Digital Strike: Monetizing Online Engagement and Content for Myanmar’s Spring Revolution

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-0126

Keywords:

Myanmar, Spring Revolution, Click Work, Algorithmic Resistance, Digital Economy

Abstract

Digital networks and social media are increasingly becoming spaces with high political stakes as well as great economic gains. This paper contributes to the ongoing debate concerning the relationship between economic and political motivations, particularly the observation that economic factors often drive the creation of politically charged content (Grohmann & Ong, 2024). We present a case in which the roles of economic and political incentives are turned on their head, the creation of seemingly nonpolitical content with the purpose of generating money for a political cause. The mechanism through which this inversion is possible is the second finding of this paper: A network of politically motivated internet users coordinate themselves to create, interact with, and watch content for the purpose of income generation through advertisement revenue, which is not for the content creators or users but for a commonly shared political goal. This phenomenon is analyzed in the highly contentious and violent political context of the coup, the Spring Revolution, and the ongoing civil war in Myanmar. In our analysis, we draw from theories of economic incentives in online content creation, click farms, and financial resource mobilization for collective action as well as algorithmic resistance.

Author Biographies

Min Htin Kyaw Lat, University of Passau

Min Htin Kyaw Lat is a doctoral student at the University of Passau. His research interests lie in the areas of digitalization and data protection in the Global South, digital colonialism, platform capitalism, and informal digital economies in Myanmar and Southeast Asia.

Lieke Fröberg, University of Hamburg

Lieke Fröberg is a PhD candidate and research associate in the Ethics in Information Technology (EIT) research group at the Department of Informatics of the University of Hamburg. Her research interests are the politics and ethics of technology, particularly how technological innovation affects (different groups in) society.

References

Amnesty International. (2022). The social atrocity: Meta and the right to remedy for the Roh-ingya. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ASA16/5933/2022/en/

Arafa, M., & Armstrong, C. (2016). “Facebook to mobilize, Twitter to coordinate protests, and YouTube to tell the world”: New media, cyberactivism, and the Arab Spring. Journal of Global Initiatives: Policy, Pedagogy, Perspective, 10(1), 73-102.

Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122–139.

Bleier, A., Fossen, B. L., & Shapira, M. (2024). On the role of social media platforms in the cre-ator economy. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 41(3), 411–426.

Bonini, T., & Treré, E. (2024). Algorithms of resistance: The everyday fight against platform power. MIT Press.

Brown, D., & Hayes, N. (2008). Influencer marketing. Routledge.

Cera, M. (2023). Digital ethnography: Ethics through the case of QAnon. Frontiers in Sociolo-gy, 8, 1119531. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1119531

Cosentino, G. (2020). Social media and the post-truth world order. Palgrave Pivot Cham.

Dove, C. (2017). Giving trends in Myanmar: More than merit making. Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 10(2), 205–222.

Edwards, B., & McCarthy, J. D. (2007). Resources and social movement mobilization. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 116–152). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Edwards, B., McCarthy, J. D., & Mataic, D. R. (2018). The resource context of social move-ments. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, H. Kriesi, & H. J. McCammon (Eds.), The Wiley Black-well companion to social movements (2nd ed., pp. 79–97). Wiley-Blackwell.

Fadhila, Z. (2021, October 26). K-Pop streaming culture and how social media helps to organize it. Center for Digital Society. https://digitalsociety.id/2021/10/26/k-pop-streaming-culture-and-how-social-media-helps-to-organize-it/6529/

Ferguson, R. (2017). Offline ‘stranger’ and online lurker: Methods for an ethnography of illicit transactions on the darknet. Qualitative Research, 17(6), 683–698.

Fink, C. (2018). Dangerous speech, anti-Muslim violence, and Facebook in Myanmar [Special issue]. Journal of International Affairs, 71(1.5), 43–52.

Forberg, P. L. (2021). From the fringe to the fore: An algorithmic ethnography of the far-right conspiracy theory group QAnon. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 51(3), 291–317.

Forberg, P., & Schilt, K. (2023). What is ethnographic about digital ethnography? A sociological perspective. Frontiers in Sociology, 8, 1156776. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1156776

González-Cacheda, B., & Cancela Outeda, C. (2022). Digital cooperation on Facebook and Twitter and financial impact on political crowdfunding campaigns. First Monday, 27(8). https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/download/12658/10687

Google. (2025). Definition of invalid traffic. Google Support. https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/16737?hl=en

Grohmann, R., & Ong, J. C. (2024). Disinformation-for-hire as everyday digital labor: Intro-duction to the special issue [Special issue]. Social Media + Society, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231224723

Grohmann, R., Pereira, G., Guerra, A., Abilio, L. C., Moreschi, B., & Jurno, A. (2022). Platform scams: Brazilian workers’ experiences of dishonest and uncertain algorithmic manage-ment. New Media & Society, 24(7), 1611–1631.

Hsu, M. (2019). Making merit, making civil society: Free funeral service societies and merit-making in contemporary Myanmar. Journal of Burma Studies, 23(1), 1–36.

Kim, P., & Hutt, E. (2021). K-pop as a social movement: Case study of BTS and their fandom ARMY. Journal of Student Research, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v10i3.1772

Liang, M. (2022). The end of social media? How data attraction model in the algorithmic media reshapes the attention economy. Media Culture & Society, 44(6), 1110–1131.

Lindquist, J. (2018). Illicit economies of the internet: Click farming in Indonesia and beyond. Made in China Journal, 3(4). https://madeinchinajournal.com/2019/01/12/illicit-economies-of-the-internet-click-farming-in-indonesia-and-beyond/

Lindquist, J. (2022). “Follower factories” in Indonesia and beyond: Automation and labor in a transnational market. In M. Graham & F. Ferrari (Eds.), Digital work in the planetary market (pp. 59–76). MIT Press.

Lindquist, J., & Weltevrede, E. (2024). Authenticity governance and the market for social me-dia engagements: The shaping of disinformation at the peripheries of platform ecosys-tems. Social Media + Society, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231224721

Meta. (2025). Inauthentic behavior. https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/inauthentic-behavior

McCarthy, G. (2016). Buddhist welfare and the limits of big ‘P’ politics in provincial Myanmar. In N. Cheesman & N. Farrelly (Eds.), Conflict in Myanmar: War, politics, religion (pp. 313–332). ISEAS Publishing.

Ong, J. C., & Cabañes, J. V. A. (2019). When disinformation studies meets production studies: Social identities and moral justifications in the political trolling industry. International Journal of Communication, 13. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/11417/2879

Ong, J. C., & Tapsell, R. (2022). Demystifying disinformation shadow economies: Fake news work models in Indonesia and the Philippines. Asian Journal of Communication, 32(3), 251–267.

Ong, B., & Toh, D.J. (2023). Digital dominance and social media platforms: Are competition authorities up to the task?. IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Com-petition Law, 54(4), 527–572.

Paddock, R. (2022, July 20). Fighting a brutal regime with the help of a video game. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/20/business/myanmar-coup-video-game.html

Tähtinen, T. (2024). When Facebook is the internet: The role of social media in ethnic conflict. World Development, 180, 106633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2024.106633

Vromen, A., Halpin, D., & Vaughan, M. (2022). Crowdsourced politics: The rise of online peti-tions & micro-donations. Springer Nature.

Wang, T. (2020). Does fake news matter to election outcomes?: The case study of Taiwan’s 2018 local elections. Asian Journal for Public Opinion Research, 8(2), 67–104.

Downloads

Published

2025-08-26

Issue

Vol. 18 No. 2 (2025)

Section

Current Research on Southeast Asia

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Min Htin Kyaw Lat, Lieke Fröberg

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

For all articles published in ASEAS before December 2014 and after July 2022, copyright is retained by the authors. For articles published between January 2015 and June 2022, the Society for South-East Asian Studies (SEAS) is the copyright holder. Articles published in ASEAS before December 2019 are licensed under the following Creative Commons License: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported.  Articles published after that date are licensed under the following Creative Commons License: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International. In both cases, this means that everybody is free to share (to copy, to distribute, and to transmit the work) under the following conditions:

  • Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

  • NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

  • NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.