Internet activism and the IGC Award

[Boyd Roberts]

Recent events in Egypt highlight the effectiveness of “people power” – of large numbers of people coming together to take small actions. While the actions in Cairo and elsewhere doubtless involved some people in considerable time and organisation, it was the involvement of large numbers of people taking relatively easy but committed actions – like spending time in the central square – that led to the retirement of President Mubarak.

In schools we tend to concentrate on “service” as a central or principal aspect of community engagement by students. There has been a tendency to give particular attention to what may be called the “heroic” end of service – perhaps time overseas engaged on projects relating to poverty or emergencies. Whatever the benefits of such service actions, they necessarily involve relatively small numbers of older students. But smaller scale actions that can be taken by everybody on an everyday basis may have greater impact, particularly when they are part of a concerted collective effort. This is the very strong case for charity giving, for buying fairly traded or environmentally sensitive products and generally ensuring there is an ethical dimension to our decisions on how we spend our money. 

Events in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East have also been dependent on the simple forms of communication – mobile phones and internet – that we now take for granted. Without these technologies the large numbers of people engaged in protests could not have been marshalled.

In recent years, electronic communication has been deployed by various organisations and groups to lobby on specific issues. One such organisation in the UK called “38 degrees” explains its name and purpose as follows: “In nature, avalanches begin when they reach the tipping point angle of 38 degrees. In the UK, 38 Degrees will enable people to act together, to create an avalanche for change.”

One of the more prominent organizations operating internationally and in a number of languages is Avaaz, meaning "voice" in several European, Middle Eastern and Asian languages. Launched in 2007 it has “a simple democratic mission: organize citizens of all nations to close the gap between the world we have and the world most people everywhere want.”

Global citizens need to consider their position on joining such campaigns. There seems little doubt that they can have an impact and bring about change. But some are cautious of the dangers of “clicktivism” – what they consider the (too?) easy action of joining campaigns, requiring little effort and perhaps without considering fully the issues.

In the context of the IGC Award, it seems appropriate to make students aware of such possibilities of action, and to encourage them to discuss with each other, and with mentors, the advantages and disadvantages of taking part.

Wikipedia has an article on “slacktivism” – embracing not only internet petitions and the like, but other low investment actions such as wearing bracelets or badges.

Micah White writes a challenging critique of clicktivism in the Guardian: see http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/12/clicktivism-rui...

Do, please, post comments or reactions, or links to other relevant sites and materials.