Does ‘slacktivism’ work?

Tens of millions of social media accounts have shared an “All eyes on Rafah” image, which draws attention to the mounting civilian death toll as a result of Israel’s assault on the Gazan city.

The viral reach of the AI-generated content has revived the debate around the effectiveness of politically charged hashtags and images on social media – often derisively called “slacktivism”.

Does ‘slacktivism’ lead to real-world action?

In addition to being a “bland, AI-generated” image rather than actual footage from the conflict, some pro-Palestinian activists noted with frustration that the “All eyes on Rafah” image comes with “no call to action beyond ‘pay attention’; no donation links, no details on how to help”, said Dazed‘s James Greig.

Movements like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter raised millions of pounds in funding after going viral, said a University of Sussex blog post. But whether this “intense” short-term spotlight translates into “meaningful and lasting social change” is a question that “remains unsettled”.

Indeed, studies into whether participation in digital activism around a given cause increases the likelihood of donating money, attending protests or other tangible support have so far been inconclusive. 

However, “the idea that online activism replaces offline activism does not enjoy strong empirical support”, said Psychology Today, dispelling one of the criticisms often levelled at social media-based campaigns.

Does that mean ‘slacktivism’ has no impact?

A lot depends on the context. Resharing posts on X or Instagram “might not count for much on its own”, said Greig, but in the case of “All eyes on Rafah”, the “ubiquity” of the graphic indicates a “shift in consensus” in the West. In a climate where “censorship and repression” of pro-Palestinian activism has been widespread, “we should welcome the movement becoming ‘trendy'”, even in the “shallowest way possible”.

Is all digital activism ‘slacktivism’?

Digital activism can mean many different things, Dr Kelly Lewis, research fellow in the Emerging Technologies Lab at Monash University in Melbourne, wrote on The Conversation. While the impact of resharing a hashtag or viral image is hard to quantify, social media is undeniably a powerful tool for organising real-world action.

This can be both literal – protests and demonstrations around the world are now largely co-ordinated online – but also through building “collective networks of solidarity and resistance”. These communities can be mobilised to participate in actions ranging from crowdsourced fact-checking to “hacktivism” targeting hostile institutions.

What are the pitfalls of digital activism?

Social media’s strength in being able to rapidly spread awareness of an issue might seem like an advantage over older forms of organising, but this can be deceptive, said The Atlantic. In the US civil rights era, boycotts and marches were organised over months and years, during which time activists were “forming and deepening social connections, strengthening and testing the fiber of their movement”. 

Compare that with Occupy Wall Street, which sprang up almost overnight on social media, but it lacked “that underlying resilience created over time, often lost focus, direction, and, most important, their potential to effect change”, until it ultimately fizzled out.

It’s also all too easy for “verified facts” and sensitive reporting to be drowned out by partisan “misinformation, political propaganda and irresponsible journalism” pumped out on social media and uncritically reshared by users, wrote Lewis.

Where the Gaza conflict is concerned, the battle to control the social media narrative has “become almost as intense as the physical acts that define war”. As demonstrated by incidents of Islamophobic, racist and antisemitic aggression around the world motivated by the conflict in Gaza, the circulation of propaganda that fans the flames of hatred can have “disastrous consequences”.