Facebook has Corrupted Advocacy

I would like to discuss briefly the merits of Facebook. The social website, that everyone has come to know, love, and hate, was originally designed to let friends interact with each other on the Internet. Writing messages to one another and looking at each others pictures was a big part of what Facebook was originally envisioned to be. After six years, Facebook has morphed into a behemoth of companies, governments, fan pages, groups, applications, games, and the list goes on and on. Now it is easy to show your support for your favorite artist, or to speak out against the plans to scrap the Transit City project in Toronto. However, I assert that this ease of advocacy available on the Internet is actually undermining real advocacy.

I know that I have on some days received invitations to more then a dozen events or groups. In some cases, a group has been formed to support or oppose a current issue. Most of the times, I don’t even bother opening up the group to see what it is about. As with emails, I skim through the subject line and determine whether it is worth reading. At least with a petition an actual person would interact with you, explain the background of the petition and give justification on why the issue should receive your signature. With the rise to prominence of Facebook, the discussion becomes one-sided. A short description is attached to the title of a group, and all you need to do is click ‘Join Group’ and you have silently consented to the aims of that group. In some cases, you need to be a member of the group to join the discussion at all regardless of if you support it or not, so the size of the true group is not easily known. As well, you may get invitations to multiple groups regarding the same topic, so if you choose to join one and ignore the rest, or join all of the groups, you are skewing the numbers.

However, the biggest potential blow to advocacy is that this form of online petitioning is quickly overshadowing more traditional forms of solicitation and consultation. More and more, readers are reviewing posts and discussions and their only action they take is to click the ‘Like’ button, or to leave a comment. That’s it. They have stated to the world that they agree with what they have just read, and nothing more will be done on their part. Unless their comments or show of contentment are read and acted upon by outside parties, their participation in the matter is finished.

How did advocacy happen before we had Facebook and the Internet? If we look at the social turmoil that occurred during the 1960s, students took to the streets to advocate for and against the issues that defined the decade. The use of posters, pamphlets, sit-ins, letters, rallies, advertisement on radio and television, and other forms of advocacy were the norm. Although it could still be easy to ignore, we knew there were actual people behind the campaigns. The Internet has led to a wave of anonymous advocacy, and along with it has arisen the irrelevant posts and childish flame wars that rage on in the comments section. The Internet has enabled us to reach so many people at once, but the constant barrage of status updates and information has desensitized us.

In short, don’t assume that a status update condemning the loss of green space on campus is actually going to result in any action in the real world. You have made your opinion known, but you are now relying on others to notice your opinion and carry it along. Nobody is forced to read your comments, or to act on them. Facebook is a network used to share information, but it is still up to its user to back up their opinions and take action.