Woman on computer - Slacktivism

SLACKTIVIST OR SOCIAL CHAMPION?: Clicking for a cause does more than people think

Last updated: November 26th, 2018

Slacktivist—the derogatory term immediately casts a shadow of low expectations, which, like any form of discrimination, ends up becoming the dominant form of thinking until the truth rises to the surface. The common thinking is that “social champions” (a term Katya Andresen, chief strategy officer of Network for Good, is using to rebrand slacktivists) will devote only as much effort to a cause as it takes to click a mouse.

Though activism on the web does take less effort than activism in the streets, there’s one important aspect people overlook. According to Dynamics of Cause Engagement, a study by Georgetown University’s Center for Social Impact Communication and Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide, 52 percent of Americans reported changing their actions or behaviour because of their involvement in a cause. For those who believe what Gandhi said about the necessity of being the change, this potent bit of news comes as a nice surprise.

Demographics of cause engagement

Though Americans agree that individuals can make a difference in supporting a cause, younger generations are more likely to believe in the ability of online activism to increase visibility for causes.

At 11 percent, Generation X (ages 30 to 45, according to this study) was the demographic with the highest percentage involved in a cause, almost twice as high as the Silent Generation (ages 61 and up). Generation Y (ages 18 to 29) is most likely to use social media for cause engagement (21 percent). That figure drops steadily with older generations.

Women are significantly more likely than men to report a behavioural change as a result of cause engagement. Gen X (ages 30 to 45) reported the highest rate of behavioural change among the other demographic groups (58 percent).

How behaviours change

Younger generations, particularly Gen X, reported a greater likelihood to change their behaviour due to their engagement in a cause. But it’s the Silent Generation that topped the list as the most likely to vote due to cause engagement, the number one behavioural change factor (48 percent). After voting, the next most likely change is to one’s recycling habits (40 percent), followed by becoming more energy efficient (34 percent), becoming a volunteer (31 percent), and becoming more tolerant of differing opinions (25 percent).

Thanks in part to the simplicity of social media, online activists are four to five times more likely than those who don’t use online tools to promote a cause by asking acquaintances to sign a petition or to contact their political representatives. The likelihood of an online activist to solicit donations for a cause is triple that of people who do not use the Internet for the same task. They are also 2.5 times more likely to buy a product or service from a company that supports causes they believe in. “Slacktivists” are also twice as likely to volunteer or take part in events such as a charity walk, laying to rest the assumption that they’re lazy.

How to engage social champions

To be called a champ we have to act like one. Statistics suggest that yes, social champions are affected for the better by their minimal online commitment to a cause, but that behavioural change is focused, not across-the-board personal change. Any amount of positive change, however, is a good thing.

So how do non-profits effect further change among social champions? By applying traditional marketing concepts, they can really take advantage of the Internet’s viral nature. When a company sells a customer on a particular product, it’s role then shifts to keeping that customer and to get her to buy other products and become loyal to the brand.

Non-profits need to think about how someone who wears a pink ribbon for breast cancer awareness can be converted into a full-on social activist. OK, that might sound a bit much, but really anything’s possible. Breast cancer obviously is linked to other forms of cancer, so that’s a start. But then why not health in general? If the non-profit has a narrow mandate of only breast cancer that’s fine, even a good thing, because it causes the non-profit to collaborate with others.

Non-profits are often criticized as being made up of too many disparate interests without the cohesion to affect real change because no one can agree on anything. Unity is an all-important virtue that bonds causes together and builds solidarity. Without unity the world doesn’t have much hope. And specialization is great because it helps an organization with limited resources to focus on what it knows best. Once building up a devoted network, these specialists can help market other groups’ causes to their attentive audience.

In our information-crowded universe, bombarding people with too many causes can overwhelm, so this approach needs to be used discriminatively. To get around this, online activism itself can be a worthwhile cause. So while someone may not care enough to get involved in a save the rainforest campaign, or even take the time to sign a petition for that particular cause, non-profits can brand online activists in much the same way fashion and clothing companies brand people. Your fashion is online activism. Your clothing is Avaaz (or take your pick of online activist communities). Your logo is the online community you choose to promote. Your purchase from a company’s subsidiary is your connection to a partner organization. By walking around the Internet wearing online activist communities’ logos you champion social causes wherever you go.

*****

It’s not possible to change people who don’t want to change. Governments, organizations and companies are made up of people. These groups won’t be transformed unless enough people within that group want action precisely why Gandhi said what he did about individuals needing to be the change.

If the Arab Spring is any proof, social champions can have an immense collective impact on a cause, but in order for reforms to last, it’s the individual change that really makes a difference. That belief alone makes “slacktivism” an inherently useful exercise.

image: Ed Yourdon (Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0) 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *