issues, but activism through social media does not solve any of the problems the issues of concern are trying to support. Also he argues that social media create weak ties among people. I am of two minds regarding Gladwell’s claim regarding social media activism and the ties it creates. On the one hand, I agree that activism through social media has its limits. On the other hand, I feel social media is an excellent way for connections to be made. Activism though social media allows is beneficial for creating awareness but does not involve any high risks to the users.
Gladwell discusses the high risk activism going on during the Civil Right movement (Gladwell). Supporters went out and risked their lives for a cause they believed in through boycotts and sit-ins. Social media cannot provide the same high risk activism seen from back then. I agree that social media cannot provide the same high risk activism; my experience in activism through social media confirms it. During the summer of 2014, the “Ice-Bucket Challenge” was a massive phenomenon online. It was done to raise money for the ALS Association. So many trying to escape the summer heat dumped a bucket of ice water on their head and posted it on social media in support of the cause. Some did donate money to the foundation, but most people simply just did it to pour cold water on their friends head. There was no actual risk, but people felt as though they were making a difference. Social media makes people feel better about themselves thanks to the support a certain cause, but in reality users of social media are not real …show more content…
activist. Another limit of activism through social media is the lack of structure it has. Social media activism has no sense of organization or leadership. According to Gladwell, “Networks don’t have a centralized leadership structure and clear lines of authority, they have real difficulty reaching consensus and setting goals (Gladwell).” Having difficulty to agree and establish goals for an organization can be problematic. This leaves networks to be extremely vulnerable since they cannot set specific goals and complete them effectively. I agree that social media lack the organization required to properly execute an aim for a group; it is quite obvious that since anyone can participate in social media sites and simply the vast number of people online it would be complicated to achieve anything. Even with a small group of people working on a project in person the difficulties of working with a group of people can be seen. Social media increases the amount of people to great lengths. So using social media as a platform for activism can prevent change from happening. Social media allows for the creation of strong ties between people. The internet allows us to interact with new people and learn new things. Gladwell insists that “the platforms of social media are built around weak ties (Gladwell).” Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter allow users to become “friends” with those that live miles away. Gladwell feels as though these connections made through these sites form weak ties since the people are not close in contact. Whereas Gladwell provides ample evidence that social media sites create weak ties, Zeynep Tufecki discussion on Gladwell’s assertion convinces me that social media does not in fact only create weak ties. Tufecki argues “strong ties become weak over time and vice-versa (Tufecki).” The internet allows people to connect so at first the ties between them are weak and as time progresses they become strong; it is like any normal human interaction. At first, you may not know a person, but as time goes on you become closer to them. The only difference is that this exchange is happening online. Gladwell is right in regards to his claims of social media creating weak ties, but he forgets to observe how over time those weak ties can become strong. Digital natives may not be completely thrilled with the claims Gladwell has made. Some may say, “Social media does have risks!” or “Social media can create real change!” Digital natives regard social media as a useful tool, but they do not realize change that can be done without it. Events like the Civil Rights Movement and American Revolution created change without the use of technology. There is no risk to clicking on a link to promote a cause or tweeting one’s opinion about a current event. Real activism involves putting something meaningful on the line or speaking out against a popular idea. Using social media allows people to hide behind a screen. Social media activism does not equate to real activism due to the fact that in reality there is no real change. Malcolm Gladwell has contributed a great deal to the conversation of social media activism.
He contributes a compelling argument that social media is a limiting platform and real activism involves actual risk holds true today. Clicking a button does not make one an activist. Despite these claims, I think Gladwell is mistaken regarding the weak and strong ties social media can create. Social media is a way for people to connect and become closer. Social media has grown to be a controversial topic and it continues to be debated. Hopefully, we can find a way to make social media a more effective platform for change in the
world.