One big reason I was more supportive of these rallies than usual was I wanted to see them address criticisms about Facebook “slacktivism.” There was a lot of scoffing from traditional folks. I didn't want to see their negative views reinforced by low turnout.

Though in all honesty, it's hard to say exactly how effective the FB campaign really was. The rallies might have happened anyways, if maybe smaller and with a lower media profile.

All part of the way…

The problem is that everyone believes that antagonistic struggle is the only way to cause change.

When people come to deliberative processes (like citizens assemblies or citizens juries), they initially expect to push a “winning” idea to the fore. But what they learn is that civil dialogue can generate collaborative outcomes that find broad rather than factional rewards.

So the challenge for those of us in the change game is to figure out how to change the game. Online facilities can help, but not if they just replicate the same aggressive, polarising approaches we see face-to-face. Like you, I believe we are getting there.

But I fear the broadcast media will always rule, so we need to convince them to look beyond tieing their ratings to the portrayal of sensationalised contestation.

We should probably also say they're represented by different groups who inherently prefer one over the other — or who are positioned to enjoy one particular set of benefits more than the other.

Cheers

One big reason I was more supportive of these rallies than usual was I wanted to see them address criticisms about Facebook “slacktivism.” There was a lot of scoffing from traditional folks. I didn't want to see their negative views reinforced by low turnout.

Though in all honesty, it's hard to say exactly how effective the FB campaign really was. The rallies might have happened anyways, if maybe smaller and with a lower media profile.

All part of the way…

The problem is that everyone believes that antagonistic struggle is the only way to cause change.

When people come to deliberative processes (like citizens assemblies or citizens juries), they initially expect to push a “winning” idea to the fore. But what they learn is that civil dialogue can generate collaborative outcomes that find broad rather than factional rewards.

So the challenge for those of us in the change game is to figure out how to change the game. Online facilities can help, but not if they just replicate the same aggressive, polarising approaches we see face-to-face. Like you, I believe we are getting there.

But I fear the broadcast media will always rule, so we need to convince them to look beyond tieing their ratings to the portrayal of sensationalised contestation.

We should probably also say they're represented by different groups who inherently prefer one over the other — or who are positioned to enjoy one particular set of benefits more than the other.

Cheers

Physical congregations definitely galvanize attention better than anything else, which is absolutely necessary. I'm not so much against protests as trying to think above and beyond them — beyond sending a message, to assuming a little more responsibility (very long term…)

A big benefit of digital media it that the crowd is easier to navigate. I was at the rally and I didn't know who anyone there was (except the speakers and people I already knew). Whereas I can go through the list of people tweeting about it, see what they're saying, click on their profile and get a sense of their affiliations and accomplishments within seconds. Within minutes we can be in contact and (in theory) talking about ways our skills and interests we might complement each other — and then I'll always know where to find them. We can do all that in-person too, just not nearly as efficiently.

And ironically, social media isn't fleeting. We can go back and look up what was said, and all the incremental actions develop into visible reputations.

Hard to say exactly how it'll all turn out though. There are legitimate concerns about echo chambers etc, but I think the best way to address possible flaws is to keep encouraging the positive aspects to flourish.

Physical congregations definitely galvanize attention better than anything else, which is absolutely necessary. I’m not so much against protests as trying to think above and beyond them — beyond sending a message to assume a little more responsibility (very long term…)

A big benefit of digital media it that the crowd is easier to navigate. I was at the rally and I didn’t know who anyone there was (except the speakers and people I already knew). Whereas I can go through the list of people tweeting about it, see what they’re saying, click on their profile and get a sense of their affiliations and accomplishments within seconds. Within minutes we can be in contact and (in theory) talking about ways our skills and interests we might complement each other — and then I’ll always know where to find them. We can do all that in-person too, just not nearly as efficiently.

And ironically, social media isn’t fleeting. We can go back and look up what was said, and all the incremental actions develop into reputations.

Hard to say exactly how it’ll all turn out though. There are legitimate concerns about echo chambers etc, but I think the best way to address possible flaws is to keep encouraging the positive aspects to flourish.

It comes down to visuals. A politician can see a number at the bottom of a screen to get an idea of how popular or unpopular an idea is. But nothing beats a few thousand people sitting on their front yard telling them so – even if the harmonized voice offers only simple protest rather than alternatives.

You state “In a way, the bigger the crowd, the less social it becomes. Of course it’s social in a really basic way, but there isn’t much genuine interaction.” How well does social media stand up to that statement? You can't honestly be saying that social media is more social than real interaction, however crude or fleeting?

In my opinion, we need more of these. I'm thrilled to see people actually getting together physically at a predetermined location because they're pissed off. Simple message to be sure, but that's all it needs to be, doesn't it?
Cheers