The history of the hashtag is divided. It was first used four years ago by Twitter user @vicaringroo who wrote: 'Rob the poor to pay the rich? I think not. Students unite to say enough is enough. #DayX #Cameronmustgo #ConDem.' The gay rights activist - who blogs about being an Anglican priest - has not used it lately. It suggests the Hampshired-based man used it because he was genuinely annoyed by Cameron's policies - not because he was trying to orchestrate a mass take down of the PM.
But things have changed. The hashtag came back to life a year later, in 2011, with anti-Conservative Twitter accounts picking up on it, such as the succinctly-named @cameronresigned, which clearly wanted just that. They used it religiously for months - but it didn't take off and start trending until four days ago.
'Let's go viral'
It was only when Jon Swindon, a left-wing Twitter user and activist who claims he co-founded the #CameronMustGo and #WeBackEd hashtags, sent out a message on Friday that the hashtag went viral. He tweeted: '6pm SATURDAY: The media won't say a bad word but we can. Please copy, share and get ready to say why #CameronMustGo,' with the following image:
This is what got the hashtag - and sentiment - back trending in the UK. It was then picked up by left-wing groups such as the think tank Labour Left, and cue 6pm on Saturday 24th, there were so many tweets happening at the same time that it started trending and just hasn't stopped.
It's why I can't help but think that this hashtag isn't a genuine representation of the British population's beliefs - it's something created by left-wing activists who are hoping to use the power of social media to get rid of the Prime Minister. As they said, they wanted it to 'go viral'.
Every time I clicked on the profile of someone who had used the hashtag, I found that they were politically involved, activists or bloggers. 'Anti-war' and 'boycott Israel' were phrases that kept cropping up on people's profiles. Even those whose profiles didn't outwardly suggest political links hadn't just written one thoughtful tweet using the hashtag as a concerned member of the public might do - they'd written dozens of tweets using the hashtag.
Should Cameron worry?
The only tweet I could find during a 30 minute search that looked like it was from a typical British voter was from mum and author Joanne Graham:
Bar this one anomaly, most of the tweets seem to be from people who know each other and they're all about the same issues such as majority are about cuts to the poorest people in society, large cuts to the NHS, the increasing reliance on food banks, and the increase in the cost of living.
They're issues that are worth discussing, but should the prominence they're getting start to bother the Prime Minister?
'I don't think he should be worried at all,' says Ian Dunt, editor of politics.co.uk. 'Twitter is usually made up of young people, students. That hashtag is the instinctive kick against the dominance of the print media [which is typically more right-wing]. It reflects the way Twitter has a much more left-wing centre of gravity than the written press.'
But even so, only last week we've seen the power that Twitter has in Westminster. Labour's Emily Thornberry was forced to resign a few days ago after she tweeted an image of a house in Rochester with a white van and England flags, which raised concerns she was mocking the working class.
Twitter targets institutions
Before that storm erupted, the Home Office decided to deny controversial pick-up artist Julien Blanc a visa to the UK after a global social media campaign against him galvanised with the hashtag #TakeDownJulienBlanc. Won't it at least be a big PR issue for the Conservatives and Cameron?
'If it was about something then maybe,' says Dunt. 'But nothing's actually happened. The list [of complaints people are sharing] is pretty standard left-wing complaints - they're all legitimate but they're not new.
'What Twitter is very good at is targeting institutions. It targets them hard over one issue over a period of days, like when a retailer sells a T-shirt that's offensive.' But to actually 'take down the Prime Minister', he thinks we'd need more than a list of topical complaints - we'd need a serious issue.
The problem with this hashtag is that it says more about Twitter, and the way we use it, rather than Cameron or the voters. As Dunt says, the social media site does seem to have more left-leaning tendencies, and in this case, it has been hijacked by activists.
It became viral not just because of Swindon and Labour Left but because it was picked up by UK Uncut, a group against Government cuts that has more than 77,000 Twitter followers. People like former deputy prime minister John Prescott then got involved, as did austerity food blogger Jack Monroe who wrote the incredibly offensive tweet: 'Because he uses stories about his dead son as misty-eyed rhetoric to legitimise selling our NHS to his friends: #CameronMustGo.'
Tory backbenchers branded her sick and distasteful for her comment, as Cameron's son Ivan, who had cerebral palsy, died aged six in 2009. It is disgusting, and Sainsbury's is said to have dropped her from its TV adverts over the controversy, but it isn't the only inappropriate tweet being written.
The hashtag lacks authenticity
When journalist Sarah Vine criticised Monroe, she received huge amounts of Twitter abuse for being 'homophobic' and 'ignorant'. That may be the case, but the way that everyone responded to her, rather than Monroe's shocking comments,shows that this hashtag isn't a healthy way to debate our Prime Minister's ruling and policies - it's a one-sided attack that leaves no room for opposing opinions.
Charlotte Henry, political blogger, sums it up when she tells me: 'It just seems to be people who don't like David Cameron repeating that they don't like him - it seems a bit pathetic to me. I think Twitter's more important when it's more authentic really.'
This hashtag isn't authentic or natural. It was planned by Swindon and other groups. The motive isn't to encourage debate - we mustn't forget that Swindon also says he is the co-founder of the #WeBackEd tweet - suggesting that what these people really want is for Ed Miliband to win the general election.
It's not an example of the public getting really involved in politics - if anything it's the same people using the same hashtag repeatedly to try and get their point across. They're obviously entitled to do this, but the problem is that all other voices are drowned out.
A recent Pew Research study found that this is a social media phenomenon named the 'Spiral of Silence'. Researchers discovered that in online settings, people were more willing to share their views if they thought their audience agreed with them. They were less willing to discuss a controversial story in social media than they were in person.
This means that people who may disagree with #CameronMustGo may feel like they can't air their views because they'll be going against the general opinion. That's why this hashtag is nothing more than a mob attack on the Prime Minister - rather than a genuine collection of legitimate concerns by real people with no vested interests.
Tidak ada komentar :
Posting Komentar