400 Words

Major social movements in the United States have stemmed from groups of activists lobbying for change. These movements are led by people who feel so strongly about a certain issue that they want to create change. Activism has been a vital part of change in the United States for centuries but digital technology has changed the way it is practiced. In his piece, “Small Change” author Malcolm Gladwell describes this shift in activism since the dawn of social media. He highlights the difference between activism during the civil rights movement and activism in the current moment arguing that in today’s world activism has very few consequences unlike before. He uses the sit-in at Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina which was a pivotal moment in the civil rights movement during the sixties as a depiction of “real” activism. (INTRODUCE HOW GLADWELL DESCRIBES ACTIVISM TODAY) In my opinion, I think that people like to say they are activists because they share a story or like a post on social media but they are not actually doing anything to make a difference. I do not consider that to be activism because they are not trying to make a change but just pretending they are. There is a big difference between saying something and actually doing something. I think that it is important to not just spread the message but actually try to implement a change. 

Although I do not agree with all of Gladwell’s opinions on activism in the digital age, I think he mentions some important aspects of online activism. In the “real” activism Gladwell describes, there is a leader who organizes and sets up the movement for change. In the digital age, social media creates networks of people with similar opinions that tie them together. Gladwell describes this phenomenon, “Facebook and the like are tools for building networks… Unlike hierarchies, with their rules and procedures, networks aren’t controlled by a single central authority. Decisions are made through consensus, and the ties that bind people to the group are loose” (Gladwell 10). Gladwell highlights that social media platforms bring people of similar interests together and allow them to share their opinions and ideas with one another.   

(TALK ABOUT CONNECTION BECAUSE OF TECHNOLOGY) He describes social media as platforms that are built around weak ties. Gladwell argues that social media gives you acquaintances and not friends, “That’s why you can have a thousand “friends” on Facebook, as you never could in real life” (Gladwell 7).

800 Words

Major social movements in the United States have stemmed from groups of activists lobbying for change. These movements are led by people who feel so strongly about a certain issue that they want to create change. Activism has been a vital part of change in the United States for centuries but digital technology has changed the way it is practiced like it has changed many aspects of our daily lives. In his piece, “Small Change” author Malcolm Gladwell describes this shift in activism since the dawn of social media. He highlights the difference between activism during the civil rights movement and activism in the current moment arguing that in today’s world activism has very few consequences unlike before. He uses the sit-in at Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina which was a pivotal moment in the civil rights movement during the sixties as a depiction of “real” activism. Gladwell describes the shift to digital activism through social media as a form of weak-tie activism. He emphasizes that digital technology, like social media has made it easier to form large networks of people with similar interests. He highlights how these connections are superficial because we do not actually form relationships with all these people. Psychologist, Sherry Turkle highlights similar issues with connection in her essay “The Empathy Diaries”. In her piece, she describes how digital technology has led to a lack of empathy in people. She argues that people today struggle to form real connections because digital technology has made it easier to disconnect from reality. I agree with Gladwell and Turkle to some extent because I feel like digital technology has created a change in the way that we interact with each other and many other aspects of our lives. I think that the definition of activism has changed too. I think that activism is seen as more of an everyday thing and not as consequential as it was before. In my opinion, I think that people like to say they are activists because they share a story or like a post on social media but they are not actually doing anything to make a difference. I do not consider that to be activism because they are not trying to make a change but just pretending they are. There is a big difference between saying something and actually doing something. I think that it is important to not just spread the message but actually try to implement a change. 

Although I do not agree with all of Gladwell’s opinions on activism in the digital age, I think he mentions some important aspects of online activism. In the “real” activism Gladwell describes, there is a leader who organizes and sets up the movement for change. In the digital age, social media creates networks of people with similar opinions that tie them together. Gladwell describes this phenomenon, “Facebook and the like are tools for building networks… Unlike hierarchies, with their rules and procedures, networks aren’t controlled by a single central authority. Decisions are made through consensus, and the ties that bind people to the group are loose” (Gladwell 10). Gladwell highlights that social media platforms bring people of similar interests together and allow them to share their opinions and ideas with one another.   

The introduction of digital technology and social media has changed the way that we interact with each other. Social media allows you to meet and interact with tons of people across the world that you would never have been able to before. Even though you are able to meet a lot of people, these relationships are often not as meaningful and deep as relationships you form in person. Gladwell argues that social media gives you acquaintances and not friends, “That’s why you can have a thousand “friends” on Facebook, as you never could in real life” (Gladwell 7). Gladwell argues that social media allows people to connect with more people than they would be able to in real life. These relationships are more like acquaintances than friendships because they lack real connections and meaning. Social media allows people to have all these “friends” that they only know because of the internet and have never met in real life. I agree with Gladwell’s belief because I am “friends” with people on social media who I have never met in person or even talked to before but if someone asks I will say that I know them because it feels like I do. (INSERT QUOTE FROM TURKLE ON CONNECTION AND FRIENDSHIP) Social media allows us to feel connected to people we do not even know personally because we share so much of our lives on the internet that it feels like we actually know the people that we follow.      

Peer Review Draft

Major social movements in the United States have stemmed from groups of activists lobbying for change. These movements are led by people who feel so strongly about a certain issue that they want to fix. Activism has been a vital part of improvement in the United States for centuries but digital technology has negatively changed the way it is practiced like it has changed many aspects of our daily lives. In his piece, “Small Change” author Malcolm Gladwell describes this shift in activism since the dawn of social media. He highlights the difference between activism during the civil rights movement and activism in the current moment arguing that in today’s world activism has very few consequences unlike before. He uses the sit-in at Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina which was a pivotal moment in the civil rights movement during the sixties as a depiction of “real” activism. Gladwell describes the shift to digital activism through social media as a form of weak-tie activism. He emphasizes that digital technology, like social media has made it easier to form large networks of people with similar interests. He highlights how these connections are superficial because we do not truly form relationships with all these people. Psychologist, Sherry Turkle highlights similar issues with connection in her essay “The Empathy Diaries”. In her piece, she describes how digital technology has led to a lack of empathy in people. She argues that people today struggle to form real connections because digital technology has made it easier to disconnect from reality. I agree with Gladwell and Turkle to some extent because I feel like digital technology has created a change in the way that we interact with each other and many other aspects of our lives. I think that the definition of activism has changed too. I think that activism is seen as more of an everyday thing and not as consequential as it was before. In my opinion, I think that people like to say they are activists because they share a story or like a post on social media but they are not really doing anything to make a difference. I do not consider that to be activism because they are not trying to make a change but just pretending they are. There is a big difference between saying something and actually doing something. I think that it is important to not just spread the message but actually try to implement a change. 

Although I do not agree with all of Gladwell’s opinions on activism in the digital age, I think he mentions some important aspects of online activism. In the “real” activism Gladwell describes, there is a leader who organizes and sets up the movement for change. While in the digital age, social media creates networks of people with similar opinions that tie them together. Gladwell describes this phenomenon, “Facebook and the like are tools for building networks… Unlike hierarchies, with their rules and procedures, networks aren’t controlled by a single central authority. Decisions are made through consensus, and the ties that bind people to the group are loose” (Gladwell 10). Gladwell highlights that social media platforms bring people of similar interests together and allow them to share their opinions and ideas with one another. He emphasizes that the loose tie connection from social media can still help create change but it does not require the same participation as real activism. I agree with Gladwell’s perspective that social media has made it easier to participate in movements and other social groups because it allows us to connect with many other people with similar interests and beliefs. However I feel that when Gladwell emphasizes that the ease of participation social media allows does not actually motivate people to make a sacrifice is not always true. He describes the success of Facebook activism by, “motivating them to do the things that people do when they are not motivated enough to make a real sacrifice” (Gladwell 9). Gladwell argues that digital activism is not “real” like the activism he describes in Greensboro in the nineteen sixties because they are not making a sacrifice like the participants in the sit-ins. I feel that that Gladwell’s perspective on digital activism and how it works is unfair. While I am not trying to dispute the sacrifice of the men and women participating in the sit-ins, I think that digital activism can require a similar sacrifice and level of commitment. Obviously not all forms of digital activism require the same commitment but some social media groups are making great sacrifices in their efforts to spread their message. It is not fair to say that all people who are brought to activism from social media are not making a sacrifice because some of them are. By supporting a social media movement some people are facing serious backlash and other consequences like losing their job and risking imprisonment. Just because activism can be done online does not mean that there are not significant consequences for the people participating in them. 

The introduction of digital technology and social media has changed the way that we interact with each other. Social media allows you to meet and interact with tons of people across the world that you would never have been able to before. Even though you are able to meet a lot of people, these relationships are often not as meaningful and deep as relationships you form in person. Gladwell argues that social media gives you acquaintances and not friends, “That’s why you can have a thousand “friends” on Facebook, as you never could in real life” (Gladwell 7). Gladwell argues that social media allows people to connect with more people than they would be able to in real life. These relationships are more like acquaintances than friendships because they lack real connections and meaning. Social media allows people to have all these “friends” that they only know because of the internet and have never met in real life. I agree with Gladwell’s belief because I am “friends” with people on social media who I have never met in person or even talked to before but if someone asks I will say that I know them because it feels like I do. Similarly in her piece Turkle emphasizes how digital technology has affected our ability to make friends. She argues that it limits the connections we are making. “Students don’t seem to be making friendships as before. They make acquaintances, but their connections seem superficial” (Turkle 345). She highlights how social media has changed the way we form relationships and connections. Since everything is digitized it is much easier to connect with many people albeit on a superficial level. Social media allows us to feel connected to people we do not even know personally because we share so much of our lives on the internet that it feels like we actually know the people that we follow. Although these superficial connections are not good for friendships I think they actually benefit activism. Having many of these loose tie connections allows people to get their message spread to many people much quicker. Gladwell acknowledges that idea in his essay when he discusses a Facebook post about a young man in need of a bone marrow donation. The post was shared many times across different social media platforms which resulted in the man finding a match and thousands of new bone marrow donors. This just shows how quickly a message can be spread through the networks of social media and the good that can come out of it.