TOUGH JUSTICE : Keeping up with social media: Why authorities struggle

Bizarre things are happening all around involving authorities attempting to survive or fit-in in this increasingly ‘digitising’ world.
Social media platforms are increasingly becoming essential to how citizens go about their social and political activities. These platforms are characterised by their randomity, and they have allowed millions of people in the world to express themselves with very little influence from authorities.
Most authorities in the world are made up of ‘digital immigrants’ as opposed to ‘digital natives’. Unfortunately for power structures, it is the natives, people aged below 35, who form an overwhelming majority of social media users.
The biggest social media platforms such as Google, Facebook, Twitter and Snapchat were most founded by people who are below 35. For me, the significance of this fact lies in my belief that these platforms were created with the young person in mind.
Power though, even democratic power, was not created in a way that particularly favours the young generation. This is why it is rare everywhere in the world to see people who are below 35 years old in top government positions, such as ministerial positions and above.
In this day and time when inventions by millennials are changing the face of the earth, I find it quite preposterous that someone would still be legally hindered from running for the top office in their country because they haven’t yet turned 35.
Up to this point I have introduced three ‘variables’ namely digital platforms, young people and power. I have also discussed the relationship between digital platforms and young people in terms of their compatibility, as well as young people and power in terms of their lack of compatibility.
I will explore one more relationship, that of the digital space and power in light of recent events, my key question being, how can power be effectively exercised in the ‘incompatible’ digital world?
In Kenya, recently, President Uhuru Kenyatta (pictured) found himself opening a can of worms when he attempted to do a ‘cool’ video mobilising people to register to vote. In this video Mr Kenyatta and a group of boys are seen following a choreography that includes a dance known as “the dab”.  
When the video was released, doctors in the country were on strike and people were calling upon the government to pay more attention to their plight. So young people took to social media in their numbers, and instead of heaping praise on the President for being cool, they condemned him for his purported negligence. They even nicknamed his dance the “dab of shame”.
The fact that the dance is extremely popular among young people did not help Mr Kenyatta dodge the bullet.  See, it is wrong to assume that young people will blindly rally behind whatever nonsensical thing simply because it is popular. Supported by their numbers, they, and not the authorities, dictate the conversation as well as the tone of the conversation on digital platforms.
The lesson for authorities here is to never attempt to cover up real issues with issues that are superficial. The fact that young people are pre-occupied with things that seem superficial does not mean that they have lost their ability to reason. All it takes is one conscious tweet!
In Tanzania, authorities overreacted over a photo of a tour guide faking a translation in a video he shot of a tourist who had a message for the country. This was obviously a harmless joke; one of the many you can expect to see on a daily basis on social media. Authorities attempting to scout around for such content on social media is really biting off more than they can chew. There are more important things to do, surely!
In the same vein, the recent ban imposed by BASATA on Nikki Mbishi’s song titled “I am sorry JK” could prove to be futile and unworthy of the effort. The song is a mere expression of the rapper’s preference for the former regime and it says nothing outrageous enough to justify offending the current regime.
People naturally assess regimes by comparing one from another, and one regime cannot expect to be favorited in all instances. In fact, even the tone of the current regime’s election campaign was quite critical of the previous. They can dish it out but they can’t take it?
To flourish in the digital world, authorities need to develop a thicker skin.  Digitisation has brought about the democratisation of opinion. This doesn’t mean that a President must do every idiotic thing on social media just to keep up, or engage in a feud (also called a ‘tweef’) with every celebrity who disagrees with them on social media. No Mr Kenyatta and Mr Trump!
Neither does it mean that authorities must attempt to actively monitor and police social media content.
Authorities simply need to understand that power is inevitably evolving, and instead of fighting off this reality, they themselves should evolve and embrace the change.