Twitter Moderation:
Lauren Richardson, Josh Carter, Hannah Doyle, Kelsey Thalholfer, Cameron Smith, Kelli Lyons
This week is all about activism and advocacy. The power of social media movements depends on how close participators are. Pre-social media movements were successful because those participating had strong ties and felt a responsibility to one another. High risk activism requires strong ties, hierarchy and power structure. Social media is a network of loose ties which is why many of the movements and causes promoted via Facebook and Twitter do not succeed in the cause they promote. The power of change and activism relies and these strong ties, which hold people accountable. Though social media has encouraged many culture changes and independence, the real power comes from a group of individuals who have had their voice’s oppressed and are fighting to be heard.
Slacktivism
One of the main concerns regarding social media’s relationship with global activism is the rise of “slacktivism.” Student Cameron Smith tweeted that slacktivism is “The act of participating in activities as an expedient alternative to actually expending effort to fix a problem.” Student Jordan Keddie offered her own definition: “Being able to be an activist from the comfort of your own twitter account.” It’s far too easy to click “like” or tweet in support of a cause without actually offering any tangible support.
Kelli’s main example of slacktivism was the Kony 2012 campaign. While the video was highly viewed and shared, by the time the day of the “Call to Action” arrived, most people had forgotten about the campaign and failed to put up signs or otherwise support the campaign. Kelli suggested that this was due to the organization’s lack of capacity to pull off this type of campaign, especially in light of the disaster that followed when the campaign’s director was found in the midst of a “crazy nude rampage.”
“Slacktivism isn’t a substitute for real world action, but a way to coordinate it,” Kelli said. The Kony campaign did an excellent job of raising awareness for the cause, but wasn’t able to follow-up with real action or deal with its own social media crisis.
Burger King
Like social media, Kelli’s class adapts in real time to whatever story the majority of people are talking about online. Although not pertaining to activism or advocacy, we covered the Burger King Twitter hack that occurred Monday morning.
What caused a stir was that Burger King’s Twitter account got taken over by an anonymous group that posed Burger King as being purchased by McDonalds. Vulgar tweets were posted, and Burger King gained 5,000 followers within the first thirty minutes of the hack.Twitter suspended the account in the afternoon, and shortly after Burger King issued a statement with an apology and plan of action.
Kelli has talked about crisis management earlier in the term, and Burger King responded precisely according to Kelli’s three main points: “tell it first, tell it fast, tell what you are going to do about it.”
The class conversation on Twitter revolved around the impact of the hack on the company. In the end, Burger King received more Twitter followers and their brand was talked about. No negative comments swirled about the quality of their product and no loyalties seemed to be lost, which begs the question: was the hack really bad for Burger King after all?
Below are student’s tweets regarding the scandal:
@paultwebber They should thank Anon for increasing their followers by 30K #j412ssm
— Alex McDougall (@adougall) February 18, 2013
Hackers followed @burgerking‘s SM Policy: BK-related content, entertain consumers, social currency, mystery. #J412ssm zennie62blog.com/2013/02/18/bur…
— Kayla Glanville (@kaylaglanville) February 19, 2013
.@burgerking has a lot of personality & could spin a joke out of this, but I still don’t think I’d follow a fast food account. #j412ssm
— Austin Powe (@yo_powe) February 18, 2013
Power to the People
The rise of social media has made it easier than ever before for people to gather together in mass numbers in a very short amount of time. As student Brandon Turner tweets, “Social media is a network for immediate word of mouth. Power to organize quickly and efficiently! One example is the Occupy Wall Street Movement. Without the use of social media to get the word out extremely quickly, it would have been nearly impossible for that many people to know how, when, and where to assemble. The use of social media makes it easier than ever for people to assemble.
However, as student Andrew Harman tweets, “Social media doesn’t guarantee success in social activism, there needs to be a stronger backing/tie to the cause.” Just because social media has made it easier for people to assemble (in a practical sense) doesn’t mean that the movement is going to be successful. Because it is so easy to become involved, many people are not that invested (see “Slacktivism” above).
Social media has great power and reach. It has helped to impeach a Filipino president, assemble thousands of protesters against Wall Street, and influence an entire US Presidential election. It allows complete strangers with common interests to unite online – and often in person, too.
Some of the most retweeted tweets from class:
SM is a way to be heard and generate support and involvement http://t.co/zaqK7x1O #J412ssm — @KelseyThalhofer
High-risk activism requires: strong ties, a hierarchy & power structure. #j412ssm — @talmizrachi
social media doesn’t guarantee a successful revolution #J412ssm — @caseyliu_
Change happens when people have access to each other. #J412ssm — @rlauren_13
In the end, more people are talking about BK. Isn’t that what they want? #j412ssm — @Kelli_Lyons