In an era where Instagram story reposts seem to hold the reins of change, it is entirely up to us, the advocates, to take a step back and ponder the effectiveness and inclusivity of our advocacy efforts. The tendency to champion specific causes while neglecting others, and our dependency on social media platforms, raise very good questions about the depth and impact of our commitment to social change.
Let us first tackle the issue of selective activism. Picture this: widespread support for urgent causes like climate change or refugee crises of certain nationalities or ethnicities, while equally critical issues, perhaps closer to home, including ethnic cleansing or genocide of other, less cared-for regions, remain entirely in the shadows. It is not that the causes garnering attention do not deserve it – they rightfully do. However, the danger lies in the unintentional sidelining of equally pressing concerns.
Selective activism, unintentional as it may be, can perpetuate a hierarchy of issues, conveying that certain problems are more deserving of our collective efforts than others.
To illustrate an example, let us briefly talk soccer game drama. Waving a Ukrainian flag as a Champions League Team before the match, posing for official pictures for mainstream news outlets? Totally acceptable, showing solidarity, deserves its place on all mainstream news sites. But, uh-oh, the audience brings out the Palestinian flag, and suddenly it is like trying to sneak unwelcome snacks into a movie theater – they will kick you out.
Both are humanitarian crises that we, as humans, should sympathize and stand in solidarity with, regardless of race, religion, or nationality, yet one is publicly funded and supported, while one remains “too controversial” to be discussed in public settings.
The truth is, no issue is “too controversial” to warrant advocacy. Maybe some need to see that standing in resistance of the bombing of innocent civilians does not mean hate speech of a certain religion or ethnicity, or that condemning the actions of a radical government endorsing genocide does not mean you are supporting a terrorist group.
Now, we zoom in on social media activism. While the digital realm can provide a powerful platform for mobilizing support, we must also question the efficacy of these efforts beyond the virtual sphere. Posting a black square or a reposting a certain charity fund Hailey Bieber shared on her story might seem meaningful to yourself, but without tangible, real-world action to accompany your post, the impact can be fleeting.
This is not about dismissing the power of online activism but recognizing its limitations. In fact, some of these celebrities and influencers should be using their over 400 million follower-count to raise awareness, instead of posting ambiguous, ineffective stories claiming they are “praying for everyone involved” and “remaining silent during these rough times.”
Of course, we must also keep in mind that misinformation spreads as quickly as genuine content, which can dilute the potency of well-intentioned campaigns. Blindly amplifying content without due diligence risks perpetuating fake news, making fact-checking before sharing essential.
Activism is not an Instagram story that disappears after a day. It should be like your favorite playlist – you keep playing and adding to it, even when the songs are not in the trending section. Some issues cannot afford to be discarded after being used as your Instagram story to showcase to your followers that you are a person “staying well aware and spreading awareness!”
Activism is not a trend – it is a commitment. It requires a willingness to engage with issues that may not be as popular or trending but are nonetheless crucial to the well-being of communities. It means not only standing up for issues that governments or Western mainstream media continuously display in their frontlines.
Let us make our voices heard without leaving anyone behind.