Does the Internet Spur Social Change, Or Lazy Activism? (usc.edu)

An anonymous reader writes: If you participate in social media, you've probably noticed the flood of posts that happen any time a social issue becomes prominent in the news. Whether it's sharing a supportive picture, changing their profile, or signing a petition, users flock to these causes. But are they really doing anything useful? An article from USC Dornsife debates whether this form of "lazy activism" is actually effective in pushing social change. It's been long established that people are surrounded by a "filter bubble" online, where they're only exposed to viewpoints they already agree with. There's also the question of whether liking something on Facebook makes you less likely to contribute to a cause in more substantive ways.

On the other hand, this type of internet activism does do what social networks are designed for: building a community. Strangers with the same views can more easily organize into groups, and groups of a certain size are heard by lawmakers, regardless of their origin. Plus, engaging in small, low-risk activism does make people more likely to engage in further activism with more impact. The real question we need to answer is whether the smaller and more ephemeral groups are doing more good than harm. For now, it's clear that protesting face-to-face is far more effective than gathering in a chat room — but at the same time, hacktivism is growing in popularity as well. It may eventually have a similar effect to sit-ins and picket lines as our culture moves more and more online.

Comments

Activisim?

[fluffernutter]

"lazy activism" is a complement. There's an age old word to describe what happens in social media, it's "gossip".

Re:Activisim?

[ShanghaiBill]

Those who want change, act, Those who want to talk about change, post.

Even talking about change is better than just doing nothing and ignoring the issue. A big social issue in America today is abusive policing, with an anti-black bias. Violent cops are going to jail, police chiefs are getting fired, body cameras are being deployed. The situation isn't changing because of a few vocal activists, but because of broad awareness of the issue, mainly through Youtube and Facebook.

When you see millions views on a video of a black kid being gunned down, it is silly to say that is bad because those viewers aren't marching in the street. Instead, you should say that it is good, because those millions of people are finally aware of an issue that has long been ignored. On election day, perhaps they will have second thoughts about voting for the district attorney that is endorsed by the police union.

Re:Activisim?

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

A big social issue in America today is abusive policing,

It's a "big social issue" in the sense that there is a lot of press coverage, not in the sense that it actually affects the daily lives of a lot of people. And the lives it actually affects are the lives of people who are generally simply apathetic about using the democratic process to improve their lives.

Instead, you should say that it is good, because those millions of people are finally aware of an issue that has long been ignored. On election day, perhaps they will have second thoughts about voting for the district attorney that is endorsed by the police union.

Policing is a local issue. It doesn't take millions of self-righteous privileged white liberals in Boston or DC to fix the problems in Ferguson, it's something the people of Ferguson need to do by participating in local elections and politics. Unfortunately, the kind of online activism you seem to favor actually reinforces the ignorance and belief of minority communities that it is "the system" or "racism" or something else outside their control that is causing their local governments to be dysfunctional.

Re:Activisim?

[drinkypoo]

It doesn't take millions of self-righteous privileged white liberals in Boston or DC to fix the problems in Ferguson,

Really? Local problems fix themselves? Is that why we have the fourteenth amendment? I think it does take self-righteous privileged white liberals in DC to fix the problems in Ferguson. They're called congress. And they need to take action to rein in the police, who are abusing and executing citizens on a regular basis. They will kill you for a pen, they will attempt "false flag" operations and then attack protesters when they are discovered, they will shoot you in the back, they will get away with serial rape... The problems are endemic and wishing will not make them go away. We need citizen's police review boards with teeth everywhere that we have cops. They need the power to fire with prejudice, and they need it now. Police Unions are helping the police murder, rape, and enslave us. It is difficult to imagine a solution to this problem that does not include action from the federal government.

Logical fallacies

[jimbo]

I think it's a logical fallacy to suggest there's only those two choices or that one one of them can be right. As for these two I have seen both happen.