Over the last ten years, social media influence has increased in the lives of people around the world in political communications, and Pakistan has witnessed this even more. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and even TikTok are beginning to palate politics using public opinion and campaigning during elections in this country, where about 180 million people are connected to the Internet. A chunk of it populates the daily user base of social networking sites; therefore, their influence cannot be small, but this very factor brings down both positive and negative effects, as in many countries.

Social media has democratized political participation in Pakistan, allowing citizens from all backgrounds to engage in national debates.

Perhaps, social media has opened avenues that have never been experienced by Pakistani citizens in political engagement, opening access and participation to everyone. Political discussion in Pakistan used to be limited to certain circles, like elite media and political gatherings. That, though, has changed; they have not been able to do away with their cell or their internet connection. Anyone can now join in the national debate. Public access to political information has become more democratic, and a person can come up with views from a tree climber to an architect.

Over the decades, political engagement has thus stemmed from television and print without any other agency, often filtered through or shaped by governmental and elite interests. Social media offers a far more straightforward and unfiltered form of information dissemination. Most political events, protests, or even government policies have been “broken” on social media before they hit mainstream media. This makes for a more aware citizenry of political developments and judgments and debate can enter quite promptly.

For instance, former Prime Minister Imran Khan, especially at the time when he was with the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, spoke through the use of social media. Not only did he have the opportunity to speak to millions, but he also engaged them in real-time political discussion. His extensive use of Twitter and Facebook very well helped him gain popularity among the youth and mobilize them against the existing traditional political establishment.

This is how much closer and more direct the link between the leader and the masses is, free from the constraint of traditional media-the father of political awareness among the youth. Issues that were hitherto restricted only within the elite circle are now knocking at the doors of ordinary citizens for greater involvement in political discourses. Now, social media has changed the political landscape of Pakistan, as it has voiced formerly marginalized sections of society within political discourses.

In terms of lobbying for the influence of social media on political discourse, this aspect truly transcends the meaning of merely political mobilizations and do-it-your-self activism. The empowerment of social movements and activists through organized action has been made possible through mobilizing protests, rallies, and campaigns that are easier and less costly to organize: in addition, it is being able to articulate and create voices for marginalized groups, often underrepresented in the mainstream media.

While empowering activism, social media has also intensified political polarization, creating echo chambers that limit constructive discourse.

Cost-effectiveness in organizing and messaging via media platforms has revolutionized activism with time. Earlier the traditional system needed all assets, developed networks, and required advertorials for publicizing a protest or a political campaign while now most organizations and individuals can mobilize millions by a single tweet, post, or hashtag. A classic example is the 2014 sit-in protests by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf and Pakistan Awami Tehreek.

They made this protest successful with the use of social media for organizing, communicating, and mobilizing support. This took momentum on a level never seen in the political history of Pakistan. Similarly, social media actively accompany and give weight to many other movements such as women’s rights, education, and environmental campaigns.

In Pakistan, its social issues are mobilized also on social media, like the #MeToo movement, for example, or the #BringBackOurGirls hashtag. Campaigns would undoubtedly experience well-organized efforts from within for their long-deterred issues of gender and other concerns. Women’s rights campaigners, who have so long heard little from the traditional media on such topics, can now expose societal myths, raise awareness with regard to concepts of sexual harassment, and demand justice, due to this platform.

Social media has democratized political discourse but has exacerbated political polarization in Pakistan. People follow each other with similar ideas, and because algorithms favor the items that match their beliefs, people see only a small picture and live in echo chambers. Growing political discussions become more and more divided, where opposing sides are vilified instead of debated.

This characteristic of polarization was very evident in the general elections or the head of the government reacting to political turbulence in Pakistan. Party supporters, especially PTI, PML-N, and PPP supporters, attack each other through various social media, creating a poisonous space in cyberspace. The mentality of “us vs. them” creates hate, making it tougher to have constructive political discourse. This environment puts a block on compromise and further entrenches political ideologies, thereby deepening divides across social segments.

The failure, then, will limit speech without infringing upon it. It has become one of the top controversies surrounding social media regulation in Pakistan. Misinformation on social media has not only greatly proliferated but has sunk confidence in political and mediatic institutions.

Misinformation and online harassment have emerged as significant threats, affecting political stability and silencing dissenting voices.

This also has an adverse effect on social media space on politics in Pakistan: a steady rise in the use of trolls and online harassment as instruments of politics. Individuals and political parties hire or assemble groups to distribute negative messages, discredit some opponent, or silence dissenting voices. Harassment is now rampant among political journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens. Most are made to face threats, personal attacks, and even doxxing. Online harassment has been particularly traumatic for female journalists, politicians, and activists, who often confront targeted attacks that include threats of violence and sexual abuse, such as “Women in Politics” or “Women in Politics.”

For example, female political spokespersons, who dare speak on various social issues or raise their voices against certain government policies, are often subjected to online abuse which makes them unable to speak their minds in political discourse. Hence such a fear drives a chilling effect on people’s political participation, as many women and men shy away from the ever-inviting opportunity to speak up.

As social media increasingly shapes political conversations in Pakistan, there have been calls for stricter government regulation and intervention. The government has introduced laws such as the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) to prevent hate speech online, defamation, and cybercrime. However, critics argue that these have been used against political opponents and can therefore act against free expression.

Effective government management of online criticism, dissent, and protests has drawn fire, particularly from opposition parties, and some civil society organizations. The use of laws as instruments of control over online content gives rise to threats against censorship and restriction of freedom of speech. The PTA has been doing acts like blocking social media platforms and content that have given rise to accusations of its overreach and stifling of legitimate political debate.

The challenges inevitably arise when social media is increasingly being examined in terms of regulation continue. The international platforms, for example, Facebook and Twitter, have come under armament by both governments and their citizens to show more responsibility concerning harmful content moderation. Pakistan has also hosted such crusades by these facilities to compel them to comply with local law and ensure that harmful contents, including fake news or hate speech, are minimized. So where does the line between freedom of expression and regulation of harmful content lie?

Social media has totally changed the way people engage – politically at that – within Pakistan. While it has empowered citizens and raised awareness on political matters, not to mention activism, it has also deepened political divisions, spread misinformation, and instigated harassment in the online space. What is now required by Pakistan is building an environment in which social media can serve a constructive political purpose while stifling its negative effects.

Balancing regulation and free speech is critical to ensuring that social media remains a constructive tool for political discourse in Pakistan.

Such a prescriptive solution would be a delicate balance between freeing speech and addressing problems around fake news, online abuse, and political manipulation. Contributions would then continue to exist in positive roles as far as social media’s influence on the political development of Pakistan can be concerned. Through such discussion, the platform will remain a ground in which people can engage in open dialogue, informed debate, and democratic progress.

As the nature of social media continues to evolve, so too will the challenge posed for Pakistan: balancing the faultless merits of the medium with the sanity of all political discourse to ensure that every voice, whatever political persuasion or social stature they come from, is heard and valued.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.