ABSTRACT
This multifaceted paper explores how Web 2.0 creates an online environment where individuals can engage in discussion about issues facing society, which in turn promotes the development of online communities around a shared interest or goal. This paper will then argue that by utilising the affordances of social network sites Facebook and Twitter, these online communities are strong enough to bring about change by participating in activism. Within this paper, examples such as the controversial case of Senator Fraser Anning, the School Strike 4 Climate, and the #MeToo movement is used to demonstrate how online communities use hashtags, retweeting, liking, commenting and sharing to raise awareness and prompt real change; ultimately countering the argument of slacktivism.
KEY WORDS: activism, online communities, Web 2.0, slacktivism, social network sites
INTRODUCTION
This paper will argue that Web 2.0, particularly social network sites such as Twitter and Facebook, encourages individuals to participate in discourse around issues that face society, ultimately allowing for the formation of online communities and the initiation of change through activism. Social network sites, which are located at the core of Web 2.0 (O’Reilly, as cited in Straub & Nentwich, 2013, p. 724), form a “mediated public” (boyd, 2007, p. 2) whereby users can gather to publicly discuss and debate the social norms that guide society, can express their own thoughts, attitudes and opinions, and can exchange ideas with others; mirroring Habermas’ notion of the public sphere (Straub & Nentwich, 2013, p. 726). Social network sites are further used by online communities to direct attention to the pressing issues that are facing society, which include, but are not limited to, gender and racial inequality, immigration laws and climate change. These online communities are able to develop through the use of Web 2.0, and are then able to initiate activist movements by utilising the affordances of social network sites. Overall, this paper will discuss four main ideas; how Web 2.0 and social network sites have impacted the way information surrounding global issues is shared among users; how Web 2.0 fosters the development of online communities; how these online communities, through the use of social network sites, are capable of initiating activist movements; and how, through the analysis of #MeToo and challenging the idea of slacktivism, these activist movements can achieve results.
THE IMPACT OF WEB 2.0 ON INFORMATION DISSEMINATION
The term “Web 2.0” was coined by Tim O’Reilly in 2004 (O’Reilly, 2007, p. 17) and is used to describe the most recent phase of the World Wide Web (WWW). Unlike its predecessor Web 1.0, the central focus of Web 2.0 is the user, the people who use its tools to participate, collaborate and communicate with others (O’Reilly, 2007, p. 19). Web 2.0 creates an online environment that encourages user contribution, the reusing and remixing of content, promotes a feeling of belonging to a community and a sense of empowerment (Arya & Mishra, 2012, p. 29). Web 2.0 is comprised of a multitude of applications including blogs, wikis and social network sites (Arya & Mishra, 2012, p. 30). Social network sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, are “online environments in which people create a self-descriptive profile and then make links to other people they know on the site, creating a network of personal communities” (Donath & boyd, 2004, p. 2).
However, it is important to note that on Twitter and Facebook, users are able to follow those who they do not know personally and thus, can build a network of “sources” (Grudz, Wellman & Takhteyev, 2011, p. 1296). It is necessary to make this distinction as it allows for the understanding of how information on social network sites spreads. For example, after the 2019 Christchurch mosque terror attack whereby 49 people were killed, an Australian politician Senator Fraser Anning released a statement which placed the reasoning for the attack on “the immigration program which allowed Muslim fanatics to migrate to New Zealand in the first place” (Anning, as cited in Kirby, para. 4). The statement was circulated via social media within minutes through the use of sharing, retweeting and commenting, and received widespread public outcry. British journalist Piers Morgan retweeted the statement condemning the opinions and attitudes Anning expressed. Morgan’s retweet, which contained the original statement, was then retweeted by his sources or “weak ties” 16,000 times and was liked 30, 776 times (Morgan, 2019). The term “weak ties” is used to label those relations that act as a link between groups and as a result, are particularly useful on Web 2.0 as they allow for the transmission of information across “greater social distance” (Granovetter, 1973, p. 1366), between platforms and between users.
This example highlights how Web 2.0 facilitates the creation and spread of content (McCaughey, 2014, p. 2), lowers the barrier to communication (Ellison et al., as cited in Ellison & boyd, 2013, p. 11) for people can express opinions without having to challenge gatekeeping regimes (Harlow, 2011, p. 230), and permits like-minded individuals the ability to “easily discern their common ground, thus helping users cultivate socially relevant interactions” (Ellison et al., as cited in Ellison & boyd, 2013, p. 11). As a result, Web 2.0, more specifically social network sites, encourages individuals to engage in debates around issues facing society. This level of interaction, participation and contribution ultimately allows for the formation of online communities on social network sites.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF ONLINE COMMUNITIES ON WEB 2.0
The notion of “community” is heavily debated in scholarly discourse (Katz, Rice, Acord, Dasgupta, & David, 2004; Wellman & Gulia, 1999). The rise of Web 2.0, social network sites and online gaming has contributed to and prompted the discussion of what constitutes as a community. Traditional definitions are predominantly central to the notion of “physical colocation” (Katz, et al., 2004, p. 324) whereby those who exist in geographical proximity experience a sense of solidarity (Schmalenbach, as cited in Katz et al., 2004, p. 324). In this traditional sense, the basic characteristics of a community includes face to face communication, common backgrounds such as identity and values, and the involuntary recruitment and participation of members (Katz et al., 2004, p. 325). Ultimately, physical ‘traditional’ communities “are based on shared social and physical boundaries” (Katz et al., 2004, p. 326). As mentioned, social network sites warrant a review of these definitions. At the basic level, virtual and online communities can be defined by “an aggregation of individuals” that are “mediated by technology” (Porter, as cited in Porter, 2016, p. 161) and are “geographically and socially dispersed” (Porter, 2016, p. 166). Online communities form voluntarily, typically around a shared interest or goal (Porter, 2016, p. 166). The characteristics that are vital to the formation of a community, regardless of whether online or offline, includes a sense of belonging, reciprocity, and the exchange of information (Porter, 2016, p. 161; Katz et al., 2004).
Web 2.0 and social network sites are able to develop and foster online communities for several reasons. As Constance Porter (2016) states, communities develop predominantly from the interaction around a shared interest or goal (p. 162). The most influential affordance of social network sites is the publication of personal expression (Aguiton & Cardon, 2007, p. 55). The ability for a user to contribute to a “mediated public space” (boyd, 2007, p. 2) means that personal thoughts and ideas are capable of becoming public opinion. By merely posting about an issue online, a user is able to interact with weak ties, followers or sources that share the same values and interests through commenting and retweeting.
In line with this information, it can further be argued that social network sites also allow for the formation of an online community around a shared interest through the use of hashtags. Hashtags (#) are a form of metadata that are used to categorise and label discourse on social network sites (Zappavigna, 2015, p. 374). For example, if a common interest of climate change was being debated on Twitter, a user is able to add #climatechange to their post in order to be found by other users. Reciprocity can be found on online communities through members retweeting, sharing, liking or favouriting other member’s posts as “the accumulation of small, individual acts of assistance can sustain a large community” as each act can “help to perpetuate an image of generalised reciprocity and mutual aid” (Wellman & Gulia, 1999, p. 9). As online communities surrounding global issues are able to develop on Web 2.0, they are also able to initiate activist movements and elicit change through the use of Web 2.0. Therefore, Web 2.0, and social network sites in particular, encourages individuals to participate in debate around global issues.
THE POWER OF ONLINE COMMUNITIES IN INITIATING CHANGE
Online communities that have formed around the shared interest of global issues on Web 2.0 also have the potential to initiate activist movements. Activism can be defined as “the actions of a group of like-minded individuals coming together to change the status quo, advocating for a cause, whether local or global, and whether progressive or not” (Harlow, 2011, p. 228). By utilising Web 2.0, online communities members are able to communicate, share information, and arrange and organise protests easily (Sandoval-Almazan & Gil-Garcia, 2014, p. 365), lowering the barrier to participation in activism (Tartarchevskiy, 2011, p. 297). Online activism includes raising awareness about an issue or advocating for a cause, and also the organisation and mobilisation of movements (Vegh, as cited in Harlow, 2011, p. 230).
Activism is achieved on social network sites through the use of hashtags, the creation of Facebook pages and events, and the circulation of petitions. For example, a series of online petitions recently circulated on the social network sites Facebook and Twitter calling for the removal of the aforementioned Senator Anning from parliament. One of the petitions, having been posted on Change.org, received 1.4 million signatures. The petition was presented in parliament and ultimately, with the support of major political parties, led to the condemnation of, and expression of dissatisfaction with, Senator Fraser Anning (Ahmed, 2019, para. 1). Moreover, the use of Facebook pages for organising activist events is demonstrated by the Facebook page “School Strike 4 Climate” which listed several events students could attend to protest and call for government action in climate change, one of which was attended by 25,000 teenagers (Brook, 2019, para. 3).
CHALLENGING SLACKTIVISM THROUGH #METOO
Due to the way in which social network sites allow users to effortlessly “like” a Facebook page, share a petition or simply tweet a message with a relevant hashtag, several scholars have argued that online activism is increasingly becoming meaningless to such an extent that it can only be classified as “slacktivism” (Morozov., & Van de Donk et al., as cited in Harlow, 2011, p. 230). As Dennis McCafferty (2011) explains, slacktivism assumes that there is no emotional drive, community or connection behind most forms of online activism, which suggests that they rarely have a significant impact or elicit any sort of change (p. 18). However, this argument is challenged by Web 2.0 communities involved in the #MeToo movement.
#MeToo is a prime example of how online communities formed on Web 2.0 can initiate activist movements that are conducive to change. The #MeToo movement was initially established in 2006 and revolved around the global issue of gender inequality and harassment. The movement was brought back to fruition by online communities on Web 2.0 after allegations against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein emerged in 2017 (North, 2018; Chiwaya, 2018). A large online community of women who had a shared interest in challenging workplace harassment divulged personal experiences with sexual harassment via Twitter with the hashtag #MeToo. The hashtag was used approximately 19 million times (Brown, 2018).
As discussed, the use of hashtags allow social network users to find discourse surrounding a particular issue or topic (Zappavigna, 2015, p. 374). As the use of #MeToo made stories of sexual harassment experiences visible, the online community was able to raise awareness around the issue, which Sandor Vegh (as cited in Harlow, 2011, p. 230) claims is a form of online activism. In the case of #MeToo, the argument of slacktivism does not hold ground for the initiation of change was illustrated by several Hollywood stars, including Kevin Spacey, being investigated for sexual assault after allegations against them surfaced during the #MeToo movement (Romano, 2018). Within a month of the movement resurfacing, there was also a significant increase in traffic to the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission website by approximately 45,000 visits (Chiwaya, 2018). The #MeToo movement ultimately demonstrates how Web 2.0, particularly social network sites such as Facebook and Twitter, allows for the formation of online communities and the initiation of change through activism.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Web 2.0, and social network sites such
as Facebook and Twitter in particular, encourages individuals to engage in
debates around important issues that face society such as climate change,
gender inequality, and racism. Web 2.0 has allowed for the rapid dissemination
of information which can be used to enhance and inform the discourse
surrounding these issues. In this sense, the social network sites of Web 2.0
have begun to resemble a “mediated public space” (boyd, 2007, p. 2) or a kind
of public sphere, as demonstrated with the rapid distribution of Senator
Anning’s statement which caused widespread outcry, and encouraged the criticism
of a political figure to circulate on social network sites. Web 2.0 also allows
for the formation of online communities around shared interests, values and
attitudes, primarily through the use of hashtags, retweeting, following and
liking. These online communities are then strong enough to initiate changes
through activist movements, as seen with the #MeToo movement which saw a rise
in awareness of sexual harassment in the workplace and the investigation of
leading Hollywood actors. Therefore, Web 2.0, particularly social network sites
such as Twitter and Facebook, encourages individuals to participate in
discourse around issues that face society, ultimately allowing for the
formation of online communities and the initiation of change through activism.
REFERENCES
Ahmad, K. (2019). Remove Fraser Anning from parliament. Retrieved from https://www.change.org/p/the-prime-minister-remove-fraser-anning-from-parliament/u/24375167
Arya, H. B. & Mishra, J. K. (2012). Oh! Web 2.0, virtual reference service 2.0, tools & techniques. Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning, 6(1), 28-46. DOI: 10.1080/1533290X.2012.660878
boyd, D. (2007). Social network sites: Public, private, or what? Knowledge Tree, (2007, May), 1-7. Retrieved from http://www.danah.org/papers/KnowledgeTree.pdf
Brook, B. (2019). ‘My teacher doesn’t know I’m here’: Tens of thousands of teens gather for climate change protests.’ News.com.au. Retrieved from https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/my-teacher-doesnt-know-im-here-tens-of-thousands-of-teens-gather-for-climate-change-protests/news-story/77234a1c1f3138d94a860c09e4c70b03
Brown, D. (2018). 19 million tweets later: A look at #MeToo a year after the hashtag went viral. USA Today. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/10/13/metoo-impact-hashtag-made-online/1633570002/
Chiwaya, N. (2018). New data on #MeToo’s first year shows ‘undeniable’ impact. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-data-metoo-s-first-year-shows-undeniable-impact-n918821
Donath, J.,
& boyd, d. (2004). Public Displays of Connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4),
71-82. Retrieved from http://smg.media.mit.edu/papers/Donath/socialnetdisplay.draft.pdf
Ellison, N. B., & boyd, d. (2013). Sociality through social network sites. In W. H. Dutton (Ed.), The oxford handbook of Internet studies (pp. 1-24). DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199589074.013.008
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/stable/pdf/2776392.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A517d06c8d718767fac04c64217421a75
Grudz, A. Wellman, B. & Takhteyev, Y. (2011). Imagining Twitter as an Imagined Community. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(10), 1294 – 1318. DOI: 10.1177/0002764211409378
Harlow, S. (2011). Social media and social movements: Facebook and an online Guatemalan justice movement that moved offline. New media & society, 14(2), 225-243. DOI: 10.1177/1461444811410408
Katz, J. E., Rice, R. E., Acord, S., Dasgupta, K., & David, K. (2004). Personal mediated communication and the concept of community in theory and practice. In P. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication and Community: Communication Yearbook 28 (pp. 315-371). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Retrieved from http://www.comm.ucsb.edu/faculty/rrice/A80KatzRiceAcordDasguptaDavid2004.pdf
Kirby, J. (2019, March 15). Far-right Australian senator blames New Zealand attack on Muslim immigrants. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2019/3/15/18267077/australian-senator-new-zealand-attack-muslims-immigrants
McCafferty, D. (2011). Activism vs. slacktivism. Communication of the ACM, 54(12), 17-19. DOI: 10.1145/2043174.2043182
McCaughey, M. (2014). Introduction: Cyberactivism 2.0: Studying cyberactivism a decade into the participatory web. In M. McCaughey (Ed.), Cyberactivism on the participatory web (pp. 2-6). Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/reader.action?docID=1675956&ppg=13
Morgan, P. (2019, March 15). Shame on you @fraser_anning [Tweet]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/1106457784810422272
North, A. (2018, October 11). The #MeToo movement and its evolution, explained. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/10/9/17933746/me-too-movement-metoo-brett-kavanaugh-weinstein
O’Reilly, T. (2007). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & Strategies, 65(1), 17-37. Retrieved from https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=684088071004067008105102110085009109026012051033042091108127097074072019068074109121101122062000122051045124000101025064075077005049095084082031086127122016119118077007007120075004000009000116120065094103113095113029122085095069117092102082112085123&EXT=pdf
Porter, C. E. (2015). Virtual communities and social networks. In L. Cantoni and J. A. Danowski, (Eds). Communication and Technology (pp. 161-179). Retrieved from https://books.google.com.au/books?id=AhxpCgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA161&ots=bZIat75i-L&dq=online%20virtual%20communities%202015&lr&pg=PA161#v=onepage&q&f=false
Romano, A. (2018, December 24). The sexual allegations against Kevin Spacey span decades. Here’s what we know. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/11/3/16602628/kevin-spacey-sexual-assault-allegations-house-of-cards
Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2014). Towards cyberactivism 2.0? Understanding the use of social media and other information technologies for political activism and social movements. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 365-378. DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2013.10.10.016
Straub, S., & Nentwich, M. (2013). Social network sites, privacy and the blurring boundary between public and private spaces. Science and Public Policy, 40(6), 724-732. DOI: 10.1093/scipol/sct072
Tatarchevskiy, T. (2011). The ‘popular’ culture of internet activism. New Media & Society, 13(2), 297-313. DOI: 10.1177/1461444810372785
Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Net surfers don’t ride alone: Virtual communities as communities. In P. Kollock, & M. Smith (Eds.), Communities and Cyberspace (pp. 1-26). New York: Routledge. Retrieved from http://groups.chass.utoronto.ca/netlab/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Net-Surfers-Dont-Ride-Alone-Virtual-Community-as-Community.pdf
Zappavigna, M. (2015). Searchable talk: The linguistic functions of hashtags. Social Semiotics, 25(3), 274-291. DOI: 10.1080/10350330.2014.996948
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Hi there Devyn,
Wow! Our topics are super similar, yet we managed to pick up different key themes to talk about. It was really interesting to hear your take on this topic, and I loved your use of current examples to explain what you were talking about throughout your paper.
I saw you argued that slacktivism could be challenged by the #MeToo movement, however, this is only one case. Do you believe that most activism online is, in fact, slacktivism as Web 2.0 has enabled support of a social cause through very little effort or commitment?
Again, great read! Web 2.0 has definitely changed the activism scene. I also discuss this in my paper. Feel free to check it out – https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2019Curtin/2019/05/05/web-2-0-effect-on-societys-engagement-with-activism/
Heya Alice,
Thank you for taking the time to read my paper! Though our topics are similar, it just goes to show how big of an impact Web 2.0 has on activism if we are able to discover different key ideas from one another!
Yes, I agree that Web 2.0 has allowed for a form of slacktivism in the way we do not have to go to extreme measures to follow or support a social cause as compared to traditional forms of activism. However, I disagree with the main idea of the argument that online forms of activism are generally lacking in passion or determination. I feel as though activists are purely utilising the affordances of Web 2.0 to engage in protests more easily, though not necessarily degrading the quality of their participation.
Thanks again for your comment Alice, I really appreciate it!
Hello Devyn!
It is amazing how Facebook began as a platform for university students to connect with peers around campus, to a social space with university students tagging each other in relatable memes about ‘peak uni moments’, till now, the ability to assemble a petition that resulted in it being presented in court – sheesh, let me catch my breath saying all of that. Your paper definitely adds value to this stream because it argues against sceptics to Web 2.0 (slacktivism), that Web 2.0 can’t add value to society. Perhaps they can’t understand as @Alice suggested that “most activism online is, in fact, slacktivism as Web 2.0 has enabled support of a social cause through very little effort or commitment”? Your paper also has a strong abstract, an average Joe would not have to read further, past the abstract, to figure out what your paper is arguing. Your inclusion of contextual examples are also very timely, appropriate and relevant such as the Anning and Strike4Climate, this is incredibly important especially when you’re trying to argue from a contemporary point of time. I also thought you defined Web 2.0 really well, that it is an “online environment that encourages user contribution”, the keywords being ‘encourages user contribution’. This proves that communication and community is now a two-way flow, very much like what @Alice argues in her paper. Your distinction between physical and virtual community has also been very applicable, defining it as either voluntary (virtual communities) and involuntary (physical communities), I believe that this is right on the money in terms of substantiating that activism in Web 2.0 is always voluntarily and genuine. Lastly, I completely agree that Web 2.0 “lowers the barriers to participation in activism”, and you have backed this up with the examples of the petition and hashtags, because anyone can be involved in their little ways, making a huge difference politically.
I do however am sceptical about one part, where hashtags that are searched for e.g. #Climatechange, can form an online community that never existed before. As they are all weak-ties, it requires great effort and strong interaction/agreement for this relationship of strangers to extend and create a community as a result. Users do produce and trend the hashtag, like and retweet each other’s tweet, but it ends there, I believe it’s very unlikely that they will form together after that.
Secondly, I feel like the #MeToo argument should highlight that this is a movement towards participatory culture, as it is voluntary in a virtual community (as mentioned in the definition earlier). As this is also a sensitive topic terms of revealing one’s harassment story for example, genuine profiles telling of one’s personal story through this hashtag would challenge slacktivism, which states that there is “no emotional drive”.
To me, the greater the paper, the more it evokes questions which forces one to critically think.
Here’s mine (because your paper is great):
– Do you think Web 2.0 has helped advanced, but personalised politicians? For e.g. in the past, there was no Internet/Web 2.0, how would the public know that Fraser Anning views are anti-islam, and if they were to find out, how far can it really reach (widespreadibility)? Is this a good or bad thing for an advancing society? For good, you can argue that it allows citizens to make more informed decisions (for those with strong religious views), especially during election.
– “Web 2.0 encourages individuals to participate in debate around global issues.” Is this really true? What about the passive consumers? Is there a repercussion for passive consumers, e.g. consume but might use that information later on, hence Web 2.0 is still successful.
What does everyone else think as well? Join the thread down below!
This paper was truly a pleasure to read, well done leg end.
“Can a 15-year-old be your boss? Wait we’re talking about games right.. or in the real world?”
Let’s find out:
https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2019Curtin/2019/05/06/press-f-to-pay-respects-to-those-who-still-thinks-video-games-means-isolation/
Heya Chris,
Wow! Thank you for your insightful comment, and for the positive feedback you have provided! I must say it is difficult to provide contemporary examples as more users everyday are unlocking the power of Web 2.0 to engage in debate and activism, and thus, more perfect examples are preventing themselves!
I appreciate your thoughts concerning the ability of hashtags to sustain the formation of a community, and particularly admire the way you have identified the role of weak ties and have used that to form your own opinion. Your comment just goes to show how disputable the term ‘community’ is, and what really constitutes as one.
Oh yes! You have made me kick myself for not making the connection to participatory culture! You are more than correct. #MeToo demonstrates participatory culture in the way that the members within the online community are seemingly experiencing a “degree of social connection with each other” and are witnessing “low barriers to…civic engagement” on Web 2.0 (Jenkins, 2006, p. 11).
To answer your questions:
1. Do you think Web 2.0 has helped advance, but personalise politicians?
Yes, I believe Web 2.0 has helped. Definitely with traditional forms of media, information on politicians, I believe, only had a small sphere of influence. Furthermore, in the pre-Internet/Web 2.0 era, readers/viewers would have to have the intent of wanting to find the information on Fraser Anning in order to formulate an opinion of him; they would have to seek out a newspaper or a news program on TV. With Web 2.0 and social network sites, however, users are exposed to this information through their weak ties without effort. We saw Senator Anning reach trending status on Twitter, suggesting that any user would stumble upon this topic unintentionally. As a result, like you said, Web 2.0 has helped advance society for it allows individuals to become more informed of current events which would prove to be particularly useful during election times. It is worth acknowledging the ‘bad’ side of this though, and I think this would present itself in the form of information disseminators demonstrating bias in the information they create and spread about politicians; ultimately, their own point of views would try to distort the image of the targeted politician and manipulate the thoughts of viewers.
Overall, I do believe Web 2.0 has helped advance, but personalise politicians but I think this is more so a good thing than bad since users can witness both the ‘for’ and the ‘against’ of a certain politician. Though some perspectives on Web 2.0 may be bias, a user is ultimately offered a range of sources in which they can use to make up their own mind and thus make an informed decision during election times.
2. “Web 2.0 encourages individuals to participate in debate around global issues.” Is this really true? What about the passive consumers? Is there a repercussion for passive consumers?
At the basic level, Web 2.0 definitely permits individuals to participate in debate around global issues. Through its affordances, we know that Web 2.0 users can spread information rapidly in order to raise awareness on a global issue and thus debate it. No matter where or in what circumstance, there will always be a passive listener or consumer though. If a user were to unintentionally read about Senator Anning, for example, they do have the option of simply swiping past it. I think this would allow the passive consumer to really reflect on what matters to them, to think about what global issues they are interested in or find value in debating. While a passive consumer may not be particularly interested or find importance in one global issue, Web 2.0 allows them to find ones that they could be. So, yes, I do think Web 2.0 encourages individuals to participate in debate around global issues.
Thanks again for your thought-provoking comment, Chris!
Jenkins, H. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Retrieved from https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/confronting-challenges-participatory-culture
Hi Devyn,
Firstly, fantastic paper outlining some of the most notable examples of online activism. I have been personally captivated by the Climate Strike movement and how schools and universities (including Curtin) rebelled against mainstream media and the government’s lack of action on this issue. Since the federal and state governments as well as mainstream media seem to only be focused on appeasing their older core demographics in Australia, these movements can potentially help younger generations(including myself) gain a voice on issues that matter to us the most into mainstream media, despite their general condemnation of youths. Despite being heavily outnumbered demographically, social activism can potentially lead to them caving in, although we are still miles away from that happening.
The Fraser Anning petition is another great recent example. Generally I find these political petitions go nowhere, but the overwhelming condemnation of his attitudes regarding the Christchurch attacks shows what the mass of the numbers can do to influence the upper echelons of the hierarchy. It has become so much more accessible and instantaneous for individuals and groups to take action against issues they are most passionate about through Web 2.0 platforms like Facebook and Twitter, amid all the ugly and appalling opinions and it can potentially provide a breeding ground for such as Anning.
Hi Stephen,
Thank you for reading my paper and providing your feedback and valuable thoughts!
I particularly like your comment on how the mainstream media and older demographic tends to condemn our efforts of raising awarness on and fighting for issues that will impact us and our children in the future. Maybe this is because we are thought of as not valuing our current situation enough, but I think it is crucial that we think of future generations and begin to make a change now. Unfortunately though, I do agree with you that we are quite a way off seeing action being taken by governments.
I also think that, in the case of Fraser Anning, Web 2.0 acted as a place of reassurance for myself and other users since we were able to understand that fortunately, the majority of people do not share his attitude towards the Christchurch attacks.
Thanks again for reading and commenting, Stephen! 🙂
No problems Devyn.
I also think mainstream media may think our generation are too naive to have such a substantial opinion in society. Notice the lack of new faces around journalism and in parliament, there are really no role models for this generation and younger to really look up to in this regard. The fact media outlets generally condemned, or at best questioned the Climate Strike might have been the best possible outcome, although the first one was sadly overshadowed by the horrific events in Christchurch.
Continuing on this discussion in relation to Web 2.0, social media has also opened up the opportunity for social activism from individuals who you wouldn’t expect to be leading the way. For example, the instigator for this #climatestrike movement was a sixteen-year-old Swedish girl called Greta Thunberg. She has 610K followers on Twitter and was invited to do a TED Talk on this issue in February this year. Without Web 2.0 and social media, her chances of getting her campaign onto a wider community would have been far more improbable. This also goes back to my point regarding users being able to take against issues they are passionate about in my previous comment.
Greta Thunberg’s Twitter: https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg
Her TEDTalk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2QxFM9y0tY&feature=youtu.be
Yes, I agree with you that mainstream media considers us too naive.
Thanks again for your contribution, Stephen!
I’ll be sure to check out Greta’s TEDTalk!
Fair to say the recent election outcome further outlines the Everest-type mountain our generation faces. Even with our activism against Climate Change, it did virtually nothing in altering the bigger picture.
Hi Devyn,
What an insightful paper! I really enjoyed having a read of this – it was an area of study I don’t know too much about, so it gave me a lot to think about. I especially enjoyed the way you challenge slacktivism (both in your paper, and in your comments), and how you believe it not to be that individuals are less passionate or determined, but simply utilising the advantages web 2.0 offers. It made me think that even if certain members in online communities are only ‘slacktively’ engaging with the issues at hand – recent news updates, live videos or other multimedia could help keep users motivated.
One question I have for you, is did you find the misrepresentation of fact/ fake news to be an issue in online activism? I’m interested to see if – as these debates occur over the internet, and are therefore on a medium where users can quickly research – contain higher validity as people are thinking more closely about what they’re saying? Or whether people are taking an issue and running with it, perhaps generalising or making incorrect assumptions?
Look forward to reading your reply,
Miranda
Hi Miranda,
Thank you for taking the time to read my paper!
I love your point about multimedia keeping users motivated, and I think this is very true!
I think to an extent there is a degree of generalisation and incorrect assumptions being made in online discourse, however, in my research, I learnt that multiple social network sites are developing new affordances to curb the dissemination of fake news and misleading information. For example, the Correct the Record initiative aims to bring the “journalistic tradition of correction into social media” (Perrigo, 2019). Perrigo’s article is actually very interesting and discusses this further if you’d like to check it out here http://time.com/5540995/correct-the-record-polling-fake-news/.
While it is not hard to imagine that the misrepresentation of fact occurs in online activism, I think it is important to note that the public nature of social network sites and the affordances which facilitate these online discussions allow users with the correct information to educate or at least make those who are spreading false facts aware of their misunderstanding. I think there is also a degree of validity in online activism as with the #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo movement, people are sharing their own first-hand experiences with these issues, providing primary accounts and sources to online activism.
I hope I answered your questions!
Thanks again, Miranda!
Devyn 🙂
Hey,
Great conference paper. It was not an area of study, I had placed a particular focus on. It definitely opened my eyes to the capabilities of statements that can be shared throughout Web 2.0.
Do you think journalists facilitate the sharing and retweeting of content?
Do you think journalists contribute to the notion of slactivisim?
Cheers,
Aleighsha
Hi Aleighsha,
Thank you for your comment!
As we saw with the #MeToo movement, working-class women and men shared their experience with sexual assault in the workplace, highlighting the role of ordinary users in facilitating the sharing and retweeting of content. Thus, I think it is primarily these users who share and retweet content, rather than journalists. At the time when this movement reached its height, however, journalists were reporting on the growing movement. I think journalists, in this sense, only facilitate the sharing of content by other users as they use multiple platforms to inform readers on current events such as the #MeToo protests; by doing so, they encourage others to participate.
Then, if journalists encourage a wide array of users to participate in activist movements, I can see how some may argue that this causes a degree of slacktivism. However, I still believe that only those with real motivation and passion will engage in activist movements, utilising the affordances of Web 2.0 to do so. Ultimately, I think journalists do not contribute to the notion of slacktivism; instead, they help passionate users find appropriate activist movements to partake in. What do you think?
Thanks again for reading and commenting on my paper!
Devyn 🙂
Hi Devyn,
Great paper! I particularly enjoyed your example of Frasier Anning, it just goes to show how internet outrage can lead to real word effects in the web 2.0 landscape. On this note, I wonder if in your research if you found anything about “cancel culture” , this is the phenomenon whereby someone or something is exposed or shown to be bad on the internet, and then you have a lot of people jumping on the bandwagon, denouncing them and saying that they’re “cancelled” . This week it’s happening to James Charles who was the subject of my own conference paper. It seems to me that the action of “cancelling” someone online can be seen as a kind of distortion of online activism; a lot of the actions are the same (sharing information, rallying around a cause, using hashtags to spread the message) but the motivation is different. I wonder if you have any thoughts on this?
Hi CSligh,
It is interesting that you make the connection between the situation around James Charles and activism as I was also thinking the same! When I had first started writing this paper, I went into it with the idea that Web 2.0 has created a new form of activism in the way, as social media users, we are able to quickly and quite significantly impact a person’s reputation. As alluded to with my discussion of Fraser Anning, users circulated messages about him that (rightfully) placed him in a negative light, and I would argue that his reputation has now been tainted due to the collective efforts of those online. This, I believe, is extremely similar to James Charles. Even though I did not come across this specifically in my research, through social media users sharing Tati’s video on different platforms, by using the #JamesCharlesisoverparty and #ByeSister, and even unsubscribing, I would argue that the collective action evident in this example of cancel culture is a form of activism!
Thank you for your thought-provoking comment!
Devyn 🙂
Hi Devyn,
I appreciate how well-written your paper is! Very well researched and an interesting read!
I would like to pose a question that critically links our conference papers together (my paper is Indigenous Australians remain disadvantaged despite equality web offers).
You argue that SNS encourage people to participate in discourse around societal issues which ultimately leads to change through activism. I agree with this to some extent, but what is your opinion on the abilities of disadvantaged groups, like Indigenous people, to create change through online activism? Do they have equal opportunities to participate in online activism and create change as other groups in society?
In my opinion, Indigenous peoples and other disadvantaged groups are not fortunate enough to have equal opportunities to participate in such online activities for a number of reasons.
I look forward to your response. Thanks!
Hi AHanley,
Since reading your paper a few days ago, I am now aware of the disadvantages and inequalities Indigenous Australians face when using the Web. As such, I do see that they do not have an equal opportunity in participating in online activism. However, as online platforms allow for collaboration, I think it may fall upon those Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians who have access to come together to represent those who do not share the same opportunities and raise awareness of this inequality (as you have done so).
Thank you for your thoughtful comment,
Devyn 🙂
Hey Devyn,
Your paper was very well written, including some great examples, insights and sources. I particularly enjoyed reading about the #Metoo movement and how it is challenging “slacktavism”. I one 100% think that the #Metoo movement has proven to many that activism on Web 2.0 can have major impacts, of course both good and bad. I think the fact that so many women and even men, came forward with their stories on these platforms greatly increased the discussion about such a prevalent issue.
Recently, there has been an outcry of rage across the globe over some American states making abortions illegal. Looking to twitter the hashtag of #AbortionIsAWomansRight is trending with almost 350k tweets. People are using their voices online to speak up and take action. Do you think with so many people using twitter as a means of sharing their outrage over such an issue it could possibly lead to a reversal of the law or maybe a change?
Thanks,
Bronte 🙂
Hi Bronte,
Thank you for taking the time to read my paper, and for your kind words!
What a great example! The criminalisation of abortions in Alabama and Georgia has caused widespread protests and feelings of indignation among women, though men have expressed their disgust as well, and I would hope that our efforts on social network sites do lead to a revision or change.
As Vegh (as cited in Harlow, 2011) argues, raising awareness is the first step in activism aiming to elicit change. As of now, I think the fact that we are using Twitter and other social network sites to raise awareness in Australia about the new “heartbeat bills” in America is creating a foundation for collective action to develop. Hopefully, this spreading of information online will encourage American citizens to reflect on their own values, to become educated on the policies of their local and state government, and participate in upcoming elections in order to rid of or avoid these laws.
Overall, I think yes, our efforts on social network sites such as Twitter will most likely see a revision of the law due to the way we are raising awareness of the issue which may cause a bottom-up change to occur in the form of who is elected in state elections, rather than those in power revoking these laws.
Thanks again for your contribution, Bronte!
Devyn 🙂
Hi Devyn,
This paper was very interesting and informative, I haven’t looked into slacktivism too much as a concept so it was great to read about it and how online activism is perceived in general. I think it’s great that we’re starting to see a shift away from people viewing online activism as pointless and young people especially are benefiting positively from engagement with it and creating real awareness.
It’s incredible that the MeToo hashtag was used 19 million times as it shows people really do care about raising awareness for these issues and this clearly had a positive effect in people coming out with their experiences. From what I’ve seen it seems like people are believing more and more in online activism and it is becoming more powerful, such that it makes change in the real world, do you think newer and future generations will continue to make effective use of hashtags such as MeToo for activism?
Your discussion on Twitter being a place where comments by prominent people can be shared within minutes was interesting as well. Do you think that this is making some online news outlets and some forms of traditional journalism redundant? As Twitter provides such an immediate spreading of different information in a much more casual way, but in a much more accessible way especially to younger people who are familiar with it.
Thanks for the great read, Louis
Hi LMamotte,
Thank you for taking the time to read and comment on my paper!
I do think newer and future generations will continue to make effective use of hashtags, as Bronte alluded to above with the recent #AbortionsIsAWomansRight and also with the #YouKnowMe movement whereby women share their own stories and experiences with abortion, it is evident that since the #MeToo movement in 2017/18, the use of hashtags is still very common! I don’t think we will see a change in this any time soon!
In response to your question about journalism becoming redundant, I definitely think Twitter has allowed for a form of citizen journalism to emerge. As you suggest, we don’t necessarily need to rely on journalists to disseminate information anymore, we do have the tools to do so for ourselves, especially as a younger generation who is technologically literate and social media has become the main way we consume news. However, I do not think traditional forms of journalism are becoming redundant. I think we still have a tendency to trust journalists’ articles more so than others’ tweets online. Personally, I always research major events and movements further for contextual information, and I usually read journalists’ articles to do so. Do you consume news predominantly through social media, or do you still find yourself reading articles written by journalists?
Thanks again,
Devyn 🙂
Hi Devyn,
I really enjoyed reading your paper. Indeed, web 2.0 has signalled a change in the way people participate and contribute in civic engagement. Your paper reminds me of the youth-led-gun-control movement (March for our Lives) which began after the mass shooting in a high school in Parkland, Florida. Social media was definitely a major component of the movement’s success. With a handful of tweets, the young survivors had effectively presented their opinions and took control of the narrative. This social media activism had eventually garnered a worldwide attention and eventually new gun safety laws were passed.
However, some governmental authorities have intensified internet filtering or blocked access to certain websites to slow down activism. In the long run, this may contribute to a decline in the participation of activists. What are your views on this whole situation?
Thanks,
Shameema
Hi Shameema,
Thank you for taking the time out of your day to read and comment on my paper!
You have contributed some really great insights, the March for our Lives movement is a great example of utilising web 2.0 to raise awareness around an issue as important as gun laws!
This is a really great point to make and question! It is definitely true that governmental authorities, mostly outside of Australia, have been attempting to monitor and slow down activist movements online. However, as demonstrated with China and the online distribution of the controversial documentary Under the Dome, citizens will always find an online space to convene, share, and participate in forms of activism, regardless of the strict measures set in place. Therefore, I think the visibility of these online forms of activism will decrease, but ultimately, it can still be found. What are your thoughts?
Thank you,
Devyn 🙂
Hi Devyn,
I totally agree with you. This reminds me of how Chinese authorities jailed five feminists’ activists for speaking against sexual harassment on subways and buses. Though China may not have freedom of the press, independent judiciary and even have the most aggressive system of Internet censorship, many are still prone to participate in movements to confront the society’s salient problems.
Thank you,
Shameema
Devyn this was such an interesting read! What you said about slacktivism was something I’m kind of guilty of myself but I think since a lot of young people are looking at their phones these days instead of anything else, I guess online activism can have some huge influence in how we think. On the topic of that, do you think that because of this algorithm we end up sort of living in a bubble? I consider myself as a Greens supporter for example and so are all my friends therefore all I see on my Facebook feed are Greens posts and are very much anti-liberal so I was very shocked when they won the election even though there are probably a lot of people out there who support liberal. I simply just had no idea because I was in my own little social media bubble. Do you think that we live in some kind of echo chamber and what effects would this have on future elections?
Hi OAbuyabor,
Thanks for taking the time to read my paper and leave your thoughts! I think we do live in a sort of echo chamber and I think those that take the elections less seriously will not invest time in ensuring they get out of this echo chamber and view the policies of all parties. Some parties may in fact reinforce this echo chamber however with the use of advertising and active engagement on social media, but it is worth noting that I believe an invested voter would find ways to overcome this. In future elections, I think there will be more of a responsibility on voters to become aware of this echo chamber and ensure they are being exposed to all parties in order to make an informed choice.
Thanks,
Devyn
I think that’s so true and I think a lot of voters are definitely aware of this but it makes me think about the ones who aren’t invested and simply think of the election as a chore so they wont get fined. There are a lot of people like that who will be swayed by the first thing they see and eventually decide on hat and get it over with. It sucks because it becomes a domino effect where one opinion put online can change a lot of peoples mind. It sort of reminds me of when Trump won the presidential election and how shocked we were by that. What we didn’t realize was that US has a lot of voters not necessarily heard in mainstream media that are very much Republican but I guess its a world we just didn’t know about.
Hi Devyn,
I thought youre paper was very insightful and focuses on a very relevant issue within a modernised society that has instantaneous communication.
This is a subject i somewhat cover in my own paper except from the angle that due to the rapid spread of information fake news and misinformation can lead to large majorities being wholely uninformed.
Overall a good paper that opens the discussion up about slacktivism and how the hashtag system is being used for social movements on platforms like Twitter.
Hi JPetch,
Thank you for your kind words.
Have you ever used a hashtag to engage in activism online?
Thanks 🙂