Wednesday, October 15, 2014

My role in slacktivism

       Previously, civic engagement never played a integral role in my life. In actuality, until being granted the opportunity this semester to participate in this class, I remained ignorant on the very definition of civic engagement. While I have always participated in various volunteering opportunities, never could I fully grasp the concept that the aid I was providing to others could be considered civic engagement. Although throughout our class discussions, the discovery that civic engagement can be viewed from multiple perspectives was made apparent to me. Unfortunately I have come to the realization that perhaps I seemingly embody more of a sense of slacktivism, rather than one of true civic engagement. Perhaps there are more people like me, who hope to stray from the confines of simple slacktivism, and begin forming the mold to become a true activist. In order to fully comprehend the role slacktivism plays on activism, I'll attempt to analyze it's effects on not only the masses, but also myself.
There is a stark contrast between true activism and slacktivism. While slacktivism can be considered a form of some-what involvement, it lacks some of the principles of true activism. Slacktivism is a coined-named, which can be defined as supporting a cause without direct involvement. That is not to say that slacktivism cannot be utilized as an important tool for raising awareness. Slacktivism and social media can go hand-in-hand, in part due to the accessibility of social media, and it's ability to spread awareness rapidly and globally. Have you ever considered what you are contributing to by "liking" and "reblogging/retweeting" items on social media? Has one ever wondered how by completing a simple action such as clicking a mouse, one can contribute to a great cause? It may seem as if it is a meaningless action to many, but those people are blind to the contributions slacktivism can provide in this way.
Kony 2012 was a video which had the foundation to truly made a great change in the world. Although the organizations credibility was diminished with the accussations and controversy surrounding the filmmaker, the organizations efforts can be analyzed in order determine the importance slacktivism played in it's success. When first presented with the video, I was overcome with a sense of shock. This issue was one that was unknown to me before, and before going foward with any research on this organization, I gave them my approval. This occurred right away due to me viewing this organization seemed to me as if it was fighting a just cause, a point of view most people would agree with. Now that I reflect back I find it rather strange how easily I was able to throw my support for organizations I barely knew. In the same instance that I finished viewing the video, I quickly shared and reblogged the video to all my peers.
One distinct memory I have of the emergence of the Kony video, would be the overwhelming sense of activism I felt toward the cause. After the conclusion of the video, it was as if I felt as strongly as the filmmakers did about this particular cause. The strange situation occurred when I was consumed with a sense of activism, how I only supported the cause through slacktivism. I didn't donate to the cause, yet I still felt apart of it through simply sharing it's information with others. The debate occurs when this sense of "activism" comes into question. It's not as if I was trekking through Africa in an attempt to halt Joseph Kony myself, or as if I was even donating some of my own income to the cause. I simply felt the spirit of activism through the simple action of spreading awareness. Before our class discussion on slactivism, I just attributed that feeling to my own previous ignorance, but through this discussion I have come to the realization that perhaps my good intentions may have contributed after all. My actions, while not being a form of direct activism, had the intentions to transition from slacktivism to activism. In my own eyes, I view slacktivism as having the ability of being a confine, but also the intial step into activism. My actions did aid in raising awareness for the cause, even if by unconventional means.

"Raising awareness is a lazy objective. Awareness is a given, action is what you want to promote." -Christina LaFon

An inherent problem of society with slacitivism is the very lack of direct participation. Slacktivism, while not consisting of direct involvement, seeks to encourage "slacktivist" to engage in this direct participation. It seemingly takes the role of that first step people take on the road to true activism. The conflict of slacktivism being "not enough" or not a true form of "activism" still astounds me. Although slacktivism may not provide organizations with direct participation, it still provides a means of engagement. When true activist attack or view slacktivist as "lazy", I am astounded. I see this as if you are making fun of someone for volunteering in a soup kitchen because you've volunteered in an activity of higher esteem. Volunteering and activism come in various forms, to call one of those forms "lazy" is to attack the very ideals of civic engagement. Civic Engagement can be defined as active citizens participating in the life of a community, in order to further improve conditions for others, and help mold that community's future. Civic Engagement is the coming together of people who have a common goal, and all pursue to achieve that goal through various means. Instead of attacking those who participate in slacktivism by calling them lazy, perhaps we can encourage them in their efforts. Through this, there is the chance that they could transition from simply clicking a mouse, to participating in marches and volunteering
Here is an article I found to be quite profound and interesting, which delves into the various components of the utilization of slacktivism through social media sources such as Facebook. The article illuminates "the trap" people fall into when they allow their activism to be restricted by the confines of slacktivism.

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3032824/6-reasons-why-were-slacktivists-the-psychology-of-liking-causes-on-facebook

3 comments:

  1. Great analysis, I'm wondering if you think that its possible for organizations to intentionally rely on the "slacktivism" of the average American to achieve their goals? One of the largest accusations against the organization that was Behind Kony 2012, Invisible Children, was that a large, inappropriate percentage of their proceeds were being donated to the church that backed them. By not providing this information outright, and assuming that the overwhelming majority of people will not look into them in enough depth to catch them, they are essentially fooling the public into donating to something they may not actually believe in by saying its something else that they do. Its a pretty amoral thing to do, but do you thing its a legitimate tactic that organizations use often?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know any numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if this were a fairly common practice in organizations with an otherwise good intention. Kony just happened to get spotlighted as it was so popular (considered by TIME to be the most viral video ever or something?) so that put it right into the line of fire of criticism. In addition, and maybe I'm being overly cynical, but America depends a lot on the ongoing social conflict in Congo and other African countries for commodities such as diamonds, chocolate, and coffee, for a large amount of revenue for a large amount of corporations, so there is that potential economic interest in making this organization look bad and taking the focus off of the real issue, child soldiers and the overall social disorder in Congo, and putting the flak on on a church that otherwise probably had pretty good intentions, even if the money wasn't allocated in a way that donors would have liked. I don't really know the whole story, so I can't really say, but it's an interesting situation.

      Money brings a whole lot of questions into play when it comes to nonprofits it seems. Some argue not so much should be spent on marketing, some argue otherwise. The foundation of an educational institution may gaining funding through investments in prisons, weapon manufacturers, and destructive fossil fuel industries, but there is no transparency in the foundations of most educational institutions and often these organizations are so complex in structure and hierarchy that accountability is difficult to place. It's important to remember that the people who are in these positions are relatively normal people given a job descriptions, many times with some kind of fiduciary duty given to them by their employer, just trying to make a living for themselves, many times for their families. Their intentions don't lie in an immoral place -- I don't think that anybody wants to perpetuate war or environmental destruction (there are some exceptions I'm sure, maybe not actively seeking this, but apathetic to the consequences) -- but being able to fund an organization as effectively as possible tends to be the end-all goal of many places, even if they're "nonprofit". Sometimes "nonprofit" just means an organization won't have a net gain in money, but these organizations avoid that net gain by spending as much as possible. So there is a gain in a material, rather than monetary sense.

      Delete
  2. The elitism of activists can be pretty disappointing. Encouragement, not destructive criticism, should be employed by activists in order to breed more activists. Slacktivism itself can also play a significant role in either breeding activists or just creating advocacy in the first place. At the end of the day, slacktivism is better than doing nothing. Further, slacktivism can be this agent of change from "doing nothing" to activism, maybe an in-between step. A true activist should be encouraging and guiding the slacktivist, not discouraging him or her. This is especially true when "slacktivists" fall into the idea that what they're doing is good and fine enough, and perhaps the best that they can for the causes they're advocating for. Maybe the real agent wouldn't be so much the slacktivism itself; not everyone is going to be able to pull themselves out of that. Maybe the activists would be the more effective agent when an individual is at this point of concern in regards to an issue.

    ReplyDelete