Gladwell’s Contention
Gladwell’s thesis
statement was buried deep in the article (which made it exhausting to read
until his point was finally made), which was: Weak ties, like the ones present in social media
networks, “seldom lead to risk-risk activism.”
The author’s definition of a “weak tie” are associations that, while allowing people to “give voice to their concerns,” do
not elicit individuals to take action; whereas a "strong tie" is one that allows people to confront tyranny and bring about significant social change because of a deeply vested personal relationship.
After a discussion of
the Greensboro lunch counter confrontation, Gladwell purported that David
Richmond, Franklin, McClain, Ezell Blair, and Joseph McNeil (the 'Greensboro Four' activists) empowered
one another, using their long-term and inter-connecting relationship, to remain
seated at the ‘all white’ lunch counter at Woolworth’s – despite being warned
and then threatened that they could not stay there. Furthermore, per Gladwell, without the
strength of their friendship bonds, they would not have had the courage needed to
protest the racial injustice of Jim Crow practices as they did.
Gladwell goes on to assert that social media connects
people but only to the extent that they are not asked to risk large stakes in the outcome. His example discussed a search for donor
bone-marrow and the creation of a database as an example of social media’s
strengths. By comparison, civil rights worker’s strength to proceed with the 1960s Mississippi Freedom Summer Project, per Gladwell, lay in the fortitude only exhibited when there are "strong ties" among the participants. The
Freedom Project would not have been fostered by social media, in Gladwell’s estimation, because
Facebook “succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice” but instead by its indirect associations.
Media
Expert Disagrees
In another TCNJ course
(i.e., Society, Ethics, and Technology) we discussed how the
viral popularity of a Facebook page (featuring Klahed Said, a slain victim of Egyptian police brutality) fueled further dissension and protests, leading
to President Mubarak’s resignation in 2012. Remembering this, I Google-searched ‘role of social media in Arab
Spring Uprising’ and a host of compelling blogs and articles were presented. One,
written by Master’s student Eira Martens reflected an academic study by someone
with diverse media consulting experience in Germany, Australia, South East
Asia and Latin America. As a result, I
felt her work was less emotional than some of the blog posts that I also read
from Egyptians who participated in the movement.
Martens' research on the Arab Spring Uprisings conflicted with Gladwell’s foundational premise the people are only willing to make a sacrifice and show the tenacity required to confront stare down injustice when motivated and flanked by personal acquaintances. In contrast, Martens stated that as brutal images
in Egypt “were distributed on Facebook and other platforms such as YouTube and
Flickr, made people more willing to take to the streets and risk being injured
or even killed…because as well as making people angry, the images also lowered
people’s fear threshold,” allowing participants to form a collective identity (Martens). This was a departure from Gladwell's assertion that only deep and meaningful friendships fuel people's courage to protest and that social media, lacking in depth, was inept at spurring social upheaval and change. In Small Change, Gladwell takes great stock in his assertion that high-risk activism mandates “strong-ties” with friends who are also taking part in the movement stating, “The primary determinant of who showed up was “critical friends” – the more you had who were critical of the regime, the more likely you were to join the protest.” Martens' commentary was in direct contrast to Gladwell's baseline arguments.
Meeting of the Minds
However, on the subject
of leadership and authority, Gladwell stated that “if you are taking on a
powerful and organized establishment, you have to be a hierarchy” which
provides an authority structure of disciplined groups. Marten’s research agreed
that “the
organizational potential of Facebook and Twitter to coordinate protests in the
long-term, to define collective goals and to create effective structures seems
to be limited.”
Gladwell’s article was
written in 2010, while the Arab Spring Uprisings took place in 2012. So, I have to wonder if Gladwell would change
his position if he compared the 1960s civil rights movement (accomplished
without social media) to the Arab Spring Uprisings, whose success in gathering high-risk
involvement has been attributed to Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, and YouTube. I would personally believe this comparison would present a more convincing argument than Gladwell did in Small Change.
Works
Cited
“What
Role Did Social Media Really Play in Egypt’s Arab Spring Uprising?” OnMedia. 10 December
2012. Web. 14 April 2015. http://onmedia.dw-akademie.de/english/?p=6491
No comments:
Post a Comment