“Flies, babbling, and the knight”: between the aura of politics and the denigration of differences. Terms in political culture among youth, media professionals, and politicians

In the past few years, certain terms have emerged as norms in political tweeting on social media, especially on the "Twitter" platform. These terms have become widely used not only among young tweeters but also have been embraced and fueled by journalists and politicians, transforming into the "branding of politics" in Lebanon.

Politicians, along with journalists, are well aware of the power of emotional appeal, especially in areas with a historical connection between people and their leaders. In Lebanon, as in other Arab countries, emotions play a significant role in shaping collective political consciousness, making it difficult to separate personal feelings or emotions from people's political choices. Of course, many factors in Lebanon have contributed to the political parties maintaining their supporters and strength, despite the many transgressions they commit. If it weren't for this emotion, nourished by geographical, regional, sectarian, and confessional factors that led to what is known as political clientelism, these parties would have either politically disappeared or weakened their grip on the state. At the very least, they would have faced popular accountability and, through the accountability of their supporters, been forced to change and evolve, ultimately leading to the proper selection of representatives who serve the people, rather than those who cater to close associates, brokers, and corruption.

The media plays a central role in either capitalizing on these emotions, driven by personal, commercial, and political interests, or in redirecting political awareness by presenting facts in accurate journalistic language, free of poetry, exaggerated rhetoric, and symbolic flourishes in news bulletins and hosts' introductions. In Lebanon, the first scenario often dominates media policies, to the point where even experienced journalists have become prisoners of these terms, which have spread across television channels and newspapers to describe politicians in Lebanon.

For instance, we frequently hear and read phrases describing political figures or phenomena like "a manly political stance" or "the real man in politics." The term "chivalry" is also used to describe a political stance or figure to imply the credibility of the action or person. This romanticized praise, which initially started in Lebanon’s media, was quickly adopted by politicians, who began to attribute such terms to their own stances or to their allies and political friends. The danger, however, lies in deceiving an entire generation by embedding these cultural terms that have no real connection to politics or public affairs, to the point that they have become integral to political choices or justifications for politicians’ mistakes and stances. Supporters compete to defend or praise these terms, always considering them correct. As such, political admiration or affection expressed on social media is not based on a politician's work or projects that they have promised and implemented but rather on their "chivalry" in political work, "goodness," or "closeness to the people."

This behavior is also reflected in how the public defends a politician when their stance is criticized, even if the criticism is constructive. Supporters often remind critics of the politician’s personal qualities, such as honesty, manliness, chivalry, humility, and so on. On the other hand, if someone dares to criticize, even constructively, they are often met with a barrage of derogatory terms like "babbling" or "flunky," among others. There is a complementary relationship in the influence between the media, politicians, and the various groups or fronts on social media. Just as journalists and politicians have succeeded in playing on emotions for political mobilization, tweeters who have popularized these derogatory terms have influenced both journalists and politicians, to the point where we now read and hear such terms in their responses to critics, which are unbefitting of their positions, responsibilities, or personalities.

The negative impact of spreading these terms goes beyond the weakness of the arguments used by those who employ them. It contributes to the distortion and emptiness of the cultural awareness of our youth, who do not need additional factors to confuse them politically and culturally. I have tried to trace the first use of these terms, and perhaps one of the readers can contribute knowledge and analysis on the origin of these terms and their economic, social, and political factors from a social and political psychology perspective to share with others.

The most widely spread term in recent years is "electronic flies." In a brief search, it becomes clear that this term gained popularity in the Arab world following the Qatari-Gulf crisis. In the field of media sociology, it refers to fake accounts programmed to be used in the battle to sway public opinion on social media, directing it toward a specific stance or position, whether in a political confrontation or to beautify a political figure or a country. Software is used to amplify the tweets of these fake accounts to make them "trend."

Politicians are happy to use various terms that serve their interests in political competition, which stirs emotions in different ways. However, it is hard to understand the continued media complicity, if one can call it that, through tweets and stances by journalists on both sides of the political divide. The behavioral influence these journalists contribute to creating through their personal stances, using terms that have almost become "trademarks" in Lebanese political media discourse, will have far-reaching consequences in the future on all economic, political, social, and cultural levels. The game of social media in shaping public opinion and influencing the behavioral and cultural aspects of a society is one of the most dangerous weapons of our time, and both politicians and the media know it very well. What kind of society do we want?

Note: I admit that I once fell into the trap of "political romanticism" at a certain point in my life, both in my tweets and in writing several articles in the past.