Like, Share, Retweet: Examining the State of Modern Digital Activism
FEATUREDAWARENESS
Introduction
For as long as modern society has existed, activism has played a key role in influencing societal dynamics, public opinion, policies, social norms and more. Many of the rights we enjoy today are the result of persistent and organised activist campaigns. Prime examples of this include the women’s suffrage movement and the civil rights movement in the nineteenth century. These movements largely involved face-to-face mobilisation and grassroots organising, which meant that participating often depended on one’s physical proximity to such events. The advent of social media and the Internet undeniably revolutionised the landscape of activism by allowing people to engage in sociopolitical events all over the world.
While this has made it easier to show support for specific causes by publishing a tweet or sharing a donation link regardless of physical distance, current research is still evaluating whether this increased accessibility facilitates greater efficacy in activist efforts. Considering the multiple sociopolitical events occurring around the world right now, investigating the actual efficacy of digital activism efforts is more relevant than ever. Thus, this paper seeks to explore the ways in which online activism can do social good beyond the screen, as well as the invisible drawbacks of this new form of activism. The terms “digital activism” and “online activism” will be used interchangeably as both leverage digital technology to spread awareness about advocacy efforts.
What is Digital Activism?
In simple terms, digital activism refers to the use of technology such as social media channels, mobile phones and the Internet for political engagement. Typically initiated by non-state actors such as student groups, community organisations, and nonprofits, these movements seek to advocate for reforms in areas such as government policies and institutional practices. In Firebrand Waves of Digital Activism 1994-2014, Athina Karatzogianni outlines four main waves of digital activism over the past two decades. She identifies the late twentieth century as the starting point of digital activism, and points to the free/libre open-source software movement (FLOSS) as the first major example of it. The FLOSS movement is the social and egalitarian effort of software developers to promote the creation and distribution of software free for everyone to use. Moreover, the movement ensures that all members are equally valued by lacking a “hierarchical organisation and centralised control” (12). Despite facing pragmatic issues with regards to leadership and distribution of projects, FLOSS demonstrated the potential of collective action in challenging restrictive structures to promote social change. This characteristic of shared empowerment is the essence of nearly every activist movement to this today.
Digital activism has also played a key part in serious conflicts, such as the Iraq War in 2003. It is often referred to as the “first Internet war” due to the distinctive role of the Internet and social media in shaping public opinion of it on a global scale. According to Pew Research Center, a staggering 77% of Americans relied on the Internet to learn and exchange differing opinions about the conflict (Fox). Unlike mainstream media outlets which faced logistical challenges in providing timely updates, the Internet enabled both professional journalists and eyewitnesses to upload real-time accounts on the ground instantaneously. This rapid dissemination of information changed the way people gained insights about wartime events, and helped foster a more nuanced understanding of its complexities. Furthermore, online channels such as blogs, forums, email lists, and websites served as vital tools for organising activist groups that comprised of members from all walks of life. This interconnectivity provided by digital platforms was instrumental in staging both online and offline protests. Within just one weekend of 15 and 16 February 2003, it is reported that “ten million people protested globally against the war”, making it “the biggest peace protests since the anti-Vietnam War protests” (21). This remarkable display of unity amongst diverse groups across the world placed great scrutiny on policymakers to justify their decisions regarding the war, as well as the mainstream media’s presentation of the war efforts to the public.
Since then, numerous other digital movements have sprung up to support causes championing equality, justice, and human rights across socio and political landscapes. Examples include the Black Lives Matter movement and the ongoing protests against the Israel-Palestine conflict, both of which have significantly leveraged the power of the Internet to mobilise people worldwide. As we continue navigating our interconnected world, it is crucial to understand the meaningful ways digital activism can encourage political engagement while staying mindful of challenges, such as misinformation, that can accompany it.
The Positives of Digital Activism: Accessibility and Amplification
As explored above, digital activism is able to spread a movement’s message much further than even before. The accessibility provided by the Internet and social media also enables more people to participate in political discourse, cultivating a more inclusive society. This section will illustrate these points by utilising the #MeToo movement as a case study to showcase digital activism’s potential to amplify voices and drive societal change.
The “me too” movement was created back in 2006 by Tarana Burke to raise awareness about sexual abuse and harassment, especially for young women of colour. Despite its early inception, it only started significant traction in 2017 due to a simple post on X by actress Alyssa Milano. After using the phrase “me too” in a tweet about her experience of sexual abuse, thousands of others including celebrities responded with their own recounts of sexual assault. Milano’s tweet quickly gained over 1.7 million impressions online across numerous countries, which effectively catapulted Burke’s grassroot movement to the forefront of public consciousness (Park). This surge in digital awareness translated into physical #MeToo protests all over the world, as survivors and allies united to demand for justice and accountability across various sectors, from politics to education and music. Besides highlighting the prevalence of sexual assault faced by both men and women, the #MeToo movement also became a catalyst for tangible changes in societal attitudes and legal frameworks in recent years. In 2022, the US Congress passed new legislation which prohibits “employment contracts from forcing people to settle sexual assault or harassment cases through arbitration”, a major victory for victims who have previously been forced to keep their allegations private (The Guardian). Moreover, research has unveiled a positive shift in societal attitudes towards victims reporting workplace harassment as they are now “more likely to be believed” compared to the pre #MeToo era (Brown). Overall, the #MeToo movement is a prime example of the potential of digital activism to empower marginalised individuals worldwide to advocate for positive change together.
The Negatives of Digital Activism: Echo Chambers and Potential Lack of Prosocial Behaviour
Despite digital activism’s evident potential to enact positive change in society, it also presents significant challenges that must be addressed. One of the primary concerns is the creation of echo chambers, in which individuals only view information and opinions that align perfectly with their preexisting beliefs. Echo chambers arguably do not pose as difficult of a challenge for in-person interactions as it is easier to find someone who holds differing views. However, echo chambers are particularly tough to overcome on social media because the platform’s algorithm has been designed to understand a user’s likes and dislikes with precision. This results in curated content that reinforces one’s existing viewpoints, hindering the potential for meaningful dialogues in the future. Moreover, extreme cases of echo chambers may influence individuals to harbour negative sentiments towards those who hold opposing views, fostering an “us vs them” mentality that is counterproductive to societal progress. This is aptly exemplified by the startling rise of both anti-Semitism and Islamophobic tweets on X in relation to the Isarel-Palestine conflict. Scholars such as David R. Cheriton have cited social media algorithms as one potential cause for the increase in such content, stemming from the goal of algorithms to “enhance engagement and … make money” (Chaarani). Polarising content usually receives the most engagement due to its inherent shock value, which he believes has caused many online to forgo a middle ground in conversations. In order for online activism to proceed constructively, it is crucial for activists to critically engage in discourse and to remain open to diverse perspectives.
Digital activism has allowed for individuals to receive aid from others all over world, whether through crowdfunding platforms such as GoFundMe or other digital avenues. Yet, there is an emerging paradox to this seemingly positive aspect. Research has revealed that one’s donating behaviour after engaging in online activity to raise awareness about a cause is significantly “reduced … by a half” (Kim et al., 4). This finding raises important questions about the real efficacy of digital activism and its capability to translate online engagement into tangible impact. While there are numerous possible reasons for this, one possible explanation could be that this behaviour is rooted in the notion of positive self-presentation. Individuals may feel motivated to publicise their participation in online causes to portray themselves as morally upright and educated individuals. This puts forth a more individualistic aspect to online activism, where people prioritise the appearance of involvement over substantive action. Though there is limited evidence to prove such a theory, future researchers can delve deeper into this intriguing phenomenon to better comprehend the dynamics of online activism and its implications for real-world change. Overall, this shows a clear need for activists to critically reflect on how they can best contribute to meaningful change beyond the digital world.
How can We Better Navigate Online Activism?
It is undeniable that digital activism has changed the way people engage in sociopolitical issues. It has allowed individuals from all over the world to amplify their voices and mobilise with likeminded individuals for social change. The accessibility afforded by Internet platforms has also helped many marginalised communities receive both monetary and emotional support, facilitating more global solidarity. However, the transformative power of online activism is at risk of being overshadowed by two looming issues. Firstly, the proliferation of echo chambers is a major threat to engaging in conducive conversations, as it reinforces preexisting biases that hinder mutual cooperation. Moreover, research findings on the lack of prosocial behaviour after people engage in online activism raises concerns about the depth of impact achieved. To navigate these issues, fostering a culture of critical thinking and open discourse is key. Doing so will help counter the formation of echo chambers to an extent, facilitating more nuanced understandings of the specific issue. Promoting more in-depth engagement with activist movements beyond simple actions like retweeting and commenting will also foster deeper connections with the cause. In embracing these values, we can push digital activism to its fullest potential by ensuring that it remains a force for positive change in our evolving landscape.