Can Social Media Promote Civic Engagement And Collective Action

Social Media in Social Movements The article How the Bundys’ social media machine fed their political movement by Lindsey Bever on The Washington Post discusses how social media was a driving force in the Bundys’ Occupation of the Oregon Wildlife Sanctuary (2016). The Bundys’ used social media to communicate with their followers and as a call to arms in times of need. In addition, they used social media to promote their cause, to support local ranching and lessen the government’s possession of land. In the article, communications professor Phil Howard states, “It’s very difficult to have a modern political movement without a social media strategy” to emphasize the influence of social media in social movements. After a lull in social media activity, the Bundys came back to protest the prosecution of Dwight and Steven Hammond, who were ranchers who committed acts of arson on public land in 2012 (Bever, 2016). This lead them to react and occupy a building on a wildlife sanctuary in Oregon. After a period of time, the F.B.I. stepped in to shut down the occupation of the wildlife sanctuary, this lead to the arrests of many members and the death of one, LaVoy Finicum. After Finicum was shot, his daughter used Facebook to confirm his death. Fearing a raid, later a man used Finicum’s YouTube channel to also announce his death and make another call to arms. Finally, they used social media to issue a stand down. The usage of social media was near imperative to the Bundys’ cause and

No matter how much potential social media has for political or societal change it is important to criticize its negative aspects. An article written by Andrea Moncada, begins her argument with the question has social media had the same impact on advocacy. Similar to Gladwell’s points of view, Moncada states, “social media can help get the word around, but participants must be united by a core message and traditional methods…” This source of uncertainty is the basis for its support and is understandable.

In the article “Did Social Media Ruin Election 2016,” the author, Sam Sanders, makes many valid points about social media, one being that it is not being used for what it was created for. Today, especially these past few months during the controversial election, social media has been used as a place for users to argue with others that do not agree with them. Sanders goes on to make many other points about social media being used destructively, and I agree with the vast majority of them.

Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted The term “social media” refers to the wide range of Internet-based and mobile services that allow users to participate in online exchanges, contribute user-created content, or join online communities (Dewing). It has become common today to use applications such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube to express and share your thoughts, opinions, and common interest. In Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted, writer Malcolm Gladwell touches upon the issues of social media’s role in activism vs. the traditional way of becoming a true activist Many of us today use these social networks for its beneficial approach to attract users and acquaintances to support their cause or

In his article “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted”, New Yorker writer Malcolm Gladwell complains that the casual, low-stakes activism that takes place on social media will never make a difference in the real world, and that sharing political posts online does not have nearly as powerful an effect as physical, real-life activism. He claims that the Internet allows us to feel disconnected from the issue at hand, and unless people feel true, personal outrage about something, and are willing to make concrete sacrifices, big-picture change is a hopeless pursuit. While I find myself primarily agreeing with Gladwell, I believe he doesn’t give social media enough credit for all that it can do for the world of activism when used effectively.

    In today’s modern time, social media has a huge impact on political environment. How the World Changed Social Media claims, “ Such political activity as there is on social media is usually at a national level and is conducted mainly by supporters…” (Miller 142,143). Social media presents a national level bias. During the last ten years, politics has gained much traction on these sites.  For example, campaigns for national

“Social media platforms held the promise of being more egalitarian and democratic than mass media in a sense that all users could equally participate and contribute content” (Dijck & Poell, 6). This explains a basic purpose of social media that remains consistent with the democratic values of freedom that the U.S. is founded upon by providing citizens with a platform where they are free to speak their mind. What makes this even more interesting is the ability for people to share their opinions on a stage that has relatively no geographical boundaries. Rather than restricting the spread of individuals’ beliefs, social networking sites help spread messages and information to anyone, faster than was previously possible. According to Dijck and Poell, “social media platforms seldom deal with ‘natural’ geographically or demographically delineated audiences; instead, they expedite connections between individuals, partly allowing the formation of strategic alliances or communities through users’ initiative” (Dijck & Poell, 8). Social networking sites are naturally designed to increase connectivity and interactions among individuals with common interests or beliefs. The idea of connectivity has significantly influenced the way in which protests are held in America and around the world.

The Civil Rights movement in the U.S. during the 1950’s and 60’s showed how effective activism is on political issues. Under the leadership of major civil figures, most notably Dr. Martin Luther King, the organized and peaceful movement brought about major change to the civil rights of African Americans and other minorities. Moreover, this movement made historical strides in changing U.S. policy, and did so without the use of social media. Today, social media activism is merely a means to an end. Social media can share a vast amount of information, and raise awareness on a broad spectrum of issues. However, the ability to make major changes on government policy, as proven by many occurrences in history, requires high-risk activism under an organized hierarchy. I argue that social media is not an effective tool for political actions because it lacks the necessary traits to make an effective impact.

Most Robust Citizen Engagement through Social Media 1. A quantitative content analysis of the social media pages for federally-funded infrastructure projects showed that when social media pages were used for two-way dialogue between the city or agency and the public (versus just information sharing), the average rating was one point higher for the variables of relevance, logic, and factuality (Bryer, 2013).

Executives today operating in large corporations know just how tough it is to get away from network tools like Yammer, SharePoint, etc. Such instruments are currently used in a regular base to cooperate communication, entertain groups, and trace gatherings. Found in an article, social media entrepreneur and political organizer Jeremy Heimans said, “ Social media helps all institutions become transparent and engage in a more participatory dialogue with the stakeholders. Social media and technology have helped political organizations, providing a more democratic mechanism to get people involved” (429Magazine).

Kathy Vega Professor Sow English 110 24 May 2016 #LoveWins With the enhancement in technology, it is now accessible to communicate and connect with people across the world. It is effortless to share information like pictures, advertisements, videos and text messages all over the world, to whomever you desire. To many people, it is perceived as a form of entertainment. However, many people do not realize it can also be used as a form of social activism. Summer Harlow author of "Social media and social movements: Facebook and an online Guatemalan justice movement that moved offline" argues that social media is very effective to create social (online) and physical (offline) activism. While Malcolm Gladwell author of "Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted" identifies that internet activism is an instant frenzy that creates a brief impact but is not adequate enough to remain on its own. When media is used as an intellectual resource for activism it can expose people 's conscious about diverse predicaments or movements occurring around the globe. In today 's contemporary society people had the power to create a significant change in the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) community by having same sex marriage legalized in all 50 states. The hashtag #LoveWins became possible in the United States by social and physical activism which included engagement with social networks.

As a logical consequence, Postmes and Brunsting (2002) reasoned that the Internet is changing society because people's cognitive processes, triggered by access to information and communication, replace the strong social ties that traditionally underpin committed activism. In simpler words, in the past, humanity used the herd instinct as the main driving force behind committed forms of activism. Thanks to the Internet, we climb another step or three on the evolutionary ladder, and simply do away with the herd instinct and replace it with reason. The argument, if put this way, does not sound particularly strong. What can be taken away is that social media is still evolving, that social media changes the way we – or most of us communicate, that social media is used in social and political activism, and that the Internet increases quantitative if not qualitative access to information.

What’s on your mind? The Pros and Cons of Social Media Activism Nowadays, social media is practically a staple in everyone’s lives. While some use it solely to stay in touch with friends or family, others wouldn’t even know the latest of current events if they didn’t have their phone notifying them that their friends are talking about it. The Internet and social media have bred a new generation of socially-aware people which has given them a platform to learn and share on. Because this generation’s growth is largely-based online and through technology, it has formed a new brand of social activism. While some feel social media has made it too easy to claim a movement or position, others believe that it is what we need to spread a message

Social Action and Community Media Assignment Mae Fincham The meaning of social action is addressing issues within society in order to spark awareness and result in change. Their

As technology develops rapidly in the modern society, the broad social influence it brings is also widely discussed, especially about its effects on social change. In the past, social movements were raised without the help of technology, specifically without social media, whereas social media has recently played a non-ignorable role. The connection between social media and social activisms concerned, here come some different voices. Few people maintain that social media now has no practical influence on social change, while others hold the opposite view, thinking social media is already a crucial factor in it. Personally speaking, I agree with the second kind of view: it is true that social media is not able to create social movements by itself in today’s world, but it plays an important and essential part in making real social change.