Page 1 of 2
#1
Time for a serious discussion. Get your "The Pit circa 2008" pants on.

I've been having this discussion with a couple of my friends and my fiance over the last few days, and it's something that I think could actually turn into a pretty fruitful discussion here.

Online Activism; does it really help?

Everyone has a soapbox, and everyone here has some sort of social media they use, even if it's just UG. This idea sprung to me from a few friends of mine who are large followers and supporters of the feminist movement. I can understand their fervor, I'm a rather big proponent on evolution being taught properly in schools and for global warming.

Everyone should be familiar with the term slacktivism e.i. changing your profile picture, or tweeting specific hashtags, etc. That movement has had it's criticism for "not really doing anything," to which the rebuttal has always been 'Well, it's spreading awareness.' That can't be argued, it's true, but the question I have is this: Are you worried about who you're spreading attention to?

A friend of mine said this last week that, "Protesting that doesn't include some sort of discomfort is doomed to accomplish nothing."

Do you guys think that's true?
Do you get politically active with people of dissenting opinion?
Do you go out of your way to read opposing sides of the story?

Basically, we had just been having dialogue about how it's easy for people to take a side, and surround themselves with only the articles and people that agree with them already. Based on that, does these "Awareness Campaigns" that revolve around social media really work?
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#2
Well people have lost jobs due to others sharing stuff on tumblr and twitter, usually relating to how the company that person works for does not want bad publicity...so in that sense "slacktivism" works.

It usually struggles with bigger issues like foreign aid though. Of course, actual protesting often doesn't work either. Raising awareness is the easy part, the rest is more tricky.

I'm usually pretty familiar with both sides of the story because I've believed in both sides at one point or another.
#4
Online Activism; does it really help?

Depends on the cause, and depends on the execution of the movement.
Are you worried about who you're spreading attention to?

If it's not anonymous, then yes. Part of having a successful campaign is being mindful of who your audience is.
A friend of mine said this last week that, "Protesting that doesn't include some sort of discomfort is doomed to accomplish nothing."

Do you guys think that's true?

I think it's true in most cases. Online activism is about making people empathise with the activist's views, which is often a view of anger from a perceived injustice.
Do you get politically active with people of dissenting opinion?

Not really. I have other things to take up my time with than argue over the internet.
Do you go out of your way to read opposing sides of the story?

I do try to consider both sides if they're presented to me.
Basically, we had just been having dialogue about how it's easy for people to take a side, and surround themselves with only the articles and people that agree with them already. Based on that, does these "Awareness Campaigns" that revolve around social media really work?

I think they do, but their effectiveness in this context is very limited. It depends on what awareness is being raised and the true motive behind it.
Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Dec 24, 2014,
#5
Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm sometimes guilty of it but I really do try to avoid being that guy.

The part about not doing anything by itself wouldn't really be a problem but it starts being one because you get a certain feeling of doing something about the issue of choice. You don't feel shitty about not doing anything to fix whatever you're bothered by like you normally would but you're not really doing anything either. Basically you get to keep the cake and eat it too except that the cake is a filthy lie.


Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
#6
I despise most forms of activism. I think few issues/causes are worthy of the types of response and discourse that follows.

I also believe that people are addicted to feeling misery. We seek it out like ants, moving from spilled soda to apple slice to gum on the pavement. My own jaded view of people and politics has led me down the path of viewing this not as a benefit to society, but as a psychological disease plaguing our culture. We need a cause and we need our voices to be heard not because it's important but because we feel unimportant.

We see all the bad in the world and we get fed up, so all we know to do is join a group of like minded people and go do something about it. The something is always pointless in my eyes. The most peaceful forms of protest/activism are generic and passers by no longer pay attention - it's a tried and true method that old hippies are trying to reprise from their youth and college kids are emulating from history 101. At the most violent - it casts more misery over an already miserable subject. Because we like to talk about misery, it just extends the conversation. This is the principle behind rioting...we will not let them sweep this under the rug. This only instigates backlash from opposing views. This relates to the last paragraph - it's called confirmation bias - and nothing pushes us toward it more than observing the arrogance of our opponents.

End of story: I keep my chin up but my head down. Take care of myself and my family. Do my job and make my money, and keep some stashed away for when shit hits the fan. Be ready to protect but don't seek a fight. The last sentence was one lesson I don't think many people were taught.
#7
Quote by BUZZARD__
I despise most forms of activism. I think few issues/causes are worthy of the types of response and discourse that follows.

I also believe that people are addicted to feeling misery. We seek it out like ants, moving from spilled soda to apple slice to gum on the pavement. My own jaded view of people and politics has led me down the path of viewing this not as a benefit to society, but as a psychological disease plaguing our culture. We need a cause and we need our voices to be heard not because it's important but because we feel unimportant.

We see all the bad in the world and we get fed up, so all we know to do is join a group of like minded people and go do something about it. The something is always pointless in my eyes. The most peaceful forms of protest/activism are generic and passers by no longer pay attention - it's a tried and true method that old hippies are trying to reprise from their youth and college kids are emulating from history 101. At the most violent - it casts more misery over an already miserable subject. Because we like to talk about misery, it just extends the conversation. This is the principle behind rioting...we will not let them sweep this under the rug. This only instigates backlash from opposing views. This relates to the last paragraph - it's called confirmation bias - and nothing pushes us toward it more than observing the arrogance of our opponents.

End of story: I keep my chin up but my head down. Take care of myself and my family. Do my job and make my money, and keep some stashed away for when shit hits the fan. Be ready to protect but don't seek a fight. The last sentence was one lesson I don't think many people were taught.

you might cut someone with all that edge


I think the biggest issues is the 'us versus them' rhetoric. Issues seems to always revolve around what will happen if "they" get control. Most people I know are generally good and have roughly the same outlook but they get caught up in how everything is presented. People love scientific advances but oppose things like evolution and global warming because the rhetoric behind the opposition has put so much into turning those issues into something they aren't.

I think some critical thinking and accountability would help everything. Like when officials are giving information on stuff, they should be held to some kind of standard. People can give outright fabricated claims on TV to hurt a competing groups reputation. Like saying climate change doesn't exist or that most scientists don't think it's an issue. That's just a lie but in many cases no one is required to provide sources or additional support. Eventually it's not even any kind of real discussion; it's just a slew of people yelling whatever piece of twisted information they believe most, regardless of what any kind of evidence shows.

I get worked up over stuff but I will generally concede where there's overwhelming evidence. People on Facebook will share and get in big fights over statements that are obviously wrong and a quick Google would give you enough to see that it was wrong

I think online activism can help a ton but people often latch onto the first thing that works them up so in the end there's a lot that is working in the opposite direction, spreading misinformation when accurate information was the initial goal. Awareness campaigns can also do a lot of good things but I often see them being less about awareness and more about pointing fingers.
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#8
I saw a lot of people on Twitter talk about how big of a part social media has played in bringing attention to these injustices which helped fuel protests and keep the conversation going on a national level. I kind of agree with that, but I think overestimating the power of social media can also be potentially problematic cuz I think people might just stop there because they think it's enough.
#9
Quote by The Spoon
I saw a lot of people on Twitter talk about how big of a part social media has played in bringing attention to these injustices which helped fuel protests and keep the conversation going on a national level. I kind of agree with that, but I think overestimating the power of social media can also be potentially problematic cuz I think people might just stop there because they think it's enough.
This is an issue.

Some sort of image(complete with slogan!) might get a lot of likes/retweets, but for many people, that's as far as they go with support. So while a particular issue/candidate/party may appear to have huge support, it often doesn't translate to the ballot box, which(for most countries) is the only place you can affect any actual change at all.

That's assuming you don;t have thousands of like-minded individuals with Ak-47's an no qualms about killing people
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#10
Quote by JustRooster
Basically, we had just been having dialogue about how it's easy for people to take a side, and surround themselves with only the articles and people that agree with them already.


I could see how some people wouldn't benefit in any way for this reason. Some people actually enjoy debate though and a good debate, even online, can create intellectual discomfort if you will.

If I'm truly putting my UG circa 2008 cap on then I'm an ignorant capitalist apologist. Fight me.
#11
Internet activism is pretty much what white people do to make them feel good about themselves right? That's what i've always thought. It might help in that it gets the word out I guess, but it seems pretty hollow in terms of the intent behind many of those who do it.

Other things related to political discourse: I think people are quick to hate those they disagree with. The point of political debates is to understand that on the other side is somebody with an opinion too. The goal should be to understand the opinion of the side that you disagree with, but the goal usually ends up being to tell the other opinion why they're wrong. It's perhaps a nuanced difference, but one is a lot more compassionate and open and not arrogant. If you want to change the opinions of somebody with whom you disagree, it's done by compassion and understanding, not through "man you're a dumbass."

But I think my view on that has been shaped by the fact that i've spent like the last 5 years of my life watching Fox News pretty consistently despite not being a conservative. Everybody hates on Fox News and sometimes deservedly so, but I think to hate and dismiss them is to miss an opportunity to actually try and understand where they're coming from. What i've learned from watching Fox News is that the criticisms often levied at them are partially legitimate and done more as a shrugged off "typical Fox" but don't really tell the whole picture. And often times the people will explain what they think and I think to myself "I think you're wrong, but I can see where you're coming from and it's an interesting perspective that I haven't thought of before."

So yeah, I think the probably with political discourse is that most people would rather dehumanize the other person in an attempt to be correct, when people should be recognizing the humanity behind the person with whom they disagree and trying to understand where they're coming from, because political opinions are often a result of deep cultural norms, like they were raised to believe x thing, so you can't just say to them "you're wrong and an idiot" because I don't think that is particularly helpful. People are more concerned with being right and surrounding themselves with information and opinions with which they agree. I think it's far more healthy to surround yourself with info and opinions that you disagree with, that way you don't become one sided and you can learn to understand and appreciate the other side of an argument even if you disagree with it. So I think the solution to all of the political discourse problems of the world is for liberals to watch Fox News all the time and for conservatives to watch MSNBC.

Oh, and since I went on a tangent:

A friend of mine said this last week that, "Protesting that doesn't include some sort of discomfort is doomed to accomplish nothing."

Do you guys think that's true?

Depends on the goals of the protest. MLK would have agreed with that though, and i'd consider him an authority on protesting.

Do you get politically active with people of dissenting opinion?

Hellz yeah, it's fun
Do you go out of your way to read opposing sides of the story?

As mentioned earlier, I watch Fox News semi-religiously so I like to get the side of the story from the perspective that I typically disagree with. That way I can take it upon myself to fact check and stuff. If I watched MSNBC all the time i'd agree with them more often and be less likely to get worked up and need to fact check. So yes, seeing the story from the opposite side is a good thing. Eventually it'll make you stop being a one-sided partisan hack.
#12
I think the dumbest thing is people who go on these big social media campaigns, sharing and retweeting shit, but then don't go vote when when the opportunity comes around.
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#13
"Raising awareness" is almost always code for "I want to look like a good person without doing shit". Just ask Joseph Kony how effective internet activism is when people don't go beyond clicking a like button and occasionally reposting something.

Now there are certain things like the Ice Bucket Challenge that raised over $100,000,000 through people posting shit online and getting awareness. And when it works, hey, that's awesome! But those are the exception, not the rule, and things like that work because A. it's not that inconvenient. Dumping a bucket of ice water on your head and donating $10 to charity is a lot easier than protesting for five hours outside a government building, B. celebrity support. You and I don't have the power to raise much awareness. If I say "Hey guys, go donate to this cause/go protest this/go sign this petition/etc." on youtube then I'll get maybe a dozen people to do it if I'm lucky. If Bruce Springsteen says the same thing, he'll get at least a half a million to do it, and C. people did more than just repost it. People actually did something other than just spreading a message! People did it themselves! People donated money after they did it! It worked because people did more than just "raising awareness". If it was just a sad or inspiring video about ALS, they would've raised maybe $1,000 at most. But it worked because there was something easy and painless you could do, and people actually did something to help, which 90% of people that are constantly reposting a bunch of petitions and angry articles don't actually do.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 50-54
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 0-0
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 0-0
Last edited by necrosis1193 at Dec 24, 2014,
#14
We don't discuss politics anymore. We default to the highest decibels of indignation and moralize, evidence be damned.

It's also kind of sad that politics is generally a taboo topic. It shouldn't be.
#15
Quote by BladeSlinger
I think the dumbest thing is people who go on these big social media campaigns, sharing and retweeting shit, but then don't go vote when when the opportunity comes around.


Voting isn't the only or always best means of taking political action though.
#16
Quote by bradulator
Internet activism is pretty much what white people do to make them feel good about themselves right?


twitter is an outstanding outlet for young people of color.

let's just ignore the pathetic white people, they ruin everything
i don't know why i feel so dry
#17
Quote by Godsmack_IV
Voting isn't the only or always best means of taking political action though.

But for a large number of people who share/retweet political messages, it would be a vast increase in their actual participation in politics(and I'm talking about those who are eligible to vote) from it's current level(ie slacktivism).
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#18
Quote by Godsmack_IV
Voting isn't the only or always best means of taking political action though.

But voting is one way people can make near direct change. If people were serious then they'd use any way they could. If someone doesn't want to get out and protest or anything like that, voting is a way they can participate. My state had a 35% turnout for the governor elections. 35%. We're almost almost last in education and incarcerate huge amounts of people compared to other states. We're generally a shitty state and people always bitch about it. But no one votes. We re-elected the governor who asked the state to pray for rain as an official action during a big drought. And it was a close election with only 35% voting.
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#19
Quote by BladeSlinger
But voting is one way people can make near direct change. If people were serious then they'd use any way they could. If someone doesn't want to get out and protest or anything like that, voting is a way they can participate. My state had a 35% turnout for the governor elections. 35%. We're almost almost last in education and incarcerate huge amounts of people compared to other states. We're generally a shitty state and people always bitch about it. But no one votes. We re-elected the governor who asked the state to pray for rain as an official action during a big drought. And it was a close election with only 35% voting.

And many of those who actually did vote are those who would vote for a literal pile of shit if it had the appropriately coloured rosette on.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#20
If it weren't for the discussion of various topics on forums and social media such as here, i would be unaware of many of the social and political issues of our world today.
#21
Quote by slapsymcdougal
And many of those who actually did vote are those who would vote for a literal pile of shit if it had the appropriately coloured rosette on.

Exactly. I think if more people voted then we might get better representatives. I voted all democrat and felt bad about it. I hate doing it but the republicans here are ****ing nuts. My step mom considers herself to be a republic and she can't stand any of them. All they do is cut education in a state where education is horrible and have been reelected a millions times over. They go on and on about constitutional rights and the left just wanting control then they enact a surcharge if you want to try using solar panels and try to ban everything that isn't what matches their views.

Texas has crazy conservatives who retain the good conservative qualities. Oklahoma just has stupid conservatives
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#22
Quote by So-Cal
If it weren't for the discussion of various topics on forums and social media such as here, i would be unaware of many of the social and political issues of our world today.


in addition, discussions on forums like this one are usually far better than the shit your dad says at the dinner table to your racist uncle.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#23
Quote by bradulator
Internet activism is pretty much what white people do to make them feel good about themselves right? Ignorant racist shit. That's what i've always thought. It might help in that it gets the word out I guess, but it seems pretty hollow in terms of the intent behind many of those who do it.

ftfy
¯\_()_/¯
#25
I'd say it's more good than bad. I wouldn't always call it activism but at least having an open discussion on a level where everyone can publicly express themselves is good imo.

Obviously if all you do is 'raise awareness' to feel good on the internet that's not really activism but going into a discussion and telling everyone 'wtf are you all doing about it huh?' is usually a dumb thing to do for a variety of reasons (unless they are actually playing themselves up). It's good for people to at least have a stance and challenge each other than to be completely apathetic because they aren't a full-time, 'actual' activist.

As far as protesting needing discomfort, I would mostly agree. I feel like the social media aspect of it is merely expressing support for a protest (gaining it more attention), not really the protest itself.
#26
It's spreading thoughts and information is my thing which is most of the point of activism. There are better vessels for that, especially in the way it's often done online but ultimately I think the internet and online sharing of thoughts has lead to a lot of good, whether you want to throw in the term activism for no reason or not.

Depends on the situation for if discomfort is needed. Like, if we're just talking about changing the minds of the public, I don't think that's best done through protests honestly. It helps because as we can see it really brings the issue to the forefront for discussion but the people that are directly being impacted are probably just going to get further divided from the opinions of the protest because now they're a massive and direct inconvenience. I think the best way to change the public's mind is either really powerful and smart leaders (like MLK) or just everybody talking to each other which is where online can help. But because the default reaction is just to get further dug in your own hole, it has to be done in a certain way. People don't like it when others try to convince them they're wrong obviously so you usually have to be friendly about it and level with them and be really clear in that you're not fighting. I think the goal should be try to get people out of that hole and then figure it out.

The discomfort or tension aspect is good for going beyond this, when that stops working or it needs to be immediate and official. Like forcing businesses/the government or even the people to acknowledge because they had no reason to care before. It depends what the situation is but I think for the more serious stuff, both sides of this revolve around each other and both are very needed.
Quote by Sliide90027
But as a bigoted lemming, you have so cry an Alinslyite slur revealing you lack of reason and sense.


Quote by MusicLord16
BOB 1. ur 20 and two u like evil things and idk if u worship the devil
#27
I do dislike online femidicks. They are probably friendzoned by all their girl friends and use online bitching to getover that.

What has happened after #yesallwomen, or the kony stuff?
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#28
The blue team has good volley ball skills, but the red team has a proper defense on the outter rim of the field. The white team is ok, but they stand around for too long and end up missing their opportunity. The green team focus too much on tactics and not enough team motivation, but their neutral ground gives them a good stand.

Other teams not mentioned were not as good as the ones listed. I think we need more teams.
Most of the important things


in the world have been accomplished


by people who have kept on


trying when there seemed to be no hope at all
#29
I get the impression that people have a strong desire to have an opinion about everything, to show that they're well-informed and an independent thinker. Social media encourages you to leave comments, and gives the (false) impression that your opinions matter. This leads to people taking sides in arguments they don't fully understand.

Maybe they're worried they'll be seen as ignorant or spineless if they don't take a stand against some issue.

It's ok to not have an opinion on something, or to withold judgement when you don't have a good understanding of the matter at hand.
#31
Quote by sashki
I get the impression that people have a strong desire to have an opinion about everything, to show that they're well-informed and an independent thinker. Social media encourages you to leave comments, and gives the (false) impression that your opinions matter. This leads to people taking sides in arguments they don't fully understand.

Maybe they're worried they'll be seen as ignorant or spineless if they don't take a stand against some issue.

It's ok to not have an opinion on something, or to withold judgement when you don't have a good understanding of the matter at hand.


do you honestly think social media has anything to do with this?
i don't know why i feel so dry
#32
Quote by Eastwinn
do you honestly think social media has anything to do with this?

Social media didn't create uninformed opinions, but it does provide a platform for them to be broadcasted to a wider audience.

Whenever some controversial issue arises, there's always some people who make an effort to show how outraged they are. They will shame anyone who doesn't share their passion for this thing they learned about 5 minutes ago. "How can you ignore _____? Do you not care about the future of our country?". Then a few weeks later, they forget about it or move onto something else. Do they honestly care about this issue, or do they just want to make it look like they care? They want to feel like they're part of something important.

They are encouraged to share their opinions because they have an audience. Right now, I am writing this post with the assumption that someone will read it. If this platform did not exist, I'd keep all my shitty opinions to myself. I fully concede that this post is not well-informed, and is based on very limited personal experience. I'm pretty sure many of my peers' political opinions are similar.
#33
i think it's best to stay out of other peoples affairs.
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
There shall be a stop to this madness. The battle is not over. My tasty licks aren't going anywhere.

Quote by The_Blode
^ I've just realised if you say Simple Plan's 2011 effort "Get Your Heart On!" really fast in a Southern American accent, it sounds gross. . .like sexual gross!

Quote by Necroheadbanger
Hello.
I'm looking for professional bongo-ists and triangle-ists to make a Progressive Technical Brutal Death Metal band
(will be called AxOxJxLxAxIxVxXxUxWxZxQxUxRxWxGxJxSxAxLxKxMxNxHxUxGxAxAxWxVxCxBxZxVx)
(Don't even ask what it means)


https://soundcloud.com/95dank



#34
the audience issue is fairly ubiquitous in our culture. i mean, we have people like this



winning awards all of the time. but when we speak our minds on social media we open up our words for debate with detractors whose words hold the same weight. wanna know why that book pictured is bound trash? gotta flip through some ~scholarly~ journals. or, parrot a theory from it here and someone will bring it into question.

honestly, haven't you all learned a lot from forums like this?
i don't know why i feel so dry
#35
Quote by Eastwinn


honestly, haven't you all learned a lot from forums like this?

Not really.

I don't think online activism as I see it today does much. Yeah, it makes some people feel warm and fuzzy inside. But it doesn't make a significant impact on any of the core issues people are attempting to address. The problems are still rampant & chatting about it on twitter isn't going to change that. People have a delusion that they are contributing when they are not.
#36
Quote by Thrashtastic15
Not really.

I don't think online activism as I see it today does much. Yeah, it makes some people feel warm and fuzzy inside. But it doesn't make a significant impact on any of the core issues people are attempting to address. The problems are still rampant & chatting about it on twitter isn't going to change that. People have a delusion that they are contributing when they are not.


that's cool but it doesn't appear to be the reality. in fact, it's been like this for http://www.ipdi.org/UploadedFiles/political%20influentials.pdf">a while, and some smarter people than myself have caught on.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#37
Quote by Eastwinn
that's cool but it doesn't appear to be the reality. in fact, it's been like this for http://www.ipdi.org/UploadedFiles/political%20influentials.pdf">a while, and some smarter people than myself have caught on.

smarter people say:

The relationship between the Internet and civic engagement has been debated both in public and among scholars. Initially, many commentators expected the Internet to have a profound impact on how democracy functions, transforming it into an ideal e–democracy with equal opportunities for all citizens. These expectations have so far not been fulfilled and are unlikely to be so in the near future.

This failure has lead many scholars to grow more skeptical when assessing the impact of the Internet, some even claiming that the Internet may have detrimental effects for the functioning of democracy.

One of the more recent critiques raised against virtual participation is that online activism is typically nothing more than slacktivism, that is, activities that may make the active individual feel good, but have little impact on political decisions and may even distract citizens from other, more effective, forms of engagement.

This paper has examined these two critiques against online activities to examine their relative merits. This makes it possible whether online participation in its most typical forms can be dismissed as slacktivism or should be taken serious as political participation by other means.

As concerns the efficaciousness of the online activities, there is a lack of reliable data to sustain the purported success of various Internet campaigns. For this reason, it is not possible to determine unequivocally whether Web sites actually have the impact they claim to.

Nonetheless, many of the campaigns accused of being slacktivistic are almost certainly never able to fulfill their stated goals, nor were they necessarily meant to. However, even if it is not possible to dismiss the skepticism about the effectiveness of online participation, it is premature to dismiss the impact of the Internet on political activism altogether. Online and off–line participation are not necessarily mutually exclusive forms of citizen engagement. This concerns the second aspect of the slacktivist critique, i.e., that online activities supplant traditional forms of participation, thereby leading to a lower overall level of civic engagement.

Most evidence in recent years suggests that being active online promotes off–line participation as well. Although this link is not necessarily very strong, there is certainly no evidence of a negative effect from Internet activity.

This suggests that the fears raised that online slacktivist activities replace more traditional and more effective forms of participation are unfounded. Although most Internet users or slacktivists never develop deeper forms of involvement, there is no evidence that Internet activities are damaging civic engagement by replacing more effective forms of participation.

Instead, most recent research suggests a positive — albeit weak — link between online activity and engagement in off–line political participation. This suggests that being involved in effortless political activities online does not replace traditional forms of participation, if anything, they reinforce off–line engagement.

It is therefore ill–advised to dismiss Internet activism as slacktivism as opposed to genuine political participation. By expanding the number of potential activists and easing the spreading of information, the Internet creates fertile ground for more direct involvement in political matters.

Doubtless, all purported slacktivists will not become active off–line as well, and the majority of the virtual activists may never progress beyond effortless forms of Internet activism. Nonetheless, the effortless Internet activities are at worst harmless fun (or an annoyance, but nonetheless harmless) without any effect on real–life politics. At best, they may help raise awareness about political issues and even mobilize citizens to take other forms of action outside the virtual world. Even if sending chain letters and joining Facebook groups do little more than raise awareness, they do at least that. In this sense, participation is more than just slacktivism and may promote engagement in a range of political activities.

There is still much research that needs to be done to assess the impact of Internet activism. As noted, there is a need to assess the effectiveness of Internet campaigns more systematically. Although a difficult endeavor, it is necessary to collect more data on the success rate of these endeavors to be able to thoroughly assess their impact on political decisions.

Additionally, there is a need to examine the factors that help activate the resource pool made up by the slacktivists. There is a need to explore what mechanisms turn slacktivists into activists, since clicking a button is rarely enough. This especially necessary since there is no evidence that the Internet can, nor ever will, provide a full good substitute for traditional activism. The best results seem to be obtained by using the means available, whether they are off–line or online.

In this sense, the efforts of Avaaz.org may be the most suitable path forward. Even if it is not possible to sustain their claimed instances of success, they at least pursue their political goals by any means possible.

Did you read your source material? My reasoning behind not being quick to praise internet activism is freely admitted (don't meet their targets or goals and aren't a significant catalyst to change). When the point of contention comes with the tagline "-- albeit weak --" or "not necessarily very strong" that is hardly moving me to change my opinion of activists. I'm concerned with change and results. The internet is an incredibly powerful tool for making this happen. That does not mean it is being used correctly to do so.

edit: btw never going to read yr response because christmas etc etc
Last edited by Thrashtastic15 at Dec 25, 2014,
#38
your reasoning/criticisms were not clear at all. you never mentioned meeting targets or goals, but now you do so under a quote of a peer reviewed article that was unable to honestly make an assessment of that but figures it doesn't actually matter. classy.

you may back up to either of the other links of mine to see how online activism is a significant catalyst for change, but i fear more than one degree of abstraction may too much for you. merry christmas, remember not the eat the poinsettia.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#39
Quote by Eastwinn
honestly, haven't you all learned a lot from forums like this?

Besides picking up a handful of British slang and learning what a diaperfur is, not really.
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
#40
I have helped spread awareness of the mistreatment of stray cats and cat cafes which do not care about the welfare of their cats by participating in slacktivism on facebook and as a result of collective slacktivism on various forms of social media one horrible cafe where a cat died and another has permanent spinal injuries has been ordered to close and more people are collecting evidence of cat abuse so the police can do something about it.
cat
Page 1 of 2