Trendy Activism

Two words that probably shouldn't go together but unfortunately do.

Whether we do it by liking, sharing, reposting, reblogging, retweeting, regoogling, or reclickbaitifying, we all love rallying behind a worthy cause, especially when we can reap those extra-validating Internet point rewards.

This would be fine, except holy ravoli there are hundreds upon thousands of these things at any given moment, and they’re flying in and out of the digital media spotlight faster than you can say “THIS”.

So to those wondering what factors influence the brief popularity of such social causes before they are deported to the land of “so last week, have you seen what Buzzfeed are doing now?” I have just one question for you. 

Does anybody remember what ALS stands for?

The ice bucket challenge is now, in terms of the attention spans of those drowning in the ocean of social media, profoundly dated, which is why ‘right now’ is the perfect time to discuss the strategies it used to become so successful.  

Let’s break it down. The ALS campaign worked because whoever started the challenge understood that "awareness campaigns" go viral not because of false ideas of social contagion, but because they utilise the powerful effects of social validation and normative behaviour.

Yes, it’s true that we can mimic facial expressions and body language to appear more likeable, and that mirror neurons might play a role in empathy as well as action, but there is insufficient evidence to generalise these findings to mean that certain social actions are implicitly contagious by the mere act of “being aware” of them.

Regardless of the objective importance of a social cause, people won’t give two hoots about getting involved if they don’t possess the motivation to do so. And often, beyond giving it a like or a share, we don’t.

But there are exceptions.

The ice bucket challenge worked because it promoted a singular, salient action that was fun and easy to do, which was consistently modelled by people we believe to be influential by the mere perception that they hold some sort of leadership authority due to their high social status. The campaign also took advantage of social motivators through the resulting validation to those who successfully performed the challenged and social rejection to those who did not.

Everything I’ve bolded here is an empirical term described in either psychology or behavioural economics. The ice bucket challenge worked because it took advantage of real science to create implicit associations between the ALS brand, the water-dumping action, and most importantly, the environment in which the decision to participate was made (i.e. the realm of infinite judgment).

And even though the ice bucket challenge is no longer cool, the initial action was so successfully modelled that the only thing that future campaigns need to do is reinforce the already existing mnemonic association. BJ Fogg called these types of behavioural drivers signal triggers, and they only work when initial motivation is already high.

Trendy? Yes. Ineffective? Definitely not. Long-lasting?

Well, perhaps.

But what happens when trendy activism is manufactured purely to sell products or brands? Similarly to sponsored “journalism”, this seems to be occurring more and more, with people either oblivious as to its strategy or simply indifferent.

I’m a fan of option B, seeing as people don’t care about brands, and therefore whether or not journalism is sponsored, manufactured, or otherwise. A heart-warming story is a heart-warming story. Just look at the opening paragraph to this piece of apparent viral media.

Our hyper-connected, internet-centred world means that anybody has access to a platform with the potential to touch millions (even billions) of people; all you need is something that people can relate to, sympathise with, or share. Sometimes god-awful things go viral (that bloody dress!), other times – a real diamond emerges. This viral story is one of those times. It has swept across the internet recently and caused an impassioned response from millions… let’s see what all the fuss is about.

If ever there was an award for the steamiest pile of horseshit in marketing, the aptly named Viral Thread would surely be a contender. Not to say there aren’t some cheeky behavioural economics strategies in use here (default, status, System 1 style marketing), they’re just being used for the wrong thing.

When it comes to activism in the digital sphere, all we can do is be skeptical. There are actual diamonds in the rough, and it is those we should be seizing. The last thing any of us want is another Kony 2012.

a.ce