In “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will not be Tweeted” by Malcolm Gladwell, the main idea is that the social media is not much necessary for a high-risk activism. I believe that Gladwell has some reasonable points in his article. For example, during the time of Independence War, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk gathered lots of supporters to fight on this goal without using any source of social media. The only communication they used was telegraph. And yet, at the end of Independence War, the result was dramatic. This result was achieved only by the strong nationalist tie between the Turkish people where the era was lack of communication.
On the other hand Gezi Park is the most recent event in Turkey which social media was the main tool. The spread of event through Turkey and also around the world was obtained by social media. The intensity of the gathering of people in Taksim and also in the other cities of Turkey in such a short time was a result of social media’s power. Also because people did go to strike and protest to defend their rights and the police force was involved, Gezi Park incident can be shown as high-risk activism.
As a conclusion, back in the time because the communication was limited people had harder time in spreading news but still they managed to have high-risk activism. With the power of social media, the potential of these strikes did not decreased, on the contrary, it helped to increase it in worldwide.