Shelby Budzko

ENG 110

Jesse Miller

November 2023

            Technology has changed the way that we operate as people. It has made things easier for us to access, easier to find and easier to participate in. It has altered the way that we seek to create change in our everyday lives. It has changed activism, the process of doing relentless work to create change in our cities, states, countries, or society. With the rise of technology, there has also been a rise in different forms of being an activist. Through social media, people are able to share news, sign petitions and organize protests at the click of a button. However, it begs the question if these new methods truly fit in with the definition of activism.

 In his essay “Small Change,” Malcom Gladwell highlights the way activism has evolved since the 1960s, in an era where racism was incredibly common and was considered to be normal and acceptable. It was normal for people of color to be turned away from businesses, but Malcom specifically uses the Greensboro lunch counter sit-in as a specific example of activism during this time. The Greensboro lunch counter sit-in was undoubtedly an incredible example of activism, as the brave students involved were putting their lives at risk to send a message of the need for racial equality in America. He compares the Greensboro lunch counter sit-in to the attempts to organize protests in Iran that were planned through the social media app Twitter, claiming that “we seem to have forgotten what activism is” (Gladwell 4). I find Gladwell’s claim complicated, because while organizing protests is a way to be an activist, following through with them is the important part. Without avtively going out and making change, it’s not necessarily activism, it more so just has to potential to be activism. However, technology does make the act of creating change more accessible to more people. Not everybody is going to have access to a protest or sit-in, whether it’s because of location, time, or physical ability, which is where technology can be incredibly helpful. Rather than participating in a protest, people can donate, sign petitions, attend virtual meetings, raise awareness and so much more. Whether you go to a protest or attend a meeting, you are still trying to do your part in making a change, but if all you do is sit from home and sign a singular petition, I don’t think that would qualify anyone as an activist. Technology can deeply alter the standards that we not only hold ourselves to, but the standards we hold other things to, such as activism. Kevin Kelley, author of “Technophilia” writes about the connection that people in our society have to technology, whether it’s in a positive or negative way. Kelley uses the work of Sherry Turkle, a sociologist at MIT, in his essay. Kelley claims that “we are so eager to love technology that Turkle is worried this love blinds us” and I agree. Technology actively enriches our lives and makes them easier, but it also creates a lot of short-cuts for people. In terms of activism, we are so attached to technology that we feel as though we need to use it in every circumstance. While technology can be used for creating a positive impact, it seems as though it’s becoming our default. While it is helpful, it’s not always the most useful way to go about making change. Our love and desire to use technology can blind us from the reason we are truly using it. In the case of the Iran protests through Twitter, people thought that they were doing something useful by organizing a protest through technology. However, the protests were ultimately organized by Westerners who weren’t even in Iran. While the people attempting to organize the protests truly meant well, and meant to be activists, the protests never actually happened because the Westerners didn’t even think about the people in Iran who were going to be involved in the protests. They were so blinded by doing the right thing that they ended up not doing anything at all. It’s becoming extremely easy for us to sit behind a screen and convince ourselves that we are helping and making a difference, because technology acts as a barrier between us and the real world. However, it’s important to take a step back and think about how our actions through technology are affecting others, even if we truly mean well.  

A common problem that comes along with activism is the use of “performative activism.” Performative activism is where someone claims to care deeply about a specific topic, and they very well might, but they actively raise awareness about it while doing nothing to create a change. As Gladwell describes, “the platforms of social media are built around weak ties” (Gladwell 7). Social media tends to create the illusion of true connections, whether that’s between two people or a person and a cause. The job of social media is essentially to be able to share your life with complete strangers, where people only post the best pictures of themselves, or perhaps repost random pieces of news that will make them appear as though they are a good person who truly cares for something. Without a true face-to-face connection, it’s hard to give your all to someone or something, which is where the weak ties are built. People simply share what makes them look the best, and often that is current events or awareness for a cause. While there are a lot of people who post these kinds of things and then proceed to go out and actively create change, most people simply just hit the “repost” button and move on with their day without a care in the world. As Anderson states, “the artificial wins our admiration” (Anderson 4). People would much rather sit behind their screens nowadays, pressing buttons and then moving on to the next big thing, rather than devoting true time and attention to something that is deeply important and deeply impactful. An excellent example of performative activism is with common social justice and worldwide issues, such as LGBTQ+ rights, racial equality, or the fight against climate change. These topics are incredibly important and have all recently gained excellent traction through the past decade. They each deserve proper time and attention. There are brave, thoughtful, and wonderful people that actively go out and join marches or protests, talk to government leaders, and truly work to bring justice to all people. However, there are still other people who will simply sit behind their screens and repost a colorful infographic about a topic without actually going out and doing something that will create a positive impact. It’s excellent to raise awareness about creating change, but it’s not activism until you are the one creating the change.

Through the hundreds and thousands of years that humans have been on this Earth, we have been actively changing and evolving, while the things we create and use change with us. Technology is one of the biggest things that we created, and that changes with us. The rise and evolution of technology has in turn changed things as well. Technology led to the adaptions that we are seeing in modern activism, as more and more people turn to their phones, rather than protesting. For thousands of years we have embraced change and embraced advancements; but is it possible that we have gone backwards with activism? We went from actively protesting and rallying for change, to hiding behind a screen because we are too afraid to go out and make a change. At this point, it is possible thar technology may have made some things a little too easy for us, to the point where we have misplaced the true meanings of the things that we value.