Though I hate the word itself, “slacktivism” is becoming more and more prevalent as time goes on, especially with the imminent and still growing presence of social media. People are able to share their personally held ideas and beliefs easily, and those who receive these messages can pass them on, “like” them, respond to them, or adopt them for their own benefit with little to no effort. Participating in a supposed movement is, literally, a click away.
Slacktivism, a grating portmanteau of “slacker” and “activism,” describes the act of passively partaking in a cause for any number of reasons. It could be that a person becomes a slacktivist to feel good about himself or herself, to be a part of something popular, to pass as a true activist, etc. Though the reasons for being a slacktivist may vary, the common denominator for most slacktivists is the convenience of inaction.
Slacktivism bolsters the egos of those who participate in it and encourages only surface-level comprehension of the issues at hand. It breeds ideas that are harmful to the causes involved. Beliefs become mangled in the web of social media. Ideas emerge from the mechanisms of Twitter, Facebook and Tumblr confused and misrepresented, as if they had just resurfaced from a strange game of telephone involving millions of people.
Take as a for instance the alteration from “#BlackLivesMatter” to “#AllLivesMatter” regarding a recent Twitter campaign. The change between the two hashtags is offensive in myriad ways I will not go into here, but, for the sake of my argument, the initial message and its intended meaning were distorted through traversing the gutters of social media.
Many people could not stand to not be included in the campaign, and so changed the message to suit their individual desires. “Black” became “all” so that those who wanted to proclaim their involvement in social rights movement could feel more included, despite that the movement itself wasn’t ever about them.
Through slacktivism, people are given the opportunity to pretend to care about a movement without actually understanding it, or even fully paying it mind. Many people utilize social media to announce themselves contributors to civil justice. Apparently social equality is achievable by giving someone’s post a digital thumbs up.
“Like this tweet if you want to save the children of Africa!” Who doesn’t remember Kony 2012? Back when the campaign was flourishing, the filmmakers of the 30-minute movie requested that donations be made to their charity, Invisible Children, rather than to the Ugandan law enforcement. So, when the $31.9 million did go to the movie’s producers, the donations were used to make another movie about stopping Kony instead of being used to actually stop Kony.
In this case, slacktivism allowed the people of the United States to contribute to a cause under the guise of helping it; although, in the end, their passive activism merely permitted Invisible Children to continue exploiting the horrors that those involved with Kony persistently confronted. Contributors to the Kony 2012 could pat themselves on the back and foster their savior complexes although they hadn’t truly done anything of worth.
Effecting change is not as simple as watching a video or retweeting a message with hashtags such as “#SavetheWhales” and “#YesAllWomen.” What makes a difference is being knowledgeable about the issues that you care about and being capable of discussing why you believe certain things. Wearing a badge that states “I Love Diversity” means nothing if you do not actively advocate for diversity when it matters.
It is undemanding and tempting to remain an observer, to chime in whenever it is convenient or popular, but we should be familiar with and educated about the things we claim to believe.
