.jpg)
Sent to you by moya via Google Reader:
via maia medicine on 10/11/10
"1) In a repressive environment, using social media tools to organize is just as dangerous and subversive as using 'traditional' ways of organizing. Organizers, activists and sympathizers use a combination of tools to participate and to reach specific goals. It doesn't matter if the tools are digital or not. What matters is whether or not they are effective in the context where they are being employed. Lina over at Context, Culture and Collaboration has a good post on the use of tools to fit the goals. 2) The level of commitment to a cause is in direct proportion to the level of personal risk. i.e., the more committed you are, the higher the personal risk you are willing to take; the higher the personal risk, the more committed activists likely become. In the US context, unless perhaps you are gay or Muslim, there is not a lot of personal risk in uniting or fighting for a cause, and most of the causes that are social media driven do not create any major personal risk to those who join them. I find a lot of US campaigns to be meaningless or misdirected compared to activism in many other places. US-based 'activism' campaigns are often more about cause marketing or branding an organization or collecting emails than they are about changing a serious social issue at home or abroad. This is not the fault of the social media tools or of 'digital activism', it's a reflection of US culture, our current values, the organizers behind the causes, and the sociopolitical moment we are living in."<br/><br/> - <em><a href="http://lindaraftree.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/activism-vs-slacktivism-its-about-context-not-tools/">Activism vs slacktivism: it's about context not tools « Wait… What?</a></em>Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to maia medicine using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
No comments:
Post a Comment