Shelby Budzko

ENG 110

Professor Jesse Miller

5 December 2023

Alteration of Activism

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 altered 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 can 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. Malcolm Gladwell, the author of “Small Change” dives into how we have gone from sit-ins to Facebook as our route of choice for practicing activism. Gladwell believes that we have lost the meaning of activism, which could very well be the case. Or maybe, we are so attached to technology that we feel the need to use it in everything, as Kevin Kelley describes in his essay “Technophilia.” Whether intentional or not, technology has changed us, and in turn, we have changed activism.

 The ease of technology is allowing us to use shortcuts, that, in turn, yield the opposite effect that we wish them to, specifically within activism. In his essay “Small Change,” Malcolm Gladwell highlights the way activism has evolved since the 1960s, in an era where it was normal for people of color to be turned away from businesses. Gladwell specifically uses the Greensboro lunch counter sit-in as an example of real activism. The Greensboro lunch counter sit-in was an incredible example of activism, as the brave students involved were putting their lives at risk to express the need for racial equality in America. He compares the Greensboro lunch counter sit-in to the attempts to organize protests in Iran through the social media app Twitter, claiming that “…there is something else at work here, in the outsized enthusiasm for social media. Fifty years after one of the most extraordinary episodes of social upheaval in American history, we seem to have forgotten what activism is” (Gladwell 4). I find Gladwell’s claim complicated because organizing protests through social media is a way to be an activist, following through is the important part. We seem to be so attached to technology, and so eager to use it whenever possible, that we’re using it as a substitute for true activism. Without actively going out and making change, it’s not necessarily activism, but it has the potential to be. However, technology does make the act of creating change more accessible. Not everybody is going to have access to a protest or sit-in, 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 hold ourselves and our values to, such as activism. Kevin Kelley, author of “Technophilia,” writes about the connection that people in our society have to technology, whether it’s positive or negative. Kelley references 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… she is concerned whether we will diminish our own humanity in order to match this minimal humanity we spy in our creations” (Kelley 9). I completely agree, because while technology actively enriches our lives, it also creates shortcuts. In terms of activism, we are so in love with technology that we feel as though we need to use it in every circumstance. While technology can be used to create a positive impact, it’s becoming our default, even though it’s not always the most useful way to go about making change. While everyone wants to help people in need and make a change in the world, our love of technology is triumphing over our connection to real people. In the case of the Iran protests through Twitter, people truly believed they were being helpful. However, the protests were organized by Westerners who weren’t even in Iran. While the people attempting to organize the protests meant well, the protests never happened because Westerners didn’t 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 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, but they actively post about it while doing nothing to support it. As Gladwell describes, “the platforms of social media are built around weak ties. Twitter is a way of following (or being followed by) people you may never have met. Facebook is a tool for efficiently managing your acquaintances…” (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 hit the “repost” button and move on with their day without a care in the world. As Kelley states, “our biggest technological advancements are like people… they elicit our deepest loves and hates…the artificial wins our admiration” (Kelley 4). I think Kelley and Gladwell would connect here, as they both would recognize that people would much rather sit behind their screens nowadays, pressing buttons and then moving on to the next big thing, rather than devoting time and attention to something deeply important and impactful. Our devices can introduce us to extremely compelling and emotion-evoking situations, for example, a baby polar bear surrounded by its melting habitat. However, as Kelley said, we are going to choose technology over what will truly make an impact. Instead of going out and protesting or contacting government leaders to save all the polar bears and the Arctic, we would much rather sit behind our phone screens and convince ourselves we are activists by posting “save the polar bears” on Instagram. Very common yet excellent examples of performative activism are with common social justice and worldwide issues, such as LGBTQ+ rights, racial equality, or the fight against climate change. All three of these topics would immediately pull me out of my chair and into the streets, and I truly wish the rest of the world thought the same. They are critically important to our existence as people and have all thankfully gained extreme traction through the past decade. There are brave and thoughtful people who actively go out and join marches or protests, talk to government leaders, and 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 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 thousands of years that humans have been around, 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 it continues to evolve with us. The rise and evolution of technology has led to the adaptations 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 that 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. We have begun to prioritize a hunk of metal and glass over real human lives.

——————————————————————————————————————–

Works Cited

Gladwell, Malcolm. “Small Change.” The New Yorker, 27 September 2010, Small Change | The New Yorker

Kelley, Kevin. “Technophilia.” The Technium, Accessed 16 November 2023, The Technium: Technophilia (kk.org)