Is the Internet revolutionising activism?

Is the internet giving rise to the online public sphere, with its global reach, decentralisation of information, speed of accessibility and permanence as an online space? Are the ideals of democratic participation within reach as communications become more inclusive and ideas are given voice? The boundaries of the public sphere are continually changing most acutely through the commercialisation of the press which is corruptive as celebrity cultures pervade the agenda at the detriment of public affairs (Poor, 2005). 

Habermas (1991; 1962) conceptualised the public sphere consisting of three vital elements which are significant to its existence online; formulated through mediated discussion, offering new spaces of discourse providing voice to those previously excluded from issues of governance and ideas judged on merits as opposed to a speakers social standing. However as critiques point out, the hegemonic values of the elite are subtly reinforced through the media which re-presents the realities implicated within social, economic and political relationships (Devereux, 2007). Since civic life is a minor area of interest this does pose the question as to whether we do only read the ‘Daily Me’ as Sunstein (2001, cited Poor 2005) suggests and whether political discussions are composed solely by the informed elite.

This leads me onto an article I read on the media landscape and political diversity. Since newspapers and media are known to have some degree of political bias; it was established within social media that whether the exposure level was subtle or straightforward it helped users gain diverse opinions (An et al, 2011). This got me thinking; with strong advocates of social filters surely this highlights the influence between publics, autonomous from state and economic power? Equally it shows how individuals are predisposed to public affairs extending across the political spectrum which refutes the conception that only the rich and cultured are engaged. It appears the internet is capable of becoming ‘the great democratiser’.

UK Uncut is an example of a public sphere which leads into the topic of digital activism as the internet provides ‘forums for organising, communicating, publishing and taking direct action’ (Spinello and Tavani, 2004). UK Uncut set the agenda for mass protest against large corporations evading taxes and the payout of ‘fat cat’ bonuses in city banks. This was a strike out at the government’s efforts to reduce the deficit by cutting public services; a policy based upon ideology, not necessity. News broadcasts reported on the protests as publics organised themselves together to build resistance to this austerity. The internet provided a communication infrastructure enabling the widespread dissatisfaction with governance to progress into a social movement (Joyce, 2010). On their website, activists are encouraged to organise action themselves as no centrally planned actions exist; they are explicit in the fact it is ‘your movement’.


Video: Daniel Garvin from UK Uncut talks about the campaign, raising some significant issues over digital activism.

Joyce (2010) uses the term ‘Meta-Activism’ which focuses on building a toolkit allowing online potential activists to become politically and socially active. Social media significantly propelled this movement forward as the 'big conversation' stretched across diverse platforms with no restraints. UK Uncut only existed as #ukuncut, a hash tag somebody dreamt up the night before protesters shut down Vodafone’s flagship store. As actions in the online realm synchronized with protest in the physical one, #ukuncut began trending across the UK (Joyce, 2010). This is evocative of the hype cycle since technology triggered the buzz in which expectations became inflated by the media (Phillips and Young, 2009). In this case, the power of going viral spread to fifty-five towns and resulted in 27,303 followers on Twitter and 25,581 members on Facebook signifying enlightened usage and demonstrating how activism reached a plateau of productivity. Joyce (2010, cited MacManus, 2010) advocates the greatest factor which determines the utility of an application to activists is scale and ‘use neutrality’. UK Uncut did both; Twitter was able to reach the critical mass of users activating the network effects which generated awareness and integrated shared ideals.

Word of mouth is an influential tool and social media is key to going viral by tracing connections through trusted networks and disseminating information quickly. Even so, I find myself questioning whether the power harnessed by the internet is too overwhelming for the minority who use it as a medium to exchange insults, known as ‘flaming’. Anonymity simply facilitates this dissent and domination by extremists which has serious consequences for offline actions, as demonstrated by protesters who saw an opportunity to cause anarchy.

Strong implications arise for corporate communications and for PROs. The clue is in the title; Public Relations. The public sphere is a haven of issues which if monitored and managed effectively can identify and enhance strategic opportunities. Mapping the conversational landscape can help identify issues, establish two contrasting sides of a debate and pinpoint key influential’s (Joyce, 2010). This forms the basis for an activist ‘political terrain map’, identifying potential allies to engage with. Marmite is an example of a brand that capitalised on the build-up to the UK General Election by holding an election of its own between ‘The Love Party’ and ‘The Hate Party’ by assembling an official group of ‘cabinet ministers’. Implementing a ‘social radar’ identified the ideal time to release Marmites ‘party’ information and spread the message through multiple social media platforms when the elections were a hot topic.

Activism can be detrimental to an organisation/brand or equally supportive of their values. As the Web Ecology perspective outlines a new generation of activist tools, these can be used by PROs to either confound ‘threatening’ activists or to internalise activism as part of CSR initiatives. 

The rise of the online public sphere facilitates the ideals of democratic participation, even leading to memetic entropy where there are too many voices and the dissemination of cultural content engenders increasing disorganisation (Joyce, 2010), yet its viral power, instantaneous nature and ability to mobilise action can lead to consensus by challenging the hierarchy.