University of Wales professor Gary Bunt began to focus on the role of technology in the lives of ordinary Muslims in the 1990s, becoming a trailblazer in the study of the phenomenon of the digitalization of Islam. In his already fourth book: “Hashtag Islam. How Cyber-Islamic Environments Are Transforming Religious Authority”, the professor continues his many years of research. Russian researcher Sofia Ragozina, in her review “Still Orientalism: How the West Sees Islam on the Internet?” criticizes the work of the British scholar.
The central concept for the Bunt is the “cyber-Islamic environment”. This term covers a variety of meanings, perspectives, and applications of media by Muslims. That is, the subject of the study is almost any reference to Islam on the Internet: an entire site or a separate post. Ragozina asks: to what extent is this justified and productive? At the same time, the growth in popularity of social networks, which affects the change in channels for transmitting religious knowledge, is considered only for the countries of the Middle East and North Africa.
In one chapter, Bunt addresses the many segments of Islam on the Internet: pilgrimage, fasting, religious neophytes, family issues, and representations of “alternative directions of Islam.” The chapter is replete with concrete situations from all corners of the Muslim world. Critic Ragozina again points to a vague aspect: how comprehensively does this reveal the cyber-Islamic environment? At the end of the chapter, “Islam 3.0” is declared: adherents do not simply use the Internet (“Islam 2.0”); the online sphere itself influences religious practices and the perception of religion.
According to Bunt, the Internet environment is perhaps the main reason for the change in the very essence of authority in the Islamic tradition, which gives rise to contradictions. The key to the success of a religious authority on the Internet is the recognition of the characteristics of its audience: not only the movement in Islam, but also political views, age, region, and so on. On the other hand, the anonymity and accessibility of the Internet allow everyone to express their own opinion, which leads to simplification and distortion of knowledge.
Bunt devotes the final chapters to “cyber-jihad”, examining the online activities of the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda, both banned in the Russian Federation. While the latter organization gradually included the use of the Internet in its strategy, the IS, banned in the Russian Federation, relied on the media from the very beginning. Critic Ragozina notes the author’s reservation: the ideas of “holy war” occupy the smallest part of the cyber environment, but they dominate Western agendas related to Islam.
According to Ragozina, Bunt has brilliantly managed to note the trends of Islamic cyberspace. However, the critic believes that today the sociology of Islam can solve more complex issues than simply recording some changes. As she has already pointed out, the general idea of the “cyber-Islamic environment” is fragmentary. The examples that Bunt cites from various sources overly unify the Islamic world, as if the Indonesian cyber-environment is no different from the Moroccan or European one.
Moreover, the author proceeds from a thesis that supposedly requires no argumentation about the comprehensive impact of the Internet on Islamic practices. “What is this effect on a substantive level?” asks the critic Ragozina. The idea of the online environment changing Islamic identity runs through Bunt’s entire work like a red thread, but the study includes too little of the Muslims themselves. After September 11, studying the personal experiences of believers helps combat stereotypes by showing the usual “normality” of the lives of Muslim adherents.
The study, trying to cover absolutely all Muslim contexts and regions, mentions only the situations most understandable to the Western reader. In this regard, Ragozina cites a quote from Professor Nadia Fadil: “The return of Muslims to the realm of ordinary people depends on the extent to which they develop values that are deeply familiar to secular feelings.” If Fadil draws attention to the secularity of Western society, then Bunt’s work inevitably turns out to be Orientalism.
The diversity of the cyber-Islamic environment boils down to a set of Western ideas: attitudes towards women, radicalism, and so on. Critic Sofia Ragozina concludes that the approach of the pioneer of digital Islam studies needs to be updated. It is more productive to look not for general trends, but to study local practices. Finally, the study is clearly missing Muslims themselves. Gary Bunt, in fact, describes how the West sees Islam on the Internet.
Interestingly, in 2024, the author’s next book, “Islamic Algorithms: Online Influence in the Muslim Metaverse”, was published. From its description, Bunt continues to develop the concept of a “cyber-Islamic environment”.
GSV "Russia - Islamic World"
Photo: Daniel Silva/Unsplash