The means is not the message
Yesterday was Egypt’s day – no doubt about it. If the joyous ululating from the crowds sounded strange to Western ears, that just served to underline how little those of us in other lands truly understand the depths of the struggle or the heights of the victory that was won in Tahrir Square. Maybe this is why reporters felt the need to give these historic events a handy ‘label’ for us. They seem to have settled on “the internet revolution”.
Whilst we should not underestimate the power of grass-roots updates from the heart of this uprising via Facebook, Twitter, blogs and text messages – they are not really the story, surely? The courage of the protesters must not be eclipsed by the portable technology they carried. These means to keep the world informed of Egypt’s tumultuous events may have oiled the wheels but they did not power the engine of the revolution. That power came from other sources , such as outrage and national pride.
Just yesterday I left a comment on somebody else’s blog saying that the point of church communication is not the communication itself, but the message it leaves behind in minds and hearts. If people remember how a sermon was preached at the end of a church service, they have maybe missed that sermon’s point.
The point of Egypt’s revolution, surely, is not how it was done but that it was done. It will take a lot more than blogging and tweeting to build Egypt’s tomorrow – and those who have prayerfully followed the story from around the world will need keep up the prayers for a long time to come.