The Passivity of Social Media & Activism
Separating awareness from privileged pity.
Many criticize the function of platforms like Twitter for activism. When did social media and hashtags become such a dominant form of political activism? It can be understood just in how social media has become a dominant feature in our lives. Writer for The Washington Post Caitlin Dewey describes, “critics of lazy or “slacker” activism love to blame its existence on the Internet — as if signing petitions or sending postcards to Congress wasn’t equally passive (… and, in many cases, equally pointless).” (Dewey) But this form of activism isn’t without its faults. It can very clearly be passive, even more so than sending a postcard to Congress.
In my last piece, I wrote about the appearances attached to activism and social media. That is, how some perceive those who are visible on their social media as being activists, and critique their seriousness toward the cause. Social media is complicated, and our critiques of each other only make it more confusing and messy. In this ethnographic vignette, I am using the piece written by Caitlin Dewey “#Bringbackourgirls, #Kony2012, and the complete, divisive history of ‘hashtag activism’” to put this new concept of using social media platforms to further activism, into perspective.
In reference to the onset of this hashtag activism, Dewey also states, “It’s difficult to pin down exactly when the preferred form of slacktivism switched from analog to digital, but the change appears to have happened in the past three years.” She explained how the beginning came in 2007, when Twitter users began creating unofficial hashtags. Twitter did not fully adopt hashtags until later in 2009. And finally, in 2011, references to “hashtag activism” — most of them negative — began popping up in the media, always in connection to Occupy Wall Street.” (Dewey) This timeline is important to how we think about social media and activism because it gives the recognition to the role that social media has played in many major events. Also recognizing that social media and “hashtag activism” are relatively new concepts and forms of circulating news and ideas.
A major issue many hold with “hashtag activism” is its natural passivity. Sharing a post with a hashtag does not concretely do anything for the cause. But, it brings recognition. How can we find the line between sharing a cause to bring light and recognition, or as a trendy display of pity from our privileged screen lives?
“First, critics argue, “hashtag activism” is lazy — it’s a frictionless convenience, conducted from the safety of a computer screen, that often serves more as a flattering public symbol of concern than concern itself. More insidiously, some claim, these hashtags are often started not by the people they’re supposed to help, but by privileged, pitying outsiders on the other side of the world, gender gap or class divide. That’s what made #Kony2012 so vaguely icky. And that’s what made #NotYourAsianSidekick and #JusticeforTrayvon so great — those hashtags transcended whatever paternalistic or imperialistic traditions may exist in traditional media and discourse, and gave a platform to an oft-disenfranchised group.” (Dewey)
What can be taken from this is the idea that awareness is important, but in all aspects. Raising awareness for a cause, event, or group does good but not as a trend of pity.
