Analysis Of Small Change By Malcolm Gladwell

In “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted,” Malcolm Gladwell discusses the social media and society changed how people and groups of interact with each other. The four students sat down at the lunch counter at the Woolworth’s in downtown Greensboro, North Carolina. The Woolworth’s lunch counter denied service because of their race. They refused to leave until the dinner closed and protest grew. The four students protested widespread and people from different states started to join in four students. They were also protested to happen without social networking. There was incident that people protested against the communist government and received through Twitter Revolution. Gladwell emphasizes the importance of social media for

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

To build his argument, he ties in similar examples from history that involve either social or political activism. Not only does he connect these examples to the “weak ties” that the platforms of social media are built upon, but he also offers insight to his readers, the general public, and social-networking gurus (Gladwell 551). In his essay, “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted”, Gladwell creates a rhetorically effective argument that illustrates why social networking is not an adequate way to conduct social or political activism.

In his article “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted”, published in the New York Times on October 2010, Malcolm Gladwell looks closely into the notion of social change and the different means to achieve it. He makes a clear distinction between traditional activism, which implies sacrifices and physical devotion, and current activism, based on social networks. The writer considers that “social media can’t provide what social change has always required” (Gladwell, paragraph 1).

Traditional media has failed to live up to its fourth estate role. This has lead us to the question, can the more modern, social media, make up for the lack of success that traditional media has had in fulfilling this watchdog role for the people? Kemp’s rules of CIDRA1 apply to social media as they do with traditional media. Thus, we must determine what, if any, obstacles are present in preventing social media from completing this role. More specifically, do the five filters that Chomsky highlights apply to social media as they do to traditional media? Or does the fundamental structure of social media allow for it to accomplish a fifth estate role? I argue that social media is more effective at playing a watchdog role than traditional media. Social media is built on a platform that has the interest of working for the people in terms of freedom of distributing ideas and checking elite power in liberal democracies. Furthermore, “…traditional media formats are no longer the only politically relevant forms of media” (Metzgar, Maruggi, 2009, p. 149). The reason that social media can have higher success in acting as a watchdog role stems from one central theme: when it comes to social media, less of Chomsky’s filters lie between the person wanting to distribute an idea and the ability to have this idea delivered to the public.

The main argument of the Gladwell in this article is that social media is not effective in “high-risk” activism because it lacks strong bonds and hierarchical command structure. Although he agrees that social media can bring a “limited” change which has far less consequences than the “high risk” activism and do not require a higher level of commitment. He thinks that social media is not an effective enemy of status quo.

With the recent advent of social media we are now more aware to the plights of the less fortunate. Former Vice Provost of Duke University Cathy Davidson, author of the essay “Project Classroom Makeover”, discusses the rise of our interconnected society through the use of social media in her essay. In tandem with Davidson is Maggie Nelson, whose essay “Great to Watch” explores the violence that is so entrenched in our society. The advent of the internet created social media platforms for previously unheard of connection. Giving everyone an equal voice, this platform was prime for being used for activism. However it is not that simple, being an activist for human rights will expose a complex world of parallel and sometimes contradictory ideas. Well used is social media for activism, and for good purpose, it is the most powerful tool for exposing the oft overlooked humanitarian issues of our world.

In the 21st century if the revolution is not tweeted, is it still a revolution? Many say the revolution will not be televised but it will be tweeted. In “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted,” by Malcolm Gladwell, he provides us with an argument on how social media has an impact on activism. Gladwell discusses how social media will not spur the next revolution because it has changed the way protests form. The protests went from small, high-risk acts formed by people whose purpose was close to their heart to a low-risk act with an enormous amount of people who may hardly know each other. Although interesting, Gladwell’s article fails to prove today’s revolution will not be tweeted.

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

Name: Arquimides San Sebastian Instructor: Ruben Aguilar Course: ENC1102 Date:5/14/15 Response to Malcolm Gladwell’s Small Change and Dan Savage's It Gets Better In his article, Small Change, Malcolm Gladwell describes two kind of activism: the traditional style and its modern online variant, social media. He discusses pro and cons of both methods.

Jessica Nichelson English 101 Essay 5 Mrs. Cain Activism at Its Finest The author Malcolm Gladwell wrote the article, “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted.”, discusses many interesting topics throughout the reading. The comparison of activism from the 1960’s to today has dramatically changed. This essay appeared in the New Yorker on October 14th, 2010. Another accomplishment of Gladwell is that he was named Time magazine’s 100 Most Influential People in 2005.

In Norman Gladwell’s “Small Change”, he seeks to answer the question: can activism through social media be as effective as it’s real world counterpart? In his opinion, no, though he notes that it can have it’s uses. Gladwell's primary argument is that social media sites lack the hierarchy and structure needed to execute and control the highly risky protests required to actually make a change, citing the almost militant precision exhibited by the civil rights movement. He theorizes that this is because social media is incapable of fostering the deep bonds between people necessary to trust and devote themselves wholly to their comrades and cause. He concludes that while social media activism can

Gladwell provided an example of successful revolution in the past when there was no existence of social media and some current examples when social media like Facebook and Twitter were popular in most of people's daily life while they were not as useful as they were claimed to be so in the revolution. By listing these examples, the author would like to to support his statement that social media is ineffective in revolution. The first example is the revolution against the racial discrimination in Greensboro, North Carolina in 1960. The revolution started with the sit-in protest of four college students in a lunch counter. It is a typical and successful example of revolution without the help of social media. The revolution grew quickly that it

Malcom Gladwell article “small change” estates an injustice that happened in the United states of America. Some examples wooed be A&T sit in that occurred because some students were refused serves in an all-white diner. this sit in started and it created a great movement that change the country. Gladwell states all of this to make the point that social medias a nonexistent tool in the time can’t make USA today he believes that the real activists are the ones that work with the people they know and have strong ties with.

Mark Granovetter, a sociologist had once said “Our Acquaintances, not our friends, are our greatest source of new ideas and information”. With social media it reinvented social activism, and it is making it easier for the powerless to collaborate, coordinate, and give voice to their concerns. Although the platforms of social media are built around weak ties because of distant connections that all leads to high risks activism. In the early sixties events such as the sit in have became a civil-rights war that happened in the South for the rest of the decade and with that it happened without social media.