#wk6post

[lucyswinburne]

One more status liked, one more problem solved

Activism has reached new levels with social media platforms and networks. You can extend your scope to wider and larger audiences, find people who share your mindset and gain more exposure and response. But is this really doing anything? Obviously there are instances when different platforms are used and communities are created and they actually do achieve something like the Egyptian revolution of 2011. But in many cases –or at least the ones I have been exposed to- they haven’t really achieved anything apart from creating a flurry on my Facebook newsfeed. Now I’m not trying to diss the idea of using these platforms for good and bringing about change because I think there is a strong potential there however what I have personally witnessed hasn’t done much.

Take the Kony campaign of 2012. I was right in there with the action (figuratively speaking). I mean I watched the whole of the 19:48 video on YouTube, I posted the red symbolic image to my Facebook and in return I got 56 likes and I felt like I was doing my part for humanity. But really what did that achieve? Now don’t get me wrong I’m not saying I’m a heartless person with no sympathy to the cause because I am not, I’ve been to Africa and seen the harsh circumstances in which some people live and I’ve donated my time and money to charities that help them but that had nothing to do with social media. When it came down to it I did nothing to help the Kony situation apart from spread the word but still that doesn’t stop him committing any more crimes.

 It’s just like the latest craze: no make-up selfie for breast cancer awareness. Now again I’ve been touched closely by cancer so I’m not at all against helping the cause but taking a selfie with no make-up on is doing nothing but making me feel like a good citizen for a minute. It isn't even raising awareness as I could bet my bottom dollar that most people already know about breast cancer. Perhaps if it was more like "if I raise a hundred dollars for cancer research I will post a picture without makeup" that would make more sense. I just feel like this is just a more extreme version of those pictures where it's a image of an abused animal and the caption is "like this picture if you think animal abuse should be stopped". It doesn't do anything, donating money or time DOES something. Social media activism does very little in these circumstances. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Social media has introduced a whole new platform for social discourse. More people are getting involved with comments, likes and sharing around information. The discussions that are taking place cover all topics from sporting games to yum cha to the governance of countries. Through this new means of communication people with the same stance can join and connect with each other. They can find thousands of people who share their view of the world or even just their view of one particular matter. When you get enough people talking about something, passions run high and tempers flare. Get enough people riled up about a particular issue and this is where revolutions begin.

Another contributing factor is that social media is dominated by young people who aren’t settled into their lives enough to just accept the status quo. Social media outlets have been indispensable tools for the voices of those suppressed to finally be heard and not only that but actually band together and bring about changes. This was seen in Cairo where thousands of people flooded the streets and demanded governance change after recognising their peers and allies on social media. By spreading viral messages, creating hash tags, uploading raw footage and images people all over the world are finally being recognised and that is all thanks to social media.  

Now I’m not saying that gaining 1 million likes on Facebook is going to over throw the prevailing power, but it is impractical and naïve to underestimate the ability of social medias use as a jump start to revolution.

The Kony campaign of 2012- did millions of people sharing the hashtag and video link psychically stop Kony? No. But did creating awareness to an issue most of the western world were ignorant of do any bad? No. If that video inspired even  just one person to actively try and help the issue then it’s a success. And just think about the future possibilities. With our early-on social media understanding things like the Kony campaign and the Cairo riots are possible, I don’t even want to try and think about what will be possible in 50 or 100 years’ time with even more sophisticated technology and social media awareness.

[seanmcclure-blog]

Like this blog post to end poverty!

Activism and the internet have gone hand in hand since the very early days of chain e-mails "raising awareness" of serious issues that need to be addressed. However only in recent years has gained any traction as something that can do something other than raise awareness towards any particular issue. I'm definitely not under appreciating the importance of awareness as a step towards taking action towards fixing an issue, but it is a comparatively small step when compared with taking physical action to improve the situation. 

Some of the benefits the internet supplies us with in terms of activism is it can mean we have the ability to start something on our own. We don't need help from journalists or famous individuals to begin to make change. Anyone can make a public page on Facebook with information regarding an issue and you even have the ability to receive donations online through sites like paypal. Although this also increases the chances of a page being legitimate.

Even back before the internet, false charities, or causes were created attempting to scam those who were easily convinced into donating. This has only become more prevalent with the tools we are given to begin our own movements and organisations for such a low cost. Any weary internet user will very rarely donate to a cause, only after researching it heavily will any truth stated by a cause website be accepted. 

There are many causes that have truth to them and which mean well, but make fabrications in order to make the truth easily digestible to the average person. The Kony 2012 campaign that became popular on social media in March of 2012 is a good example of this as although child soldiers and warlords being legitimate issues in parts of Africa, the film depicts killing Kony as a solution to the issue, which is a wild simplification. This has been labelled as "slacktivism" by criticisers who argue that while the campaign did raise awareness, and despite the funds raised for the cause, no end to the issue would come from it.

This idea of slacktivism is interesting to me, it means to donate or share or "like" an issue online to simply feel as though you are contribution to the solution of an issue. It frustrates me deeply that people are happy to assume the end to an issue just because they hear no more of it. I guess this is the way the internet works though, and people are learning to exploit it better everyday.

[yumchaquarterly]

RECENT: Food Strikes Starve Paying Diners

You can fry us, Try to steam us. But until you eat us, You can not oppress us! ~ Local Vegetarian Dumpling in regards to being left behind by 'full' diners We refuse to boil, In your dictatorship toil!! ~ Fed up Noodles about recent reform to chicken stock usage.

Social media platforms have become channels for mediating democratic action, ranging from political protest (Arab Springs) to social publicity (#nomakeupselfie). The commonality between these two diverse activist campaigns is how social media is utilized as a network using the ties between individuals that pre-exist. Essentially, campaigners take advantage for the ‘proximity-defying’ quality of social media. The concern with this forms of campaigning it’s ability communicate effectively the intended message and to remain relevant, hindered by miscommunication and social interpretations. Henrik Serup Christensen discusses the implications of ‘slacktivism’ in his article ‘Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means?’. He defines slacktivism as “negative sense to belittle activities that do not express a full–blown political commitment. The concept generally refers to political activities that are easily performed”. I observe that slacktivism arises when social interpretation deludes the user, or ‘political activist’ from the intention. Take for example the ‘no-make up selfie’ fiasco. What originally was a social campaign from Britain to raise awareness for Cancer transcended into a vain expression in Australia. Here we see the concept of ‘selfie’ take priority over the awareness for cancer. The #nomakeupselfie become more about expressing a ‘brave’ for bearing a natural face, that communicated as a proof of natural beauty (with most selfies reflecting enough sun to compensate for lack of make up) or a feminist pursuit to deny glamourizing themselves for men. This is the consequence, and often motivations, behind slacktivism – an alternative intention, often to reflect identity via association. A cancer survivor Kim Stephens shares her compelling perspective in this article.

  http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/theres-no-bravery-in-no-makeup-selfies-20140327-35lyx.html

  Social interpretations therefore deprive the campaign of its relevance. The no make up selfie became bulletin news, not for cancer, but for the abuse of no make selfies. No information to donated, or what the original case was for was mentioned in these news segments; a disappointing outcome, however this does demonstrate the consequences of ‘slacktivism’. 

[horsey1989]

This is in relation to my week 6 blog, it is an example of how Apple is an addictive technology killing how humans interract.

[aaaaaaaaaaaamy-blog]

SOME KIND OF RANT ON PROTESTS AND THE WORLD AND BLAH BLAH

digital citizenship: activism and protest week 6

So if you watched Q&A this past week you know where I'm coming from. Mona Eltahawy was on the panel, and she is from Egypt where the revolution is eminent. Anyway she was talking about how no one else is getting involved when history is in the making. The world may be very connected, but we don't incite change unless it directly effects us. Selfish? Perhaps, but it happens all over the world. 

I'm not saying that social media doesn't have usage, because social media played a huge role in overthrowing the government in Egypt. It's just that social media and activism can only reach a certain amount of people. And that is those who want and need to be directly involved. It was even proved that social media played a very important role in Egypt's governments (Iskander, 2011; Kavanaugh, Yang, Sheetz, Li, & Fox, 2011; Khamis & Vaughn, 2011; Wilson & Dunn, 2011). It makes an easier way of communication for citizens to co ordinate. Those social media platforms paved the way to more worldwide coverage, youtube videos were played on television news. It gives the community an instant access pass in to what is happening, and what they can do. It is a way to bring all publics together. They shape interaction with activists. And although people around the world may not be directly involved, the effects of what happens can be shown globally. That proves in itself, how important social media can be in times of protest and activism. 

[digicoms]

Liking/sharing - not entirely enough to deem someone an activist, but potentially beneficial.

"There is now unprecedented opportunities for expression and interaction, especially among activists, artists and other political and cultural groups..." (Leah Lievrouw 2011, Alternative & Activist Media: p2)

Unprecedented ways include merely recognising something online. I mean, sure... we all hate it when someone talks about being so involved with an issue after just liking something, and that isn't wrong... I mean you can't say you're a dedicated activist just from sharing and passing on knowledge. Although it does serve a purpose in my opinion.

Personally, before getting into this subject, I was one of many who believed in this concept of "clicktivism" and that it's just a way of perhaps making people feel good or like they're doing something but honestly, if people didn't like and share... with the nature of Facebook, not many would see anything.

I mean, clicktivism perhaps could be a worth-while and accurate concept if Facebook wasn't set up the way it was. For example someone you're friends with on Facebook likes or comments for whatever reason on a post, and chances are one of your friends or yourself will see it and it may potentially and eventually reach you and now you are aware of something you weren't a minute ago. 

The power of this thumb, is quite underrated. 

Most of us (being active on social media) have seen posts/pages with over a million likes.

This links into activism because if 1 million like it, more people see it and even if 500,000 of those people are inactive and merely liking just to acknowledge that the problem is there... aren't chances of an individual actually doing something about it, growing? as more people continue to like, share, expose and ultimately, raise awareness. 

Speaking from personal experience, I like many magazines, artists and art pages on Facebook so I see a lot of original content... I can't say the same for the content I gather from my friends though. There has been a gradual shift from the initial "making a status" phase and contributing your own content to simply liking memes, funny images, worldwide issues/trends, cool photos of landscapes etc... this has dominated my news feed and its safe to say that what i see on a day to day basis, is because someone liked it. 

[smediahut-blog]

Week 6 - Digital Activism and Protest

I think that activism has become an important part of our democratic society and the use of social networks as tools allows us as citizens to have a bigger presence, spreadability and accessibilities to issues that would in the past have been hidden from the public eye.  Although I think the effectiveness of protests and activism campaigns is dependent on their context and their interrelationship with mainstream society. The digital community working in isolation isn’t enough to bring about change, it may raise awareness, questions and vulnerabilities in society but without incorporating manual methods of protest a lot of the time the hype on the internet fizzles out when it hits society as a whole.

  When I hear the term digital activism I immediately think of the Kony Campaign which while hitting unprecedented coverage across social network platforms, the main drivers being Youtube, Twitter and Tumblr I saw little action correlate to the streets. I remember in Melbourne there was a poor number that turned out to post the posters on the streets to create wider coverage off the issue. I’m not sure if the immense amount of coverage was paralleled by the results of the campaign, while small increments of change have happened in result, Joseph Kony is still leading the resistance army in Uganda and abduction of children is still occurring. I think social media can sometimes create a false illusion that we are creating change in the world, we think that buy clicking like on a Fackbook group or becoming apart of a hype around and issue the same hype is creating change in the outside world.

  In saying this the utilization of media and communication platforms are a vital tool in creating a larger audience, without social media issues wouldn’t gain the same amount of reach. Tools like Facebook enable organizations of movements, enable momentum and act as a sight for event information, YouTube creates visual that can create emotive responses, streaming allows for real time reaction and intervention and twitter allows for opinions and momentum. Used cohesively they can become the backbone for a campaign of active change and stimulate action but the power of traditional activism must become apart of the platform. Think about the case of Jill Mayer in Melbourne, hype around rape and death led to peaceful marches for the safety of people in the community to create awareness, these peace marches were then trafficked around social media and mainstream media alike. Pages like “RIP Jill Mayer” created a network of sympathy for the family but also created dialog about the safety of the streets. An illegal mural in Melbourne made the presence more real and changes in security by the state government where put in place.

  I think there is a blur in the digital community between activism that creates change and clicktivism or slacktivism, many people are happy to like a page and publicize their support but how many then attend the rally and become apart of the issue? The internet has the ability to breed social activism and while the intention of change is good, the outcome and results depend on an active community and a wide spread assimilation of need and want for change. The protest has to jump of the screens and out into the real world.