“Social media makes it easier for activists to express themselves and makes it harder for that expression to have an impact” (Gladwell, 2010 , p.49). Discuss critically. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayIt is clear that the growing power of the Internet and social media in the 21st century has had a significant impact on activism and social movements. Some believe that social media allows for a bottom-up approach to activism and provides marginalized individuals with a platform to voice their concerns and issues, often related to inequality within society. However, the extent to which activism via social media has had an impact on society is debated. Some scholars such as Shirky (2011) take a techno-optimistic approach, arguing that social media makes it easier for individuals to participate in social movements and makes it easier for these social movements to have a lasting impact on society. At the same time, scholars such as Gladwell (2010) take a techno-skeptical approach, arguing that although social media facilitates activist expression, their expression has little impact on contemporary society and politics. This essay will critically discuss the idea that “social media makes it easier for activists to express themselves and more difficult for that expression to have an impact” (Gladwell, 2010), examining a series of arguments, taking at both the techno-optimists and the techno-optimists. techno-skeptical positions. In the first part of my essay, I will discuss Gladwell's views regarding social media activism, and then I will discuss Morozov's "slacktivism" argument and the debate surrounding it. In the second part of this essay, I will discuss the techno-optimistic arguments of scholars such as Shirky. I will then discuss Fenton’s (2012) analysis of these arguments and his views regarding the accessibility of social media. Gladwell (2010) argues that social media “makes it easier for activists to express themselves and makes it more difficult for activists to express that expression.” have any impact” (Gladwell, 2010). The increasing accessibility of social media means that various questions are constantly being raised by users. As a result, social media does not give enough attention to issues to create change and have a lasting impact on society. Gladwell (2010) goes on to argue that social media is not “a natural enemy of the status quo” and is “well suited to making the existing social order more effective” (ibid.). We therefore argue that, to the extent that social media provides a platform accessible to all, social media provides a platform for regressive views, rather than a platform for progressive views alone. Therefore, it can be argued that social media can contribute to maintaining the status quo in societies as well as social change. However, this does not mean that social media does not help activists create lasting political and social impact. In his article “Brave New World of Slacktivism,” Evgeny Morozov (2009) defines the term “slacktivism” as “a feeling of well-being online.” activism that has no political or social impact. This gives those who participate in 'slacktivist' campaigns the illusion of having a significant impact on the world without requiring anything more than joining a Facebook group. (Morozov, 2009). This therefore supports Gladwell's view that although social mediacan help activists express themselves, they do not create lasting impact. Jodi Dean (2005) argues that slacktivism results in post-politics, a disengagement from real activism, because "busy people may think they are active – technology will act for them, alleviating their guilt while keeping them busy." ensuring that nothing will change too much. » (Dean, 2005). Individuals who are disengaged from politics and don't have the time to engage in "real" activism may feel like they're participating "by sending an email, signing a petition, responding to an article on a blog, people can feel political. And this sentiment nourishes communicative capitalism to the extent that it leaves behind time-consuming, incremental and risky political efforts. (Dean, 2005). Dean (2005) goes on to argue that activism that takes place on social media, or “slacktivism,” is not a form of “activism” and does not result in social or political change. Dean states: “It is a refusal to take a position, to venture into the dangerous territory of politicization” (Dean, 2005). Therefore, according to Dean, social media simply allows individuals to "pretend" to participate in social activism, rather than facilitating active participation and assistance in social movements in order to create lasting change. Fenton (2012) describes “slacktivism” as “an easy-to-implement policy where you are just a click away from a petition; a form of technology that encourages issue creep whereby individuals shift their attention from one issue to another or from one website to another with little or no engagement” (Fenton, 2012. However, Fenton argues that this view ignores experiences of political solidarity, Shirky (2011), argues that Morozov's view is irrelevant in the debate on the impact of social media on activism and social movements, because. it ignores the impact that engaged activists can have using social media “The fact that barely engaged actors cannot make their way to a better world does not mean that engaged actors cannot. cannot use social media effectively” (Shirky, 2011) Therefore, Shirky believes that social media provides us with a democratic platform and the freedom to highlight issues and contribute to social change, and publish online. it’s about connecting with others. With the advent of globally accessible publishing, freedom of expression is now freedom of the press, and freedom of the press is freedom of assembly. Social media can therefore be used to create solidarity and organize protests and occupations. Various social movements in the 21st century have used the Internet and social media to their advantage, such as the Arab Spring in 2011 and the Indignados/15-M movement in 2011. It is therefore clear that social media has had a significant impact on activism and social movements. Manuel Castells supports the techno-optimist position, arguing that yes, social media facilitates activist expression in the context of protests and revolutions. Fuchs (2012) defines protest as “a negotiation of existing structures that result in frictions and problems and a political struggle that aims at the transformation of certain aspects of society or society as a whole” (Fuchs, 2012). Castells (2012) asserts that communicative power is arguably the most important form of power in contemporary society. Thus, social media facilitate the expression of activists, because according to Castells (2012), the Internet and social media allow the construction of communicative autonomy. Castells (2012)also argues that the Internet is necessary for the occupation of spaces, used as a form of social protest. According to Castells, another role of the Internet in times of protest and revolution is to provide activists with a platform to share emotions on particular issues, these emotions become collective emotions which become collective action. “The Internet provided a safe space where networks of outrage and hope connected. Network forms in cyberspace have extended their reach to urban space. (Castell, 2012). Castells therefore supports Shirky's view that social media creates political solidarity and facilitates the organization of social movements. However, Fuchs (2012) argues that collective social action often has little effect, or simply highlights existing problems, but fails to create lasting change. Fuchs (2012) goes on to argue that social change brought about by social media activism depends on context, for example "power relations, resources, mobilization", capabilities, strategies and tactics as well as complex outcomes and indeterminate struggles. (Fuchs, 2012). Fuchs goes on to argue that social media exists in a contradictory society, consisting of class conflicts, racial conflicts, and various other conflicts between dominant and dominated groups. Therefore, Fuchs believes that social media has a contradictory character: "they do not necessarily and automatically support/amplify or dampen/limit rebellions, but rather present contradictory potentials that conflict with state influences , ideology and capitalism. (Fuchs, 2012). In his chapter “Internet and Radical Politics,” Fenton highlights a variety of different perspectives regarding the debate over the impact of social media on activism. Some believe that social media, rather than contributing to solidarity and collective action, highlights the fragmentation of contemporary politics that makes it difficult to organize collective social movements. Highlighting this, Fenton (2012) shows how social media can make activism more difficult, rather than easier. However, Fenton also argues that when the Internet is used to present radical and oppositional arguments, it serves as a tool for social change. Some argue that this use of the Internet allows activists to raise societal awareness of issues and give marginalized groups a voice and social empowerment while also allowing individual activists to organize. Fenton therefore argues that the Internet can be used as a tool for activism and social change. However, Fenton (2012) argues that there is a “digital divide”. Those who actively use the Internet are often younger, more educated, and wealthier than those who do not use it. They are also typically male and likely live in cities (Fenton, 2012). There are also differences between Internet access in developing and developed countries, as well as “traditional divisions between the well-educated middle class that dominates public discourse” (Fenton, 2012). Therefore, it can be argued that social media fails to provide marginalized groups with a platform to express their issues, and thus social media only facilitates the expression of privileged individuals. For this reason, it can be argued that social media does not facilitate the expression of all activists, but that the expression of activism of privileged individuals can have an impact. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a :