Week 10 - Slactivism

Madison and Klang have a tough job. They are trying to put a positive spin on a process that can be done from the comfort of one’s home and relies heavily on the internet. In this age of cynicism, misinformation campaigns and sensationalized “click bait” headlines, it might be hard to convince some that the internet is good. Moreover, the idea that people can be efficient and hardworking while no one else is watching is a concept that has only become more acceptable in the wake of a global pandemic. The writers have the unenviable task of arguing the benefits of online activism while pointing out that the term “slacktivism” is unnecessarily demeaning. “Slacktivism”, according to Madison and Klang, refers to the ineffective use of the online platform to essential signal activism without actually doing anything constructive to advance a cause. I believe it stems from the general and outdated idea that a person is not doing anything constructive if it is not outside of their home and in a locale that is dedicated to some purpose like work, or in this case, fundraising. Activism in any form is a many-layered process. In terms of the Pro-Choice movement, there is a heavy push to garner support in the days leading to the midterm elections. It is easier to reach people and to provide links to important voter and candidate information through internet resources. Online activism serves a purpose that is harder to achieve through a brick-and-mortar establishment alone. Moreover, with aggressive right wing tactics and voter intimidation, in person rallies are more dangerous. being able to use the internet to disseminate and inform while coordinating efforts to change laws, is not "slacktivism" but smart. In addition, traditional methods of mailers and phone calls are no longer effective. Online activism can be a great tool for social movements. It should not matter if it can be done while sitting in a chair at home.