November 2015
    • December 2015
  • 2014
    • January 2014
    • February 2014
    • March 2014
    • April 2014
    • May 2014
    • June 2014
    • July 2014
    • August 2014
    • September 2014
    • October 2014
    • November 2014
    • December 2014
  • 2013
    • January 2013
    • February 2013
    • March 2013
    • April 2013
    • May 2013
    • June 2013
    • July 2013
    • August 2013
    • September 2013
    • October 2013
    • November 2013
    • December 2013
  • 2012
    • January 2012
    • February 2012
    • March 2012
    • April 2012
    • May 2012
    • June 2012
    • July 2012
    • August 2012
    • September 2012
    • October 2012
    • November 2012
    • December 2012
  • 2011
    • January 2011
    • February 2011
    • March 2011
    • April 2011
    • May 2011
    • June 2011
    • July 2011
    • August 2011
    • September 2011
    • October 2011
    • November 2011
    • December 2011
  • 2010
    • January 2010
    • February 2010
    • March 2010
    • April 2010
    • May 2010
    • June 2010
    • July 2010
    • August 2010
    • September 2010
    • October 2010
    • November 2010
    • December 2010
  • 2009
    • October 2009
    • November 2009
    • December 2009

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay up-to-date with our latest news and information.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Connected Learning in Teaching Practice
  • Connected Learning Research Network
  • Connected Learning in Libraries
  • Connected Educators
  • Connected Courses
  • Connected Civics
  • Institute of Play

  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Work With Us
  • Media
  • Write for Us
  • People
  • Newsletter
  • CLRN
  • CL Summit
  • CL Lab