Slacktivism

In the Digital Age, the term ‘slacktivism’ has been thrown around considerably. While it originally had a positive connotation when it was coined in 1995, the term slacktivism has come to refer to actions performed on the Internet that are believed to have little to no effect on the real world, and are instead done to make the participants feel good about themselves (Christensen, 2011). From online petitions to hashtags and posts, actions that fall under the umbrella of slacktivism have been used in discussions regarding topics such as the Black Lives Matter movement, sexual assault, and mass poverty. And while some in the present day are critical of slacktivism, there are still groups of people who believe in its benefits. 

Background

Slacktivism was first used by Fred Clark and Dwight Ozard in a series of seminars at the 1995 Cornerstone festival, shortening the term slacker activism (Clark, 2009). In a blog post, Clark detailed that the term was not used to reference “…minimal effort ways to feel self-righteously smug…”  Instead, it was a twist on a term used by Baby Boomers to describe the younger generation of the time as lazy and unwilling to put in a sufficient effort in social causes. To Clark and Ozard,  slacker activism described actions by young people on a personal scale, such as processes like planting trees, in contrast to participating in a protest march (Christensen. 2011, Clark, 2009).

(Patheos, 2009)

In the 2000s, we began to see a shift in the connotation of the term (Barnett Cosby, 2018). Articles such as a 2001 article in Newsday and a 2002 article in New York Times references mass e-mailing and the effect they may have on the cause they are a part of. In 2009, Nora Young, host of CBC Radio show Spark, interviewed writer and prominent critic of Internet activism, Evgeny Morozov, where he criticized slacktivists (Morozov, 2009). He later detailed his position in a Foreign Policy blog post, describing slacktivism as:

“…activism for a lazy generation: why bother with sit-ins and the risk of arrest, police brutality, or torture if one can be as loud campaigning in the virtual space? Given the media’s fixation on all things digital — from blogging to social networking to Twitter — every click of your mouse is almost guaranteed to receive immediate media attention, as long as it’s geared towards the noble causes. That media attention doesn’t always translate into campaign effectiveness is only of secondary importance.” 

Today, Morozov’s position is one espoused by many journalists and bloggers, ranging from large, corporate newspapers to those only circulated within a single county (Barnett, 2015; Barnett Cosby, 2018; Harris, 2010). However, it is important to note that this position is not just held by news organizations and blogs: in the wake of many events, such as a terrorist attack or social movement, many wonder on social media if the actions taken by those on the internet actually have any benefit.

Nowadays, slacktivism includes a range of actions, such as: 

• Clicktivism: focuses on increasing awareness and involves signing online petitions orform emails, or even something as simple as liking a post. For this blog post, challenges with little to no connection to the cause they are for (i.e. A.L.S ice bucket challenge) and performance activism (black squares on Instagram during the 2020 George Floyd protests) are also included as clicktivism.
• Charity slacktivism: may include liking or sharing a charity’s post or video (as seen with Kony 2012). However, a distinction is that charity slacktivism can have a financial component, which may include either donating directly, or buying a product where a portion of the products go to charity. 
• Sympathy slacktivism: consists of actions that are meant to show support to the people affected by an event. A popular form of this is changing one’s profile picture to something related to the topic, such as the flag of the affected country.
• Info-slacktivism: a category defined specifically for this blog post. While it may be considered clicktivism, its purpose goes beyond raising awareness: info-activism is focused on spreading information and educating viewers of the contents of a post, and often involves sharing infographics. Many readers may remember examples of this kind of slacktivism during the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 and the Stop Asian Hate movement in 2021. 

Importantly, slacktivism has evolved since it was first used in a series of seminars in 1995, and now encompasses a variety of techniques, each with their own criticisms and benefits, some of which we will highlight in this post.

Criticisms

While there are a wide variety of criticisms towards slacktivism, there are two critiques that can be seen as the most significant. The first critique is a lack of other actions. In the eyes of many critics, slacktivism only requires minimal effort (Christensen, 2011). Therefore, not partaking in other actions that are deemed to have a higher level of involvement is seen as a lack of dedication to a social movement. In the opinion of critics, it is unlikely that individuals who perform activism would also participate in actions with a higher level of involvement.

The second area is the lack of effectiveness (Christensen, 2011). Questions regarding efficacy are constantly raised when discussing slacktivism, with studies showing that certain forms of it are not effective in creating meaningful change. Furthermore, in some instances where social campaigns stated that their slacktivist methods led to social change, the data that they used to support this claim was difficult to verify.

An example of these concerns is Kony 2012. A movement meant to spread awareness about Ugandan warlord Josef Kony, Kony 2012 began as a 30 minute film of the same name by the organization Invisible Children (Internet Historian, 2018). In the first six days of the video being up, it garnered 100 million views, with the organization receiving significant media attention and donations from netizens. A key message of the video was that on April 20th, 2012, people who had paid and registered online before that day would go out and put up posters and signs across their city. However, despite the hundreds of thousands of hashtags and likes, and tens of thousands of registered attendees across the world, a fraction of volunteers showed up on the date, with no volunteers coming out to support the cause in some cities. For example, in Sydney, Australia, 12 people out of 18,000 registered volunteers showed up. While the video campaign fulfilled its goal of raising awareness about Josef Kony, there was a lack of conversion of online views, likes, and dedication to the cause of in-person action despite its international virality. While the goal of raising awareness was achieved, many experts pointed out that the entire approach Invisible Children utilized was rife with misinformation and oversimplification, with even Ugandans criticizing it. For example, at the time of the video’s release, Kony’s presence in Uganda had actually diminished, and he had actually moved on to bordering nations (NPR, 2012).

(Invisible Children, 2019)

Ultimately, critics believe that the low effort required and the debatable effectiveness of slacktivism leads individuals to believe they’re making a meaningful impact, when they are not contributing at all.

The Other Side

Despite the large amount of criticism levied toward slacktivism, there are those who believe that slacktivism can still do good. Supporters of slacktivism point out that critics are only partially correct for suggesting that slacktivists do not perform higher involvement actions which require more effort: it ultimately depends on the publicity of the slacktivism. For example, researchers at the University of British Columbia found that private “token displays of support”, or slacktivist-type of activities, can actually result in participants being more likely to help with  a more meaningful assignment afterwards (Kristofferson et al., 2013). Specifically,  one study  found that private token displays of support from the participants indicated a greater chance of agreeing to volunteer. They also found that the group of participants who performed a private token display of support would subsequently donate an average of $0.86, while the group who performed a public token display of support would donate an average of $0.34, by comparison. Lastly, the group that did not perform a token display of support donated only $0.15. In the case of slacktivism, specifically charity slacktivism, sharing a charity’s post would be considered a public action, while donating or volunteering with the charity would be considered a private action.

Due to the minimal threshold of effort required to participate, accessibility is another strength of slacktivism  (Hamilton, 2010; Rajani, 2017). Certain forms of slacktivism can allow anyone with access to the internet to participate. This then allows those who may be unable to take part in traditional forms of activism, such as individuals with physical disabilities, to be politically and socially active (Hamilton, 2010). Furthermore, the accessibility of slacktivism allows for the previously overlooked issues to be brought to the attention of the general public fairly quickly and easily (Lekach, 2021).

This last argument is perfectly demonstrated by 2014’s A.L.S. ice bucket challenge. Meant to raise awareness about A.L.S. or Lou Gehrig’s disease, many wondered if the purpose of the challenge was being overlooked as it swept the world (Surowiecki, 2016). It did not: millions of dollars were donated to various A.L.S. organizations worldwide as the challenge took over social media, with the A.L.S Association alone receiving more than ten times the amount contributed in the last year, in just eight weeks. Furthermore, in 2016, it was reported that contributions to the A.L.S. Association had stayed about twenty-five per cent higher than in the year before the challenge, suggesting that “slacktivist” activities can have a lasting effect.

(Slgckgc, 2014)

Slacktivism is a tricky topic. There is no concrete answer as to what works and what doesn’t. In the end, when it comes to deciding whether or not to partake in what may be considered slacktivism, it is up to the individual to examine various factors about the action. What is the goal of this action? How effective is it? Will it be conducted publicly or privately? Is it performative? Will any follow-up actions be conducted? This also applies when consuming content regarding slacktivism, such as reading your friends’ posts or tweets about a topic. Keeping an objective mind, while remaining both critical and open when participating in and consuming slacktivism, is the optimal way to ensure that one’s slacktivism is still effective.

References 

Barnett, E. (2015, Sep 18). ‘Dislike’ icon mere slacktivism. Edmonton Journal https://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/dislike-icon-mere-slacktivism/docview/1713769473/se-2?accountid=14474

Barnett Cosby, N. (2018). The Revolution May Not Be Televised but It Will Be Hashtagged: The Impact of Social Media on Social Movements, Racial Perceptions, and Real-World Activism (Order No. 10841889). Available from International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global; Sociological Abstracts. (2097747136). https://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/revolution-may-not-be-televised-will-hashtagged/docview/2097747136/se-2?accountid=14474

Christensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means?. First Monday, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v16i2.3336

Clark, F. (2009, June 11). Etymology. Patheos. Retrieved February 10, 2022, from https://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2009/06/11/etymology/

Hamilton, A. (2020, November 11). In defense of “slacktivism”. Rooted in Rights. Retrieved February 20, 2022, from https://rootedinrights.org/in-defense-of-slacktivism/ 

Harris, M. (2010, May 01). Online advocacy now slacktivism. Nanaimo Daily News https://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/online-advocacy-now-slacktivism/docview/238084948/se-2?accountid=14474

Internet Historian. (2018, October 11). The Story of Kony2012 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7nymZEXjf8&t=961s

Invisible Children. (2019). Stop Kony 2012 poster. Wikipedia. Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stop_Kony_2012_poster.png. 

Kristofferson, K., White, K., & Peloza, J. (2013). The nature of slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(6), 1149–1166. https://doi.org/10.1086/674137 

Lekach, S. (2021, October 29). Your slacktivism isn’t as useless as everyone thinks. Mashable. Retrieved February 15, 2022, from https://mashable.com/article/slacktivism-dapl-protest-online 

Morozov, E. (2009, May 19). The Brave New World of Slacktivism. Foreign Policy. Retrieved February 20, 2022, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/05/19/the-brave-new-world-of-slacktivism/ 

NPR. (2012, March 8). Fact checking the ‘kony 2012’ Viral video. NPR. Retrieved February 24, 2022, from https://www.npr.org/transcripts/148235383 

Patheos. (2009). Poster for Slacktivism Seminars in 1995. Patheos. Retrieved from https://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2009/06/11/etymology/. 

Rajani, N. (2017, October 15). ‘slacktivism’? or just different forms of activism? ALiGN: Alternative Global Network Media Lab. Retrieved February 18, 2022, from https://carleton.ca/align/2017/slacktivism-or-just-different-forms-of-activism/ 

Slgckgc. (2014). Doing the Als Ice Bucket Challenge. Flickr. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/slgc/14927191426/. 

Surowiecki, J. (2016, July 18). What happened to the Ice Bucket Challenge? The New Yorker. Retrieved February 25, 2022, from https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/als-and-the-ice-bucket-challenge 

Written By: Ashwath Puchakatla

Edited By: Sara Assaf