Taking a Look at Digital Activism

“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.

Our generation has been filled with outstanding technological advancements. Indeed, even only 15 years back, the absence of moment correspondence and the innovation accessible for scope had a significant effect in challenging. Even just 15 years ago, the lack of instant communication and the technology available for coverage made all the difference in protesting. Michel Corey in a peer reviewed article, noted how protesting is more simple with the new usage of technology. Corey goes into detail about an application, created by students, on their phones that sends updates on the current protest.This is just one example of the advance type of protesting. In contrast, we see a negative consequence of the social media in protesting by losing some of the

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

Today, people seem blinded by their outsized enthusiasm for social media. According to them, a few clicks can change the whole world and accomplish wonders such as curing cancer. Good intentions become sufficient on their own, as if there were no need for medicine and scientific researches anymore. Well, this is pure nonsense. Facebook’s likes cannot save African children from starvation, the same way Twitter’s 140 characters will not put an end to acts of terrorism. This notion is not even remotely debatable. For instance, the project Kony2012 had a perfect starting point; inspiring video, moving story and most importantly worldwide spread. Unfortunately, the terrorist is still at liberty, and the lack of thorough investigations is to blame. Instead of focusing on the real problems of war and kidnapping of children, the so-called activist related to the obvious and spent all of his money and energy on his movie. Ultimately, due to the predominance of weak-ties, the project was not successful. More importantly, certain tools of social networks, especially “likes” and “retweets”, encourage people to feel good about themselves, when actually they should incite them to put their efforts and means in the cause they supposedly defend. As Gladwell wrote, “[current] activism succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice but by motivating them to do the things that

Their actions alone sparked the revolution for sit-ins and silent protesting, contributing to the Civil Rights movement. The protesters didn’t put anything on social media that allowed their sit in at the diner to grow, but simply the sight of how “people spilled out onto the street”(Gladwell 400) that grabbed activists’ attention. Gladwell observes that in the absence of social media in these events, the protesters tend to be stronger, have emotional bonds, and be more organized. The people participating in the revolt had strong connections (strong-ties), due to the fact that they all share a high risk of consequences. Talking about the dangers starting on page 404, protesters faced violence from the Klu Klux Klan and other white supremacists. Gladwell uses the examples of the revolutions in Moldova and Iran to show how while Facebook and Twitter did let people be “confident to stand up for freedom and democracy” (401), the use of that social media is a weak-tie. Social media helped bring awareness to these, but as Gladwell explains “social networks are effective at increasing participation-by lessening the level of motivation that participation requires” (408). He talks about how social

In Mark Pfeifle’s article “Changing the Face(book) of Social Activism,” the definition of the term slacktivism is introduced with the words of the Urban Dictionary which defines it as an idea that belong to people who want to look like they are taking action to support a cause when they mostly do nothing. Despite the dictionary’s meaning of the term, Pfeifle concludes that slacktivism has completely changed social activism because people all over the world now have the ability to create impacting and beneficial reforms on society. He argues that social media is more powerful than ever, and the way people play a role in politics has changed because of it. Pfeifle gives an example of the power that social media has when he points out that the Democrats regained power through the use of social media during Obama’s run for presidency. He states that social media can form political groups with greater masses of people while reducing the expenses as well as the difficulty of organizing one anywhere in the world from Cairo to Zuccotti Park. He also supported his conclusion with the example of Kony, a cruel guerilla leader whose brutality was exposed to the world with the help of slacktivists. Keeping all these events in mind with the contribution of social media, Pfeifle sees the totality in the positive change of social activism from slacktivism. Pfeifle is right about slacktivism having successfully transformed social activism since it causes vast social changes, increases the

In his essay, “Changing the Face(book) of Social Activism”, Mark Pfeifle writes about the role social media has played socially and politically in our world. In his time, Mark Pfeife has served as a top national security advisor, communicator and deputy assistant for George W. Bush. Pfeife has come to the conclusion that social media has redefined social activism - in place, calling it “social slacktivism”. The word “slacktivism” is a conjuring of his views and biases. Pfeife believes this describes the populace as taking action over the internet without doing anything physically to change things. An example that Pfeife brings up is during the presidential election of 2008, Barack Obama’s campaign was promoted all over online, sources like

As a middle eastern, I did not realize how much Facebook was considered a main role in these uprising and how it was reported here in the U.S. and the west. These uprisings were not just a result of a “Facebook revolution,” but the thousands of people who took to the streets and protested against dictators and demanded change. As someone who lived there, I believe that the political, religious, and economic problems were there already and Facebook was a tool that happened to be accessible to help protesters organize. It certainly was not a main factor in these revolutions. As a matter of fact Facebook was also used and still being used by governments to spread propaganda. In the Syrian conflict Facebook, twitter, and video platforms like YouTube are being used by terrorist groups like ISIS to spread their radical ideology and even reach like-minded people in the west. This was not possible few years ago and is definitely an example of how social media could play a negative role in

Protesting has become the newest way to get attention and stand together, because of social media that provide inside to every internet users. In the following of recent protests against police violence and blame in the United States judicial system social media has show beyond doubt to be an important practical tool for activists aiming to a amass support and raise awareness on police brutality. Clearly, social media has the capacity to make, advocate and apprise mass crowd about protests. Social media platforms such as Facebook or Twitter have the capability to connect us with millions of others internet users in order to acquire support and share awareness. These social media platforms permit us to reach an immensely large audience and allow people to participate and help a cause without having to be there in person.

Kenneth first premise is that hacktivism with political motivation is digital civil disobedience. She argues that the characteristics of hacktivists and the motivation of the act decided

As the world continues to react to the Technology Revolution, easy access to technology that can use the Internet to find and spread information within a quarter of a second has become the lifeline to global interaction for millions across the world. And this ability to spread information has begun to worry the governments of countries that people rely heavily upon the internet. And for counties like China that have censored most of the free thinkers within their society,

Digital citizenship is interesting to me. We the people (2014) states, “digital citizenship is when people use technology to engage in society, government, and politics.” A few examples of it are reading the news online, following a presidential candidate on twitter and reading their tweets, watching the debates online, or blogging about political candidates. This gives citizens the opportunity to have an active role in their government without physically being involved.

Digital campaigning is a medium which uses electronic communicative technologies like Facebook, twitter and youtube etc. Individuals or groups may take to these forums to discuss particular issues with other users, with the intention to simply vent or to make zealous change via petitions, campaigns or advertisements. “Networking and strategising among women and women's groups have led to activism, such as the Women's Internet Campaign” Sutton, J and Pollock, S (2000) Online Activism for Women’s Rights. Cyberpsychology and behaviour. Vol. 3, pp 699-706. Since it’s uprise, digital campaigning has been the fundamental reason behind many significant changes regarding the fight for feminism. An example of a small scale but still very much momentous

Unintentionally, Invisible Children demonstrated “ Slactavism”, the act of supporting a cause by demonstrating social media engagement ( likes, retweets, shares) , assuming that if there is enough digital exposure Kony could captured and America could be Uganda’s saviour. Although this strategy may work for geographic based social issues ( Morozov, 2011) with global issues like Kony 2012, that dealt with ‘saving children’, too much western narrative was emphasized and with lack of

The issue of activism versus "slacktivism" — which is the key term coined that explains when “people who are happy to click a ‘like’ button about a cause and may make other nominal, supportive gestures. But they’re hardly inspired with the kind of emotional fire that forces a shift in public perception” (McCafferty, 2011, pg.1-2) — is at the heart of every debate over online or e-advocacy, especially in regards to hashtag activism. Many people believe that due to the nature of social media, people won’t often go farther than using the hashtag associated with a tragic event. Slacktivism suggest that concepts like hashtag activism do not translate to any real measurable offline activism efforts or bring about social change.