| Summary: | Around 1 in 4 Zimbabweans lives outside their home country, with the majority of these having emigrated between 2000-2010 due to economic instability and political repression. The emergence of new technologies and social media means that the 4-5 million members of the diaspora scattered around the world are now connected to the families and friends they left behind, as well as to each other, via an extensive web of online communications networks, which remain engaged in politics by discussing political issues relating to their homeland.This paper sets out to answer the question “How do members of the Zimbabwean diaspora in Botswana use digital media to engage in political commentary and debate about their homeland?” and argues that there exists a vibrant and multifaceted network of everyday social activists communicating about political issues through various platforms. The paper places examples of online communications, political humour, lively debate and analysis critical of the Zimbabwean government within a wider picture of subversive and counter-government communications under repressive regimes to investigate how this informs our understanding of counter- government debate. It also considers the extent to which this communication process be described as democratising, and how this contributes to a wider discussion of the democratising and social change potential of ICTs.
Overall the paper argues that new media and ICTs offer new solutions for community members to gather and express their opinions to one another. This is viewed as an improvement on previous ways of communicating about politics, and may yield personal benefits to individual members of the community. However, they are not without their shortcomings; as yet no tangible social change in Zimbabwe has been linked to the proliferation of ICTs, and ultimately it is even arguable that social media may limit the potential for real change to occur. The paper assesses these arguments and uses the opinions of the interviewees to ultimately conclude that there are great challenges involved in creating social change through these networks and that there is some way to go before this is achieved.
|
|---|
