“Social media makes it easier for activists to express themselves, and harder for that expression to have any impact” (Gladwell, 2010 , p.49). Discuss critically. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayIt is clear that the growing power of the Internet and social media in the 21st century has had a great 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 raise their concerns and issues, often regarding inequality within society. However, the extent to which activism via social media has had an impact on society is debated. Some academics such as Shirky (2011) take a techno-optimistic approach, arguing that social media makes it easier for individuals to participate in social movements and easier for these social movements to have a lasting impact on society. Meanwhile, academics such as Gladwell (2010) take a techno-skeptical approach, arguing that although social media makes it easier for activists to express themselves, 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 harder for that expression to have any impact” (Gladwell, 2010), examining a range of topics, taking both techno-optimists than techno-skeptical positions. In the first part of my essay I will discuss Gladwell's views regarding social media activism, then I will go on to discuss the topic of Morozov's "slacktivism" and the debate around it. In the second part of this essay I will discuss the techno-optimistic arguments of academics like Shirky. I will then discuss Fenton's (2012) analysis of these topics and his views on the accessibility of social media. Gladwell (2010), argues that social media makes it “easier for activists to express themselves, and harder for that expression to express themselves.” have any impact” (Gladwell, 2010). The increased accessibility of social media means that a range of issues are constantly being raised by users, so social media does not provide issues with enough attention to create change and have a lasting impact on society. Gladwell (2010), goes on to argue that social media are not “a natural enemy of the status quo” and are “suitable for making the existing social order more efficient” (ibid). Arguing therefore that because social media provides a platform accessible to all, social media provides a platform for regressive views, rather than a platform only for progressive views. Therefore, it can be argued that social media can help maintain the status quo of societies along with social change. However, that doesn't mean that social media doesn't help activists create lasting political and social impact. In his article 'The brave new world of slacktivism', Evgeny Morozov (2009) defines the term 'Slacktivism' as "feel good online activism that has zero political or social impact. It gives those participating in “slacktivist” campaigns the illusion to have a significant impact on the world without asking anything more than joining a Facebook group.” (Morozov, 2009) Thus supporting Gladwell's point that although social media can help activists express themselves, they do not create an impact. lasting Jodi Dean (2005), argues that slacktivism results in post-politics, a disengagement with real activism since “people.busy people may think they are active: the technology will act for them, alleviating their guilt and assuring them that nothing will change too much." (Decan, 2005). Individuals who are disengaged from politics and have no time for 'real' activism may feel like participating “by sending an email, signing a petition, responding to a blog post, people can feel political. And that sensation fuels communicative capitalism to the extent that it leaves behind the long, incremental and risky efforts of politics.” (Decan, 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 argues: “It is a refusal to take a stand, to venture into the dangerous terrain of politicization” (Dean, 2005). Therefore, according to Dean, social media only makes it easier for individuals to "pretend" to participate in social activism, rather than making it easier to actively participate in and aid social movements in order to create lasting change. Fenton (2012), describes 'Slacktivism' as an “easy-come, easy-go politics where you are only ever one click away from a petition; a form of technology that encourages problem drift whereby individuals shift attention from one problem to another or from one website to another with little or even effort” (Fenton, 2012However, Fenton argues that this view ignores the experiences of political solidarity. Shirky (2011), argues that Morozov's point of view is not relevant to the debate on the impact of social media on activism and social movements as it ignores the impact that engaged activists can have using social media. “The fact that low-commitment actors fail to achieve a better world does not mean that committed actors cannot use social media effectively.” (Shirky, 2011). Therefore, Shirky believes that social media provide a democratic platform and the freedom to highlight issues and aid social change. Shirky argues that "talking online is about publishing. , and publishing online is about connecting with others. With the arrival of globally accessible publishing, freedom of speech is now freedom of the press, and freedom of the press is freedom of assembly” (Shirky, 2008). Therefore, social media can be used to build solidarity and organize protests and occupations. A variety of social movements in the 21st century have used the Internet and social media to their advantage, examples of this are the Arab Spring in 2011 and the Indignados/15-M movement in 2011. Therefore, it is clear that social media has had a role significant impact on activism and social movements. Manuel Castells supports the techno-optimistic position, arguing that yes, social media makes it easier for activists to express themselves in the context of protests and revolutions. Fuchs (2012), defines protest as “a negotiation of existing structures that causes friction and problems and a political struggle that aims at the transformation of some aspects of society or society as a whole” (Fuchs, 2012). Castells (2012) states that the power of communication is probably the most important form of power in contemporary society. Therefore, social media makes it easier for activists to express themselves since, according to Castells (2012), the Internet and social media enable 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 during times of protest and revolution is to provide activists with a platform to share emotions regarding particular issues; theseemotions become collective emotions which become collective action. “The Internet provided the safe space where networks of outrage and hope connected. Networked forms in cyberspace have extended their reach to urban space.” (Castells, 2012). Therefore, Castells supports Shirky's point of view that social media creates political solidarity and helps the organization of social movements. However, Fuchs (2012) argues that collective social action often has little effect, or simply sheds light on existing issues but fails to create any lasting change. Fuchs (2012) goes on to state that the social change brought about by social media activism depends on the context, for example, “power relations, resources, mobilization capacities, strategies and tactics, as well as the complex and indeterminate outcomes of struggles”. (Fuchs, 2012). Fuchs goes on to argue that social media exists in a contradictory society, consisting of class conflicts, racial conflicts, and a variety of other conflicts between dominant and dominated groups. Therefore, Fuchs believes that social media have a contradictory character, “they do not necessarily and automatically support/amplify or dampen/limit rebellions, but rather pose contradictory potentials that are contradictory to the influences of the state, ideology and capitalism” . (Fuchs, 2012). In his chapter "The Internet and Radical Politics" Fenton highlights a variety of different views regarding the debate over the impact of social media on activism. One view is that social media, rather than fostering solidarity and collective action, highlights the fragmentation of contemporary politics that makes it difficult to organize collective social movements. Highlighting this aspect, Fenton (2012) shows how social media can make activism more difficult, rather than facilitate it. However, Fenton also argues that when the Internet is used to advance radical and oppositional arguments it serves as a tool for social change. It is argued that this use of the Internet allows activists to raise social awareness of issues and provide marginalized groups with a voice and social empowerment, while at the same time allowing individual activists to organise. Therefore, Fenton 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, highly educated and wealthier than those who do not, and also tend to be male and likely live in cities (Fenton, 2012). There are also differences between Internet access in developing and developed countries, along with “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, so social media only makes it easier for privileged individuals to express themselves. For this reason, it can be argued that social media does not make it easier for all activists to express themselves, but the expression of activism by privileged individuals can have an impact. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay To conclude, the rise of social media has changed contemporary activism and social movements. Fenton supports this claim, arguing that regardless of whether one takes a techno-optimistic or techno-skeptical position, “the Internet is at the heart of radical politics in the digital age” (Fenton, 2012). It can also be argued that the Internet provides us with a democratic platform that allows: