Those activists wouldn't have to stand out in front of people to show people their opinions, and they are less risk to become a target of Iranian government and authorities. Nevertheless, their information and opinions might not fully credible. .
The post-election aftermath also had referred as a "Twitter revolution" due to the astonishing role of social networking sites. Andrew Sullivan, who "made a significant contribution to how the rest of the media-cut off from access to the streets of Tehran and unable to navigate the new media maze as effectively as well-trained bloggers-portrayed the protests"(Morozov, 10). Sullivan's contributions to the revolution not only enchanted young Iranians but also global young people. .
There was undoubtedly an electric charge to the circulation of news about the June protests, and this charge was conveyed largely at the level of affect. Television news stations made repeated reference to the unmediated emotional content of the data coming out from cellphones, YouTube uploads, and tweets. Viewers were continuously cautioned to prepare themselves for the emotionally raw footage that they might find disturbing (Naghibi, para. 3).
However, those social media didn't drive the revolution happened, but people are intelligent enough to utilize those social media to make the protests. As it happened twenty years ago, those young people utilized fax machines and Xerox copier to make the protests in the revolution of 1979. "Technology is only a tool: the strategy is what matters"(Schleifer, 2). In reality, technology is making a shortcut for people to post and view information, pictures, and videos. People are easier to adopt information from internet than other tools. Twitter is a more powerful website than others, and it is "open-ended design allows for its messages to be broadcast from various sources" (Schleifer, 2). That means Twitter can't not be completely blocked, which makes the Twitter Revolution more powerful and successful in Iran.