Perfectly Imperfect

Activism looks different in 2025.

The use of social media when it comes to activism is controversial. According to Bart Cammearts in his paper “Social Media & Activism,” “The use of social media in movement contexts is not only widely diverse but also oftentimes complex or contentious.” On one side of the argument, you have the issue of slacktivism (a term for passive engagement) and on the other, you have people who believe in the strong power of social media to do good. 

When it comes to social media and activism, we must realize that the topic concerns two different concepts being put together. Social media allows for activism, but it is important to note that social media platforms, in and of themselves, were not specifically made for activism. These platforms were made for a broad range of socialization and communication between people.

In “Introduction to Social Media, Activism, and Organizations,” Dhiraj Murphy writes that “Twitter was not invented to coordinate protest events, but a social constructivist approach is helpful in understanding that technology innovation and practice is co-shaped by designers and users.” We can apply this logic to all social media platforms, and not just Twitter/X. No social media platform was built with an activism focus, but they all can certainly be used for activism. Social media is a part of society, and therefore, exists in the context of reality.

Activism, many times throughout America’s past, has involved demonstration. This is especially true when thinking of the Civil Rights or Women’s Suffrage movements.

Now, activism looks a bit different. Instead of marches, it looks like informative graphics on Instagram. And this seems to be the limit on social media activism that most people set. Call it what you may: slacktivism, virtue signaling, being performative, or tokenism.

However, activism is simply more than just standing up for your message. There’s a lot of efforts that happen behind the scenes when it comes to activism, mainly, the coordination of people to mobilize. And that involves a lot of communication and making sure people are all on the same page. That’s what happened with the news media during the civil rights movement – and it’s the same thing happening today with social media.

Social media is a widely used communication tool, which means it can be used as part of mobilization efforts. According to Murphy, “Inward-oriented communicative action relates to the potential of social media to make internal organisation more efficient through the mediation of internal communication… Social media are seen as being instrumental in enabling more fluid membership and asynchronous participation, although this potential should not be exaggerated.” Now, not all movements start this way, but one can imagine that coordinating people eventually leads to some movement.

As a result, activism that begins on social media can ultimately be reflected in real life. Cammearts writes that “microblogging may be seen to be a weak form of activism (i.e., slacktivism) with Gladwell’s (2010) infamous argument that it is fairly ineffectual. However, recent social movements such as Black Lives Matter transitioned from tweet debates to action on the streets which profoundly shaped ‘national discourse about race’ (Carney, 2016, p. 180).” Yes, Twitter wasn’t made for protest, but it played a huge role in transitioning activism from the screen to the streets.

Should social media be entrusted as the “end all be all” of activism? Definitely not. But can it play a helpful role in coordination and messaging, eventually leading to real action? Definitely so. I, for one, am simply glad the technology has afforded the opportunity for people to get their foot in the door at a much easier level, not just in activism, but in any things in society. Social media activism should be critiqued, but also welcomed for the benefits it has given activists and their movements.