Slacktivism and Clicktivism debate? You’re boring me.

I wrote a quick blog post Tuesday on the MAP site (“Clicktivism Schmicktivism.  Move on, literally.”) in response to Micah White’s article in the Guardian on Clicktivism and the demise of Digital Activism. It similarly compared digital activism and marketing, but added a bit about strategy.  You can check it out to read more.

I wanted to make a quick comment on an issue that was sparked by an excerpt of  Esra’a's blog post on the same:

“When you are a housewife with 5 kids, a fulltime job, financial issues, and mismanaged stress, supporting Iran or Kyrgyzstan or China is not going to be your #1 priority. But you still care – so you RT a link. Or two. And then three. There is nothing wrong with that, it’s actually encouraged to get involved in every “little” way you can, and tweeting counts. This is the only way you can tap into audiences that would otherwise not be inspired to think and possibly act upon these global issues that affect us all.” – Esra’a Al Shafei, Is digital activism ruined?

I’ve gotten really tired of these labels such as “Slactivism” and now “Clicktivism,” because I think most of them miss the point. They’re usually referencing

  1. What people are calling themselves (“You think you’re an activist just because you clicked?”) or
  2. When people claim large numbers (“You think your 10 000 Twitter followers means anything?”)

Critics are too caught up in their own egos as digital activists and repeatedly fail to address what those numbers really mean. When you have 10 000 Twitter followers, if you convert just 1% of those into true, passionate and active supporters, that could be 100 possible volunteers or donors! So if that passionate but busy housewife who can only tweet something RTs to someone who might have and equal amount of passion but more time who can get up go, in my book, that’s fantastic, and couldn’t have been done with your “clicktivist.”

As I mentioned in my article on the MAP site, there are bad Digital Activism campaigns, just as there are bad marketing campaigns.  However, there are many instances in which numbers and clicks can be used very successfully and we shouldn’t criticize campaigns or people simply because they “just clicked.”

Since it’s Sunday night, I’ll stop here for now, but wanted to throw these thoughts out there.

What do you think?  Can there be value in these campaigns if done with the “right” strategy?  Are the critics of these campaigns right?

Enhanced by Zemanta

SXSW Panel: Ending the Lazy Discourse of Digital Activism (Vote if you like it!)

I’ve submitted a panel for SXSW, and if you like the topic (and only if you like it, as I don’t support having a popularity contest about it, as it does no one any good!), please consider giving us a vote!

Ending the Lazy Discourse of Digital Activism

Description

We’ve been asking the same questions about digital activism for years now: Does digital technology give activists or repressive governments an advantage? Are these technologies actually changing the dynamics of political or social power or is it just hype? We’ve got cyber-utopians and cyber-pessimists, but are both overstating their cases? We’ve dissected siloed cases of digital activism to death – the Iranian Revolution, the No Mas FARC Facebook page – but have we developed any long-lasting frameworks? But it doesn’t seem like we’re getting any closer to the answers. What do we really know about digital activism anyway?? The reason we aren’t closer to answering these questions is that we’re stuck in lazy discourse and un-winnable ping-pong debates based on sets of contradictory narratives and messy comparisons across different contexts. We lack a standard for analysis, leaving us in a free-for-all where legitimacy is based mostly on the boldness of claims and the catchiness of neologisms. The goal of this panel is to move the discussion of digital activism in a direction that supports development of foundational knowledge… and eventually a bonified field of discourse and study. We’ll spend some time constructively dissecting the current problems in how digital activism is discussed and debated and get right to the meat of what we really SHOULD be talking about in order to identify concrete ways to move the field forward.

Questions Answered

  1. How can we characterize the current discourse on digital activism?
  2. Why is this current method of discourse inadequate?
  3. How can we increase rigor and analysis in the field?
  4. How can we turn the current discussion into a more productive one, and make progress towards developing frameworks and the foundation for a long-term field of study?
  5. What can we glean from the current debates on issues like slactivism, or the cyber-utopian/cyber-pessimist divide that is more constructive, useful and progressive?

You can vote here, and please pass it along to anyone you think may enjoy the topic!

Enhanced by Zemanta

SXSW: How to Spark a Movement in the 21st Century#sxsw #sparkmovements

Panel: How to Spark a Movement in the 21st Century

Speaker: Scott Heiferman

Description: Technology connects us to each other as never before, making it easier to harness our collective power. Obama’s election and post-election Iran barely scratch the surface of what’s possible when people self-organize. Hear how to embrace this potential, and what it means for our future.

Usual movement call-to-action on web: Watch us, See us, Download us, Join us, Friend us, Follow us, Contact us, Visit us….. what about giving them something to do?  What about connecting them to each other?  This ends up being a false sense of membership.

Remember: Numbers of followers mean nothing. Fans and followers are not a movement, get them to self-organize, mobilize, act.  Distribute responsibility, not just info or tasks.

We’re all organizers now.  Watch what happens after they connect and share stories.

“Let’s” is a word used  a lot on these networks.  One of the keys is to be everywhere.

Portrait of a great movement:

“Heart of a movement is that they have universal distribution, local presence everywhere, is infinitely expandable, provides person care and contact, is a leadership factory, turns spectators into participators, consumers into contributors and an audience into an army.”

You must make followers powerful.

Step 1: Get followers & Fans around the mission

Step 2: Get them interacting online, globally

Step 3: Get them to meet up locally everywhere



Digital Activism Book: Chapter Abstract

I’m in the last stages of writing a chapter for a book on Digital Activism that’s being written by a really great group of colleagues, such as Patrick Meier, Gaurav Mishra, Mary Joyce, and Tim Hwang (among others).  I thought I’d lay out my outline for now, as I’m working through it.

Please let me know your thoughts on any of the subjects, or if you think there’s a great resource or case study I should be including.

Title: Digital Inequality and Elitism

CURRENT LANDSCAPE OF DIGITAL INEQUALITY & INHIBITING FACTORS

  • What are the real hurdles to digital adoption? Is it economic differences?  Educational level?  Access?  Skill level?  Is it the internet itself?
  • How does the Digital Divide effect society, its access to information and progress in certain parts of the world?
  • What does it mean if people in rich countries are using digital tools for activism on behalf of people in poor countries? (Example: Online Darfur Movement)  Is this helpful? Or is this harmful (for instance, does it reinforce “colonialism”?)

DIGITAL ACTIVISM & POLITICAL PARTICIPATION

  • How can political parties, groups and organizations use these tools?
  • How does this decrease the Digital Divide?

DIGITAL TOOLS & COLLECTIVE ACTION

  • What does it means if certain groups in society are participating in digital activism efforts while others are not? (Iran twitter example) What does it mean if certain groups are able to advocate more effectively just because they are more tech savvy?
  • Who will the new elite be?

WHAT MAKES A GOOD DIGITAL TOOL FOR ACTIVISTS

  • How have certain digital tools lessened the Digital Divide?
  • What are some specific qualities of digital tools that make them more likely to be used?

Other Questions

  • When can we claim victory over the digital divide with regard to activism?
  • Is an active and engaged global middle class sufficient to push for progressive values?
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

DigiActive: R@D Digital Activism Survey

Colleagues Mary Joyce, Timo Zaeck and myself have just released the findings of a study on Digital Activism around the world through DigiActive’s Research@DigiActive (R@D).

To download the full report click here (in .pdf format):

Abstract:

Our goal in creating this survey was to collect the first international demographic data on the new group we call “digital activists”: people who use digital technology as part of grassroots campaigns for social and political change.

From late mid-February to mid-April of 2009, DigiActive collected 122 responses through an open online form, followed by three rounds of qualitative and quantitative analysis.  Despite the challenges of researching the world’s digital activists we felt a need to record – in some rough way – this evolving demographic.  Our original data set is available for download above and we welcome comments below through survey@digiactive.org.

Key Findings:

Economics Digital activists, particularly in developing countries, are much more likely than the population at large to pay a monthly subscription fee to have Internet at home, to be able to afford a high-speed connection, and to work in a white-collar job where Internet is also available. In short, digital activists are likely to be prosperous.

Access Intensity of use, rather than simple access, is critical as to whether or not a person is a digital activist. This high use is only possible for people with the ability to pay for it. The Internet may be democratizing, but its effects are felt most strongly in the global middle class.

Causes Across regions, “rights” emerged as the most popular cause, with 21 different types identified by respondents.

Broadcast The plurality of respondents (37%) believe digital technology’s greatest value for activism is one-way communication. What makes social media useful for digital activism may not be its interactivity but rather the fact that these technologies collapse the barrier to broadcast.

Mobiles Respondents with more features on their mobile phone – such as Internet, video, and GPS – are more likely to use their phones for activism. This is another indicator of the importance of financial resources for digital activists, both quantitatively, in terms of greater technology access, and qualitatively, in terms of better (mobile) hardware.

Platforms Social networks are the most common “gateway drug” into digital activism.

Skills Findings on technology and advocacy skills acquisition challenge the assumption that those who have a facility with technology are more likely to become digital activists and gives encouragement to programs that seek to teach technology skills to traditional activists.

Age Older activists in the respondent group are most likely to use digital technology to increase the efficiency of offline activities, such as training and evidence collection, and less likely to participate in activities which have gained popularity because of the availability of online tools, such as posting original content on web sites.

The purpose of Research@DigiActive (R@D) is to produce applied, thought-provoking, actionable research at the cutting edge of Digital Activism. It seeks to highlight and disseminate studies in the new academic field of digital activism by publishing short papers by promising scholars. To submit a paper or get more information, please contact our Director of Applied Research, Patrick Meier, at Patrick AT Digiactive.org.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Pop!Tech post: DigiActive and social tools for social change

A write up on digital activism and DigiActive as an organization.

In recent months, there’s been a marked increase in the mentions of how social media tools have been used around the world to enhance social activism either on a small scale, such as campaigning to free locally-jailed individuals, as was the case with “Free Jestina Mukoko” Facebook group or a larger scale, as was the case with the recent protests in Moldova. Press on the subject has varied from surface-level analysis to more well-informed accounts, but in each case, the use of digital tools was highlighted as playing an active and often pivotal role in the campaign.

Visit the Pop!Tech blog for the full post.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Feed me!

What I thought

Check out our book release!




Obviously you were wondering what time it was....

A barrister bookcase is furniture.

Get Adobe Flash player

Follow me

My Company