Week 10 Reflective Post - Slacktivism

‘Slacktivism: Can social media actually cause social change?’

In light of the week nine discussions surrounding online resistance and culture jamming, I found this newspaper article from The Sydney Morning Herald that deals with yet another form of online activism, that of Slacktivism, a term the author, Lin Ma, uses to describe ‘those who update their status, join a Facebook group or make a blog post about a cause for social currency.’ In other words, one considers themself an activist through the click of a virtual button.

Ma poses the question of whether or not Slacktivism through social media has the capacity to cause social change, and goes on to present both perspectives. On the one hand, she presents evidence for the argument that social media does not have the capacity to cause important social change (such as changing political situations) which only “offline” action can do, however, it is a useful forum for influencing trivial change related to consumer patterns, such as the online backlash over iSnack.2.0 which forced Kraft to rethink the name of the product. On the other hand, Ma finishes with a very optimistic view of social media’s capacity to cause social change as it ‘reduces the barriers for participation’ (Sheikh, cited in Ma 2009) thus increasing people’s willingness to participate as activists.

The latter argument drawing upon Simon Sheikh’s (the national director of GetUp) claim that social media is a forum for social change, is particularly problematic. Firstly, Sheikh assumes that the ease of online activism has resulted in increased participation, yet seems to ignore the issue of the Digital Divide, that not everyone has access to and knowledge of computer technology and online spaces in the first place. Secondly, the level of participation itself needs to be questioned. Even though as is argued, online activism is allowing more people to participate; is joining a Facebook group against slave labour really the same as protesting outside the Nike factory? It seems that Slacktivism relies upon quantity rather than quality as a measure of participation.

The shift from offline to online activism means contemporary protest is often confined to individual acts pursued ‘in the privacy of your own home.’ This got me thinking about the meaning of the term “protest,” which is no longer associated solely with the public sphere but has recently come to include the private sphere too. In online activism, the collective experience associated with traditional protesting activities ceases to exist, particularly the sense of euphoria and ritualised power that accompanies large masses of people. It is hard to imagine 600 234 569 340 675 fans on a Facebook page or eight word Twitter postings leaving more of an impression than the noise, imagery and atmosphere of a large mass of actual bodies marching for a unified cause.

One issue that is touched on but not really expanded upon is the likelihood that Slacktivism renders the meaning behind ethical causes meaningless, as we are bombarded with a multitude of emails and Facebook groups to the extent that they become reminiscent of Baudrillard’s concept of the simulacra (Baudrillard, cited in Bates 2010). So as “participation” becomes easier and thus more commonplace, will we become more removed (and possibly cease to care) about the issues we are able to support through the click of a button? As social media marketer for Vibewire, Omar Samad asks ‘how much impact would joining a Facebook group have unless people actually take action in the real world?’ (Samad, cited in Ma 2009). In the end marching is reduced to mouse-clicking, and who is going to see this?


Although I have been somewhat critical of this article, I do believe that Ma makes one particularly valid point about the hope for social media to change the world. In quoting Jye Smith from Switched on Media, it is noted that ‘what drives change is awareness…and people are never going to care unless they know’ (Smith, cited in Ma 2009). So if for nothing else, Slacktivism through social media has the potential to let people know about important issues so they can pledge their online support which will hopefully translate into offline support.



Reference List:

Bates, T 2010, lecture in WOMN2205 at the University of Western Australia, Crawley on 20 November 2010.

Ma, L 2009, ‘Slacktivism: Can social media actually cause social change?’, The Sydney Morning Herald October 1. Available from http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/slacktivism-can-social-media-actually-cause-social-change-20090930-gcgk.html>. [5 October 2010].