Slacktivism: n. (slakte-vizem) the policy or action of using online social media and websites to bring about social or political change. a portmanteau of "slacker" and "activism".

     Slacktivism, so named because it requires very little on the part of the "activist", (was there ever a more ironic meaning of the word?) has drawn both praise and criticism for its use of quick online transactions in contributing to various campaigns. Also referred to as "nano-activism" this kind of direct action (which is anything but) requires very little in the way of time, commitment, or real sacrifice on the part of the actor. The question is: is it effective or does it just provide these armchair activists with a fuzzy sense of contribution? Perhaps even more damaging is whether or not slacktivism is influencing individuals that were formerly traditional activists to stay at home, replacing pickets with mouse clicks?

     Proponents of slacktivism point to the accessibility of becoming socially, politically, or environmentally active from one's own home. They say that there are huge numbers of people that otherwise would not participate in campaigns and initiatives that now will. It's true that there has been a major decrease in the cost of organizing with the widespread use of social networking sites and online campaigns. Twitter and Facebook have been hailed by many to be "galvanizing" and "motivating large numbers of people to become involved". Although there may be some truth to this, Evgeny Morozov of Stanford University, writing for Foreign Press Magazine, asks, "...are the publicity gains gained through this greater reliance on new media worth the organizational losses that traditional activists entities are likely to suffer..." In other words, Facebook and Twitter are fantastic for increasing public awareness, but are they worth the loss of real influence that traditional forms of action bring?

     Malcolm Gladwell (author of Blink, Outliers, and Tipping Point) writes in The New Yorker that social networking campaigns are decentralized, less focused and directed, and often people's allegiance to the campaign is very loosely held. He points to the idea that social network campaigns are good for easy commitments; fighting childhood obesity, promoting cancer research, protecting endangered animals. These movements are not controversial and are already part of the mainstream consciousness. In other words, there's very little real work that can be done to increase public awareness of them. Gladwell says of this type of Facebook activism, "[it] succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice but by motivating them to do the things that people do when they are not motivated enough to make a real sacrifice." It increases participation by reducing motivation.

     Gladwell speaks eloquently of the sacrifices made during the Civil Rights movement; arrests, beating, even murders. The civil rights movement was a high-risk social and political campaign that required the direct action of hundreds of thousands of individuals. Can you imagine the fight for desegregation of schools taking place via Facebook petition? Could the Freedom Summer schools that were set up to educate underprivileged blacks in the deep south have been created online in a distance learning format? How can people enact change without ever stepping foot in a "warzone?" We are living in a paradoxical age of greater unrest and greater complacency, where the troubles of our times are more complex than ever, but people want to solve them in cyberspace.

     I worked as a political organizer for a number of national and state-level candidates, as well as in campaigns for clean air, energy, healthcare reform, and most recently, education reforms. It's true that Facebook, Twitter, and the web has been instrumental as an organizational tool, but I've never seen an online petition make one iota of difference to a voting politician, or a person that was suffering. I have, however, experienced the hardship and sacrifice that need to be made by American citizens to really enact change.

     Standing in the cold and rain to protest a corporate hog refinery or hand out literature. Making hundreds of phone calls each day to solicit money or votes for pro-education candidates. Walking into hostile association meetings to ask members to support healthcare reform. Receiving verbal abuse, having things thrown at me, and even getting embroiled in a kind of four-person shoving match to simply get past a group of people angry about Obama's healthcare reforms. Talking people "off the ledge", so to speak, in order to create a diplomatic environment to discuss education reforms. Writing letters, flyers, articles, and emails by the hundreds in the name of making some kind of difference in the world in which we live. There is no easy "slacktivist" substitute for enacting real change and real reforms in this country. Democracy, as the adage goes, is messy. There will never be a substitute for that either.