The Social Media Pandemic
On May 25th of 2020, something transpired in America that started a movement and would change history. A black man named George Floyd was killed during an arrest after a store clerk alleged he had passed a counterfeit $20 bill in Minneapolis. A white police officer named Derek Chauvin knelt on Floyd’s neck for a period reported to be 8 minutes and 46 seconds. Floyd told the officers over 20 times that he couldn’t breathe. The video circulated around the internet and the Black Lives Matter movement was born. Families of other victims of police brutality against African American victims spoke out and told their loved one’s stories. Day after day, a new story would reach the internet. There was Tony McDade, Dion Johnson, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery, who were all killed without a just cause. The Black Lives Matter movement is notable not only for its effectiveness but also because it acts as a revolutionary example of the role social media plays in politics with our current generation. In her piece “How to Do Nothing”, Jenny Odell suggests some ways of addressing this phenomenon.
On May 26th, protests began in George Floyd’s hometown of Minneapolis. These protests were the match that started the fire that was the black lives matter protests. Over 2,000 cities in 6 different countries were protesting for the black lives matter movement. While most protests have been peaceful, demonstrations in many cities escalated into riots, looting, and altercations with police. In Minneapolis, local stores were burned and looted for their goods. There have been numerous reports and videos of aggressive police actions using physical force including “batons, tear gas, pepper spray and rubber bullets on protesters, bystanders and journalists, often without warning or seemingly unprovoked”. Some protests turned into riots where police would fight back against protesters, but others would be peaceful where children and elders were tear-gassed for nothing.
While in-person protests were a major part of this movement, social media played just as an important role. People would post the latest story and others would respond and post their opinions. Every social media post became related to the movement. It became so big that if you were to post something not related to the movement, you would get judged. Some would be pictures of protests, some would be links to petitions you could sign, and others were informative videos. I reposted a video about the faults of the police system. It was so powerful and wasn’t attacking police, but discussing how America can do better to make our country a safer and more inclusive place.
Jenny Odell, in her book “How to Do Nothing”, discusses political activism in our society. Not only does she address political activism, but she talks about the problems with our world and ways we can go about “doing nothing” as a way of fixing them. Odell says,
To me, one of the most troubling ways social media has been used in recent years is to foment waves of hysteria and fear, both by news media and by users themselves.
You would see a video online of violent protests and it would make you fearful because these protests were happening everywhere. The videos of the protests made people scared of the movement and those involved. It made people look at it as a movement of destruction and not of hope and change.
How this movement depended on social media brought the attention economy into this touchy subject. While people were spending time on social media to read up on injustice in America, the CEO’s of these companies were making money. They were drawing you into the movement while taking advantage of you. Odell discusses the problem of how the big social media companies take advantage of us while engrossing us in the movement on page 179 of “How to Do Nothing”:
The overwhelming anxiety that I feel in the face of the attention economy doesn’t just have to do with its mechanics and effects, but also with recognition of, and anguish over, the very real social and environmental injustice that provides the material for that same economy. But I feel my sense of responsibility frustrated. It’s a cruel irony that the platforms on which we encounter and speak about these issues are simultaneously profiting from a collapse of context that keeps us from being able to think straight.
This is the danger of involving politics and social media. Obviously, there is a benefit to spreading awareness to people all over the world, but that benefit feeds into the attention economy. However, in this day and age, what else is there to do? What other way can you get someone’s attention to show them what is going wrong with the world? If you really want to make a difference, be motivated and inspired. Go out into the world and make a difference. Odell describes this as:
Disengaging from the framework (the attention economy) not only to give myself time to think but to do something else in another framework. When I try to imagine a sane social network, it is a space of appearance: a hybrid of mediated and in-person encounters.
An example of this social interaction was done by the students of the #NeverAgain movement. This was a student-run group that was founded after the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in 2018. They would meet in person to come up with ideas and anything they thought would help, they did it. They would organize interviews, social media posts, and organizing events. The key piece to the success of this group was that they were motivated and passionate. They did not sit behind their screens and post something and moved on. They got up out of their beds and made a difference. In a social situation like this, you can communicate openly with your peers, and as Odell said,
Disagreements and debates would not be triggers that shut the whole discussion down, but rather an integral part of group deliberation.
Over the internet, it is so easy to fight someone’s opinion instead of reason with it. We start arguments with people we don’t even know. However, in-person, disagreements become room for discussion. This is an example of space of appearance because people from all around the world could join in on this moment from their screens and feel empowered. The kids in charge of the movement even organized a televised event featuring performances by celebrities and speeches from survivors of the shooting. This mix of hybrid and in-person encounters gave everyone a chance to be a part of this movement and feel like they were making a difference.
As the black lives matter movement went on, people started using social media to not only spread awareness but debate. The hatred for police was spread just as frequently as posts about black lives. Police brutality became an equally important part of the movement. With this rose opposition. People posted things entitled “all lives matter” or “blue lives matter”, regarding the lives of police officers. While it isn’t exclusive to the party, most Republicans were posting these words. With one of the most controversial and important elections coming up, this puts even more of a divide between the two parties. People attacked each other on Instagram and try to tell them that their beliefs are wrong. I remember on blackout Tuesday, someone I followed on Instagram posted the “blue lives matter flag” and this sparked a huge debate. His comments were full of people ripping him apart. This is where politics on social media get taken too far. Social media is not a sparring ground where one political party can win and claim that their ideals are correct.
Veronica Barassi, in her essay “Social Media, Immediacy and the Time for Democracy,” discusses the shortfalls that social media presents for online activists. First, instantaneous communication creates an excess of information. On one hand, you have to constantly be producing content, and on the other hand, there is so much information online that no one reads it. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen an article and clicked through it. Unless something really grabs your attention, most teenagers do not have the time to read an article or are not interested in reading it. A second issue is social media eliminates the time needed for “political elaboration.” The content that social media activists have to put out must be catchy, so the message loses its real meaning. Barassi says, “social media were not a space for political discussion and elaboration, because the communication was too fast, too quick, and too short.”
The Black Lives Matter movement is a revolution that takes place in the actual world but is also heavily reliant on social media. Because of this, we have all been a part of the movement and have seen it unfold. However, social media should not be our battleground. We should not be feeding into the attention economy while trying to make a difference. Social media should be used to spread awareness, not to fight with your peers. While the world would be a better place if there was a solution to issues like this, there is not. While there is no big fix, doing little things every day can make a difference to make your community a better place to live. Instead of posting hateful comments about someone’s political beliefs, take a moment to think if it is the right thing to do. Do nothing for the attention economy but do plenty to make the world a better place.
