The digital age has undeniably reshaped the landscape of activism, offering unprecedented opportunities for collective action, information dissemination, and global mobilisation. From viral campaigns raising awareness about climate change to online petitions demanding justice, online activism has become a pervasive force. Yet, it often faces criticism for being superficial, dismissed as “clicktivism” that lacks real-world impact. This article delves into the nuances of online activism, moving beyond simplistic critiques to explore its true potential as a tool for empowerment, dialogue, and tangible change. Indeed, a friend recently shared her experience of being from a Facebook-free zone, acknowledging that many others likely share a cautious relationship with social media, yet for all the noise, Facebook and similar platforms offer something profoundly valuable: online activism.
At its core, online activism excels at generating awareness. Platforms like social media can instantly broadcast messages to a global audience, bypassing traditional media gatekeepers. This rapid dissemination of information can quickly bring overlooked issues to the forefront, as seen in countless movements that have gained traction through hashtags and viral content. The immediacy of online platforms allows for swift responses to unfolding events, enabling individuals to express solidarity or outrage in real-time. This aligns with the “From Awareness to Action” mission of planetandpeople.online, highlighting the initial, crucial step of informing a wide audience. This broad reach is facilitated by the very design of digital platforms, which, as explored in the “Smartphone Influence: The Overlooked Cost” article, are engineered to capture and maximise engagement. While this can lead to concerns about “opportunity cost” and fragmented attention, it also presents an undeniable opportunity for activists to harness these mechanisms to spread vital information and call for attention to pressing issues. The ability to share an article, sign a petition, or join a virtual protest with just a few clicks lowers the barrier to entry, inviting a wider array of participants than traditional forms of activism. As one campaign group, Avaaz, powerfully articulated in an email, “Across the planet, millions of people young and old are flooding the streets and mobilising online to reject corruption and injustice and speak of a more beautiful world. ‘The sleeping giant has awoken’ is the translation of the hashtag used.” Avaaz, which has grown to nearly 25 million members, is active almost everywhere, demonstrating the scale of online mobilisation. For example, the Brazilian Senate has cited the Avaaz community when voting to give any 500,000-citizen petition the power to directly introduce measures to the government. This global network is growing by well over a million people per month, accelerating the realisation that the world is ours to shape.
Beyond mere awareness, online platforms also possess the capacity to build powerful communities. Shared digital spaces allow like-minded individuals, who might otherwise feel isolated, to connect, share resources, and strategise. This sense of belonging is a fundamental aspect of human identity, as discussed in “Increasingly Uncomfortable with Labels,” where groups provide comfort and nurture. Online communities can transcend geographical boundaries, bringing together diverse voices united by a common cause. Furthermore, online activism can foster co-creation; when individuals contribute their thoughts, ideas, or even a simple share, they invest effort, leading to a sense of ownership and deeper emotional investment in the movement. This can manifest in online discussions that refine strategies, collaborative content creation (e.g., shared documents, protest art), or even direct participation in digital campaigns. By actively acknowledging and celebrating these contributions, online movements can transform passive supporters into active participants, building a stronger, more resilient collective. The UK organisation 38 Degrees, which brings together over 1 million members, demonstrates this by engaging its community in decisions. For instance, when invited to help design the new NHS Civil Society Assembly, 38 Degrees issued a survey to its members, ensuring their collective views were represented in the meeting with NHS England. This collective input ensures a powerful voice in shaping public services.
Another compelling example comes from the “Wipe Out Homophobia” campaign, where, through online competitions, 30,000 people now have their local suicide helpline number in their phones—a clear testament to the tangible impact of social networking activism.
Similarly, in Hamburg, a 5th-grade class saved their classmate Gleb from deportation by starting a petition on a community petition site to their local government officials, demonstrating how a few focused minutes can kick-start an amazing campaign, allowing Avaaz staff to pick up the campaign and provide strategic advice, media help, and wider distribution.
However, the digital realm is not without its significant challenges for activism. The very algorithms designed to keep us engaged can also inadvertently create “echo chambers,” reinforcing existing beliefs and limiting exposure to dissenting viewpoints. This can exacerbate the “us vs. them” mentality discussed in “Increasingly Uncomfortable with Labels,” where group identity can lead to polarisation and animosity. In the context of the “Culture Wars,” online spaces can become battlegrounds where dialogue devolves into confrontation, making it harder to find common ground or address underlying issues. The ease of online engagement can also lead to a sense of superficiality, where clicking “like” or sharing a post replaces deeper, more impactful actions. The “clicktivism” critique points to the risk of engagement without genuine commitment, where online actions substitute for real-world efforts that demand greater time, resources, or personal risk.
The true power of online activism lies in its ability to catalyse real-world change. It serves as a vital bridge, connecting digital engagement with tangible offline action. The goal is to move beyond the screen and translate online momentum into protests, policy changes, community organising, and direct interventions. Examples abound: from online fundraising campaigns supporting grassroots organisations to social media calls leading to mass demonstrations. The “Cocoa Price Spike” (Ritchie, 2024) article, for instance, highlights how awareness of supply chain injustices could fuel online advocacy for fairer trade practices and more sustainable production methods, leading to consumer pressure and policy changes. Beyond this, numerous successes underscore the impact of online activism.
Avaaz has played a key role in numerous impactful campaigns globally. In Brazil, they were instrumental in the fight against corruption, winning the Clean Record Law and later seeing an Avaaz member initiate the largest online petition in Brazilian history, demanding the removal of a disgraced Senate President with over 1.6 million voices. In Bangladesh, following a garment factory collapse, Avaaz collaborated with labour organisations, using Facebook to pressure H&M and GAP, which led to H&M embracing an enforceable worker safety plan and prompting over 75 other brands to follow. Their two-year campaign, featuring a 2.6 million-signature petition and large-scale protests, was crucial in securing Europe’s ban on bee-killing pesticides. In Tanzania, Avaaz mobilised 1.7 million people online to oppose the eviction of Maasai families, drawing international media attention and leading to the Prime Minister pledging a permanent solution.
Across the Americas, hundreds of thousands of Avaaz members advocated for more humane drug policies, resulting in a historic declaration by the Organisation of American States. In India, the Maldives, and Somalia, Avaaz members amplified millions of voices to pressure governments for stronger laws protecting women. A campaign to save fin whales from butchery successfully convinced Dutch and German politicians to close ports to whale meat shipments, forcing the meat back to Iceland and spurring further action against the whaling company. Lastly, a massive Avaaz petition and collaboration with NGOs influenced the G8 summit to reach a historic agreement on transparency in tax evasion, demonstrating the power of collective online pressure to shift international policy.
Online activism, also known as digital campaigning, online organising, electronic advocacy, cyberactivism, e-campaigning, and e-activism, is fundamentally the use of electronic communication technologies such as social media (especially Twitter and Facebook), YouTube, email, and podcasts for various forms of activism. It enables faster communications by citizen movements and the delivery of local information to a large audience. Internet technologies are used for cause-related fundraising, community building, lobbying, and organising. Sandor Vegh divides online activism into three main categories: awareness/advocacy, organisation/mobilisation, and action/reaction. The Internet is a key resource for independent activists or E-activists, particularly those whose message may run counter to the mainstream. As Burmanet stated, “Especially when a serious violation of human rights occurs, the Internet is essential in reporting the atrocity to the outside world,” helping to distribute news otherwise inaccessible. Internet activists also use e-petitions to influence governments and organisations on issues from the arms trade to animal testing. NGOs use these methods for inexpensive and timely communication, and gatherings and protests can be organised with input from both organisers and participants. Mainstream social-networking sites, especially Facebook.com, offer e-activist tools, enabling an active participatory culture by facilitating communication between groups. As case studies show, “Without ongoing communication among its participants, a community dissolves,” highlighting how constant communication enriches online community experiences and redefines the word community.
Historically, one of the earliest known uses of the Internet for activism was the campaign against Lotus MarketPlace in 1990-1991, where a mass email and e-bulletin-board campaign led to the cancellation of a controversial database containing personal information on 120 million US citizens. In 1993, The Nation magazine surveyed online activism from Croatia to the US, quoting activists about their projects. The earliest form of mass emailing as a rudimentary DDoS occurred on Guy Fawkes Day 1994, with the “Intervasion of the UK” emailing John Major’s cabinet and UK parliamentary servers to protest the Criminal Justice Bill. From 1995-1998, Z magazine offered online courses on “Using the Internet for Electronic Activism.”
In 1998, Dr. Daniel Mengara, a Gabonese scholar in exile, created the website “Bongo Doit Partir” (Bongo Must Go) to encourage revolution against Omar Bongo’s regime in Gabon, inaugurating modern cyber-dissidence. The same year, the Mexican rebel group EZLN used decentralised communications to network with developed world activists, helping create the anti-globalisation group Peoples Global Action (PGA) to protest the WTO in Geneva. Later, in 1999, Indymedia was created to provide grassroots coverage of the WTO protests in Seattle, bypassing corporate media. Also in 1999, in the UK, the Professional Contractors Group was formed online to campaign against the IR35 employment tax, raising £100,000 within weeks and later £500,000 for a High Court challenge, presenting the first e-petition to Parliament and organising a flash mob of 1,000 people.
My own journey into online activism began when I joined Facebook on September 1, 2009, feeling like a small fish in a big pond. At that time, Facebook, less than a decade old (founded February 4, 2004), already boasted 1.11 billion users—a population comparable to Africa, the second-most-populated continent. The sheer scale of these numbers cannot be ignored. My activism didn’t start immediately; I only had a handful of friends online and checked infrequently. Things changed in spring 2012, when a post introduced me to Avaaz. Avaaz, founded in 2007, quickly exploded to become the globe’s largest online activist network, distinguished by its focus on individual issues rather than traditional party manifestos. Its underlying values are universal human responsibilities to each other, future generations, and the planet, leading members to take action on successive campaigns. Similarly, concerns over the NHS connected me with 38 Degrees, a British not-for-profit political-activism organisation campaigning on diverse issues, named after the critical angle of an avalanche. Recognised as “Best UK Internet NGO” by the Oxford Internet Institute in 2011, 38 Degrees notably pressured Olympic sponsors to reverse tax breaks.
Other powerful global platforms include Care2 (22.5 million members), Change.org (10 million members), and The ONE Campaign (3 million members), which successfully lobbied G8 leaders on Africa’s food revolution and transparency. Transparency International, a non-governmental organisation monitoring corruption globally, has campaigned on issues like extractive industries disclosure, forcing oil and mineral firms to disclose payments to governments, echoing the wisdom that “If you want to understand the workings of the crocodile, you must ask the hippo.” The Arab Spring, India’s “Ring the Bell” campaign, and organisations like Global Voices, Ushahidi (an open-source software for crowdsourcing, visualisation, and interactive mapping of eyewitness reports), and Magpi (mobile apps for data collection) all demonstrate the diverse and powerful ways online tools are used for social change. Meetup, an online social networking portal, further facilitates offline group meetings, bringing digital connections into the physical world.
Ultimately, effective online activism requires strategic thinking, leveraging the digital tools for awareness and community-building, while consciously mitigating the risks of fragmentation and superficiality. It demands a commitment to moving “From Awareness to Action,” ensuring that online engagement serves as a powerful launchpad for real-world impact. It is about understanding that while the digital sphere is an essential tool, the most profound changes still occur when individuals, empowered by knowledge and connection, actively “grasp the nettle” in their communities and beyond.
Where next? Use the links below:
About: Our mission: From Awareness To Action
My Blog: Events and Commentary
Web of Power: Book 1 of a trilogy – Understanding Power
Grasp the Nettle: Book 2 of a trilogy – Embracing Power
Forward Futures: Book 3 of a trilogy – Using Power
Facebook: Our community space and new content information
Mailing List: Online Form
Bibliography
Becker, Howard S. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Free Press, 1963.
Erikson, Erik H. Identity: Youth and Crisis. W. W. Norton & Company, 1968.
Goffman, Erving. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Simon & Schuster, 1963.
Joy, Melanie. Beyond Beliefs: A Guide to Improving Relationships and Communication for Vegans, Vegetarians, and Meat Eaters. Lantern Books, 2018.
Ritchie, Hannah. (2024, April 1). The chocolate price spike: what’s happening to global cocoa production?. Sustainability by numbers. Retrieved from https://substack.com/profile/13813955-hannah-ritchie/note/c-5727038.
https://youtu.be/fYbWQ_MhloU [Unpublished lecture transcript by a regenerative energy engineer with an M.Sc.]
Tajfel, Henri and Turner, John C. “The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior.” In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1986.
Turner, John C. Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory. Basil Blackwell, 1987.
Vegh, Sandor. “Classifying Forms of Online Activism.” The Electronic Journal of Communication/La Revue Electronique de Communication 10, no. 2 (2000). Burmanet. (Source for quote “Especially when a serious violation of human rights occurs, the Internet is essential in reporting the atrocity to the outside world”).