University of Amsterdam Department of Media Studies Master New Media and Digital Culture
WHEN, HOW, AND WHY:
THE SOCIOTECHNICAL ARABIC
LANGUAGE PRACTICES OF LEBANESE
USERS ACROSS SOCIAL PLATFORMS
MA THESIS 2016 24th of June 2016 Supervisor: dr. T. (Thomas) Poell Second Reader: mw. dr. S. (Stefania) Milan
Table of Contents
Abstract
3
1.
Introduction
4
2.
Research Question
7
3.
Theoretical Discussion
7
3.1.
Linguistic History
7
3.2.
Role of Platforms and Softwares
10
4.
Methodology
15
5.
Data and Discussion
21
5.1.
Netvizz
21
5.2.
Semistructured interviews and survey
34
6.
Challenges and Limitations
45
7.
Conclusion
48
8.
Bibliography
53
9.
Appendix
56
9.1.
Interview Transcriptions
56
9.2.
Coding Manual
131
9.3.
Links to Facebook Posts
132
Abstract
This paper focuses on the possible ways social platforms like Facebook and Whatsapp shape the sociotechnical language practices of Lebanese users. It studies the #YouStink movement Facebook page in order to understand these user language practices in a context of political contestation. Furthermore, this research uses Netvizz, the Facebook data scraper, to analyse the context of which Arabizi, the Arabic internet chat language, and input from 10 interviewees, and a survey conducted on 346 Lebanese users in order to study user online behaviour on two separate social platforms, Facebook and Whatsapp. The study aims to highlight the possible ways platforms may shape a Lebanese social platform user language choices through its technical architecture and purpose.
Keywords: Arabizi, platform studies, online user behaviour, Lebanon, arabic, collective identity, Facebook, Whatsapp, political contestation
1. Introduction
Walking on Lebanon’s busy street of Hamra in Beirut, chaotic noises are in abundance: people swearing and beeping at each other in the midst of traffic, old men yelling at each other over a game of tawlé
(backgammon), a group of women gossiping at the nearby hairdresser and
university students hitting their keyboard, trying to submit their work before the deadline. The variety of sounds that one hears is very similar to the variety found online among Lebanese social media users; yet instead of sound, what is chaotic in this case is the communication amongst them.
Lebanon officially has one language: Arabic, like most of the Middle East. The difference between Lebanon and other Arab countries is, however, the fact that the French and English languages have an equally important role in the country’s culture and identity. It is almost an element of pride to speak all three languages in the country, it comes with status and prestige; therefore it is only logical that a Lebanese person is capable of jumping from one language to another in conversation, or even mixing the languages together to formulate a Lebanese sentence, such as the typical example of “ Hi, kifak, ca va?” (Hi, how are you, all is good?)
; this has been the case for the past 7080 years. However, with the sudden rise of
technological innovations, such as mobile phones and the Internet, in the last 20 years, another language was added to the mix: Arabizi. It is a mixture of the Arabic words arabi (aka Arabic) and englizi (aka English) (Yaghan, 2008, 39). The key to understanding the uses of each character will be extensively discussed in chapter two, but for now, the basic concept of Arabizi is using Latin characters and numerals to express an Arabic word or sentence. An example of Arabizi is “Kifak ya 7abibi, shta2nellak, shou a5barak
?” which more or less translates to “How
are you my love, you’ve been missed, what’s going on these days.”
According to Robert Michael Bianchi from the Virginia Commonwealth University in Qatar, the use of arabizi has increased due to the Internet (2012, 99). This is parallel to the notion of its use by Arab youths. The Internet is a space replete with young adults and teenagers, so it only makes sense that this style of writing is becoming more present on social media platforms. However, with the rise of this hybrid orthographic style, the Internet seems to be a space where
one cannot find a uniform, consistent manner of communicating in Arabic, which might add strain to an Arab’s identity. Arabs are already a complex people. They are composed of nations that are subject to similar cultures and traditions, yet each possesses its own unique identity, something that is of great importance and value. Lebanon’s irregular and unregulated form of speaking is greatly reflected online, especially with the introduction of Arabizi. As a Lebanese person, my newsfeeds on all of my social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, Whatsapp) have a gamut of posts written in different languages. A friend may post something in English, while another friend replies to it in Arabizi. The lack of consistency in communication online amongst Lebanese users represents a sort of cultural instability. However, although unstable, there is a definite understanding amongst one another. Lebanese people still understand the post shared whether it is written in any of the languages. It is Lebanon’s youth that especially understand each other. The generation of Lebanese Internet users has indirectly found a way of communicating, with the help of context. They have strategies to appropriate each language to a certain context. Yet, this leaves many questions unanswered, especially concerning it’s use and development on social media platforms, the role the platforms’ architectures play in shaping this use, and the possible reflection of Lebanese culture within these language practices.
The Arabic language is one that is subject to many debates due to its diglossic nature. Diglossia is a linguistic term to define a language community that either has two languages varieties, with one being used for formal situations and one for quotidian situations (Bassiouney, 2010, 101). Over the past decades, there have been issues concerning the way in which the Arabic language is being taught and used. Arab conservatives and nationalists have been attempting to promote the use of Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), an Arabic that is usually used for formalities, such as political speeches and religious sermons (Bassiouney, 2010, 101), as a way of reviving the Holy Quranic language (Suleiman, 2011, 50).
The reason behind these constant attempts at revival is the fact that vernacular or colloquial Arabic is gaining more and more popularity throughout Arab countries, especially concerning Arab youths (Palfreyman & El Khalil, 2003, 1), and results in unique identities among different Arab nations. For example, identifying as a Lebanese is different than
identifying as an Egyptian. The identification process is one that embodies the individual and takes control over his/her social actions. When one speaks Lebanese Arabic, there is a certain reputation that follows it, a certain identity; similar to one speaking Egyptian Arabic. Even within one kind of identity there are subidentities. For example, a Lebanese person can belong to a society that speaks French and Arabic, which is a specific type of Lebanese person, sometimes associated with snobbery or prestige. While the Lebanese who belong to an English and Arabic speaking society are more likely to be associated with being openminded and “cool,” or even closely associated to American culture. The lack of identity uniformity within the Arab population is represented within its language, and today is reflected online. This can be clearly seen on social media platforms like Facebook. Since it was first introduced to Facebook in 2009 (Chan, 2009), Arabic script can be used to write posts, comments etc. However, this created another schism: Arabic speakers are given the option to write in Arabizi, MSA in Arabic script or colloquial Arabic in Arabic script. And because most modern Arabs are bilingual (in either French or English), they can even choose to abstain from using any Arabic at all.
This raises vital questions regarding an Arab user’s identity. One question could be that of the moment in which an Arabicspeaking user decides to use a specific code (whether Arabic or Arabizi) and what that this says about the user’s identity. Another question that is raised here is whether or not an Arab’s identity can be easily defined with all the languages and dialects that surround it. The question of how social media platforms and technologies have shaped the language should also be addressed as it has played a role in the way Arabic is communicated online. Furthermore, when do users decide to use a specific language and in what context? For what reason?
Addressing these question, the thesis first critically reflects on the current research on the use of Arabizi. This research is almost exclusively situated in linguistics. What is missing is a sociotechno inquiry into the processes of mediation through which Arabizi takes shape. The thesis shows why such an inquiry is essential to understand the development and particular articulation of Arabizi. When studying the sociotechnical processes of mediation, it quickly becomes clear that major commercial social platforms are increasingly central to the use of Arabizi. This thesis offers a contribution to new media studies. This intervention is first
developed in the next section by addressing the current literature, in linguistics and platform and software studies. It is further developed through research on the sociotechnical practices of Arabizi. The thesis focuses on two platforms, Facebook and Whatsapp, and their use in the Lebanese context. The inquiry is developed through a case study on the social movement “#YouStink”, which concerns the current garbage crisis in Lebanon. It will be operationalized through a crossplatform analysis of Facebook and Whatsapp. For Facebook, data is scraped using the digital methods tool Netvizz. Furthermore, semistructured interviews have been conducted with 10 young Lebanese social media activists, who have also been asked to provide screenshots of their Whatsapp conversation. Finally, I have done a survey with 346 Lebanese participants, asking them about their general online practices. The research chapters are discussed in parallel to existing literature and hopes to contribute compelling data to both the linguistic and new media studies. However, to ensure the credibility of this paper, the limitations and challenges are discussed for future researchers to take note of when researching a similar topic. The results of the study are additionally reflected on within the contexts of future implications within Lebanon and the other possibilities that may arise from it, with hopes to shed light on the importance of a user’s relationship with social platforms.
2. Research Question
To what extent do Facebook and Whatsapp shape the sociotechnical language practices of Lebanese users in the context of political contestation, and what does these practices suggest about their online culture?
3. Theoretical Discussion 3.1 Linguistic history
Arabizi has been studied often within the field of linguistics. Arabic linguists have attempted to define its traits and it’s social practices among Arabs. Yet, before understanding the importance of Arabizi, it is essential to have a general understanding of the Arabic language, as many of it’s characteristics are reflected on the Arabizi style. Arabic is a language with a diglossic nature. Diglossia is the term to describe a language with two different sets of varieties that coexist
within the same community (Bassiouney, 101, 2010); the dual varieties are appropriated to two different levels. Low (L) level language variety is used for colloquial, conversational purposes; for example, when two Arabicspeaking college students discuss their weekend plans or when asking a butcher for steak filets, they will be expressing themselves in a low level language variety. High (H) level language variety is used for official, professional situations (Ferguson, 1959; Bassiouney, 2010); for example when a television news anchor is reading out the news or when a political figure is giving a speech to the general public. The different levels of varieties often creates a separation between social classes, since a higher level language variety is an indication of the level of education the individual has received. The higher the level one speaks in, the more he/she is associated with being well educated.
Yet, diglossic nature of the Arabic language has evolved over the past decades as Arabs are more likely to speak in the lower level language variety; Yasir Suleiman points this out in his book, “Arabic, Self, and Identity: A Study in Conflict and Displacement” (2011). In his book, Suleiman discusses how his training of teachers at a school in Qatar reflects the way in which the lower language variety is more likely to be spoken in, rather than the higher variety, known as fu
ṣḥ á, the more traditional way of speaking Arabic. His explanation for this practice is concerned
with the strict and systematic way in which high variety Arabic is taught in. He describes how many of the teachers he trained tended to move away from traditional Arabic due to the higher possibilities of committing mistakes as they speak, therefore opting to speak in a “higher colloquial level Arabic” (Suleiman, 2011, 48). Therefore the more conversational, lower variety level form of Arabic communication has become commonly accepted by anyone who speaks the language, especially in a country like Lebanon, where Arabic is supported by English and French.
The move from traditional Arabic to more colloquial Arabic has become more apparent with the rise of technology and the Internet. Rarely do you find Arabs speaking in traditional Arabic on a daily basis, which is reflected online. This is where Arabizi comes in. The already shifting Arabic language paradigm, which went from Arabic being a holy, complex language to a more conversational, simpler language, has once again shifted, yet this time the conversational form has been adopted for the eyes rather than the ears.
David Palfreyman and Muhamed al Khalil discuss how “technical and economic considerations have restricted the use of Arabic on the Internet in proportion to the number of users of the language” (2003, 6). As computer software and hardware were first being developed, the Arabic language, among many others, was not taken into consideration. The technologies that were distributed globally were set in English: an English keyboard, an English interface etc… This was especially the case with mobile phones and the texting phenomenon (Yaghan, 2008, 41). Arabizi comes within this context as it was created because of this purpose. Arabs were forced to adopt a new language in which to communicate without actually having to learn a new language.
Arabizi is “a system of writing Arabic using English characters. This term comes from two words “arabi” (Arabic) and “engliszi” (English)” (Yaghan, 2008, 39). It uses Latin numerals to substitute the sounds and letters that are not found within the English language. Therefore, ‘3’ is ‘2‘ ,’ﻉ’ is ‘5‘ ,’ء’ is ‘ﺥ’ and ‘7’ is ‘ﺡ’ and so on. Yet, there is no official way to write in Arabizi, as it was formed in nontraditionally and lacks many rules and regulations. Across the Arab world, the different societies, nations, social classes, etc. have their own style of writing Arabizi, as Dua'a Abu Elhija discusses in her 2014 article titled “A new writing system? Developing orthographies for writing Arabic dialects in electronic media.” Her empirical study is one that provides an insight into the Arabizi user demographics and the different ways it can be written. Abu Elhija finds support in a paper written by Becky Schulthies in 2014, when she studied the chaotic ways in which Arabic, not Arabizi in particular, is communicated online through her analysis of YouTube comments on Egyptian political parodies, showing the inconsistency in Arab communication online.
Although lacking in official rules and regulations, Arabizi use has increased greatly with time. Robert Michael Bianchi illustrates how Arabizi has shaped the way users communicate in different contexts (2012). There is an unspoken understanding that has been established between Arab users when they communicate online. Without having to learn any sort of “Arabizi etiquette,” users manage to appropriate different languages to different contexts, and are capable of easily switching from one to the other. This is shown within Bianchi’s article as he discusses many examples of Arabizi he came across while studying a popular Egyptian blog. In one
particular excerpt he mentions that Arabizi is used to “write personal, intimate, and general texts” while Arabic was used for cultural themes and English for “professional and academic topics” (2012, 98).
Lelania Sperrazza even goes to the extent of arguing how Arabizi shaped the way users expressed themselves online in both English and Arabic, which therefore facilitated the Egyptian revolution, since the youths had been exposed to western ideals for a long period of time, being influenced to believe that the “impossible was possible” (2014). She describes how the knowledge of Arabizi allowed Egyptian youths to reach a larger crowd, therefore gaining more support from Internet users all over the globe.
Yet, the studies mentioned above are solely situated within a sociolinguistic perspective. They describe the way in which the language shapes the user and how the user shapes the language itself, through the help of computer mediation. The authors only briefly taken into consideration the role the ‘computer’ has played within the study of Arabizi. Although, Mariam Aboelezz determines the difficulties that users faced in the past, before the introduction of Arabic language to technology (2009). She illustrates how users would email each other in either English or Arabizi (or as she calls it, ‘Latinized Arabic,’ in order to communicate and further mentions how the lack of Arabicreading software shapes this use. Aboelezz’s article indicates the possible role software and hardware have within Arabizi’s user practices. Hence, it is important to have research that concern not only the way in which the language shapes user practices, but also the way in which online platforms and softwares shape user practices. This yields the question: to what extent do social media platforms shape the sociotechnical practices of Arabizi?
3.2 Role of Platforms and Softwares
To answer this question, one first needs to understand the history of platforms and their relationship with the Arabic language. To begin with and as previously mentioned, the introduction of internet technologies was made available to the public, but only a certain public. As the products were designed and manufactured by “western” countries, the technologies initially targeted “western” consumers/users; therefore, creating these technologies in a language (mainly English) the western world could understand and use ‘easily.’ Naturally, with a trendy
new technology, it spread worldwide, becoming available in the Eastern part of the world. Yet, the language needed to use it was foreign to the nonEnglish speaking consumer. Mobile phones, for example, were shipped globally and consisted of being in English, meaning both the hardware and software was written for an Englishknowing audience. An audience that consists of people who understand and read the English language, perhaps imperfectly, but enough to be able to use the device. This was definitely the case with the Arab world. Many Arabs are bilingual to a certain extent; they are not unfamiliar with Latinbased languages such as French or English, as many were colonized by “western” powers in the past decades. In this context, there were definitely some aspects of technological determinism, where technologies played a central role in giving rise to the Arabic chat language known as Arabizi. Therefore, because of modern technological practices such as texting, emailing, instant messaging, Arab users were influenced to change the interface of their language and customize it for their own communicational benefit. This is the initial instance where technology obviously played a role in the user’s adoption of this language. It completely changed the way Arabs engaged in communication through computer mediation. This has been the case since its conception to this current point, and it will become more apparent throughout the rest of this research.
The same way user’s personalized their language interface, large social media companies took it upon themselves to further personalize their already personalized interfaces. For example, in 2009, five years after it’s conception and three years after its global integration, Facebook makes the Arabic and Hebrew language feature available (Chan, 2009). For three years, Facebook users from the Arab world continued to communicate with one another within the Latin language sphere rather than it’s original Semitic language sphere; meaning using Arabizi to express themselves via a new digital, personal space. Yet, with the introduction of Arabic writing, Arab users began putting the feature into practice, yet this does not entail that they are continuously using that feature, as will later be discussed.
Another corporate media company that customized its user interface is Twitter. Six years following its launch and one year after the Arab spring, Twitter introduces the Arabic feature in 2012 (Twitter, 2012). This is key to remember because Twitter was one of the most used social media platforms and acted as the prime mediator of communication amongst Egyptian activists.
As Sperrazza mentions in her chapter in the book titled Toward, Around and Away from Tahrir (2014), Twitter facilitated the communication during the Arab Spring, allowing activists and grassroot journalists to pass along messages to others in support of the cause; also giving them a medium to organize the memorable protests that took place outside the digital realm in Cairo’s Tahrir Square.
However, although the introduction of Arabic to social media platforms was beneficial for Arabic communication, it was more beneficial to the social media companies as this meant more posts, more user interaction and more users in general, which meant more dependency on the social media platform as a means of communicating, therefore opening a new market for advertisers and thirdparty developers. José van Dijck even points out how the modern economy is built upon usergenerated content (2009), indicating the importance of developing platform features that would enable such user activity. The necessity of sustaining and maintaining users has become the main priority of corporations like Facebook, as it the users that are the main source of profit and revenue. Because such online platforms are free, users are more likely to join, however, keeping the users active on the platform is the company’s outlet for financing themselves. The need for user engagement and interactiveness has been further discussed by Anna Helmond and Carolin Gerlitz (2013), who go to the extent of arguing that the increasing use of “buttons and social plugins” on Facebook, such as ‘likes’ and ‘shares’, are creating what they call the “Like Economy,” which not only places value on human social capital, but also uses it to promote corporations, companies and brands on social media through the fabric of the web. The aim of large media corporations becomes more apparent here as it aims to make profit from human intellect (Langlois et al 2009; Fuchs 2011). To further understand the relationship between the Arabic language practices and social media platforms, one must first understand the debates surrounding the relationship of a social media platform and user practices in general. Tarleton Gillespie argued in 2010 that a platform has been understood:
Computational, something to build upon and innovate from; political, a place from which to speak and be heard; figurative, in that the opportunity is an abstract promise as much as a practical one; and architectural, in that YouTube is designed as an openarmed, egalitarian
facilitation of expression, not an elitist gatekeeper with normative and technical restrictions (Gillespie 2010, 352).
This definition of platforms allows for the platform itself to be a grounds of interaction between different actors such as the social media companies themselves, the users, advertisers and thirdparty developers (Gillespie, 2010; Helmond, 2015, 28). This entails that social media platform companies control and process the activity generated within it in order to make a profit. This is reiterated by Poell and Van Dijk when they argue that “through technological features, such as ‘retweeting’, ‘liking’, ‘following’, and ‘friending’, as well as algorithmic selection mechanisms, which privilege particular types of content, social platforms shape how users can interact with each other through these platforms. [This does not] necessarily correspond with user interests […] but are first and foremost informed by the business models of social media corporations” (Poell, van Dijk, 2015, 528). Or as Langlois, Elmer, McKelvey and Deveraux maintain: “Web 2.0 companies, software processes, and informational architectures, now play a central role in providing the very material means of existence of online publics and in framing the scope of online political practices,” (2009, 417) within the context of political communication. Meaning that they are more than just included within what is being said on the platform, but also integrated within the practices that users adopt to communicate.
These observations are especially important in the light of the current political turmoil occurring within the Middle East as it entices the idea that “Western” ideology might be involved within the regulation of Arab political communication. Inspired by Deleuze and Guattari (1987), Langlois and colleagues argue that through the double articulation of code and politics on the web “that define[s] new conditions and possibilities of political action and communication” (2009, 417). They further state that this causes the restrictive nature of the platform. Through constant interface personalization, automatic updates and suggestions, platforms restrict the way in which users bond socially and culturally (2009, 419). They argue that Facebook is subject to ideological components that are hidden by its interface in order to “shape political practices and the horizon of political subjectivation” (2009, 25).
Particularly vital of the present research is that communication through mobile devices is becoming increasingly abundant, especially with applications such as Whatsapp and Facebook messenger. Smartphones have made it simpler for users to send messages (Evans 2015). This article provides insight on how mobile hardware and software communicate with one another to shape usermessaging practices. He describes how push notifications and “already being logged on” from your mobile application shapes, or simplifies, the way in which users choose to communicate. This point brings back the notion of language practices within social media platforms. Woltering and colleagues (2015) in their research on the We are all Khaled Said Facebook page make clear that users often “abstained from using politically factional language” as a way of creating a sense of unity. By choosing to express themselves in a certain way, the page admins of the Facebook page managed to create a community that not only existed online, but also in the physical world. The power of language is apparent as it managed to transport the cries of freedom from the comment section to Tahrir Square. Stefania Milan (2015) further proposes that algorithms can restructure joint narrative and collective identities during times of protests. She addresses the “politics of visibility” and its relationship with individuals on the platform, indicating that during times of political movements, meaning work is somehow influenced by four mechanisms pertaining from the individual: performance, interpellation, temporality, and reproducibility. These mechanisms could also be used to distinguish the possible ways online language practices of individuals involved within the #YouStink movement are in fact shaped, especially when looking at the top comments that are ordered by relevance on Facebook.
Similarly, a study on performativity and regulation on Facebook also indicates the effect a social platform has on user behaviour, especially within this context. To certain extent, language could be used to define and possibly convey an individual’s intellectual capabilities, or intelligence, as it reveals that individual’s education level. Stijn van Wonderen’s paper, “Captives of the Social: Facebook and Digital Pantopticism,” (2012), he compares Facebook to Jeremy Bentham’s infamous panopticon prison, Michel Foucault’s favourite example of power and surveillance. User selfregulation occurring on Facebook is similar to that of the Panpoticon’s prisoners. This selfregulation can similarly be applied to the user code choice on
online social platforms. Due to the Arabic language’s strict grammar policies, as pointed out by Suleiman (2011), van Wonderen’s research could explain users possibly opting for English or Arabizi rather than Arabic on Facebook. Because of Facebook’s surveillance properties, users would rather not embarrass themselves by committing language errors, and choose to communicate in the way that is more convenient to them, yet this needs to be further explored with the data collected for this research.Although it is not directly related to the platform’s architecture, it is still relevant to the field of platform studies, as each platforms are subject to certain ideals and preconceived branding reputations. Facebook has already established its brand and users conform and regulate their behaviour in exchange for their services.
While the current literature provides important insights, there is a lack of answers to questions regarding a social media platform’s shaping of user language practices. They have all touched upon the ways in which Arabizi came about and the way that has been integrated within the Arabic language, and the ways in which online platforms are no longer ignored when discussing culture shaping. However, this research fails to discuss how a platform’s technical architecture shapes the choice of language used, the context within which it is used and the possible reflection of culture within these sociotechnical user practices. The coming chapters will aim to resolve this gap, contributing to platform and software studies, as well as that to the field of sociolinguistic studies. It will attempt to do so by situating Arabizi within a context of Lebanese political contestation through the crossplatform analysis of Facebook and Whatsapp, two of the most used platforms in Lebanon.
4. Methodology
The case study at the heart of the thesis focuses on the #YouStink campaign. This campaign first began when the 17yearold Naameh landfill in the South of Lebanon had filled up and complaints of the smells increased in July 2015. Following the landfill’s closure and the government’s failure to find a solution, Sukleen, Lebanon’s main garbage company, was unable to dispose of the waste properly, leading to garbage piling up all across the country. As the garbage continues to increase on the streets of Lebanon, more specifically, its capital of Beirut, citizens in the area naturally began complaining of the smells and impending health hazards that
the garbage is causing. After one month of ministry officials delaying to solve this problem, many citizens began rallying in front of the parliamentary palace in Downtown Beirut. Soon enough, what was once rallies pressuring the government to find a solution to the garbage crisis, quickly turned into a social movement against the government’s countless years of corruption and failure to provide the country with proper basic needs such as: electricity, water, employment, internet… This social movement became known as the #YouStink (Tol3it Re7etkom) campaign. The campaign’s name not only addresses the literal stench coming from the streets of Beirut, but also the metaphorical stench of the government’s corruption, and quickly turned into a movement towards a revolution.
This case study was specifically chosen to study the sociotechnical practices of Arabizi because Lebanon has been characterized a lot by social media use, as it has done in many other countries. But also due to its popularity and its influence on many Lebanese people fighting for their basic human rights, it acts as a platform for middleclass voices to be heard, similar to the revolutions of the Arab Spring. The #YouStink online community is comprised of citizens, both young and old, from different religious and economic backgrounds, who have grown restless with Lebanon’s political infrastructure, which is founded on sectarianism and greed. It is the first social movement that is apolitical; as most of its members are youths trying to break away from any affiliation with the country’s political parties, focused solely on finding solutions to Lebanon’s main socioeconomic issues. It also encompasses the issues of Lebanon’s social culture. It generates posts that are against the traditional way posts have been previously addressed; meaning old values that still plague the country presently, are being challenged and reacted to on platforms like Facebook and Whatsapp . What is meant here, is that older social movements or political demands have always been led by a party or organization with political ties, either financially or personally. The posts that have been created in that context mostly followed an “appropriate” standard, one that either favoured a certain religious or political perspective. In #YouStink’s case, one might consider them the “outlaws” or “rebels” of a social cause, as they do not follow just one leader. They follow the trend of a leaderless campaign, as was seen during the Egyptian revolution in 2011. It is “influential Facebook admins and activists tweeps [who] become “soft leaders” or choreographers, involved in setting the scene, and
constructing an emotional space within which collective action can unfold” (Gerbaudo, 2012, 5; Milan, 2015, 4), which is the case for this campaign.
The main outlet that #YouStink activists used to organize protests, meetings, fundraisers, share opinions, decisions etc. was Facebook and from it emerged the different ways in which Arabizi in the context of contestation can be studied.
Since the case study is the #YouStink (Tol3it Re7etkom) campaign, which initially started its campaigning on Facebook, the first method conducted was a page data extraction using Netvizz, “a data collection and extraction application that allows researchers to export data in standard file formats from different sections of the Facebook social networking service” (Rieder, 2013). This method was imperative to this research as it acts as the ‘fieldwork’ of this research. It involves collecting all the posts and their engagement (likes, comments, shares) from a specific page, inserting them into an Excel sheet and analyzing each post in an organized manner.
For this research, the data was extracted from the campaign’s Facebook page similarly named “ﻢﻜﺘﺤﻳﺭ ﺖﻌﻠﻃ” (toli’t reh’itkom
, Tol3it Re7etkom, or You Stink ). Similar to Egypt’s
“Kulluna Khaled Said” page during the 2011 Egyptian Revolution, #YouStink’s page acts as a platform that provides its followers, or “likers”, with updates from the ground by posting videos and photos of the protests, or posting statuses encouraging many to join and support the cause. It is also an outlet where Lebanese Facebook users, from all social and political classes, express their frustrations with the campaign or the government. They are given an opportunity to voice their opinions in the ways they see appropriate, whether it is by choosing a specific language to communicate in or posting their own videos and photos. It is a page reflecting two kinds of collective identities situated within the country, allowing for debate. Furthermore, the importance of the page is the fact that it is not run by politicians aiming to maintain a political image and encourage a political agenda. The page is run by a group Lebanese social activists who’s agenda is not to silence the people with different opinions, rather it allow them to voice their opinions on their platform. This does not mean that the campaign does not promote their own agenda, yet, the interaction between users and admins is issued in a way where fear of censorship and persecution are none existing.
The time frame of the data collected ranges from July 25 2015, when the campaign first joined the platform, up until April 10, 2016, which is just a few days after the campaign organized it most recent protest. The total number of posts collected from this timeframe is 1,615 and includes status updates, photo albums and photos, and videos posted by the page admins.
To study the sociotechnical practices of users, a focus on comments is appropriate as it encompasses both the context in which users are communicating or expressing themselves and more importantly, the way in which a statement is expressed, whether expressed in Arabic, English, French, or Arabizi. A content analysis was conducted on the top ten most commented on posts, since these posts portray the most reacted to posts. Writing a comment requires more effort than clicking share, like or any of the newly added emotions. They were gathered once the data was tabulated within the excel sheet. Due to the volume of comments on each post, the collection of comments were divided into two parts to obtain more accurate results: the first was collecting the ten most liked comments on each post and the second was the collection of a minimum of 10 comments per post that was selected based on every 100 th post if the dataset contained more than 1,000 comments, and every 50 th post if the dataset consisted of less than 1,000 comments. The comments were coded according to language and content. This was done by including a color to each tally added when analyzing the comments. This is necessary to the analysis as it shows the times in which the languages are used in different times and to highlight the objective to study the context Arabizi in which it practiced in, the color coding can be found in the coding manual in the Appendices. The second code were based on the comment’s content and context: ● Critical of Current Political & Social Situation ● Support for Campaign ● Critical of Campaign ● Debate ● Coordination
These codes were chosen to distinguish the context the comments are being communicated in. In terms of political contestation, this coding sheet offers an opportunity to examine the language users prefer to implement when expressing themselves via comments.
Although this research is partly based on crossplatform analysis, the campaign’s Facebook page is the most active and most engaged with compared to their other social media accounts, such as Twitter or Instagram; therefore, data extraction from other social media platforms would have caused a gap in amount of data collected between each platform. This is where the second method plays its part.
The second methodology used for this research are semi structured interviews with 10 social media activists voicing their opinions on their personal social media accounts, especially concerning the #YouStink campaign. The semistructured interviews were necessary for the appropriation of certain reasons behind the different ways in which Arabizi is used. This method provided this research with user practices as well as providing information about other social media platforms by studying the social media accounts they are most active on; such as Instagram, Whatsapp, and Twitter. Since most of the people interviewed are actively part of the campaign on Facebook, it seemed unnecessary to study their personal Facebook profiles.
For the interviews, the questions were adapted to each interviewee since each seemed to have their own way of using Arabizi. As an overall structure, the questions were formulated based on three categories: the user’s relationship with Arabizi (the how, when, why of their practices), the platform’s characteristics as a possible influencer/shaper, and finally their personal opinion about Arabizi. These categories are crucial for this research as they encompass the study’s main objective. The first allows a deeper understanding of specific user practices and provide the context in which it is used, for example if it is used within a humorous, critical, empathetic etc. situation. The second is aimed at distinguishing whether or not the characteristics of a platform, for example the infinity scroll or character count, could somehow shape their choice of code within the platform. The third will provide colored and subjective views on Arabizi, for example whether or not they would keep using it in the future, as technologies become more compatible with the Arabic language; or what the use of Arabizi means in the context of Arab or Lebanese identity.
The 10 interviewees were chosen based on their activity on social media and their involvement with the #YouStink campaign:
● Sarah Bou Kamel
: 31, female, social activist, with a degree in Communication
Engineering, member of the #YouStink campaign. ● Jinane Abi Ramia
: 26, female, social activist, American University of Beirut
Environmental Health (B.S) and Public Health (MA) graduate, core member of #YouStink movement.
● Assaad Thebian
: 28, male, works in Marketing, and cofounder of #YouStink movement.
● Tima AlAhmad
: 19, female, Communication Arts student minoring in Political Science
at the Lebanese American University, teaches Debate and Drama at the International College, member of the university’s feminist club.
● Hamza Mekdad
: 23, male, freelancer in the visual communications field, social media
personality. ● Imad Jawad
: 26, male, freelance architect with master’s in Public Spaces, content
creator at a company (prefers to keep it anonymous), musician and partner in media and culture magazine “Audiokultur.”
● Edwin HarbKadri
: 26, male, filmmaker, currently doing a master’s in Cinematography
in Barcelona, shot and directed many of #YouStink campaign’s videos. ● Hassan Julien Chehouri
: 24, male, Lebanese American University graduate, freelance
filmmaker and Lebanese Vine celebrity. ● Hassan Sleit
: 26, male, Architecture and decoration graduate, volunteer and protester
for #YouStink movement. ● Safa Hamzeh
: 20, female, Communication Arts/Journalism graduate from the Lebanese
American University, currently working in the social media department at undisclosed company.
In addition to being interviewed, the participants were asked to share screenshots of their Whatsapp activity, since they all use it the most compared to any other social media platform. Each participant submitted screenshots from their personal Whatsapp conversations, which will exclude the names of actors within the conversation to respect their privacy. As aforementioned,
the screenshots are necessary in order to study the technosocial practices on other social media platforms, instead of only focusing solely on Facebook. Since Whatsapp and Facebook are the most used platforms among Lebanese internet users, the data collected from them are relevant for this research. The content of the screenshots is analyzed using the same method of the Netvizz analysis; meaning each screenshot will be placed under the categories listed above; yet due to the fact that these are screenshots of private conversations among individuals, the participant may not have felt completely comfortable in sharing their chats.
Although the screenshots provide the opportunity for a crossplatform analysis, the sample is too little compared to the samples collected from Facebook. As a resolution to this challenge, another method was necessary to fill this gap. A survey was conducted, targeting Lebanese social media users. The survey consisted of asking questions concerning the user’s relationship with Arabizi online. The survey garnered 346 participants, which is a large enough sample to come to certain conclusions concerning the Lebanese populations’ internet behaviour. This method provides the research with a largescale understanding of user demographics; it also encompasses a general outlook on user language preferences.
5. Data and Discussion 5.1 Netvizz
The page’s data reflected the way in which users chose to speak. Interestingly, at first glance at the posts by admins, the languages that are mainly used are Arabic and English. Then, as the posts are further analyzed, it is clear that the admins initial language choice is Arabic, written in Arabic script and never in Arabizi. The first part of the research chapters will be to study the context in which Arabizi is practiced. The posts extracted via Netvizz for analysis consisted of the 10 most commented on posts starting from July 25, 2015 till April 10, 2016. The number of comments per post is organized in the descending order, starting from the most commented to the least:
1. 5770 comments 2. 2366 comments 3. 1260 comments
4. 1242 comments 5. 1187 comments 6. 1020 comments 7. 954 comments 8. 779 comments 9. 753 comments 10. 771 comments
50% of these posts have captions written in colloquial Arabic script, 20% in English and 30% in both colloquial Arabic script and English, where the English acted as a translated version of what is written in Arabic. This behaviour by the page is mainly in order to make sure their message reaches not just Lebanese community, but also the international community who do not speak Arabic. However, this is also due to the fact that many Lebanese users are more likely to read the post if it is written in English, as will be seen in the next chapter.
The top ten most commented on posts consisted of three different types of digital media artifacts that the Facebook platform offers as features: videos, pictures and text (status updates). Interestingly, the posts with videos generated the most comments compared to the other types of posts. In total, there were five video posts that were collected amongst the most commented on posts. The top three most commented on posts are videos with contextual captions written in Arabic script, while the other two posts’ captions are written in English. From the top three, written by the page’s admins, differed in the sense that the tones used varied between suspenseful, critical and coordinative, yet were similar in the target, which was the garbage crisis. All three videos focus on the impact the garbage has made on the country. The fact that these are the posts generated the most comments indicate that the video feature on Facebook allowed for more interaction on the post. Users were more likely to comment on something they saw, rather than something they read. Even more interesting, the top commenters on the videos seem to parallel the language the post was written in as most of them were written in Arabic script. Users are more likely to comment about the crisis in Arabic script and to criticize the country’s current political and social situation. 76% of top comments are written in Arabic script,
while 50% of the random comments collected show that users commented in Arabic script. Although written in colloquial Arabic, the comments portrayed a more “formal” aspect than the comments written in Arabizi. The top comments written in Arabic script expressed a serious tone, leaving out any forms of insults or terms that could weaken their argument.
This is apparent when comparing the most commented on post, a video of garbage flooding the streets of Beirut after rain, and the tenth most commented on post, a picture of the current Minister of Interior and Municipalities, Nohad el Machnouk, attending a funeral, where guns were fired into the air in the town of Zahle, in the Bekaa region. The top comments on each post differed in both context and language. The video of the garbage flooding the streets generated comments that condemned the government’s inactivity and its comments were all written in Arabic script. While the pictures of Minister el Machnouk generated comments that expressed criticisms towards the campaign, with half of them written in Arabizi. Interestingly, the contrast between the different tones between Arabizi and Arabic script are most apparent in the post about Zahle. The most liked comment on the post is written eloquently, as the user justifies the reason for the shots being fired during the funeral as a form of respect, especially since there is no law in the area forbidding it; the user ends the comment by politely paying his respects to the campaign and all those involved in the post’s comment thread. The most liked Arabizi comment on the post indicates something different, however. Not only is it longer, it expresses the same opinion as the first Arabic comment, yet more aggressively. The user expresses anguish by the campaign using his “hometown” to exploit the minister’s actions, comes to the defense of Zahle’s strength, and ends his listed rant by demanding that the campaign “fixes the way they talk” (translated from Arabizi). This is obvious throughout the post especially due to the fact that people of Zahle are taking offence by the campaign’s use of these photos to entice its Facebook followers and “prove their point.”
The fact that posts in Arabizi are more textual and expressive than those written in Arabic supports a point previously expressed by Robert Michael Bianchi in 2012. He suggested that Arabizi was used in more personal contexts, and the more personal the context, the more
expressive the user will be. Furthermore, as will be discussed in detail in the next research chapter, the survey result, conducted on 346 Lebanese Internet users, shows that 18.7% find it easier to type in Arabizi, while 0.9% find it easier to type in Arabic, this was also the case with the interviewees, but this will be addressed later on. This is additionally supported within the most commented on post, the “River of Garbage” video. Top commenters chose to type in Arabic, however, the texts are not as expressive or as long as the comments written in Arabizi. They most liked comment on that post links this “disgusting” sight to the government’s corrupt government officials. Many of the top comments on this post used jokes as way to portray criticism, for example one user wrote “The World’s First Garbage River ” (translated from Arabic) sarcastically refers the “pride” the country should feel with this accomplishment. This, however, moves away from Bianchi’s (2012) initial findings that Arabizi is used more humorous contexts. The findings here indicate the way in which “witty” sarcasm or criticisms are more likely to be expressed using a colloquial tone in Arabic script. In 2012, Arabicspeaking Facebook users were in the process of adjusting to the addition of the Arabic language made available in 2009. In their study of Egypt’s “Kulluna Khalid Said” page, Rieder & als (2015) describe how users had not made the full transition to writing in Arabic script, and kept the language of their Facebook’s interface in English. Yet, within this data, it is clear that users are opting to write in Arabic script in order to appear more “professional” or to leave a greater impact, as is the case with the use of humour. Users who chose to write in Arabic script, articulated their thoughts in a concise and eloquent manner, while those who opted to write in Arabizi express themselves in a more personal tone, with hasty characteristics, addressing a specific notion, rather than wanting to generally address the current situation.
The fact that it is easier for users to type in Arabizi on Facebook is linked to the “easiness” of typing in English. This partly due to Lebanese people growing accustomed to the English language, especially with its integration within the country’s educational system, Hollywoodinfluence within the mass media, and postwar diaspora. The relationship between the Lebanese populous and the English language is reflected and possibly encouraged on the Facebook platform. As many Facebook users initially joined the platform while it was still
available in only English, using the English language on the web seemed like the go to language to be integrated within the Facebook community. PreArabic Facebook days gave rise to Arabizi as way to reconnect with Lebanese culture and humour, but English was the main language that was used to express the “professional, eloquent opinions,” similar to the way Arabic script is being used in this case of contestation. Although, the English comments left posts were mainly due to the fact that the post itself is written in English. This type of user behaviour follows Stefania Milan’s notion of collective identity within cloud protesting (2015). Here, the metaphoric “imagined space” put forth by Milan implies that the cloud platform, which in this case is Facebook, allows for collective action by connecting individuals in a “multiauthored” situation.
In the #YouStink context, language seems to play a role in what binds, or connects, these individuals to the cause. For example, the two of posts collected are written in English and are both videos portraying on the ground footage of protesters being physically assaulted by authorities, both the police and army. The posts urge users to “share” the videos as a way to highlight the way in which authoritative figures are mistreating the Lebanese public, instead of protecting them. These videos generated exactly what admins had hoped for, as top comments expressed the shamefulness brought on by the authorities’ actions. Although the English used is imperfect, users still opted to use the English language, with some of them choosing to mix codes, in order to further explain themselves. One top commenter used the English language to express feelings of frustration towards the authorities:
“for every time i have called ur offices when i needed help and ur officers did nothing at all, for every time u held an army block and ur officers looked at our sisters and women in a sleezy way before they can allow them to pass for every time u have have laid a hand on ur people because they were speaking out JUSTICE for every time u wore ur costume with an EGO and a GUN and used that against us for every time u have put a dollar in ur pockets to let go of criminals for every time u held a hidden price tag for the traffic law and every other so called law for every tear and every stress and every injustice ur allowing ur fake costumed men to execute on my
people my lebanon for everything u were hired to do but do nothing about but get ur salaries at the end of the month and benefit from the schooling discounts and supermarket purchases for everything u tried to cover up on because of ur abuse for every televised lie, for every wrong heroic broadcast WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH AND WE WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT Dont u dare lay a hand on us anymore because WE THE PEOPLE VOW TO DO UNTO U WHAT U HAVE DONE UNTO US”
The comment is quite long and more expressive than those written in Arabic. And similar to the post’s other English top comments, they all follow a similar tone of frustration and anger with the government as the post. The comments below further portray users collectively typing in the same language in order to connect to the cause:
● “The government is a failure beyond imagination. This system is corrupt beyond imagination. The majority of us are numb and desensitized beyond imagination. I salute these brave men and women, these few that make me hope that one day this country can rise again.”
● “The sad thing is that all the officers and soldiers should turn around and join the people instead of facing them. They do not see that they live in the same problems as we do and that they are controlled as puppets?”
● “I wonder, if those 1500 likes and endless angry comments had actually been down there, how the scene would have been different. They are obviously scared and trying to shut this movement down, all the more reason to keep it up. See you Saturday.”
There is a similarity in the moments users choose to express themselves in Arabizi on these posts as it was used parallel to English. They reiterate the same tone and feelings expressed in the English comments. Those who chose to type in Arabizi often included English in their comments, as way to further support their opinions. However, the English language presents a sort of balance between users who choose to write in Arabic and those who choose to write in Arabizi. While English was previously used as a way to express professional opinions (Bianchi,
