Since embarking on this masters program I have reflected on a great many areas of my life, and what I have come to realize is that for the past few years I haven’t been able to see the forest for the trees. However, as my ever expanding brain began to synthesize all the information that was being thrown at it, I became aware that I was no longer focusing on the details of my problems; instead I was beginning to see the bigger picture. So, it would seem that with knowledge comes understanding, and with understanding comes better communication, unfortunately sometimes a little overdue, but better late than never.
Before I end this session I want to talk a bit about online activism because I found this to be a very interesting topic in light of all that has been written about the world wide web, particularly that of social networking sites. I had never really thought about the term ‘social media activism’ before reading Popov’s article, but I have thought a lot about it since. Then again, I never expected to find myself involved in a protest from my computer or any other place for that matter. Yet it happened and I must say that we could not have accomplished what we did through online activism. On the other hand, while I think Gladwell’s opinion that “social media activism is practically useless when it comes to serious activism” is a little judgemental, but is actually quite accurate in my case. However having said that, Popov also has every right to criticize Gladwell for his opinion, because as she says he has never participated in social media and further claims even his Facebook page was set up by someone else in a false name. So I ask you, could someone who does not use these interfaces be qualified to critique them; I think not. However, I do have to agree with Gladwell’s point that it is easier to passively affiliate yourself with a cause over the internet simply because there is no real threat of danger, something New York Times writer Barnaby Feder terms ‘slacktivism (Popov, 2010).
Another issue Popova brings up is the way our human rights and freedom of speech are violated through censorship and cyber attacks. Although this happens everywhere to some extent, censorship is particularly apparent in authoritarian regimes, such as those in the Middle or Far East for instance. The problem with censorship, besides the obvious, is that often governments block sites for religious, cultural or dictatorial reasons, making it difficult for teachers like myself to access sites for research. An example of this was when I was trying to teach a history of photography class, but was denied access to the Masters of Photography website. This can be terribly frustrating for anyone when sites are well respected and the ‘powers that be’ just arbitrarily block them. It is especially exasperating in Oman where there are no public libraries, the college libraries are akin to a home bookshelf, and the few existing bookstores, have an extremely limited selection. Another example of both censorship and endorsement for social media activism was that of the Iranian Presidential Elections. During the rioting thousands of texts were being sent around the world in protest, and in response the government blocked many internet sites as well as text messaging. This of course is in direct opposition with Gladwell’s insistence that social media activism or slacktivism as Feder termed it has little power. In this particular case I would have to say they were very wrong. The Iranian government obviously saw these social media tools as inherently dangerous to their regime or they would not have shut them down. For injustices to end someone has to be held accountable, there needs to be mass awareness of the issue, and action must be taken to eliminate it. “While the social web with its inherent anonymity and predilection for slacktivism may do little in the way of assigning responsibility, it has a monumental effect on awareness.” (Popova, 2010)
“The power of the social web lies in the sequence of its three capacities: To inform, to inspire and to incite.” (Popova, 2010)
References
Popova, M. (2010, October 6). Malcolm Gladwell Is #Wrong. Change Observer. Retrieved October 8, 2010, from http://changeobserver.designobserver.com/entry.html?entry=19008
Before I end this session I want to talk a bit about online activism because I found this to be a very interesting topic in light of all that has been written about the world wide web, particularly that of social networking sites. I had never really thought about the term ‘social media activism’ before reading Popov’s article, but I have thought a lot about it since. Then again, I never expected to find myself involved in a protest from my computer or any other place for that matter. Yet it happened and I must say that we could not have accomplished what we did through online activism. On the other hand, while I think Gladwell’s opinion that “social media activism is practically useless when it comes to serious activism” is a little judgemental, but is actually quite accurate in my case. However having said that, Popov also has every right to criticize Gladwell for his opinion, because as she says he has never participated in social media and further claims even his Facebook page was set up by someone else in a false name. So I ask you, could someone who does not use these interfaces be qualified to critique them; I think not. However, I do have to agree with Gladwell’s point that it is easier to passively affiliate yourself with a cause over the internet simply because there is no real threat of danger, something New York Times writer Barnaby Feder terms ‘slacktivism (Popov, 2010).
Another issue Popova brings up is the way our human rights and freedom of speech are violated through censorship and cyber attacks. Although this happens everywhere to some extent, censorship is particularly apparent in authoritarian regimes, such as those in the Middle or Far East for instance. The problem with censorship, besides the obvious, is that often governments block sites for religious, cultural or dictatorial reasons, making it difficult for teachers like myself to access sites for research. An example of this was when I was trying to teach a history of photography class, but was denied access to the Masters of Photography website. This can be terribly frustrating for anyone when sites are well respected and the ‘powers that be’ just arbitrarily block them. It is especially exasperating in Oman where there are no public libraries, the college libraries are akin to a home bookshelf, and the few existing bookstores, have an extremely limited selection. Another example of both censorship and endorsement for social media activism was that of the Iranian Presidential Elections. During the rioting thousands of texts were being sent around the world in protest, and in response the government blocked many internet sites as well as text messaging. This of course is in direct opposition with Gladwell’s insistence that social media activism or slacktivism as Feder termed it has little power. In this particular case I would have to say they were very wrong. The Iranian government obviously saw these social media tools as inherently dangerous to their regime or they would not have shut them down. For injustices to end someone has to be held accountable, there needs to be mass awareness of the issue, and action must be taken to eliminate it. “While the social web with its inherent anonymity and predilection for slacktivism may do little in the way of assigning responsibility, it has a monumental effect on awareness.” (Popova, 2010)
“The power of the social web lies in the sequence of its three capacities: To inform, to inspire and to incite.” (Popova, 2010)
References
Popova, M. (2010, October 6). Malcolm Gladwell Is #Wrong. Change Observer. Retrieved October 8, 2010, from http://changeobserver.designobserver.com/entry.html?entry=19008