Armchair Activism
Do you remember ever signing petitions calling for justice for George Floyd, or Animal Cruelty? Or are you among the second group who create these online petitions for other people to sign? In either case, my question to you is, did you put in some effort to understand the nub of the issue, or were you just pitiful?
The Cambridge Dictionary defines activism as — the use of direct or noticeable action to achieve a result, usually a political or a social one. But what about the term “Armchair Activism”? While it does contradict your whole image of people protesting and shouting slogans that comes into your mind when you think of activism, there are a lot of debates going around this topic.
Armchair Activism — a.k.a. slacktivism, online activism, internet activism, clicktivism — is, according to Urban Dictionary, “One who sits in their armchair or desk chair and blogs or posts Activists issues on Facebook without ever really doing anything about said issues or exercising any form of activism as it would require that person to actually leave the armchair.” But in reality, Armchair Activism propagates an issue to the knowledge of every single person who has access to the internet, though it brings along the well-known little detail of the issue, leaving behind the root and solution.
Though it existed even before the pandemic, the lockdown paved a way for every person to stick to their screens, and like and share whatever happens to appear on their feed. But there’s more to Armchair Activism than just liking and sharing posts. One doesn’t realize the depth of an issue without either studying or experiencing it. One disadvantage of Armchair Activism is that people would only see what’s “trending” and not what’s needed.
Asking people to sign petitions and donate to various charities while the person posting it isn’t doing any of it is what Armchair Activism means.
“The model suggests that online activism helped organize collective actions and amplify the conditions for revolutionary movements to form. Yet, it provoked elites’ reactions such as Internet filtering and surveillance, which do not only promote self-censorship and generate a digital divide but contribute to the ultimate decline of activism over time,” said Shahla Ghobadi and Stewart Clegg in their study — “These days will never be forgotten …”: A critical mass approach to online activism.
As mentioned above, the posts these slacktivists share usually don’t have any useful information or sources related to the issue; it is easy for people to fall into fake news, sign petitions on false complaints (usually created for attention, or other intentions), and even donate to charities that never reach the needy. In its article about Internet Activism, The Quint said, “It is important to realise the impact of conversations. Even if 80% of the people who tweet about an issue are ill-informed, they’re engaging in debates online, having conversations, and being made aware. In such a sense, one must see online activism as a means of galvanising a complacent society, and not the final step.”
Social media can be used to communicate ideas, find solutions, voice opinions, and join hands but it shouldn’t be the only place where the action is going on. Armchair Activism can be a safe space for activists wanting to use social media for visibility, help, or recognition; but not a replacement for activism or for gaining popularity (personal or organizational).
Last but not the least, not only does asking people to sign petitions and donate to charities come under Online Activism, but also posting hashtags (such as #pridemonth, #blm, #metoo), tweets, or forwarding messages to get popular or have attention, rather than to fight for the problem.
Concluding all of the above, Armchair Activism isn’t a term that’s used to describe the actions of one trying to promote the facts, ideas, or news about an issue over social media; it is a term used to describe actions of people who post issues even before having established a proper understanding themselves.
