Our world is ever changing; year after year, day after day, minute after minuet, change is taking place in every way. This change effects everything, and activism is no exception. As technology and social media use has increased, activism has adapted new forms. Where those of the past had put up posters and hold signs, those of today can click a heart or share a post. This is not to say that the physical activism of the past is gone – it’s not, rather there is a new additional type of activism that has become increasingly present in life today. Along with this rise in digital activism has come questions about the effectivity of it. For Malcolm Gladwell, the author of “Small Change”, social media activism doesn’t hold the same effect as physical activism. Entering the conversation from the other perspective is Kevin Kelly, who wrote “Technophilia”, which focuses on the love and beauty behind technology. For me, the question of effectivity of digital verses physical activism isn’t so black and white. I can see benefit in the widespread visibility of digital activism yet also recognize its flaws in terms of connection and deep participation. Additionally, I understand the importance of physical activism, yet see limits in its ability to have a widespread impact. Thus, I believe that it should not be a debate about which type of activism is better, but rather a conversation about how these two types can work together to have the largest impact.  

            In terms of the connections and ties built around digital activism, Gladwell is of the belief that digital activism is built on the foundation of weak ties, with this I can agree. According to Gladwell, “The kind of activism associated with social media isn’t like this at all. The platforms of social media are built around weak ties.” And “Weak ties seldom lead to high-risk activism.”. Essentially, Gladwell argues that since digital activism lacks the physical social component that in person activism does, it does not create strong bonds and ties between the activist and the cause. This then leads to a lack of high-risk activism, which according to Gladwell is the type of activism that makes the biggest impact. In this regard, I do not disagree with Gladwell, as I agree that social medica creates a disconnect from the actual cause and thus creates a weakened sense of activism. Additionally, social media activism can also lead to people feeling as though they need to participate in digital activism, since they see others they know doing so and feel almost guilted into participating. This thus creates more weak ties, since those who feel this way are participating in the activism, yet not being fully connected or invested in the issue at hand. Despite this, I am not saying that digital activism does not work, any type of activism helps to spread awareness and ideas about important issues, yet the fact is that activism via social media creates a disconnect which results in it being weaker than physical activism. 

            In addition to digital activism being built upon weak ties, Gladwell also is of the belief that the expression which digital activism creates does not have as great of an impact as physical activism. To argue this, Gladwell writes that social media “shifts our energies from organizations that promote strategic and disciplined activity toward those which promote resilience and adaptability. It makes it easier for activists to express themselves, but harder for that expression to have any impact.”.  In this, Gladwell is saying that digital activism via social media has shifted the energies of activists and has consequently made expression easier, yet in doing so it has also resulted in expression having less of an impact, as it is so widespread and diluted compared to in person activism. Here is where I disagree with what Gladwell is saying, as I push against the idea that social media makes it harder for activism to have an impact. Instead, I believe any amount of activism, no matter where it takes place, can have an impact. In fact, I would argue that social media and digital activism actually increases the impact that expression can have. Social media allows for people to spread the news and awareness of issues easily, which in turn allows for more people to see and become aware of activism, thus leading to more people getting involved in the activism and said activism having a greater impact. Additionally, if paired with physical activism, the arability of information and widespread expression that digital activism provides can lead to the largest and most widespread impact. Thus, I argue against the Gladwell’s sentiment that social media makes it harder for expression to have an impact, as I believe it does the opposite, leading to greater knowledge, expression, and in the end a greater impact.