#HashtagActivism is a robust and thorough defense of its namesake practice. It argues that Twitter disintermediated public discourse, analyzing networks of user interactions in that context, but its analysis overlooks that Twitter is actually a heavy-handed intermediary. It imposes strict requirements on content, like a character limit, and controls who sees what and in what context. Reintroducing Twitter as the medium and reinterpreting the analysis exposes serious flaws. Similarly, their defense of hashtag activism relies almost exclusively on Twitter engagement data, but offers no theory of change stemming from that engagement. By reexamining their evidence, I argue that hashtag activism is not just ineffective, but its institutional dynamics are structurally conservative and inherently anti-democratic.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    17 days ago

    I read another book along similar lines called If We Burn, which was a broader look at the 2010s protest movements that sprung up from online activism. What I took away from it is that most of that activism was hollow and didn’t have a political vision or party program, it was just the masses shouting “No!” at their shitty governments. It was also easily put down once people in power got used to it.

    • theluddite@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      I actually also reviewed that one, except my review of it was extremely favorable. I’m so glad that you read it and I’d welcome your thoughts on my very friendly amendment to his analysis if you end up reading that post.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        Oh I absolutely loved it, don’t get me wrong. I lived through that decade as my own political awakening, so every single event described was something I watched super closely and posted about and participated in as part of the online activist space (and sometimes in person!)

        Your observation that the social media companies can leverage and benefit from these protest movements (and perhaps even create them) is important, I think. It’s probably why Musk bought Twitter, he wanted to wield that kind of power over the masses and their ability to organize. It seems to have worked, too. We don’t see anything like what we saw in the 2010s these days.

        • theluddite@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          Same, and thanks! We’re probably a similar age. My own political awakening was occupy, and I got interested in theory as I participated in more and more protest movements that just sorta fizzled.

          I 100% agree re:Twitter. I am so tired of people pointing out that it has lost 80% of its value or whatever. Once you have a few billion, there’s nothing that more money can do to your material circumstances. Don’t get me wrong, Musk is a dumbass, but, in this specific case, I actually think that he came out on top. That says more about what you can do with infinite money than anything about his tactical genius, because it doesn’t exactly take the biggest brain to decide that you should buy something that seems important.