4b686ff333188210VgnVCM100000e56411acRCRDapproved/thenational/Articles/Migration/2009-Q2Lessons learnt from Iran in a digital age3b686ff333188210VgnVCM100000e56411ac____If nothing else, the Iranian election has shown how important social-networking technologies have become in participatory politics.<p>If nothing else, the Iranian election has shown how important social-networking technologies have become in participatory politics. This trend was particularly evident in Iran because nearly half of the country's 46.2 million voters were under the age of 30. These voters have come of age as citizens in an era of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and instant messaging. From the grassroots organisation and fund-raising efforts of Barack Obama during the US presidential campaign, to the recent Lebanese parliamentary elections, social networking sites have become vital political instruments. The Iranian regime knew this only too well, blocking access to Facebook and instant messaging at critical moments in order to sway the direction of the electorate and stunt a growing discontent with the official result. Instead of these technologies being used to usher in a new age of youthful activism in Iran, they now serve as a window for the entire world into the repressive tactics of the regime. While such videos may be blocked in Tehran, clips of police violence against young people protesting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's victory will be accessible in many other capitals in the Middle East. What then to make of Mr Ahmadinejad's heralding his sweeping victory yesterday, congratulating the "intelligent and independent" country, affirming the "very accurate" results and a democracy "based on ethics"? The inconsistency between Mr Ahmadinejad's words and his government's deeds will be stark. Such contradictions will not bode well for Iran's ambitions to become a regional power nor to its claim to uphold the rights and dignity of the oppressed everywhere. It is difficult to tell what the ultimate impact of these technologies will be for Iran. Nor is there any proof publicly available to support the claim that the vote was rigged in Mr Ahmadinejad's favour. But the regime's reaction to both the accusations of foul play and to the young people who demonstrated both in the streets and on the internet, is telling. As hard as a government tries to stifle dissenting voices, those voices will only try harder to be heard, and there is little that Iran can do to stop them. Technology always seems to be one step ahead of the censors. Thankfully, Iran's is not the only example of how these technologies have been used in the democratic process. The Lebanese parliamentary campaign was also heavily influenced by internet campaigning. Traditionalist parties were slow to react to the phenomenon. With its aversion to emerging trends that they consider to be "western" or "corrupting" to youth, this put Hizbollah at a considerable disadvantage. But even in Lebanon, these developments were not all to democracy's benefit. The internet also served to make the buying and selling of votes easier and more prevalent. But on balance, the engagement and participation that Facebook and YouTube advanced were positive. Lebanese politics will never be the same because of them. Whether in the United States, Lebanon or Iran, these were not your grandfather's elections. The power of youth is a force to be reckoned with in any society, and digital media has increasingly engaged young people in civic life. This can be of particular benefit to nations in the Middle East, where such a large number of young people are coming of age. But the increasing digitalisation of politics has no off switch, and efforts to stem its use will only fail.</p> 84YYOPINION2009061500000020090615000000100ARhttp://adedit.ad.atl.publicus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090615/OPINION/906149956590614995620090615100000000