What “Gen Z Protests” Reveal About the Role of Social Media Companies in International Politics

By Ian Kennedy

Gen Z-led protests across Asia and Africa have brought social media’s political power to the forefront, fundamentally reshaping the landscape of modern dissent. As platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok increasingly play a prominent role in uprisings worldwide, states have responded with internet blackouts and social media restrictions. Recent uprisings in Nepal and Bangladesh have shown that, rather than quelling unrest, social media bans now trigger widespread mobilization. This phenomenon is especially apparent among the digitally integrated and social media–dependent Gen Z, casting doubt on the future effectiveness of this strategy. 

Recognizing the catalytic potential of social media bans on domestic unrest, regimes may turn to more proactive tactics: manipulating and controlling online content before movements gain momentum. Government authorities may seek to broker agreements with social media companies, offering market access in exchange for stricter oversight and censorship within their borders. These arrangements, if implemented, would confer significant influence upon social media companies in the domestic politics of these nations. 

As a result, the growing leverage of these non-state actors – technology companies whose policies and decisions shape information flows – will reverberate across international relations. The international community must anticipate and adapt to this shifting power dynamic, as social media companies increasingly play a central role in the political landscapes of digitizing societies. Preparing for an era in which global politics are shaped not only by states but also by powerful multinational technology corporations will be critical to navigating the challenges ahead. 

Social Media Blackouts in 2011 

Coinciding with the dawn of the digital age, the Arab Spring protests showcased the power of social media in mobilizing political opposition. In Egypt, the Facebook campaign “We Are All Khaled Said” catalyzed a movement that ultimately helped force longtime president Hosni Mubarak to resign. Like many other governments facing Arab Spring protests, Egyptian authorities attempted to restrict Internet access to stifle dissent. Instead, these restrictions demonstrated the regime’s vulnerability and motivated more citizens to take to the streets in search of reliable information that was no longer accessible on the Internet or Facebook. 

While social media facilitated mobilization during the Arab Spring, most scholars contend that deep-rooted sociopolitical divisions were the primary forces behind the revolutions. In Egypt, the enduring gulf between ruling elites and the general public is widely recognized as the driving factor in the 2011 uprising. Social media blackouts heightened tensions and amplified protest activity, but ultimately reinforced an existing movement rather than sparking a revolution. 

The Gen Z Paradigm Shift

Among Gen Z, the relationship between digital access and political protest has shifted dramatically, marking a new era in which social media restrictions can directly ignite collective action. In September 2025 in Nepal, a campaign exposing the privileges of Nepalese elites gained traction online, prompting authorities to enact a social media blackout to contain dissent. This social media ban sparked nationwide protests that eventually toppled the Nepalese government. Unlike in the Arab Spring, where social media restrictions exacerbated existing unrest, in Nepal, the blackout itself was a direct catalyst for the revolution. 

This dramatic difference underscores the extent to which the global digital landscape has changed. In 2011, Facebook had 750 million users, with 70% of users being from outside the U.S. This was a number significant enough to influence global political events, such as the Arab Spring, but remains modest compared with its current reach. By 2025, Facebook’s worldwide user base exceeded 3 billion, and social media users globally as a whole accounted for over two-thirds of the world’s population. In Nepal, almost 50% of the population used social media in 2025, a 5% increase from 2024. This figure indicates one of the highest per-capita user bases in South Asia, with experts pointing to Nepal’s relatively young population – the median age of the country is 25 – as a primary reason for social media’s widespread use in the country. 

These generational dynamics explain why digital crackdowns now serve as rallying cries. During the 2024 Bangladesh “Gen Z” Revolution, protesters called Facebook a “lifeline,” revealing the value they placed on social media access. For Gen Z, being cut off from social media is perceived as a direct attack on their autonomy and community, making blackouts far more provocative and politically consequential than they were during the Arab Spring. 

Implications for the Big Tech-State Relations 

Given Gen Z’s fundamentally different relationship with social media, traditional “digital authoritarian” tactics such as censorship and blackouts risk provoking significant backlash, as evidenced by recent events in Bangladesh and Nepal. As a result, governments concerned about potential uprisings will increasingly focus on curbing social media’s mobilizing power before opposition movements reach critical mass. The most effective strategy is likely to involve close collaboration between states and social media companies, enabling authorities to preemptively censor and monitor online content deemed threatening to their authority. 

Such arrangements grant these companies not only market access but also immense political leverage. Social media platforms gain the ability to support cooperative governments through surveillance and information control, while simultaneously retaining the power to galvanize opposition against state actors who fall out of favor. With the power to shape public discourse on a massive scale, social media companies will become pivotal geopolitical arbiters. 

Importantly, this dynamic extends beyond autocratic states. In the United States, TikTok has emerged as a significant political actor, leveraging its newfound influence to secure support from former critics – including President Trump – who previously advocated for the app’s ban. Trump claimed that TikTok contributed to his victory in the 2024 election and that “young people would go crazy” if the platform were banned. As of December 2025, the President has delayed bipartisan legislation intended to ban TikTok on five separate occasions. Trump’s reversal on TikTok exemplifies the tangible leverage social media companies now hold over political actors and policymaking. The compromise negotiated between the U.S. government and TikTok signals a future in which the relationship between states and platforms will be defined as much by negotiation and political leverage as by formal regulation. 

Currently, the international system is ill-equipped to address the rising power of social media companies. A critical question remains: How can international norms, human rights, and free speech be enforced in the private agreements that social media companies broker with states? Unlike traditional state actors, social media platforms operate outside existing frameworks for international accountability while wielding influence that can fundamentally alter governments and societies. Without robust cooperation to restore the primacy of state oversight, nations risk becoming subordinate to the strategic interests of these powerful non-state actors.

Edited by: Amina Dunn, MS & MURP /Jessica Soulliere, MS & MLA