Slacktivism isn’t a problem of lazy activists. It’s a problem of leadership

One common criticism of digital activism is that it’s an escape valve: people get to feel like they’re making a difference when they’re actually doing nothing. Back in the old days, the critique goes, people voted and petitioned government and marched in the streets. Now, we retweet and like and think we’ve done our duty.

This understanding causes a significant amount of frustration to movement builders. And the numbers don’t look good—250,000 likes on an issues campaign’s Facebook page might translate into $2,000 in donations.

“Those lazy slactivists!!”

However, this is an incredibly narrow view of digital activism. Let’s look at this phenomenon a bit differently:

“You mean to tell me that you had 250,000 people raise their hands (or, in this case, their thumbs) and tell you they care about this issue, and you were only able to raise $2,000?”

Slacktivism isn’t a problem of lazy activists. It’s not an issue of people not caring. Slacktivism is a problem of leadership. Tens of thousands of people are expressing interest and support in a wide variety of causes, and movement leaders are just now beginning to figure out how to turn all this support into meaningful action.

Email lists and Facebook pages need to be pieces in a larger organizing strategy if they are going to do much more than encourage slacktivism. The best activist tools are providing leaders the opportunity to turn slacktivist support into meaningful relationships: recruit online volunteers, generate in-person meetings, solicit and crowdfund donations, create engaging content, and connect in all kinds of other creative ways.

Of course, there will always be supporters who don’t meaningfully engage. These folks have always existed. The challenge now is for movement leaders to make use of available tools and recognize slacktivism for what it really is.