As I end my ethnographical experiment and my time getting to know Joanne Babcock, I'm starting to have second thoughts about the power of the Internet and social media in the context of political movements. People who criticize Web 2.0, such as Andrew Keen, believe that it is destroying mass media as we know it, by de-emphasizing the importance of authorship, lowering the standards of quality for good journalism and writing, and diminishing the importance of honesty and truth in reporting. This same idea can be applied to social media as a political mobilizer. It's starting to become apparent that many of the people involved with the Tea Party online would not necessarily be supporters if they didn't have the option of doing so online. So what: someone "likes" Sarah Palin, is in the Tea Party "group," and participates in online discussion. Are they taking action? Are they actually politically involved? It's hard to gauge the level of impact that the online participation of these thousands of people is really having. Although there is evidence in the Tea Party's success, given the recent victories of people like Christine O'Donnell, this doesn't have a direct correlation to the individuals participating online.
As we've learned, the Internet gives people the opportunity to be anonymous and create online identities, and I believe that political activism online is no different.
No comments:
Post a Comment