In a sense YouTube is nothing without CNN

Since the beginning of the protests in Iran, all newscasts Word the same speech: journalists cannot do their job and the only available images are filmed by citizens with phones, broadcast on YouTube and relayed through Facebook or Twitter. Traditional media appear to be reduced to impotence and forced to rely on the "Web 2.0" term invented by the "guru" of the Internet Tim O'Reilly to designate the new generation of Internet, interactive and "collaborative".

Another context, same observation: in January 2009, journalists are prevented from entering Gaza by the Israeli authorities, and French television spend looping images that the Israeli army on Youtube. In the space of a few weeks, videos uploaded by IDF are viewed by millions of people.

Early 1990s, the term 'CNN effect' was used to describe the impact of television satellite on the foreign policy of the United States. One of the most outstanding case remains the US operation in Somalia, in 1993. Images of starving Somalis had moved America and pushed to establish a military intervention for the less risky. Later, photographs of us soldiers lynched by the crowd and dragged through the streets of Mogadishu had precipitated the withdrawal of the troops. Republican Senator Phil Gramm then made the following comment: "people show American bodies do not have the air of starvation in the eyes of the people of Texas."

Today, "the CNN effect" seems to be partially removed by "effect YouTube", which has three major characteristics. He firstly one global, while CNN is little or no reserved to an elite Western or westernized. If the videos found on YouTube come from the countries of the world, it is because the price of information and communication technologies has collapsed. Cell phones including those that allow filming and then publish videos are invading the South. Today, a human in two has a mobile phone. The Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Iran are part of the country where the number of mobile phone users is growing more rapidly. The fact that Abdul Salam Zaeef, former Ambassador of the Taliban in Pakistan, has recently praised the qualities of his iPhone is more likely a symptom of the story.

The second characteristic of the YouTube effect is he relies on the traditional media as a resonator. For the moment and undoubtedly continue for many years traditional media retain the upper hand on the definition of "the agenda" media and, to some extent, political. Videos of all the "forgotten" conflicts including wars African are available on YouTube. This is not so far as these conflicts out of oblivion. To make mention of them, they need to be taken up by the media that matter, those who are viewed by "makers." In a sense, YouTube is nothing without CNN.

Finally, the YouTube effect emphasizes that the US military called the effect "strategic corporal". If, to the more low level of military hierarchy, a soldier commits an unjustifiable act a summary execution, for example , his actions may now be filmed and broadcast on the Internet, with the political consequences that we can imagine. Thus, a blunder publicized, even committed by a corporal, may have strategic consequences. The Abu Ghraib photographs provide an overview of this effect "strategic corporal". Their release would have been much faster and their impact may be more important if YouTube, Facebook and Twitter had existed at the time of the facts.

"Dictionary of received ideas", Gustave Flaubert defined innovation in two words: "always dangerous." In the case of Web 2.0, this definition is only in part of the wisdom. YouTube can serve as a means of democratization to circumvent censorship that expression of totalitarianism support the video of the beheading of Nick Berg is still available on the Internet. This is not technological innovation which is dangerous but that man is capable to do.

Marc Hecker is a research associate at the Ifri and co-author of "War 2.0: Irregular Warfare in the information Age" (Praeger, 2009)