In defense of online activism

It's refreshing and thought-provoking to see some of the responses to Jenkins' piece this week, and particularly the focus on forms of activism through online engagement, even though this is far from Jenkins' last word on the topic. For me, personally, the piece was a lot more descriptive rather than celebratory. It spoke to a current observed reality, which, for us all, typing away at our blogspots, should be somewhat relatable.

To first assume that activism can and should have material consequences on working class people in particular is a strange proposition. Am I not an activist if my cause fails? Am I not an activist if my cause is to change attitudes rather than materiality? To secondly assume that there is a clear distinction between those who perform activism online and the working class, as if the working class requires effects done unto them, is rather uncalled for. Despite rhetorics of the digital divide, the online environment is much more complex and filled with many voices of the working class, and so if their choice is to blog and have that as their resistance, arguably the material effect has already occurred.

Finally, access and articulation are in and of themselves forms of resistance. Personally, I've had a qualm about calling this resistance as well, but from where I'm standing, any form of online engagement is valuable regardless of whether it can be considered resistance, and resistance writ large is also not always the ultimate goal (but that's a discussion for another day). Given my iffy stance on the matter, I would still argue that, for many parts of the world, blogging itself is very very risky. Putting the colour of a flag on your profile picture or using a hashtag could get your account taken away or worse. Although this is hopefully not the case in our world, people hold onto those attitudes and cultures, and so for them, resistance and activism might be pushing themselves to post something that someone else won't hesitate to. Just as voting has a different meaning and significance to each individual that votes (and doesn't vote), to dismiss online forms of engagement was ultimately not as powerful as traditional forms of activism, to me, is to deny the work of those who perhaps find the online sphere as the only outlet of political expression, in whatever form and for whatever reason. I think that's ultimately why, time and again, I stand by Henry's work. Rather than starting from definitions of activism for content to live up to, it starts from the content itself, as well as the content creators, to see what activism and resistance might mean for them and for the mediascape they find themselves inhabiting.