Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
"lazy activism" is a complement. There's an age old word to describe what happens in social media, it's "gossip".
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
But I really, really want everyone to know how much I care about things that don't affect my own life in any meaningful way!
All those movements for change in the middle east? Looks like they ended up making matters worse. Arab Spring turned out to be a disaster. Only self-styled "keyboard warriors" engage in slacktivism. 100 people protesting is far more effective and far more meaningful than 100x as many people "liking" something.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Does the Internet Spur Social Change, Or Lazy Activism?
Lazy activism and much worse.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
It's kinda like a decentralized, private sit in. I suppose we could get people to do *by the book* work slowdowns.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
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.
+1 irony
Creating a filter, to counteract the effects of filtering of ideas.
Better suggestion: remove the filtering features from social media services. This makes the creation of echo-chambers nearly impossible.
For now, it's clear that protesting face-to-face is far more effective than gathering in a chat room
This quote from TFA says it all: what happens on the Internet is of little relative value compared to what actual people do in the Real World, because there is little to no risk involved in anything you do on the Internet,and if you protest in the Real World? You may get arrested, or even killed, depending on where in the world you are. Words on a screen don't mean a whole hell of a lot compared to actual physical action because words on a screen can be easily ignored. Oppressive governments are not overthrown with posts on an Internet forum, and no real social change occurs because 100,000 people signed an online petition, not unless the powers-that-be receiving said petition are holding themselves to a set of rules that means they're willing to take said petition seriously. The Internet gives you the illusion of making a difference; if you want to make a real difference, you have to do something in the real world; ISIS may use the Internet to radicalize people who are susceptible to being radicalized, for instance, but the rest of the world isn't going to defeat ISIS by posting in online forums or signing online petitions. That all being said: Does getting people 'talking' have any value at all? Yes, it does. But if posting on the Internet is all you ever do, and you never get out of your chair, go outside, and actually do something? Then you're just kidding yourself. The Internet is now what people sitting in a living room discussing things over drinks used to be; it's all fine-and-dandy to talk over a glass of wine about how you think the human rights abuses in some far-off country is terrible and what you think should be done about it, and a far, far different thing to actually get out of bed the next morning and go do something about it. Most people won't, they're satisfied with the illusion that signing some online petition or voicing their opinion on Reddit 'made a difference'.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Wait..you mean propagating #hashtags don't really change anything? OMG, mind blown!
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
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
That's why on Slashdot sometimes I friend people I disagree with, if they are able to make a well-reasoned argument (even if I disagree with that argument).
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The internet is a container for any kind of content. It can hold anything. Saying that people using it can be lazy means nothing.
It's like the whole argument about games and art. Games can contain anything. They have music, creative artistic images, moving digital sculptures, all mixed with varying degrees of audience participation. Whole TV shows and movies are occasionally enclosed in game content. They can be anything, and are made into new things all the time.
The internet is that, and more - it's the combination of whatever anyone chooses to share over certain protocols, and even the protocols can change. It can and likely will become almost anything. Are people using it frequently lazy and ineffective at some tasks? Yes - and people everywhere using virtually all tools are also frequently lazy and ineffective.
Did anyone expect the internet to somehow make people especially efficient or effective at every task? Just because someone reads newspapers, that won't make them any better at journalism - same with internet and activism. More opportunities to learn, but it's not a school, and even specialized schools don't have the greatest correlation in reliably measurable improvement.
The only thing you should expect is that using the internet will likely make some folks better at using the internet. Until the internet changes. Everything else is just bonus.
Lazy people sitting on their asses complaining instead of going out and doing something about it. #GetOffYourAss
There, you can consider that my contribution for today in the fight against lazy activism.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Social media and email and for that matter group-texting are great for organizing pop-up/short-notice real-world street protests.
Local (to me) groups have used Facebook and other tools to arrange last-minute events at least twice in the last few months.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I'd been considering this for some time. Generally I am writing letters to politicians to raise their awareness of an issue as they have the same problem most busy people do, they are time poor. The difference is, it's the job they were elected to do. Throw in entities with vested interests in an issue and you reach the point where the only people trying to influence politicians are the one being paid to do it.
So, since the question has been asked, here is a experiment for anyone willing to participate, right here, right now. I am writing letters to politicians regarding the TPP. I will reply to my own thread with a version of the draft and I invite anyone or everyone to word their concerns and add it to the letter and extend the effort I've made. Anyone who is prepared to read a section of the TPP and voice specific concerns, even better, just post which section you are refering to.
The end goal of this experiement is a letter that anyone can send to their representatives and maybe we can get politician to work for the people, for once. Alternatively, we will know just how effective the platforms are for this kind of thing.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
I wish to voice my opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership Bill. I ask that you reject the Trans Pacific Partnership until proper time has been given for our citizens to analyse it's effect.
Considering there are roughly thirty chapters and 6000 pages in this Trade Agreement I would be expecting it to be scrutinised and proper time for the ramifications to be thoughly assessed and not rushed passed the house, considering there is no emergency that it addresses.
As an important part of a functioning democracy, citizens should be allowed to veiw all documents being presented to the parliment so that the impact on our society can be evaluated. The secrecy that has shoulded this bill over the last few years of it's construction followed by the limited time granted, relative to the amount of pages in the Bill, to allow for such analysis subverts the intention of democratic process.
As our representatives you are bound to provide 'Responsible Government' to citizens. Passing a Bill that cannot be evaluated is not a form of responsible government, for this reason alone the Bill should be rejected.
I would like the house to go further and introduce laws, practises or other available legislative instruments that prevent the rushing any legislation into law that has a detremental effect to the country and, that in the event of any emergency legislation passed as law, a mandatory sunset period that has the duration of the government that sponsors the bill.
The other issues rasied by segments of the TPP leaked on the Internet that effectively give away the effective sovreignty of our nation, through Investor State Dispute Settlements, is disturbing. Chilling effects on the Health, intellectual property and many other things that are nation destroying.
For these reasons, and many more, I ask you to defeat the TPP passing into law, and enact structures that prevent these kinds of agreements ever being rushed through the House.
As to specific parts of the agreement I object to the following clauses and seek their removal from any finalized agreement:
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
"Is Technology allowing us to improve ourselves, or allowing us to become lazy and complacent?" The answer is always it depends who and where and when and how. For example, if I'm outraged by Boka Haram, I could (per the article) tweet hashtags and think I accomplished something by venting my gossipy opinions. On the other hand, I can speak directly with Africans in the northern sahel who are online and have 80-90% cell phone teledensity about the problem and get information unfiltered by western media. Half assed opinions emerge and travel briskly, but so does research that snopes those halfassed opinions. Mass communications spreads information and disinformation very quickly, and what matters is how hard you try to get correct information (or to correct disinformation). BTW #freehurricanebenson #freejoebenson #ewastehoax
Gently reply
and groups of a certain size are heard by lawmakers
Ya, every FB group with a thousands members is well known to lawmakers /sarcasm. Lawmakers have no idea about any FB group, it does not matter if they have a million members, or one. If you want lawmakers to hear you, you actually have to attempt to be heard (and we known single people are more than capable of doing this quite well if they have enough drive).
hacktivism is growing in popularity as well
Ya, and DDOSing Trumps website, and threatening ISIS did so much good.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
But actually discussing the subject and coming up with plans that go more personal and executing em over the internet do actually work sometimes.
For local stuff, it can be fantastic. I was just involved with a large movement to get city council to vote to make municipal gigabit a thing, and we did a lot of networking, communication, and outreach via Facebook, and am now involved in a neighborhood watch group online. For larger stuff, can't say, but for local stuff it's really helpful.
Hacktivism I don't care about, it's done nothing to spur positive change quite the opposite and new hacktivist group are starting to appear with their own agendas and are beginning to cause more damage than ever. SOPA with the help of many organizations did make temporary change for a while that did include using the internet to help with that change. But then people lost interest and now we have variations of SOPA and soon the TPP. And it goes on and on. Biggest problems the 1%. Solution the other 99% will need to stand up to no more and vote accordingly, but I think 98% are distracted with Facebook and reality tv not to mention well curated news to notice that there is a problem and by the time they do it will be too late.
Interesting.
Definitely the latter, IMO.
If one is going to spend the time filling out the stupid petition forms on change.org or whitehouse.gov, they'd be better off just jerking off literally instead of just figuratively. Then, at least, they'd have something to show for an end result afterward.
Fine, you think you've got a cozy little electronic commons where everything will be unicorns and rainbows if we are all just willing to show our beautiful selves to one another. In the meantime, Facebook and its partners are making bank data mining your junk and marketing to you. And they say, "Thanks!"
None of it is real, people agree because it only takes a click, people disagree because they like stirring. They do very little to actually make a difference.. It's the hate mobs that are the problems!