In the era of digital communication, it is easier than ever to have conversations about a range of political, social, economic, and environmental issues. Oftentimes, these conversations prove to be beneficial, fostering a space where people can spread information about their stance on an issue, why they feel that way, and actions others can take to alleviate the situation. However, with the rise in social media activism came the increase in Performative activism; a form of activism that proves to do more harm than good. This essay’s objective is to explore the pitfalls of performative activism in a heavily interconnected world and to criticize its insincere nature and detrimental effects on real-life causes and organizations.
With recent events going on, it is becoming much harder to determine what is performative and what is genuine. It seems as if the majority of the outrage towards a social issue stays online, where people can claim a side without putting in any effort otherwise. This is an attempt at what is called ‘virtue signaling’, a desire to appear righteous without an actual commitment to a cause. Virtue Signaling is a phenomenon exhibited on all social media platforms, where people are more concerned with presenting themselves as a good person rather than contributing to the greater good of a social issue. Virtue Signaling is mainly exacerbated by the pressure to pick a side, even if you have a lack of sufficient knowledge. When a person expresses neutrality on an issue, performative activists are quick to pass judgment on them and their character. While their arguments do have some merit, it is important to note that they are overlooking the possibility of a person being neutral because of their lack of understanding, especially in a situation that contains a lot of nuance. The issue with virtue signaling is that while it may bring awareness to a group’s cause, it is only temporary. Soon, when the outrage is gone, so is the majority of the support garnered for the cause. In the video “Turn Performative Wokeness Into Allyship ”, author Layla Saad highlights the difference between a good ally and someone who only claims to be an ally to look good. She argues that a good ally is focused on showing up in allyship with minorities without considering the social benefits or rewards. Saad backs up her claim by giving examples of a thought process a social media activist might have when reposting or sharing content. They may think that by reposting, they don’t need to do anything else because they are supposedly already fighting against the issue. Saad argues that instead of pointing fingers, one way an ally can fight in solitary is to look within themselves and think about the ways (if any) they are contributing to the issue.
People are not the only ones who signal virtue. A known fact is that brands tend to treat social issues as a way to gain public favor and make money. They commodify social issues to the point of oversimplifying and turning them into a simple slogan, a jingle, or even completely misleading consumers. Although the issue of commodification may seem trivial to some in the grand scheme of things, it proves to do more harm than good to social justice issues. A prominent example of this is Pride Month. During Pride Month, there is an overwhelming amount of rainbows and LGBTQ+-related merchandise. After Pride Month, the moment it hits July 1st, there is hardly any talk of Pride Month by brands and big businesses until the following June. Richard Morrison, the author of an NBC news opinion piece titled “The Tired Corporate Critique Of Pride Month Misses The Point”, argues that the commercialization of Pride Month should be looked at from a more nuanced perspective. He acknowledges some of the criticisms some have for “corporate allyship” while insisting that it helped the community broaden its visibility and played a role in heightening social acceptance. Morrison argues that “it’s weirdly old fashioned to be repeating hippie era denunciations of big business when one of the world’s most valuable corporations is led by an openly gay CEO”. This is a peak example of performative activism. To Morrison, because a CEO is openly gay, it immediately denounces any criticisms one may have for corporate America’s surface-level capitalization of Pride month. He seems to think that just because brands print a slogan on a shirt, they have done their part. But my question for him is: where is that energy for the rest of the year? Is June the only acceptable month for brands to show their political awareness concerning the LGBTQ+ community? The oversimplification of queer liberation allows for those who claim to be allies to put on a shirt with rainbows on it in the name of activism but go no further than that. Another example of this is detailed in a YouTube video by Olisunvia, who discusses an instance containing a black business owner who received a lot of monetary support during the height of the BLM movement in 2020. When the movement started to fade out, the initial support she garnered was replaced by people demanding Amazon-level service from a three-month-old business all while claiming that “they wanted to support her” Olisunvia (2022).
An important argument to note with Performative activism is that ultimately, we cannot truly decide whether someone is being performative in their actions or not. That would mean having to judge the intentions of another person, something we have little to no insight into. This is an argument highlighted by Miles Bess, a journalist and podcast host, in his video titled “Looking Woke Vs Being Woke” (2021). Bess addresses the topic of performative activism and argues that we are not in a place to discern whether someone is performative or not. Our ideas of activism may look completely different from another person’s idea of what activism should look like. He claims that since these situations aren’t always black or white, there is a lot of nuance in them. Bess supports his point by showcasing research in support of the argument against performative activism. The research showed that people who posted in support of a cause on social media were not any more likely to donate money than someone who didn’t post anything online. However, data also revealed that people who posted about issues online were more likely to attend meetings and rallies compared to those who posted nothing. These findings highlight the complexities of social media activism and how hard it is to decide someone’s true commitment to a cause. Bess also acknowledges that there are some clear instances in which performative activism is showcased without much nuance. Blackout Tuesday, an attempt at solidarity, actually hurt the movement because the hashtags used were the same hashtags BLM activists used to relay information, coordinate protests, and plan events. But instead of insightful information about the movement, the hashtags were filled with black squares. This is because although the intentions were there, their actions did not translate well in the grand scheme of things. With that being said, acknowledging performative activism does not always equate to passing judgment on a person’s character or intentions. Instead, it can be used as a tool to educate on ways to devote yourself to a cause and make actual long-lasting change. Since performative activism is so normalized, it can be hard to recognize if you are partaking in it. By bringing awareness to what constitutes performative activism, we are encouraging individuals to look within themselves and recognize their behaviors.
Another issue with social media activism is the short-lived recognition of social justice movements or causes. This is mostly the product of social media’s tendency to cycle through topics and trends. More than ever, our attention spans are shortened to the point where a topic is hardly talked about for more than a few months. This is acceptable in certain cases but in the context of social issues, if a cause is not sustained for a long period, all the effort and support garnered during its peak can prove to be temporary. For example, in 2014 there was a popular challenge called the Ice Bucket Challenge. The basic premise of this challenge was to raise awareness about amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by pouring a bucket of ice-cold water over your head, mentioning ALS, and tagging others to do the same. In total, the videos were able to amass over $115 million during the span of the trend. However, when the campaign was relaunched in 2015, they were only able to raise 0.9% of their previous earnings (Linden). According to the article “The Surprisingly Short Life Of Viral Social Movements”, one of the main reasons for this can be attributed to the “‘extrinsic’ incentives to do ‘good’, rather than cultivating an internally sourced ‘intrinsic’ motivation to help others”. The motivation to do good is based on external factors, such as others’ perception of you or the potential social benefits of claiming that you contributed to a cause instead of a genuine commitment to the cause. The article suggests that since extrinsic motivations tend to last a shorter period, social movements fueled by such values struggle to maintain momentum compared to those fueled by internal motivations. Extrinsic motivations can also come in the form of the constant expectation to know the ins and outs of every social injustice issue talked about online. Individuals may feel pressured to join conversations and share infographics despite their lack of interest or knowledge on the subject. If a person who only knows surface-level information speaks on a topic, it could easily create an echo chamber where their opinions spread to others who are just as uninterested in furthering their understanding of said topic. This is an easy way to spread misinformation under the guise of activism. Most of the time, it is not done with ill intentions. It is just a very shallow and superficial form of activism because it is being forced onto you by another person- not yourself.
In this exploration of social media activism, we discuss the insincere nature of performative allyship, the impact of external pressures on activism, and the oversimplification of social justice movements. The key point is that while performative activism has its merits, such as visibility, ultimately it is more important to have a genuine commitment to a cause if we want to see substantive results.
Works Cited
Jezebel. “Turn Performative Wokeness Into Allyship | Jezebel.” YouTube, 22 Feb. 2020,
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ms02RwM_oCI.
“Opinion | The Tired Corporate Critique of Pride Month Misses the Point.” NBC News, 14 June
2022,
www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/gay-pride-month-corporate-backlash-hurts-gay-rights-r
cna33020.
Above The Noise. “Looking Woke 😇 Vs. BEING Woke 💪.” YouTube, 15 Sep. 2021,
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xi95ktw3hc0.
Kristofferson, Kirk, et al. “The Nature of Slacktivism: How the Social Observability of an Initial
Act of Token Support Affects Subsequent Prosocial Action.” Journal of Consumer
Research, vol. 40, no. 6, Nov. 2013, pp. 1149–66. https://doi.org/10.1086/674137.
Nature, and Sander Van Der Linden. “The Surprisingly Short Life of Viral Social Movements.”
Scientific American, 19 Feb. 2017,
www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-surprisingly-short-life-of-viral-social-movements
Van Der Linden, Sander. “The Nature of Viral Altruism and How to Make It Stick.”
Nature Human Behaviour, vol. 1, no. 3, Feb. 2017,
Leave a Reply