Abstract: Online networks are some of the most used forms of communication within contemporary society. In regards to social change movements and politics however, they are also used as a tool to spread messaging, create awareness and overall educate people who otherwise wouldn’t have access to this specific kind of information about differing social causes. However, while the prevailing thought that online social networks can and are being used effectively amongst social movements, this paper instead showcases how they halt progress for these causes within the real world. As online social networks facilitate a variety of behaviours from such things as the sharing economy, misinformation as well as algorithmic selective information and creation of memes as a form of disenfranchisement from social movements. In this paper, I argue that while online social networks can be a tool for effectively political social messaging to encourage real world action within social movements, currently they are being utilised for gratification, entertainment and misinformation.
Full Text:
Online networks and their use for social change is a topic that is often discussed amongst political movements. However, what is not discussed revolves around the idea of wanting to participate in online social networks for social change, in place of real-world action within these social movements. Papacharissi (2011) states that social networking sites have created the ability to inhibit similar if not the same behaviours offline as they would within an online environment (p. 314). But despite this statement, the reality of the situation is quite different. On a professional level such as in the industry of public relations, online social networks have been fantastic at facilitating social interaction and behaviour to promote campaigns online (Papacharissi, 2011, p. 315). Allowing companies to embrace this new form of social connection between themselves and their audiences. But even with this in mind, the online behaviours that exist because of this facilitation, don’t actually begin until offline action is taken to get movements started (Papacharissi, 2011, p. 312). This paper discusses and showcases the environments that online networks are creating for social change promotion, but not building for offline action encouragement or participation with social change movements.
There are three key points about online social networks and the social change within them that demonstrates exactly why those participating in them are not engaging in real world action. The first revolves around the idea of the sharing economy and the instant gratification and recognition of being a part of a social change movement without creating an impact in the real world (Kopacheva, 2021, p. 77). The second idea highlights the role of misinformation and selective information through online social networks, leading people to different ideas of what is the collective viewpoint in a social change movement (Masip, Sua and Ruiz-Caballero, 2020, p. 54). Finally, the disenfranchisement of youth populations within online networks to create effective real world social changes due to the lack of knowledge around political systems despite having access is creating detrimental effects to organisation of movements (Gad, 2015, p. 5). Through this lens, it can be seen how while online networks can facilitate and provoke people to engage with social change on various levels. The lack of follow through when calls to actions begin, showcases the negative effect that these online networks have within the progress of social change movements. As a result, online social networks, through the sharing economy, disinformation environments and disenfranchisement have negatively affected the ways social change progresses and actions taken within it, leading to its effectiveness faltering.
When it comes to online social networks and social change, participation is one of the most important ways people can take part in discussing actions and sharing ideas. Currently however, this sharing of ideas is now taking priority over the action that they are supposed to promote. Kopacheva (2021) states that social media can be an effective tool in organising and mobilising offline political action, however the research to back up this is still largely being conducted (p. 78). The discussion around potential of social change, instead of real actual change, is often discussed when in reference to online networks. Even in major social movements such as Black Lives Matter, online networks played a huge role in creating initial awareness of protests to spring attendance, but theorists/social commenters noticed afterwards that no participation or action such as voting or further protests followed the earlier attendance (Freelon, Marwick and Kreiss, 2020, p. 1-2).
As previously mentioned, the gratification that social media creates through the sharing economy is one that places emphasis on fulfillment of participation in communication, rather than being involved with what is trying to be communicated (Kopacehva, 2021, p. 77). This has shifted what it means to actually be involved within real life social change. The focus now, instead of a building upon communities and organisations of people, is on the life politics of friends and leisure time, instead of civic politics and engagement (Gozzo and Sampugnaro, 2016, p. 760). Gozzo and Sampugnaro (2016) state that political participation has shifted into that something that now focuses on only everyday life exposures and a person’s social sphere, instead of the wider community (p. 772). This, therefore, creates a disconnect amongst people within online networks about what kind of social change matters as well as their want to participate in it. Vizcaino-Laorga, Catalina-Garcia and de Ayala-Lopez (2019) state that despite young people having the skills necessary to work in the digital environment for social change, the fact they are made aware of these issues does not mean they will participate in action for them (p. 556-557). Individuals instead are just happy contributing towards the communication of a cause instead of action, such as protests or canvassing, as they can gain social capital from it within their social sphere (McLean and Fuller, 2016, p. 592). Through this, it can be demonstrated that online networks have had a negative effect on social change due to the prioritisation of the sharing economy instead of in-personal social action.
The rise of misinformation and selective information within the realm of online networks has changed the way social change is viewed, communicated, and acted upon. Musolino, Baum, Freeman, Labonte, Bodini and Sanders (2020) state that online social networks are crucial for building upon a central message as an idea for social change (p. 12). With online networks now however, creating a message is no longer about spreading that information, but convincing people of it as well. But in the case of spreading information online this process does not create the change that people are aiming for such as swaying public opinion on major political issues or even votes for their local representative. Freelon, Marwick and Kreiss (2020) state that while online activism is not detrimental social movements, the misinformation that can come from spreading its ideals may create a long-term problem around the reliability of that movement (p. 5). This isn’t exclusive to any one side of the political spectrum either. While most of the misinformation around online activism does come from a ring wing perspective, left wing social movements are now also growing with misinformation, giving precedent to horseshoe theory which states that each side of politics ends up in similar positions, through different means Freelon, Marwick and Kriess, 2020, p. 4). Through this, it creates an unclear lens of who, what and where to find reliable information about social movements online, leading to inaction in the real world.
In addition, with the introduction of online social network algorithms, selective information is increasingly changing the ways social change is viewed and even the meaning of it entirely (Masip, Sua and Ruiz-Callebro, 2020, p. 54). This creates a questionable environment as despite claims that audiences want to steer clear of information that is argumentative, there is a large willingness to engage with that material if given the opportunity (Masip, Sua and Ruiz-Callebro, 2020, p. 55). By creating this environment, online social networks are not truly facilitating platforms of discussion but instead merely for reasons for people to simply continuing their use of these platform as a means of consuming content. Sinpeng (2017) states that Facebook as one example due to selective information acts as just another echo chamber for ideals within social change movements, leading to inaction as a result (p. 261). Moreover, due to the lack of challenging of ideas within online networks, action is no longer being prioritised. These echo chambers also lead to further polarisation of people’s views within social change movements, leading to online interaction seeming more important than offline engagement (Keller, Honea and Ollivant, 2021, p. 13). This showcases, as a result how misinformation and selective information has impacted social change to encourage a lack of action and engagement with real world participation.
The ways disenfranchised individuals have utilised social networks as a means of new participation digitally but not in person has changed the way we view social ideals and action offline. While not a new manifestation, young people feel disenfranchised by political systems and social change as a whole due to the nature of not feeling like they can have any effect in their surrounding environment (Hart and Henn, 2017, p. 10). The result of this within online social networks, however, leads to something entirely unique to online discourse and communication in memes. Those who felt disenfranchised with the current political system have now created their own way to participate with online networks and the social changes that exist within them (Gad, 2015, p. 5). Buraga and Pavelea (2021) state that memes have become a new way for people in online social networks to engage uniquely with the social change around them (p. 93). Due to this new form of communication coming to the forefront, its impact on social change and introduction of complications to online discourse come with it are alarming. Pedwell (2017) states that memes as a platform, regardless of the online social network, may exist to spread social change online but only in that framework (p. 164).
The limitations of this spread however, vary and through the lens of enacting real action within social change movements are non-existent. Memes in and of themselves are a form of passive participation and while there goal may be to spread ideas, the actual change they seek through their reach has a negating effect on getting individual thoughts altered (Pedwell, 2017, p. 160). The reasons behind why however, showcase a complete understanding as to why there is a lack of action being started due to their creation and sharing online. Burke and Sen (2018) state that despite knowing that these individuals have the capacity to start real world social change through their online network participation, their disenfranchised feelings prevent them from not wanting to take part (p. 8). Hart and Henn (2017) go on further to state that disenfranchised who create and share memes as a form of participation admit to having a very low-level understanding of political systems and processes (p. 1). Understandably this is a problem that needs to be addressed in order to further encourage individuals to participate in real world action. But this does not excuse the behaviour and attitude on display from these individuals as a means to create and spread social change effectively. By looking at this, it is clear how online networks have enabled individuals to participate in an environment that does not promote social change in a realistic setting.
In conclusion, while social media generally has a good reputation for building social capital and relationships, in regard to political or social change, offline participation is crucial for meaningful results (Skoric et al., 2016, as cited by Vizcaino-laorga et al., 2019, p. 557). Online networks through this lens have damaged and altered what it means to create real social change and its impacts will be felt for a long time to come. Whether through aspects of the sharing economy, encouraging participation of sharing related social change movements for social capital and selfish fulfillment reasons instead of for the cause itself. The introduction of misinformation and selective information by online social network algorithms as a means to transform what social change movements are about and their purpose overall. A unique communication model through the introduction of memes as a source of participation for social change without the understanding of its purpose to actually change peoples’ ideas, but instead to simply communicate your thoughts online. All of these aspects contribute towards an environment where online networks have both facilitated and encouraged behaviour that lacks any call to action or real-world change political participation. While a lack of understanding political processes can be understood or even justified, the significance of knowing that change is possible but there is no participation is contradictory of action itself. The potential for online networks to create meaningful social change through its digital environment is possible. But with these current problems listed, time will only tell if this is of enough importance to those who engage in real political action to change it.
References:
Buraga, R., & Pavelea, A., (2021). Memes in Romania: A New Form of Political Participation. Journal of Media Research, 14(2), 91-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.24193/jmr.40.5
Burke, R. B. & Sen, F. A. (2018). Social media choices and uses: Comparing Turkish and American young-adults’ social media activism. Palgrace Communications, 4(1), 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0090-z
Freelon, D., Marwick, A., & Kreiss, D. (2020). False equivalencies: Online activism from left to right. Science, 369, 1197-1201. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abb2428#
Gad, K. A. (2015). The impact of political advertising through social networking sites on Egyptians’ political orientations and choices. International Journal of Information, Business and Management. 7(1), 1-18. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/impact-political-advertising-through-social/docview/1626374132/se-2?accountid=10382
Gozzo, S., & Sampugnaro, R. (2016). What Matters? Changes in European Youth Participation. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 9(3), 748-776. http://dx.doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v9i3p748
Hart, J., & Henn, M. (2017). Neoliberalism and the Unfolding Patterns of Young People’s Political Engagement and Political Participation in Contemporary Britain. Societies, 7(4), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc7040033
Keller, S. N., Honea, J. C., & Ollivant, R. (2021). How Social Media Comments Inform the Promotion of Mask-Wearing and Other COVID-19 Prevention Strategies. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(11), 5624. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115624
Kopacheva, E. (2021). How the Internet has changed participation: Exploring distinctive preconditions of online activism. Communication & Society, 34(2), 67-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.15581/003.34.2.67-85
Masip, P., Suau, J., & Ruiz-Caballero, C. (2020). Incidental Exposure to Non-Like-Minded News through Social Media: Opposing Voices in Echo-Chambers’ News Feeds. Media and Communication, 8(4), 53-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i4.3146
McLean, J. E., & Fuller, S. (2016). Action with(out) activism: understanding digital climate change action. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 36(9), 578-595. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-12-2015-0136
Musolino, C., Baum, F., Freeman, T., Labonté, R., Bodini, C., & Sanders, D. (2020). Global health activists’ lessons on building social movements for Health for All. International Journal for Equity in Health, 19, 1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-020-01232-1
Papacharissi, Z. (2011). Conclusion: A Networked Self. In Z. Papacharissi (ed) A Networked Self: Identity, Community and Culture on Social Network Sites (304-318). Routledge. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/curtin/detail.action?docID=574608)
Pedwell, C. (2017). Mediated habits: images, networked affect and social change. Subjectivity, 10(2), 147-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41286-017-0025-y
Sinpeng, A. (2017). Participatory Inequality in Online and Offline Political Engagement in Thailand. Pacific Affairs, 90(2), 253-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.5509/2017902253
Vizcaíno-Laorga, R., Catalina-García, B., & de Ayala-López, M. L. (2019). Participation and commitment of young people in the digital environment. Uses of social networks and perception of their consequences. Revista Latina De Comunicación Social, (74), 554-572. http://dx.doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2019-1345-28en
Hi Jack, I think you made some good arguments your paper and I agree with the thrust of your argument that online networks do not lead to change in the real-world. I think social media platforms can be useful for organising political movements and raising awareness but for some reason this does not translate into real changes as a lot of time is spent promoting and ‘raising awareness’ rather than engaging with the political system to push reforms. Black Lives Matter is interesting as it was very successful at getting people out on to the streets (or was this more the media showing the murder of George Floyd?), either way there was a real protest but has this made any difference to anyone’s lives, in terms of social and economic material improvements? I don’t see much evidence for this. I also think a lot of people online are engaging in a form of performance, which you allude to in your paper, they are more concerned with being seen to be aligned with the ‘right’ causes, rather than engaging with the cause in the offline world. I guess this is what people have called ‘Slacktivism’ which promotes the idea that you can change the world by retweeting from the comfort of sofa.
I have written a paper on the same topic but coming from different angle. Feel free to have a read.
https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2022/onsc/674/online-activism-does-not-lead-to-material-social-change/
Hi there Philip, thank you for reading my paper. Slacktivism is an interesting term in regards to both of our papers. However the key distinction I want to make about my paper in reference to it is that I’m more focused on the conversion between online and offline social change action rather than just slacktivism in and of itself. Meaning, the online social networks themselves through the points that I mentioned in the paper (sharing economy, disinformation and disenfranchisement) are creating this environment for the people on the platform, rather than the people being actually lazy or unwilling to participate in said causes. This is an important distinction as a lot of people who engage in online social change discourse and “activism” for lack of a better term, ultimately believe that the reality they see online is what is really happening around them, leading to a false sense of progress or action. I don’t believe that it’s the fault of the person individually that contributes towards lack of political action, but instead the platforms themselves. I completely agree with you that the raising awareness portion and organising movements is crucial with these new forms of communications, but like in marketing where you want your customers to click through onto your website, there needs to be a incentive for people to click through or rather participate in real world action through the things they see online within their local community. Thank you again for reading my paper.
Hi Jack, I agree that social media is good for raising awareness of the wider issue, but often there is a lack of action offline. Often times people are making posts on social media for the recognition. I wonder if there is a sense of the bystander effect happening here; someone else will do it.
I think posting for recognition is also extended for corporations. They’re participating in these social media movements for the clout to make themselves look and feel good. For example all the companies that participated in IWD2022 and the Twitter Pay Gap Bot pinged them by displaying gender wage gaps (https://twitter.com/paygapapp). Would like your thoughts on this.
Hi there Ruby,
Thank you for reading my paper.
Yeah I think there is a huge problem with the idea of “posting for recognition” however, the positives of this can be that it further creates awareness around the issues that matter. In addition, it could further create awareness for those who are completely unaware of a social movement that is happening in their local city. While I’m still in full agreement that social media does facilitate a lack of offline action, I do believe that companies participating in this spreading of messaging is still an overall good. While it may not come from a place of genuine support in terms of legislation, creating awareness for the general public is one of the hardest things to do and if companies that people follow are going to spread awareness then I see that as a win. We’re seeing a rise in consumers wanting to buy more ethically, consume more responsibly and overall be more aware of their individual actions. If companies see this as a way to make money then great, but at least they are also contributing towards the overall positive change around social movements as a whole. Of course if they are found to only being do it performatively then they need to be investigated, but those who are doing it as a shift in their production pipeline, should be rewarded by consumers through their purchase of their good/service. Not necessarily praised of course.
Best Regards,
Jack
Hi Jack,
There have been a few papers discussing social media as a Third Place can act as escape from the physical world. As your paper highlights, people seem to keep them separate and this can be a problem for social movements when trying to affect change.
You mention how how there is growing disenfranchisement with political systems and I think this reflects a changing direction of activism. Protests seem to be hit or miss when it comes to affecting any political decision making. Instead awareness goes for a bottom-up approach, rewriting social conventions an hoping regulations eventually follow. It is slow and inefficient but I think this is how people feel is the best avenue for change.
I discuss similar issues in my own paper, with a focus on Reddit. I would love to hear your thoughts:
https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2022/onsc/357/the-burden-of-reddits-architecture-on-social-movements/
Hi there Raymond,
Thank you for taking the time to read my paper.
Yes I have seen this rise in the discussion of “Social Media as a Third Place”. As a person who partakes in political action offline (canvassing, changing my super to more ethical investments, joining my union etc) I really do care about this issue. Protests as least in modern times I see as ineffective as getting your point across, regardless of which side of the political isle you may exist on. But they still serve at least some purpose around spreading awareness of the issue, for better or worse. I definitely will have a read of your paper as I use Reddit daily and would be interested in reading your research and perspective.
Best Regards,
Jack
Hey,
I enjoyed reading your paper discussing a kind of opposite view to my paper on social movements on social networks! I do agree that when it comes to social movements discussed through online platforms there is many who will post about the issues, hashtags or join the trend of spreading “awareness” but are doing it for their own personal gain, to look good or follow the trend at the time. That being said I do believe that social networks provide more good than bad when it comes to helping social movements. I do agree though I would like to see more actual real life change from these movements being implemented than awareness posts etc. It will be interesting to see how this changes in the future! Great paper.
Hi Molly,
Thank you for taking the time to read my paper. The good that social networks provide does indeed help social causes in furthering their awareness and essentially spreading their message to a wider audience. I just wish that offline action was more of a priority for these groups than simple spreading a message online. I completely understand as to why the bad can be overlooked in regards to online social networks, however offline action, despite the online world we live in, whether local, state or federal is one of the key ways we can actually establish these causes within the framework of the law. Giving more help and backing to those who need it the most. As a union member for the last eight years, the support for it online has been amazing, yet whenever I look at union memberships country wide I notice the continuing downfall of the sector. Especially in dangerous sectors such as construction or even something more simple like retail or hospitality. Giving establishments such as the ACTU, ANTaR and Equality Rights Alliance a legal presence to exist in, could help bring him critical protections and funding that workers and underprivileged individuals need during times of crisis or stress. Based on the current data, even looking at the protests in 2020 with movements such as BLM, even the people who contributed towards those movements, didn’t vote in their local elections to reallocate police funding in order to prevent potential further Police Brutality in their area. I am really hoping that Social Media can be used as a great tool for organising, advocating for and creating awareness of issues that matter and should be discussed. Again, thank you for taking the time.
Hi Jack,
I enjoyed reading your paper. I agree that some people who use social media for political action don’t always engage in real world political movements. However, I believe that some people who use social media for political action typically wouldn’t be the type of people who engage in political action offline, therefore their contribution to social media political action is in fact helping offline political movements, at least for the spread of awareness. Do you agree? Why or why not? I also believe that slacktivism is something that has clearly presented itself on social media. Some people believe they can simply share or use a hashtag and that is enough political participation for them. I think the three key points you’ve outlined do facilitate slacktivism so there isn’t really a distinction between them. What do you think? And why do you think slacktivism is preventing the conversion between online and offline social change? I agree that offline participation is crucial for meaningful results, however, social media is a powerful tool when it comes to political action. There are online social movements that have strengthened offline movements beyond what they would have been if social media did not exist. Look at #BabaeAko, #bringbackourgirls and #aufschrei. #BabaeAko was also recognised as one of Time Magazine’s “25 Most Influential People on the Internet in 2018” (Alingasa & Ofreneo, 2020) and #Aufschrei won a media award for how it influenced the German public sphere. How would you suggest that social media is used to incite real/offline political action?
This paper talks about identity but I think it’s an interesting read and it outlines the powerful impact that hashtags can have in political activism and actually facilitating offline action. Alingasa, T & Ofreneo, M. (2020). “Fearless, powerful, Filipino”: Identity positioning in the hashtag activism of #BabaeAko. Feminist Media Studies. 1-17. https://doi-org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1080/14680777.2020.1791927
Cheers
Chantal
Hi there Chantal,
Thank you for reading my paper.
I do think that people who originally wouldn’t be interested in offline political action are now engaging in online political access due to the accessibility of social media platforms, but I don’t think it’s a good thing in sense of creating real world change. Spreading awareness is great in and of itself, but it creates an environment where they feel like they are participating in the contribution to the action that people on the ground are actually doing. While creating awareness is a key pillar to political action, offline or online, this false sense of advocacy is dangerous and as already seen with movements such as BLM, as soon as the offline action is gone, policy change and legislation, goes back to normal. When I think about “slacktivism” in my paper I don’t think I’m referring to it directly as I think slacktivism infers a lot of “we want to participate in political action, but we don’t actually want to do anything physically” but what I’m arguing is around how people outside this political sphere or are even remotely aware of these issues react to movements when seen online. As they think that simply sharing or hashtagging a post is “participation” when they see others do it. I think “slacktivism” for lack of a better term prevents this conversion as it allows people to feel involved without any repercussions to themselves personally. Creating that stimulus loop of dopamine and serotonin from the algorithm and tells them “yes good job, you’re a part of the right side or history” despite the real world materially being effected. I agree with you in the sense of they have strengthened social movements, I don’t think that’s really up for debate personally. But strengthening a movement and improving it’s effectiveness are two entirely separate things. Even your example of hashtags and recognition in “25 Most Influential People on the Internet in 2018” is great, but this is constantly brought up as “made people think about this issue”. Making people think about this issue is one thing and I entirely support creating awareness around issues. But I think there needs to be better information given, both to and from organisers to people so they can help find ways to interact in real life around these issues. Even something as simple as donating to charity, changing your bank account provider or even super account are huge ways to create an impact without literally any work needing to be done individuals. As mentioned in my paper, social media constantly has this idea of “having potential to create social change” yet the research to suggest such change is non-existent (at the moment) or a large scale level. But in saying that a lot of people want change over night without understanding the minutia of the political system they exist in. This is an incredibly complex topic that has been discussed for decades,
I do think this is much of a western problem however, rather than globally due to the affordances western countries have around their society and I think in other regions of the world, these platforms can be used (and have been used) to create effect. But of course living in Australia haha, this issue more or less relates to the environment around me. Regardless, incredibly insightful comment and thank you for taking the time to respond to my paper.
Regards,
Jack
Hi Jack,
Fair points. I suppose social media does shield “online activists” from the repercussions of offline protests, preventing them from becoming fully immersed in causes and facilitating meaningful political action. I guess this begs the question: what level of involvement must you have to be a protester? Do you believe there’s different levels of protesters or do you believe that online and offline participants in political movements are completely separate from one another?
Cheers,
Chantal
Hi Chantal,
Thank you for replying to my comment.
Yeah I think there is a level of involvement you have to partake in as a protester, but depends on a variety of factors. From level of importance for the issue to you personally, socially and economically. Whether or not you could help bring in more people to the movement by taking a larger role (organising for example etc). If the average 9-5 worker is going to a protest on the weekend because it’s something they believe in, but then Monday-Friday just donating and sharing stuff on social media, personally that would fit my needs of “this person cares deeply about the issue and is doing actions that are within their means reasonably to forward this cause”. I don’t believe the we need to separate the offline and online actions of political movements. But instead utilise them and intertwine them more. Both have incredibly uses for creating change, but the issue currently is that one is creating more change than the other. While having the trending page on Twitter is great, only 330 million people use it. Which for countries like America, only makes up 80 million of their userbase in a country with 380 million people. There are definitely some movements that exist separately from one another offline and online, as previously stated, there needs to be a representation of both. Thank you for taking the time to reply.
Regards,
Jack
Hi Jack,
Your paper was an interesting read, especially since you mentioned it had a different point of view to my own. I’d like to take this moment to clarify that my paper is more so focused on the scalability social media provides online advocacy movements, rather than the offline impact it can provide. So in that sense, I don’t think our papers are opposing, just focused on different elements of online social movements. In saying that, how do you think we can combat the spreading of misinformation? Do you think that a social change movement could survive if run entirely offline? I’d be curious to know whether there’s a certain social media platform you found to perpetuate misinformation more so than other platforms? If not understanding the relevant political systems is a contributing factor to the lack of tangible action, do you have any ideas on how we as a society could better educate the people on the political landscape? I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.
Kiah.
Hi there Kiah,
Thank you for taking the time to read my paper.
Honestly, combating the spreading of misinformation is an incredibly hard task. Due to the nature of social media platforms we are seeing extreme views being now taken down as enough pressure of shareholders and consumers is helping enable companies to ban both bad faith actors as well as misinformation spreaders off the platforms themselves. I think creating some sort of economic incentive for companies that platform political discussion or information in an honest (which in this day in age is entirely subjective) manner would help create a reason for companies to combat the spreading of misinformation. Education secondly plays a huge role as social media literacy as well as general media literacy is incredibly important in how people interact with the things they consume offline and online. Teaching people about rhetorical strategies, sourcing and some base level of critical thinking is crucial for this to happen. I don’t think one platform is worse than the other when it comes to spreading misinformation as I think all of them play a role in it. As for educating people on the political system. Again it’s an incredibly hard question. Some have suggested more integrated learning within High School education before graduation (before age of voting) would help contribute towards that. I would be interested in seeing what experts within political science and education believe on this subject as they would have it on better authority to make suggestions. While I personally don’t have solutions to any of these problems, my best course of action it to just try something, see if it makes a difference in any sort of way and then make changes accordingly. As aforementioned, I usually defer to the experts on this matter as they have a better idea as to what could be trialled and tested.
Political and social movements in general are a fascinating topic, but are also incredibly complex and require decades of study. But as I mentioned in your paper there are means of creating and taking action offline that would help people today rather than just asking them to wait for big sweeping changes that they need now.
Regards,
Jack
Hi Jack,
You make a good point about extreme viewpoints being targeted, discredited and/or removed. I think it’s curious to consider in relation to social media platforms supposedly providing individuals a freedom to explore their own personas and performed selves. If social media platforms take down extremist views and accounts spreading misinformation, do those accounts really have the freedom to explore themselves and their identities without judgement/punishment?
I agree with you that whilst we might not know what exactly the best path forward may be, we can at least understand that we do need to move forward, that real life action is needed to support and encourage the general population to learn and develop our society’s understandings of the current political climate.
Thank you for your response,
Kiah.