When blue-ticked politicians on social media leave you red-faced

The surge of online platforms has redefined the idea of public engagement in India’s political processes

So Narendra Modi’s big reveal about “giving up” social media was about letting women take over his social media accounts, for a day, to share inspiring stories. OK. The Indian Prime Minister’s announcement of the campaign #SheInspiresUs to mark the International Women’s Day, on March 8, ended conspiracy theories and speculations, many dystopian and others utterly, absurdly real – Is this a step closer to a social media shutdown? Are we in for a nationalist, truly desi social media platform of our own? Is he leaving it all to join Tik-Tok?

A teaser tweet for a Women’s Day campaign, from the Prime Minister of a country grappling with fresh Covid-19 cases and tension set off by the communal riots in Delhi, is not timely and this is the kind of hashtag hurrahing that invites, deservedly, criticism of being tokenist.

For those of us who are conditioned to the social media engagement of Modi and other leaders across political parties he has inspired, this is brand-building SOP. This is showmanship; the pause before the punch-line, straight out of a rally speech.

Critics did hit out at the “gimmick” which they argued was intended to take attention away from the riots. There, of course, was resentment but what led the trending lists were calls from people who wanted the Prime Minister to reconsider his decision. The desperation was evident in Twitter trends like #NoModiNoTwitter and #Iwillalsoleavetwitter.

These are people who believed that Modi with over 130 million followers across social media platforms, Modi who shuns media briefings and uses these platforms to counter mainstream media narratives critical of his politics, was actually planning to leave the stage and his arena audience. This is a leader at the helm of the BJP, a party that ran two hugely impactful social media campaigns ahead of its 2014 and 2019 general election wins.

The manner in which Modi’s first tweet on the topic was celebrated as big-ticket entertainment points to a social media strategy that appears to be hitting the mark. It plays by the book in that it reveals a bit on what to expect from a leader perceived to have a thing for dramatic announcements. It’s also disruptive in the way it exposes him to possible backlash because the messaging is not timed well. It’s a strategy that should work just right for a leader who consistently divides opinion.

The PM’s followers have welcomed the campaign with relief and lauded his commitment to empowering women.

The critics, meanwhile, are asking Modi to drop the posturing and instead, stop his supporters from abusing women – including journalists who criticise his politics

– on social media.

It’s all typically split on social media platforms but there’s no denying that Modi and his two tweets dominated the internet for two days. The buzz reasserts the reach of India’s political leaders who are also social media influencers but it leaves us with questions: could this reach not be mined for better results? could we not have campaigns calling for an end to hate speech? What about one to check fake news? Why event-mode activism? Why not engage, argue and then assert rather than push political narratives or personality cults to a largely approving audience?

These are questions pertinent to all Indian politicians who limit their social media leverage to further personal branding or interests of the parties they represent. Optimising social media presence is a personal and political prerogative but this is also a time to use the presence to inspire positive action.

In February, deepfakes – videos manipulated with Artificial Intelligence – showing Delhi BJP chief Manoj Tiwari appealing for votes in Haryanvi and English ahead of the Assembly election went viral in WhatsApp groups. Social media narratives built on rumours and fake news are now making local skirmishes look like communal face-offs with national import. The influence of the social media stars of Indian politics should help in ending the acrimony; it should, at least, not contribute to it.

There are no easy answers available for the politicians, considering how elections are increasingly seen as being won and lost on social media and how aggressive positions – more than balanced, inclusive views – taken on social media are likely to improve their stakes as influencers.

The surge of social media platforms has redefined the idea of public engagement in India’s political processes. It has been divisive and chaotic for most parts but it does not take anything away from the argument that these platforms have enabled important, non-conformist voices.

This engagement often involves faceless masses and cannot always be informed and balanced but the rules need to change when it involves influencers. Their popularity cannot be detached from the responsibilities it comes with. So, when a seasoned politician with the coveted blue tick chooses to share unverified information that targets an individual or a community, he’s recycling hate, to a larger audience. If his influence amounts to amplifying animosity, it’s upon his party to step in and regulate that influence.

It doesn’t help that the social media model of party hierarchies is often an extension of the offline model. Top leaders position themselves as interested in the larger social goals while down the rungs, leaders are given the licence to provoke, to be abrasive.

In a country facing threats of deep political polarisation, can they afford to anymore? Not at least on public platforms where their word carries weight. Those who choose to enjoy the influence without the accountability can, perhaps, consider leaving.

This engagement often involves faceless masses and cannot always be informed and balanced but the rules need to change when it involves influencers. Their popularity cannot be detached from the responsibilities it comes with.