The document discusses the potential for social media to promote peacebuilding or perpetuate conflict in the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh. It notes that traditional media in Armenia and Azerbaijan often set a negative context that hinders dialogue. While new digital tools could encourage nonviolent solutions, they also risk reinforcing biases if used to spread nationalist rhetoric. Experts argue that both online and offline cooperation are needed, and that social media alone cannot transform deep-rooted attitudes. Approaches must be cautious and avoid imaginary hopes for technologies.

1. Works-in-Progress Series: SOCIAL MEDIA IN ARMENIA AND AZERBAIJAN NEW TOOLS FOR PEACEBUILDING AND GRASSROOTS ACTIVISM? Onnik Krikorian Caucasus Regional Editor, Global Voices http://www.globalvoicesonline.org [email_address] [email_address]

2. What is Global Voices? Global Voices is a community of more than 300 bloggers and translators around the world who work together to bring readers reports from blogs and citizen media everywhere, with an emphasis on voices that are not ordinarily heard in the mainstream media. Global Voices is translated into more than 15 languages by volunteer translators, who have formed the Lingua project. Additionally, Global Voices has an Advocacy website and network to help people speak out online in places where their voices are censored. We also have an outreach project called Rising Voices to help marginalized communities use citizen media to be heard.

3. Global Voices Impact Four websites most consistently account for links between countries: YouTube , Wikipedia , the BBC and, a distant fourth, Global Voices Online . The last of these, launched at Harvard University in 2005 […] works to create links between bloggers in different countries, and to find what it calls “bridge bloggers” […] The Economist, 2 September 2010 Working relationships with BBC, Reuters, Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting, La Stampa and many others. Frequently quoted by CNN, BBC, New York Times, The Economist etc.

4. Nagorno Karabakh 1994 ceasefire

5. Approx 25,000 dead

6. Approx 1 million refugees and IDPs

7. 16 percent of Azerbaijan controlled by Armenian forces

8. Border skirmishes and clashes still occur

9. Territorial integrity vs. Right to self-determination

10. Peace deal still elusive

11. Threat of new war

12. Attitudes in Armenia

13. Attitudes in Azerbaijan

14. Perpetuating Conflict [A] negative context [is set] in the public consciousness, which hinders dialogue and mutual understanding […] Without more accurate and unbiased information […] free of negative rhetoric and stereotypes, Armenians and Azerbaijanis will continue to see themselves as enemies without any common ground. Report on media in Armenia and Azerbaijan , Caucasus Resource Research Centers

15. Perpetuating Conflict [...] people are often inclined to consider their existing attitudes and beliefs to be true and filter the news through this lens . Thus, they accept messages in order to maintain their original perceptions. […] bias in the local media [...] serves as a means to fuel and perpetuate hatred . This is a role the media has and continues to play with regards to the conflict over Nagorno Karabakh. Report on media in Armenia and Azerbaijan , Caucasus Resource Research Centers

16. Attitudes in Georgia

17. Another Alternative? Throughout history, war has affected media, with conflict often creating an information void. In the 21st century, media has begun to affect war more than ever before. Digital media technologies [...] have increased communication and information dissemination in conflict settings [...]. These new tools can be used to foment violence or to foster peace , and it is possible to build communication systems that encourage dialogue and nonviolent political solutions. Ivan Sigal, Global Voices Executive Director, Digital media in conflict-prone societies, Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA)

18. http://www.oneworld.am/diversity/

22. Twitter Communication