Category: Activism

The use of direct and noticeable actions using vigorous campaigning to achieve a change, usually a political or social one. This is the definition of activism given by the Cambridge dictionary. If this definition is analyzed deeply, some of us, teens, might wonder if we could really be the motor of such drastic changes in our society and political arena. The answer is ‘yes.’ Teen activists have done amazing things by choice around the world. Our history and our present can testify the positive results achieve in different parts of the world thanks to teen activism. Teen are doing what is right. They do not ignore what needs to be fixed in the world despite the obstacles that stand in their way. Teenagers around the world have raised their voices without fear for what they consider is wrong in our societies becoming strong agents of change.

Young students, most of them between 12 and 17 years old, started a massive campaign against Apartheid, a system the was perpetuating racial segregation in South Africa. In the 1980’s, the black majority of students, of what it will be here in USA middle and high school, started a protest against the educational system stablished by the nationalist apartheid regimen. They wanted access to a better education, and they wanted the education to be in English not in African. The black students began their meeting in small churches until they formed large groups across the whole country. Once they were better organized, they went to the streets and began national protests demanding better education and opportunities for the black students “We agree that Apartheid is immoral, and so we established what we called Actions Against Apartheid,” McKinley said. All these teenagers played a fundamental role to bring down an oppressive government. And many of them payed with their lives. These kids were a clear example that teens activism can definitely change the course of history in a nation. Lindsay Graham.

That was also the case of Malala Yousafzai. This Pakistan girl was shot by the terrorist group of the Taliban because she stood up for her right to receive an education. Malala survived, and know she lives as a refugee in England. She has become an influential voice that advocates for the right the girls to have an education in the Middle East countries and around the world. Being only 17 years old, Malala received the Nobel Peace Prize on October 10th 2014. She is the youngest person in receiving such honor. Now she is 22 years old and continue working for the right of all children to education. Sarah Jackson and Jessie Kirk.

Teens here in California and across our nation are fighting homophobia, racism, poverty, and advocating for gun control. The shootings in our schools have being happening more and more often. The most recent shooting took place this past Thursday in Saugus High School in Santa Clarita. Teenage understand that they most do something to protect their lives. They want to create a safe learning environment in their school and communities where they can socialize and grow. The American teen are not taking this grief quietly, they are speaking out and calling for political changes.

These teenage wants to be agents of change since the adults in charge of their protection have failed in doing their job. They want to end the horrible massacres that are taking place in our schools and around our nation.

Zion Kelly, a 17 years old high school student, lost his twin brother as a result of these random shootings. Eight months on since his brother was killed, Zion remembers Zaire as “goofy and always cracking a joke. He was the center of our friend group.” After his brother’s death, Zion was determined to change this terrible reality that many students and his family had experienced due to poor legislation that regulate the use of guns in the USA. He felt inspired, and he invited some survivors from the past Parkland shooting where 17 students were killed to speak at his school. Zion also joined these survivors at March for Our Lives to demand legislative gun control in front of the US Capitol building on March 24th of this current year. He is also advocating for a city ordinance, named after his brother to expand gun-free zones to create safe passages for students travelling to and from school in a safe way. Cheree Franco

All these young protesters are giving up their free time to speak at rallies, in front of congressional representatives to put an end to the violence that students are experiencing in their school. Teens understand that they are a powerful source of change, and they are using this power to improve the world around them. They are shaping their destiny and the destiny of this nation at the same time.

In conclusion, all the teen who raised their voices to bring down the Apartheid in South Africa, the one who are fighting for more gun control legislations like Zion in USA, the one demanding education for all like Malala, are agents of change who are shaping our world into a better place. Teenager in the USA and around the world will continue their fight until they are sure the cause has been accomplished, and they are living in a more egalitarian and safer world for all.

Bibliography

1. Graham, Lindsay. “Students protest against Apartheid are part of a long history of activism.” The Daily Tar Heel. 28 November 2016. www.dailytarheel.com/article/2016/11/student-protests-against-apartheid-are-part-of-a-long-history-of-activism
2. Stack, Liam. “Malala Yousafzai, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, Starts at Oxford.” The New York Times. 10 October 2017. http://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/10/world/europe/malala-yousafzai-oxford.html.
3. Jackson, Sarah and Kirk, Jessie. “Supporting education and activism on Malala Day” Womankind.org 09 July 2013 https://www.womankind.org.uk/blog/detail/our-blog/2013/07/09/supporting-education-and-activism-on-malala-day
4. Segalov, Michael. “Teenage activists are shaping our future.” Huck 65-The Coming of Age Issue. 27 August 2019 http://www.huckmag.com/perspectives/activism-2/teenage-activists-protest-worldwide-agents-of-change/

Introduction

Scholars have studied how mainstream media reports the activities of protesters and how news coverage influences the way the activists are depicted in those news stories (Harlow, Salaverría, Kilgo & García-Perdomo, 2017; Ismail, Torosyan & Tully, 2019; Kilgo & Harlow, 2019; Kyriakidou & Olivas Osuna, 2017). The dominant pattern which scholars agree that typically appear in news coverage of activism is what they call the “protest paradigm” (Harlow et al, 2017; Ismail et al, 2019; Kilgo & Harlow, 2019; Kyriakidou & Olivas Osuna, 2017). According to Kyriakidou and Olivas Osuna (2017), the protest paradigm is the long-established term that describes the ways in which social movements and demonstrations are presented in the mainstream media and how the coverage is molded into a “specific template” (p. 457). The protest paradigm unfolds in several ways, which McLeod (2007) identifies these characteristics as “story frames, reliance on official sources and official definitions, the invocation of public opinion, delegitimization, and demonization” (pp. 186-187).

Scholars have long studied the news coverage of protests that occur in specific countries, such as in the United States and Spain. The existing research on those activist movements has mainly focused on the protests movements that involve largely sized group rallies that typically took place in the towns or cities within those countries (Kilgo & Harlow, 2019; Kyriakidou & Olivas Osuna, 2017). These scholars have found that “protest-related stories” (Harlow, et al, 2017) covered by online sources such as social media networks, slightly diverged from the well-known pattern called the protest paradigm, compared to the traditional forms of news coverage (Harlow et al., 2017; Ismail et al, 2019). In addition, the scholars agree that not all mainstream media tends to gravitate its focus on the negative and violent aspects of the protesters that characterizes the protest paradigm but instead, legitimizes the protesters (Harlow et al., 2017; Ismail et al., 2019).

Unfortunately, while scholars have researched the news coverage on larger protest movements through online sources, scholars have neglected online news coverage of popular culture activism. Popular culture has many definitions (Storey, 2018, p. 5) but within this context of activism, popular culture can be defined as “culture that is widely favoured or well liked by many people” (Storey, 2018, p. 5). Popular culture and activism put together refers to the individuals who have a voice in the community and how others have taken an interest in their perspectives. Scholars have yet to study protests that are performed by an individual that influences the community who raises questions and concerns about political manners and issues. Do mainstream companies and online journalists downplay the role of famously known individuals and follow the dominant template of the protest paradigm when covering the event? This study examines how journalists reports the event of the destruction of Banksy’s art piece during an auction in 2018. I analyzed four news stories and categorized the text into two main characteristics of the protest paradigm: delegitimization of the activism and reliance on official sources (McLeod, 2007). According to McLeod (2007), delegitimization of the activism refers to how “the media often fail to adequately explain the meaning and context of protest actions, leading the audience to perceive them as futile, pointless, and even irrational” (p. 187). Reliance on official sources refers to how “public officials are the predominant source of information for news stories, [and] stories tend to be told from the perspective of the powerful, downplaying perspectives that challenge that power” (p. 187).

Methods

I conducted a discourse analysis (Taylor, 2001) of four news stories of the stunt act planned by the anonymous graffiti artist Banksy. The event took place during an art auction held in Sotheby’s in London, England on October 5, 2018. Banksy auctioned off an art piece that was designed to self-destruct itself through a shredder built within the artwork’s frame as soon as the auction buyer was finalized. I analyzed the news stories of two mainstream companies from NBC News and The Washington Post and two online journalist websites from Salon and Vox.

According to Taylor (2001), discourse analysis is used to identify patterns of the language used in the text published about a single event or events. The patterns are categorized and then further categorized into overarching patterns (p. 39). I examined the news stories on whether the journalists conform to or diverge from the protest paradigm and investigated Banksy’s proposed actions of anti-capitalism covered in the news stories. The text of the news stories was identified by characteristics of the protest paradigm and categorized as (i) delegitimization of the activism and (ii) the reliance on official sources (McLeod, 2007).

Results

Through the discourse analysis of news coverage of the destruction on Banksy’s artwork, revealed interesting patterns. The protest paradigm somewhat appeared in the news stories but most of the content covered in the news stories were shedding a positive light of Banksy’s prank directed to the art community. The most prominent patterns found were diverging from the protest paradigm: (1) the legitimization of destroying art, (2) street artists were given a voice and (3) official sources spoke positively.

Diverging from the Protest Paradigm

The Legitimization of Destroying Art. The most interesting pattern found through the discourse analysis was that the news stories provided context about the destruction of Banksy’s artwork. The journalists reported that “… Banksy has pulled off another stunt that seized the attention of the art world’ (Wang, 2018, para. 1). It therefore announces that this is not the first time Banksy has done a stunt to gain attention towards his artwork and has once again opened the eyes of the art community. The artist has “… famously used elaborate stunts, like the one he pulled on Friday, to drive this point home’ (Romano, 2018, para. 17). The news stories have given context that shredding the painting is another way that Banksy is displaying anti-capitalist views to the art community. Furthermore, Banksy’s actions are legitimized since it is an act of “extending a tradition of pranks as an art form that began in the 1960s” (Romano, 2018, para. 25), which contextualizes Banksy’s action of destroying his artwork. The coverage of Banksy’s stunt of shredding the auctioned off art piece was provided background information about “Banksy’s history of subversive, highly politicized artwork, which is often accompanied by pointed stunts — many of them conceived to undermine power structures and call attention to the superficiality of the world we live in’ (Romano, 2018, para. 7). Banksy’s previous art pieces has showcased the artist’s anti-capitalist views.

Although the destruction of the painting, according to journalists may have increased the value of the art piece, which is the opposite of Banksy’s anti-capitalist views, the journalists believe that “Banksy did something brilliant with his shredder gag” (Charney, 2018, para. 6) and “… [it] is actually a clever way to immediately transform a painting that [is] probably less than $25 to produce and a few hundred to frame, and which sold for $1.4 million, into a work now worth many times that” (Charney, 2018, para. 8). However, “he is in it not for the money but for the laughs.’ (Chaney, 2018, para. 1), which brings back the point that the artist is not interested on how the art piece is now worth more in its shredded state.

Street Artists are Given a Voice. Another interesting pattern found from analyzing the four news stories was that other street artists were given a voice in the news coverage about the event. This is insight of non-official sources sharing their perspectives of the destruction of Banksy’s artwork. Street artist “Shepard Fairey” (Rodney, 2018, para. 3) was interviewed and voiced that ““I think Banksy’s idea here is that an appreciation for the concept is more important than an appreciation of the object.”” (Rodney, 2018, para.3). This drives the point that other street artists do not downplay Banksy’s actions and interpret the stunt in a way that encourages readers to take a step back to re-analyze the actions of Banksy in another perspective. Another street artist “Zardulu” (Romano, 2018, para. 22) was also interviewed and asked about whether she believed Banksy was doing something smart or not. She believes that ‘“Banksy is in a unique position that he can simply release a piece of work and it goes viral”” (Romano, 2018, para. 23) and ““… he obviously wanted us to ask whether the piece is now worth more or less now that it’s been part of a viral moment”’ (Romano, 2018, para. 24). What Zardulu suggests is that Banksy did plan on confusing the art community and wanted others to question his actions. This is evidence from the news stories that non-official sources are also given a voice when reporting a stunt performed by a famously known artist within the art community.

What also stood out was that coverage included Banksy’s Instagram post which showed the shredder being installed into the frame of the art piece (Rodney, 2018 para. 5; Wang 2018 para. 10). This shows that the journalists did not leave out the star of the show and gave a spotlight to the anonymous graffiti artist in terms of sharing the artist’s point of view of the whole event. This then means that Banksy had given thought prior to the destruction of the painting and was quoted ““… in case it was ever put up for auction …”’ (Rodney, 2018, para. 5; Wang, 2018, para. 11) and the caption of the Instagram post was ““The urge to destroy is also a creative urge”” (Rodney, 2018, para. 10; Wang, 2018, para. 13). Banksy and other street artists were given a voice in the news coverage which diverges from the protest paradigm, where official sources are typically reported in the coverage and downplays the actions of the activists.

Official Sources Spoke Positively. What was also found through the discourse analysis of the news stories was a surprising pattern. The official sources reported in the coverage spoke positively about the anonymous artist rather than downplaying Banksy. Higher powerholders such as art critics, art directors, and art gallery owners were prominent in voicing their opinions and perspectives about the destruction of Banksy’s painting and are viewed to be the official sources within this context. The official sources did not downplay Banksy’s actions in hopes of sharing his anti-capitalist views: “… the typically conservative critic Jonathan Jones declared that the stunt “proved [Banksy] is the artist who matters most right now” …” (Rodney, 2018, para. 3) and “John Brandler, director of Brandler Art Galleries, described Banksy as ‘the ultimate publicity artist’” (Rodney, 2018, para. 3). The official sources in this context are applauding Banksy and it means that Banksy is the street artist that the art world has their focus on.

Conclusion

In conclusion, through my research on popular culture activism of the planned destruction of Banksy’s painting, it suggests that news coverage of this event has given background context to provide an insight to the readers about what the event entails and legitimizes Banksy’s actions. The journalists tended to seek out other street artists, as well as art critics and art gallery directors, to see where their perspective stood about the event and what it means to the art community. My research confirms the findings of Harlow et. all (2017) that not all mainstream media gravitates towards the negative aspects of the protests and it does not conform to the protest paradigm. A limitation of this study was the analysis of only mainstream companies and online journalisms of one famous individual. Further research can be conducted on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, where the lives of celebrities are being constantly shared among users, as well as research about other individuals who influences the larger community.

References

1. Charney, N. (2018, Oct. 13). Why Banksy’s self-destructing “Girl With Balloon” is worth even more shredded. Salon. Retrieved from https://www.salon.com/2018/10/13/why-banksy-shredded-self-destruct-girl-with-balloon/
2. Harlow, S., Salaverría, R., Kilgo, D. K., & García-Perdomo, V. (2017). Protest Paradigm in Multimedia: Social Media Sharing of Coverage About the Crime of Ayotzinapa, Mexico. Journal of Communication, 67(3), 328-349. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12296
3. Ismail. A., Torosyan, G., & Tully, M. (2019). Social media, legacy media and gatekeeping: the protest paradigm in news of Ferguson and Charlottesville. The Communication Review, 22(3), 169-195. https://doi.org/:10.1080/10714421.2019.1651153
4. Kilgo, D. K., & Harlow, S. (2019). Protests, media coverage, and a hierarchy of social struggle. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 24(4), 508–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161219853517
5. Kyriakidou, M., & Olivas Osuna, J. J. (2017). The Indignados protests in the Spanish and Greek press: Moving beyond the ‘protest paradigm’?. European Journal of Communication, 32(5), 457–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323117720342
6. McLeod, D.M. (2007). News coverage and social protest: How the media’s protest paradigm exacerbates social conflict. Journal of Dispute Resolution (1), 185-194. Retrieved from https://mulaw.missouri.edu/journal/doi:10.1177/1940161211433837
7. Rodney, S. (2018, Oct. 18). Banksy’s shredded painting stunt was viral performance art. But who was really trolling who?. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/banksy-s-shredded-painting-stunt-was-viral-performance-art-who-ncna921426
8. Romano, A. (2018, Oct 8). Banksy’s shredded Sotheby’s art was a rebuke of empty consumerism from a master. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2018/10/8/17941350/banksy-trolls-sothebys-shredded-art-balloon-girl
9. Storey, J. (2018). Cultural theory and popular culture: an introduction (8th ed). London: Routledge.
10. Taylor, S. (2001). Locating and conducting discourse analytic research. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. Yates (Eds). Discourse as data: A guide for analysis (pp. 5-48). UK: The Open University.
11. Wang, B. (2018, Oct. 6). A Banksy painting sold at auction for $1.4 million – then automatically shredded itself. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2018/10/06/banksy-painting-sold-auction-million-then-automatically-shredded-itself/

The impact of activism can be felt worldwide. Done right, activism changes ideas and shakes the very foundation of society. Student activism is rising, but also falling, and the fall is cause for concern as insufficient vital changes are made after demonstrations and protests. Marx proposed that the economy colours our ideas, and indeed capitalism has infiltrated our thought process and been ingrained in our psychology. Therefore, student activism fails to make a dent in society.

In 2018, the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Shooting happened, and #NeverAgain was conceived shortly after that. Students around the USA gathered in mass numbers at March For Our Lives rallies, but anti-gun activism has died down since. Was March For Our Lives anything more than a one-off, adrenaline-fuelled nation-wide event? It appears to be so.

After the noise died down, students returned to their ordinary lives. Subsequent shootings just exemplified that people, even children, were numb and expectant (Fernandez, Fausset & Bidgood, 2018). Guns take lives and should be more heavily regulated, confiscated, or even banned. But students have ceased championing the reform of gun laws, many have dropped out of this race, simply due to “obligations as students” (Jason, 2018). Why is this so?

Whilst campaigning for social change, capitalism reminds us that we should prioritise what is “worthwhile”; finishing our education to earn a degree, then a salary. We think that unless we are “well-off”, we are unable to change lives. There is no point in fighting for change if I can’t even feed myself in the first place. Many drop out of the crucial race to save lives to “save” their own lives. Capitalism makes us risk-averse, so we will not jeopardise ourselves even when others’ lives are in jeopardy. If we jeopardise ourselves, we have nothing left.

But what constitutes well-off and worthwhile? According to capitalism, worthwhile means things or people that will invariably make money and well-off is defined as accumulating commodities, because more commodities equate to more happiness. Evidently, championing social change will not make a person money or produce more commodities, in fact, it is far more likely to deplete money and resources. On the other hand, the very things inciting social movements are of immense value to capitalists, for instance, the US gun economy which is worth billions (Al Jazeera, 2018).

Hence, the new age of student activism is failing due to the deep-set belief of capitalism, that we are worthless to impact anything else without first being well-off. Capitalism teaches us that we must be anxious, competitive in school, that we must conform to the pursuit of grades, if not we would be left behind. Amidst all the other factors of why this new age of student activism is currently nothing more than just a one-off event for the majority, I believe that capitalism holds significant weight as a standalone reason, “because the status quo is always going to have more money and political power, failure is an inevitable” (Jason, 2018). Although I do applaud and admire the courage and passion of youth activists, the odds are simply stacked against them in making a permanent dent in the legislation.

“Philosophers until now have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.” (Marx & Engels, 1942). Unfortunately, however hard student activists are trying to change the capitalist world, “the mode — the most common outcome — “is that activism doesn’t work.”” (Jason, 2018). Marx was right, capitalism has even crept into and corrupted the more humane side of society — activism.

For the past decade, there has been a surprising increase in the number of employee activism instances reported worldwide, specially among the technical community. Almost all tech giants including Amazon, Facebook and Google have faced this struggle with their growth journey.

Employees have now started questioning the project agenda, goals, company socio-economic policies and are getting their voices out by forming unions, staging walkouts, and going out for protests. They try to spread their message and put forward their views to the people who are not even aware of the situation. Sometimes, companies have to take strategic decisions the to excel in their growth chart, which might not be appreciated by all the communities. Such decisions and policies stimulate undue tension and confusion among the employees in the organization, which further takes the shape of “employee activism”. It can have both positive and negative impacts on the company, depending on how it is being projected. It has the potential to bring socio-political changes within the organization and create a healthy workplace for all. On the other hand, co-workers complaining and questioning about the leadership values, can also bring down the morale and social status of the company as a whole.

CURRENT TRENDS

There has seen a huge rise in activism activities, leading to employee protests on a range of issues from low wages, human rights, sexual harassment, climate change policies, job outsourcing to making deals with a specific third-party group for better profits. Employees now believe that they have every right to question the end goal of how their work is going to be used. Moreover, in this age of digital media, people now have the power to propagate their stories and ideas to an extent (through Facebook, Twitter, social-media chat groups, filing a change petition etc.), that it becomes impossible to ignore. However, they also face a lot of challenges. Most of the employees feel reluctant to protest against the ideologies of their superiors due to peer pressure. Also, it becomes hard to convince those who fear and blindly follow the upper management. Sometimes, high earning members, (considering their social strata) don’t feel the need to connect with such unions. Despite all the barriers, trends are now changing, and tech workers are setting to fuel a new employee activism movement.

ANALYSIS

As per the recent trends, employees mainly confront the corporate policies regarding sexual misconduct, privacy & security, lack of ideological diversity (specially for the minority groups), job security or environmental issues (e.g. Climate changes). For instance, 20,000 employees at Google walked out of their work in protest over how the management handled social misconduct claim on a senior leader. There were reports that the company handed him a grand exit package of $90 million. Google reverted with the claim that it does not require sexual harassment cases to be settled in front of private arbitrators. Hence, the employee could not sue the company in open court. In another case of policy disagreement, 100 Facebook employees joined Mr. Brian Amerige to form an online group called ‘FB’ers for Political Diversity. The group was created over an online comment where the company posted about being intolerant to different political views.

Second type of agitation arises when companies make high-profit contracts with third parties or indulge in job outsourcing, to which the employees don’t approve. Grameenphone, the biggest wireless telecommunication network in Bangladesh, announced that it was initiating a project to hand over its operations to a third party, hence would outsource work through other tech firms. Around 600 operation workers could thus lose their job with this move. Hence, their employee union, (GPEU) demanded and protested for complete rollback of this decision.

RECOMMENDATIONS

All the tech-giants mostly encourage transparency, freedom of expression and accountability as their key company values and try their best to live up to the one-team brand culture. Employees also prefer to work at a place with ideological diversity, where seniors give due attention to their feedbacks and suggestions, irrespective of the role, cultural roots, gender or political bias.

REFERENCES

1. The Daily Star. (2019, July. 11). Job cut fear grips GP employees [Online]. Available: https://www.thedailystar.net/business/news/job-cut-fear-grips-gp-employees-1655953
2. The Financial Times. (2019, Jan 21) Shannon Bond #MeToo in Silicon Valley [Online]. Available: https://www.ft.com/content/af5f42a8-1501-11e9-a168-d45595ad076d?fbclid=IwAR0F1QE7C1e_MI55t309N-xCki96duZH8tyH6R9CBclnir3wVp1UeEKC1LQ
3. The New York Times. (2018, Oct, 25 Daisuke Wakabaysahi and Katie Benner – How Google Protected Andy Rubin, the ‘Father of Android’ [Online] Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.html
4. The Brink News. (2018, Dec 13). Richard Levick – Employee Activism Is On the Rise. How Can Companies Respond? [Online]. Available: https://www.brinknews.com/employee-activism-is-on-the-rise-how-can-companies-respond/
5. The New York Times. (2018, Aug 28). Dozens at Facebook Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/technology/inside-facebook-employees-political-bias.html

Do you know what teen activism is? What do you think about teen activism? Teen activism is something that teenagers do to fix a problem in the world. They are usually affected by it before aiming to fix it, and they do it for the better of others. Sometimes they correct a problem in a community, sometimes it worldwide, sometimes it to adjust a problem in a country or county. Teen activism happens all over the world and it is a good thing. It builds character and makes you and others feel good.

I think that more teenagers should take part in teen activism. Community service is important because of the positive outcomes it has on everybody. When you do community service, you feel good, accomplished, and satisfied. You helped people and made a difference that could change the way people see things and have a big effect on society. It enhances communicative awareness and relations. For example, when the animal humane society saw a rise in animal population, they began to spay and neuter the animals that people owned. when you When being a teen activist, you create relations with the people you help and the people you work with. It’s exciting to see how people live their lives and see how they change when you make an impact. When engaging in teen activism, you feel good, and make others feel good.

The benefits of teen activism not only help people but animals too. If you don’t spay or neuter your pets, then they tend to have babies. That extends the animal population. Which means more and more animals without homes. There would be more animals than responsible homes. If this were to happen, many dogs and cats would go in crates, in a pound, and end up being put to sleep. Plus, if there are too many stray dogs and cats, they may follow you back home to maybe other pets you might have, or someone in your family is allergic. That is why teen activism is important. Not only to help people, but animals, and the environment.

When taking part in teen activism, when you are helping people, you can be affected by it. If you see a problem in the world, there is a big chance that you have been affected by it, making you realize how big the problem is, and how it is hurting people. For example, if you were hurt by not getting an education, or seeing a lot of electronic waste, or people getting assassinated for speaking up, then there’s a big chance that you would want to help those people, and there’s a big chance, you would also want to help yourself too. Another example is that we all have a little empathy or sympathy. If you were homeless, and you just won the lottery, and then you saw another homeless person, you would have sympathy, because you’ve experienced it before. Or, if you saw your little brother lost his shoes, you would feel empathy, because you feel sorry for him, although you never lost your shoes because you’ve never hidden in bushes. So, if you do see someone who is suffering, then do what you can to help them. Because if you want the best, someone else might be appreciative for just a little.

Community Service? Important. Animal Population Control? Considerate. Making a difference? Worthwhile. Teen activism is the character of helping others. I believe that everyone should take part in teen activism. No matter how big or small a problem is, someone out there would be glad you tried. So, if you do see someone who is suffering, and you have the capability to change it, then go ahead. Someone just may need your help.

In her writing, Plant considers the role of Situationalist International “vanguard movement” and theory as an ethnographic catalyst and artefact for revolutionary change in a postmodern world. The group was a revolutionary alliance of European avant garde artists and writers that developed a critique of capitalism based on Marxism and surrealism (Plant 2). Forming from the Lettrist international and the international Union for Pictorial Bauhaus, the group has its origins deeply rooted in radical art and design. According to Plant, Situationalist International theory advocates for the people to shun accepted acedemia, media, and understood conceptions of art and politics (Plant 33). They rejected all art forms that were detached from politics and the artforms that ensued were about using space, and altering it to convey a political or social message to the public. SI pioneered the ‘political collage’, a new form using popular comics with changed content in speechbubbles, calling this misappropriation ‘detournement’. Ultimately the situationism Plant discusses offered artists a new perspective that was applicable to all levels of art making, proving that the radical and experimental avant-garde was far from dead and that artworks were pivitol to our understandings of society and to ennacting change.

In response to Plants writings I have looked critically at my own work. When I look back at my time in highschool its obvious how much we were actually restricted with what we could produce. Constricting not only becuase of the content of the task, but also because of how we were forced to present it. Though I do understand the significance of my previous work as an important piece of my journey, Plant shows me how important it is to abolish old theories, in favour of forging my own. The writing allowed me to engage and reflect on how I have previously engaged with situationalist activity in my own works and way. Plant encourages me to reflect on not only how my art can influence, but what my art is influenced by. I learnt to break the shackles of NCEA design theory in order to forge my own ethos and pathos at university. The writing informs me that the making of artistic work entails the active practices of memory and creativity. Where the product from the process is a new and unique fusion of ideas both conscious and subconscious.

My old artboard raised awareness for our current societies emotional detachment from our environment, highlighting our ever increasing dependance on technology. I realised that I did not challenge or question the issue in ways that Situationalism would have.

In ‘Explore Everything: Place-Hacking the city, Garrett delves into the global community of Urban Explorers as an ethnographer in the literal sense (Garrett, 4). Their exploits at a rudimentary level are selfish, concerned only with tackling challenges in the spirit of freedom, yet on a theoretical level, placehackers are actually pioneers of the unseen. Through blogs, photos and videos brought to the public, the Urban Explorer, albeit often unintenionally, implores us to find a “deeper meaning in the places we pass through everyday” (Garrett 6). UE’s ask us to question our understanding of barriers and boundaries. In this technologically dependent world, the everyday city has a ‘security entertainment complex’ where our thoughts are controlled by a mixture of surveillance and distraction (Garrett 14). Through urban exploration, the ‘place-hackers’ recode our relationships with city space, encouraging us to break away from the shallow sterile and emotionally bare environments we live in. Urban explorers promote their own brand of social and political activism, through the systematic infiltration of secure locations, they dismantle the urban ‘iron curtain’ through photography and moment capture. Although they are not unified, Garrett introduces us to a message from their works. The world may be sterilised in many ways, but it is ultimately up to us to ‘break the mould if we find it lacking’.

Garrett asked the reader to question our understandings of barrriers and boundaries, and whether the barrier is there for privacy and security or simply because the owner does not want to take responsibility for anything that may happen on the otherside of a boundary. This reminded of the Christchurch earthquake and how a vast amount of the iconic buildings of the city were closed to the public indefinitely. After reading Garretts piece I was curious to see if there were any Urban Explorers who had infiltrated such buildings. Researching further, I found more exploits of this band of activists who have opened a door into the secret city of the prohibited and unknown. Above all a passage from Garretts writing has stuck with me and has made me think. Why settle for the banal experience in the places we are told to exist in? The reading has encouraged me to explore and find a deeper meaning in the places I encounter in my everyday experience and when I pass cordoned off areas I intend to ask the question, why.

Markussen examines how previous literature on Design Activism has been inadequate in defining the term in a postmodern society, and advocates for the development of a new framework. The root of the problem, is in understanding how the aesthetic aspects of design come together with the political aspects of activism (Markussen 39). He writes that the focus of design activism, should not be on the techniques used, but instead, on both the effect that they can evoke in people and on how design activism stimulates social change by addressing experience itself (Markussen 50). These effects, he says, cannot be understood through the broadening of ‘art’ that the avante guard movement and its incessant obsession with the radical or unorthadox is known for (Markussen 39). Ultimately, the goal of design activism is the exposition of the existing systems that control and restrict our everyday lives, not a violent realization of a ‘grandiose social utopia’ (Markussen 45). Design activism has a significant potential to promote social change, through its affect on peoples senses, perceptions, emotions, and interpretations. It introduces new, diverse artifacts into the public cone of perception and therefore effects peoples experiences in a certain way.

This reading resonanted with me the most, as I think of myself apart of a collective of thinkers who aim to produce work that solves a problem or serves a purpose. The reading challenged me to think of other design pieces where the focus was not on the techniques used but on the message and effect it had on societies perception of change. Shepherd Fairey created an iconic campaign image that connected the idea of hope with a political figure which in this case was Obama. This had an effect on peoples interpretation as when they saw Obama, thoughts of hope were simultaneously evoked. Markussen has changed my understanding of activist artifacts and how they influence social change and our experiences. He has also altered my grasp on the scale and focus of my work and has informed me of the ability for design to be used as a tool to form a connection between peoples emotions and the way they react (Markussen 39), much like the connection between Obama and hope from the campaign image.

Avgikos’s writing examines not only the meaning behind art and its role in activism, but also looks at ‘Group Material’, a group of individuals from different demographics who had come together to explore the assumptions that dictated what art is and could be (Avgikos 87). The group wanted to display art that was deemed unmarketable by the ‘official art world’. They were the first in the 20th century to define their practice in opposition to the insitution of art and the idea that art and the society were seperate. Theirs was a crusade that echoed that of the avant-garde movement, they wished break down art and rebuild it with new meaning (Avgikos 88). Avgikos infers that art questions the entire culture that as a community we have taken for granted, and when art is described as political, what more can it do than protest against its own limited status. (Avgikos 86). The group recognised that art, in its purest form, was the whole holistic process of creation. They refused to define art as being independent, instead recognising the entire spectrum of activity involved in the production of art, believing the process was the work (Avgikos 89). The members of Group Material all believed that art was a force for social and political discourse, and held strong critiques of both the institutional standard and dominant culture. Ultimately the group strived to make art that ‘spoke the language of the people’, art that showed its relevance when discussing social and political problems. Rather than the interests of the institution or a single artist.

Although by now art discourse is over saturated with talk of Banksy, this reading evoked ideas about platforms of communication that are under utilised in the quest for social change. For example, street graffiti is a ‘unistitualised’ and radical form of activism that is rarely thought of as marketable in the ‘artworld’. By using the streets as a canvas for his own opinions, Banksy brings his activism to the forefront of the public eye, where his art can more effectively spread his message. Thus, reaching a wider auidence for his protest, echoing the same methods and goals displayed by both Group Material and the avant-garde movement of the 1960’s. As a design thinker, i am taught to take inspiration from established artists and groups and incorporate their techniques into my own work. Avigiko, presents a new way of looking at how I can present my work in order to make the most impact. Later in the text, it is mentioned that Group Materials recognised institutions such as museams and galleries as a source of power and appropriated the authority that came along with it. The text refers to this as “sleeping with the enemy” (Avigiko, #), which made me think about Banksy’s rise from infamy to his current almost celebrity status and how his ideas now marketable and come along with a price tag.

All four texts discuss the ability to create social or political change in an artistic way, though they differ on the how and the why. In ‘The Most Radical Gesture’ and ‘But is it Art?’, both Plant and Avgikos speak of the effect the instution has on socially accepted forms of art. In ‘But is it Art?’ Avgikos focuses on the ‘Group Material’ and their opposition to the seperation of art and society. Going so far as to wish for a complete overhaul and reconstruction of social understanding of how we view, understand and experience art. Plant in the text ‘The Most Radical Gesture’ writes in support of the Situationalist International whose thoughts and theories were likely influencers of the GM. SI introduced radical demands on the imagination, desire and perceptions of the public and encouraged them to critique accepted stimuli (Plant 21) . A common point from both writings was the call for the abolishment of seperation. Plant wrote that the SI did not want to live in a homologous society but to exist in one that emerged from the critique of the old, demanding to do that which was banned by existing society. This sentiment is echoed by Garrett the author of ‘Explore Everything: Place-Hacking the City’, who describes his time as an ethnographer for a group of urban explorers. A mantra that echoes that of the Situationalists, urban explorers state that “no one is stopping you from doing what you want”. Mirroring both the SI’s and GM’s disdain for our institutionalised society, the UE lives a life that is about making connections and crossing boundaries. However, in contrast to Plant, ‘place-hacking the city’ is about beating the system unlike the situationalists, who attack it. For the urban explorer to exist, the society must exist too, for the society is what creates the fineline that “rigidly seperates what is possible from what is permitted” and that is where placehackers are (Garrett 14). Plant, Avgikos and Garrett all call for a reform of how we interpret beauty, In ‘But is it Art’ Avgikos plays with the idea that a new system will appeal to our innate sense of curiosity, similar to the desire to explore restricted areas discussed in ‘Urban Explorers’.

In ‘The Disruptive Aesthetics of Design Activism: Enacting Design Between Art and Politics’ Markussen pro actively discusses the definition of a design act, as being less of a boycott or political act, and more of a catalyst of resistance in an artistic way to intervene and improve peoples lives (Markussen 38). Markussen views Design activism as a potential catalyst for the reform of existing systems, instead of being the figurative spark to start a revolution. Avgikos’ ‘But is it Art?’ Parrallels this, Group Material utilised previous elements from earlier projects to support and strengthen the message the artwork was trying to make. What is clear is that both Avgikos and Markussen believed in the importance of art and design processes, and how social and political activism created opportunity for immense creativity and spaces of contest. As a member of a collective of design thinkers, this has encouraged me to think about how I can explore those spaces in my own work in the future. To not only think about the impact of my final works but how the processes I take impact social change. I would like to think about how I could create new spaces and systems for myself within my work rather than opposing the systems already in place.

In an interview with Richard Anderson and Jon Kolko, the relationship between design and activism is discussed. Anderson’s view is that human centered design is the form of activism, whereas Kolko feels the physical aspect of viewing design itself is the force for cultural change. As Markussen discussed, we cannot hope to understand design activism simply from borrowed external ideas (Markussen 38) and thus both Anderson’s and Kolko’s interpretations arent wholely correct. What is clear is that throughtout the years there have been multiple design ‘vanguard’ movements, specifically, The Situationist International and the Group Material. Reflecting on the artists of the early 20th century avant-garde movement who could only see a single option for art. Political. These movements have been focused on the breakdown of our seperated societal spheres, but when all art becomes activism does art as a principle cease to exist? Design does shape society, albeit slowly and less obvious when compared to the images of protests and riots evoked by the word activism (Anderson Medium).

Works Cited

1. Anderson, Richard, and Richard Anderson. On the Relationship between Design and Activism – Jon Kolko in Conversation with Richard Anderson. Medium, 3 Sept. 2017, medium.com/@Riander/on-the-relationship-between-design-and-activism-jon-kolko-in-conversation-with-richard-anderson-a7914657b0f4.
2. Felshin, Nina. But Is It Art?: the Spirit of Art as Activism. Bay Press, 2006.
3. Garrett, Bradley L. Explore Everything: Place-Hacking the City. Verso, 2014.
4. Markussen, Thomas. “The Disruptive Aesthetics of Design Activism: Enacting Design Between Art and Politics.” Design Issues, vol. 29, no. 1, 2013, pp. 38–50., doi:10.1162/desi_a_00195.
5. Matthews, Phillip. “The Art of Urban Exploration.” The Art of Urban Exploration, Stuff, 13 Dec. 2014, www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurch-earthquake-2011/64121796/null.
6. Plant, Sadie. The Most Radical Gesture: the Situationist International in a Postmodern Age. Routledge, 2006.

We should not be shocked that even within the courts, the judges can reach different conclusions. For example, a case in Alberta made its way to the Supreme Court of Canada. Hutterian Brethrens challenged a provincial regulation that required them to have photo identification on their driver’s licenses. They claimed that the law infringed on their religious belief. The SCC justices were split about whether the provincial law’s requirement for photos justified the violation of their religious freedoms. The majority of the court decided that the law was justified because the negative effect on religious freedom of the Hutterian colony members did not outweigh the benefits of the security and the integrity of the driver’s licensing system. However, two justices found the harm to the rights of the religious group, and stated that the impact was not on just their belief system but also on the life of the community and their religious lifestyle. Therefore, this shows an understanding that the Charter cases often require judges to weigh-in on social issues, something that the courts have been criticized for.

In sum, both of the cases above illustrate how the charter changed the role of judges where they bear the responsibility to interoperate the charter. Due to the charter, judges now have a bigger role in the constitution. This means judges have more power and responsibility by force than before, when it was only the BNA act in motion.

Although judges bear more responsibility now than before, judges are appointed and not picked randomly. Judges are chosen based on a number of factors and are picked to maintain the trust of the people. In sum the Supreme Court of Canada has nine judges that includes the Chief Justice of Canada. The Governor in Council appoints them and all of the judges must have been either a judge of a superior court or a member with at least ten years of experience with the province or territory. Furthermore, judges stay within the office till the age of seventy-five or earlier if they choose to retire (Kent, 2016). Judges can also be removed if found causing misconduct. This is important to understand because, despite the fact that judges do hold power in the palm of their hands, they are not picked randomly. As stated above they require experience. Through this experience judges are picked and selected based on their skills that best fit the court. Because judges are appointed, they are chosen to make sure they do not abuse the power they are given. This means that judges must remain impartial and fair. If judges do abuse their power and cause any sort of misconduct, they will be removed from their seat. Overall, the appointment process is intended to protect the citizens and balance the power judges are given.

Another factor to consider is the notion that more power and responsibility does not mean it has to be bad. Phycology studies done by suggest that power doesn’t make a person bad but it shows their true nature (Kaufman, 2015). As mentioned earlier judges are appointed and if they cause misconduct they will be removed. Therefore, the power is not given to be bad or become bad rather, if the nature of the person with the power is bad they will be removed. Additionally, with respect to the claim that judges have too much power, many fear that power. They assert that judges act on their own will and make decisions based on their own opinion rather than following the law.

In the next section of this paper I will go into detail regarding the fact that judicial activism is not a myth and is a very real thing to add on, I will illustrate that judicial activism has been exaggerated within the courts to seem more than what it really is. In sum, by the end of this section I aim to convey that judicial activism is not as common as it seems in the courts and when it does exist its not as bad as people have portrayed.

As many have argued that the courts have too much power despite it being a result of the Charter, they state that judicial activism is what makes them so powerful. Rather than understanding the crucial and difficult role of the judges to remain impartial and interoperate the law, many seem to be threatened by judicial activism. I argue that judicial activism should not be seen as a threat and instead should be seen as an attempt by the courts to understand the society and interoperate the laws to fit the societies needs best. I would like to first define judicial activism to better understand my argument. Judicial activism refers to judicial rulings that are suspected of being based on personal opinion, rather than on existing law (Kent, 2016). Judicial activism has been a very controversial topic as many argue whether judicial activism exists or not. Retired Supreme Court of Canada Justice John Major stated, “There is no such thing as judicial activism in Canada” (Anand, 2006). Whereas many citizens or victims of the court argue that judicial activism does exist within Canada where the judges can act based on their opinions and not the written laws.

One of the major myths of judicial activism is that it did not exist prior to the charter of 1982. However judicial activism is real and existed prior to the new enactment of the charter (Anand, 2006). An example of judicial activism was evident in the case of Donoghue v. Stevenson in 1932. In this case the two women ordered a beer and one bottle contained a decomposed snail. The plaintiff alleged she suffered from shock and gastroenteritis. She sued the manufacturer as they were in breach of its contract by supplying the cafe with defective beer. However, a lower court ruled that she was not eligible to sue for damages, as she was not a party in the contract.

Activism is the policy or action of using vigorous campaigning to bring about political or social change. The pros of activism are that it helps spread awareness about a cause or event, helps students engage and participate in educational activities, assists with networking and fundraising. The cons of activism are that nobody does anything about it although awareness has been raised these people do not donate to the cause.

Slacktivism is the practice of supporting a political or social cause by means such as social media or online petitions, characterized as involving very little effort or commitment. The pros of slacktivism are that you are able to reach people of companies faster, the people who aren’t able to financially support can share posts and get involved online. The cons of slacktivism are that there is no privacy, it is unreliable and false information is easily accessible, liking/commenting/sharing posts doesn’t change the situation and systemic issues also arise from hashtags.

Using social media to create awareness and encourage support benefits the organisation due to increasing awareness; the organisation is being shared and more people find out about it due to social sharing. Another way social media benefits social issues is by allowing organisations/people to speak out and tell their story to all the people who follow their account, thus defining themselves to the public, get the word out and receive assistance from people, major companies and schools.

A drawback of using social media is that false and unreliable information is spread which has a major negative effect on the person or organisation, another drawback is people who are against your organization can bad mouth your organization if you retaliate you could end up with a law case and end up spending more money in court rather than on the organization.

One major social issue in South Africa is unemployment; the unemployment rate is at its highest and the unemployment rate at the end of the second quarter of 2018 was 27.7%. Unemployment increases the crime in South Africa and leaves many citizens without their basic needs such as food.

“Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself” (King, 1963). Few words in Letter from a Birmingham Jail from Martin Luther King Jr., an activist of civil rights and champion of human rights, equality and justice. In the society we live in, activism is like a coin. It can be seen with two sides. Some individuals would only view activism as an act of pure violence owing the fact that activists groups do rallies, sit-ins, street marches, strikes and protest in order to exhibit their opposition and advocacies. There are individuals that has the capacity to realize that activists demand to be heard. They call for attention having the aim for greater good, for change and for progress with no one being left alone. Increasing numbers of activists should be alarming not in a way that there will be violence around the corner but numerous individuals seek for justice and demand ears to listen to their pleas.

Around the world, as early as the age of 11, youths are demonstrating their advocacies to change the world. At an early age, there are numerous activists who are trying to open the eyes of people to climate change, education and other global issues. One of the most famous youth activists is Greta Thunberg, a seventeen-year old Swedish girl who challenges everyone to contribute in putting an end to climate change. On September 21, 2019, Greta delivered her speech to world leaders which brought her to the headlines. When she was asked what is her message to the world leaders, “My message is that we’ll be watching you.” (Thunberg, 2019). She is teary-eyed while delivering her speech in the UN Climate Action Summit. “…entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairytales of economic growth. How dare you…” (Thunberg, 2019), some of her speech dedicated to the world leaders. These are some words of a sixteen-year old Greta that occur to me that climate change is not a topic to ignore. We must all take action. In Middle East, a 24-year old woman named Shamma bint Suhail Faris Mazrui, a youth activist empowers young people in the UAE to take part and be active to the society and the government. Yousafzai, from Pakistan, the author of “I am Malala”, 23 years old fought for women and girl’s education. Her spirit and passion to fight for women’s rights made her gained enemies. In October 2012, she was shot in a school bus. She survived the attack and became the center of international movement to support her but led to Taliban officials to announce a second assassination attempt. David Hogg, Jaclyn Corin, Emma González, Cameron Kasky, and Alex Wind, youths from Parkland Florida, who survived shooting are youth activists that advocates gun control. Yara Shahidi, 19 years old advocates women’s and girl’s engagement. Just like Greta, a 18-year old woman from Seattle, Washington named Jamie Margolin and Isra Hirsi, 17 years old from Minnesota, fights for climate change. Desmond Napoles or also known as Desmond is amazing, 13 years old from America fights for the LBTQ community for its youth’s visibility. Mari Copeny who is only 12 years old became famous when she was eight years old in March 2016, she wrote a letter to President Barack Obama about the water crisis in Flint, Michigan. In May 2020, major protests sparked after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Black people were protesting against police brutality after the video of a police officer kneeling on Floyd’s neck, eventually lead to his death went viral. The movement Black Lives Matter organized protests to have justice for the death of George Floyd. The police accountable for Floyd’s death was charged with second-degree murder. Three other officers who were there have all been charged with aiding and abetting second-degree murder and manslaughter. As you can see, these amazing people exemplifies that activism is done because change is needed, change is demanded not only in a country but around the world. Social injustices should be corrected and not ignored. We are all accountable for what is happening globally so we all must take action in building harmonious, sustainable and progressive world for each and everyone and for the people of the future.

“Tibak”, a slang term derived from the syllables of the word aktibista or activist in English. It became popular in the Philippines among the youths during martial law period. On September 21, 1972, Ferdinand Marcos signed Proclamation No. 1081 placing the Philippines under Martial Law. He declared it on 23rd of September on the same year. 14 years under martial law, a lot of activists were awakened that this fascism should end. Philippines lost its democracy under the hands of a dictator, Marcos. The political protests during martial law are Interim Batasang Pambansa (IBP) election noise barrage (April 6, 1978) and Post-IBP election rally (April 9, 1978). It took 4 momentous days of February 22-25, 1986, millions of Filipinos gather along Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue (EDSA) to demonstrate their resistance against the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos. Their exemplary courage to stood against the regime succeed in ousting the dictator peacefully. Years later, another leader was ousted of his office. On January 17-20, 2001 an uprising in Manila has happened again. The second EDSA revolution or also known as, EDSA 11 or EDSA Dos peacefully overthrown the government of Joseph Estrada, more popularly known as ERAP. He was ousted after an aborted impeachment trial in which he was charged with perjury and plunder. Activism started both the uprisings. We can never tell that activism will not bring any good, because if it is then why did activism and the Filipinos successfully ousted traitors of our country who once became our leaders?

“’Di niyo ba naririnig tinig ng bayan ng galit? Himig ito ng Pilipino di muli palulupig. Dudurugin ang dilim, ang araw ay mag-aalab, at ang mga pusong nagtimpi ay magliliyab.”, an excerpt from “’Di niyo ba naririnig?”, the Filipino adaptation of “Do you hear the people sing?” from Victor Hugo’s theatrical production, Les Misérables. This was sung during President Rodrigo Duterte’s fifth State of the Nation Address (SONA) on July 27, 2020. Despite an official ban on all forms of protests and gathering considering physical distancing protocols due to 2019 novel corona virus or COVID-19, an estimated 8,000 activists gather around University of the Philippines Diliman. They weren’t defied by the mass arrests going on the country, about 6,000 policemen were deployed that very day. People were pleading to be heard as they demonstrate their resistance against the slow, incompetent and militarist response of Duterte’s administration in the health crisis going on. Activists were also conveying their opposition with the recent passage of anti- terror law which filled the people with dread that it may cause falsely accusing activists as terrorists. They were wearing masks and observing physical distancing while holding their protest. By the end of July 2020, cases of COVID-19 went up to 93,000 but the Philippine President preferred to be deaf to the supplication of his countrymen. They continued to dismiss all forms of criticisms, saying that everything is under control which is the same with what he said on January 29, 2020 when people were appealing travel ban to China. ‘Mahirap ‘yang ano, sabihin mong [It is hard to say that] you suspend everything because they are not also suspending theirs and they continue to respect the freedom flights that we enjoy,” his exact words during an ambush interview regarding travel ban. People were appealing and this regime refuses to understand its citizens. I, personally was one of the people who are in favor of travel ban from China. I did actually sign a petition because that’s the least I can do for my co-Filipinos. Privileged people don’t see what the masses are yearning for because they were so blinded by the comforts of life they’re experiencing. It is close to impossible to implement social distancing in a poor urban area. Spaces were few and the place is very crowded. This might be avoided if the petition for travel ban was granted. I desired for a travel ban as much as the activists did. I consider myself a weakling, having to hide my feelings and emotions in this writing, I was never one of the great brave people who stand for their rights and fought for the greater good of the masses. We are in an almost a year of lockdown now, but nothing has happened except the endless cycle of things. Filipinos have died without being heard. We failed with the travel ban just because as the President said, China isn’t suspending theirs. Given the fact that the virus sparked in that country, a leader must do an immediate reaction, for his people. This is what activists do. They don’t just do rallies and strike mobs. They are brave enough to think of the welfare of their countrymen, risking their own. A thing that people without compassion wouldn’t understand. On April 27, 2020, Duterte’s Administration was called out by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) for the implementation of “highly militarized response” for the quarantine and lockdown violators. “Shooting, detaining, or abusing someone for breaking a curfew because they are desperately searching for food is clearly an unacceptable and unlawful response. So is making it difficult or dangerous for a woman to get to hospital to give birth. In some cases, people are dying because of the inappropriate application of measures that have been supposedly put in place to save them,”, (Bachelet, 2020). Georgette Gagnon, director of field operations and technical cooperation for the UN Human Rights Office, international human rights lawyer and activist went on describing how highly militarized the response to the pandemic had led to the arrest of 120,000 people for violating the curfew in the Philippines. Desperate citizens build barricades in EDSA, Quezon City to ask for local government’s food assistance on April 1, 2020. Tensioned was build after the PNP or Philippine National Police demolished the barricades. Citizens resorted to going out because they are insisting that they were not receiving aid. Residents were asked to go home and 20 residents of Sitio San Roque were arrested by the Quezon City Police District (QCPD), after the protests. The tension in Sitio San Roque exemplifies how militaristic the response in COVID-19 our country has. People were asking for food and they were given beating. Given the fact that the virus could spread that easily, arresting shouldn’t be an option. Jails in our country are very crowded and the virus will spread in that kind of place in a snap. Jose Reyes Memorial Medical Center (JRMMC) health workers staged a rally in Sta. Cruz, Manila, conveying their disreputable working conditions amidst the health crisis. They are also calling for a higher budget this 2021 for Department of Health (DOH). “The Department of Health budget is only P127.7 billion and ranks number 8 only on the top 10 departments’ budgeting for 2021. The COVID-19 response budget is only P11.95 billion which indicates that the DOH and the Duterte administration have no intention of suppressing the virus,”, a statement issued by the Alliance of Health Workers (AHW) to indicate their grievances for the national government seemingly not prioritizing the budget for health despite the worsening health condition. The government restricts rallies, mobs and protests to help our health workers in defeating the virus, then why are the medical health workers doing protests? Does this indicate that something is wrong and they are standing on what is right? If the government is really trying their very best to help to health workers why is the budget for health low? In September 2, 2020, President Duterte expressed seeking for a total of 20,000,000,000 PHP increase in the funds of Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) for next year. That is the reason why the activists are increasing here in our country not because they just desire to oppose the government or even overthrown the one in the position, but because they have their eyes wide open. They can see that something is wrong. The fact that were under a health crisis and the military is much focused on, people will fight and resist.

To summarize the three points that I am aiming to prove in writing this essay, I will start with the statement that “Activism is like a domino”. One’s word can awaken another one’s spirit. A person who has a strong conviction to fight for them know what is right will always be appealing. In the ted talk of Gordon Brown, he mentioned how globalization took part in activism and how it was able to reach out to more individuals around the world. If we remain blinded towards to alarming issues such as climate change, genocide, corruption, rights for education, employee discrimination, racism, sexism and all sorts of oppression, change wouldn’t be put into place. We can’t just sit in a corner, just because we aren’t experiencing the torment other people is facing. Activism it can open a person’s eyes to the truth and see the global issues we are facing. Second point is that, “activism aims for the greater good of the masses.” Activism isn’t just about overthrowing a regime but it aims correct the injustices that will bring peace to the people. It is much more than that. Without activism, we are still under the filthy hands of oppressors and dictators. Our heroes were dictators. They fought for our freedom. We shouldn’t be afraid to continuously fight for it. Our duty isn’t to serve the government but to serve our people. Lastly, “Activism demands to be heard. There are activists because there are injustices.” We shouldn’t be silenced just because we are muted and asked to do so. If the government listen to its people, they will realize that there are things that needs to be discussed. Activist shouldn’t be defied. They are the voice of the masses, they are the voice of the weak and poor, they are the eyes of people and they are the strength of every citizen to fight for their rights. We shouldn’t be blinded; we shouldn’t be afraid and we shouldn’t be silenced. There will always be activism as long as there are demands for change. I have never been in an activist group or in an activity concerning activists but all I know is that they are the voice of the people who are crying for help. I am not an activist nor a terrorist or affiliated with any groups against the government, I just want to voice out my thoughts that activists needs to be heard.

Twitter is “what’s happening in the world and what people are talking about right now” (Twitter, 2019). The platform is an American microblogging and social networking service. The site was first launched publicly on March 21, 2006, by Co-founders Jack Dorsey a computer programmer, internet entrepreneur, and current chairman of the board, Christopher ‘Biz’ Stone an entrepreneur, film director, and founder of various internet-based services, Evan Williams a computer programmer and internet entrepreneur and Noah Glass a software developer. In 2017, Twitter’s CMO Leslie Berlan clarified what the platform’s key aim is, stating that it’s the place to go “to see what is happening.” (Kapko, 2017) As of 2019’s first quarter, Twitter has an average of 330 million Monthly Active Users -MAU- and 139 million Daily Active Users – DAU- with an average of 500 million Tweets per day (Clement, 2019). 34% of Twitter users are female and 66% are male with 262 million users, which is 79% of Twitter accounts, coming from outside of the United States (Aslam, 2019)

Similar to other social media platforms, Twitter’s signup simply requires users to enter their name and email address or phone number, once they have signed up, they can choose a username to go by. As of 26 September 2019 at 7:57 EDT, Twitter’s share price is at $41.35 USD – $61.19 AUD – having seen a -4.09% drop in the past month.

What is digital activism?

Digital activism is defined as “the use of electronic technology, such as social media, email or websites, in order to fundraise, lobby governments or raises awareness among a specific audience” (Herbert, 2016). According to Joyce (2012), there are six functions of digital activism, shaping public opinion,

Social media and the internet have changed the way people engage and participate in activism, with Twitter and the hashtag allowing for a transformation in modern-day activism. Digital platforms like Twitter “have become essential tools for 21st-century social movements” (Freelon, McIlwain, & Clark, 2016)

One of the first cases of digital activism is the Arab Spring. In late December 2010 protests started in Tunisia after street vendor Mohammed Bouazizi set himself alight. Known as the ‘Jasmine Revolution’, it eventually led the country’s authoritarian President Zine al-Abidine bin Ali to abdicate and flee to Saudi Arabia.

The Arab Spring is considered to be one of the first cases where activists used social media to incite change. Social media platforms such as Twitter were used by activists to spread information and organize protests around the world. It could be argued that Arab Spring changed the way activists used social media, specifically Twitter and the hashtag, the protests revolutionized the use of the hashtag, as it was the first time it had been used for political engagement across social media.

Hashtag activism

Introduced to Twitter in 2007, the hashtag changed and transformed the way people used the platform. “Twitter hashtags are able to bring together a community of interest around identified themes and events and channel the relevant tweets posted by members of that community into a unified stream of updates.” (Bruns & Highfield, 2014, p.33). Yang (2016) defines hashtag activism as “discursive protest on social media united through a hashtagged word, phrase or sentence”.

Hashtag Activism is “the act of supporting a cause that is being advocated through social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and other Networking sites” (Hill, 2014). Recently, hashtag activism has become the popular way in which people, activists and celebrities get their message out and ignite change.

In October 2017, American actress Alyssa Milano renewed the MeToo movement by tweeting “If you’ve been sexually harassed or assaulted write #metoo”, this hashtag was used over 200,000 times in 24 hours, sexual assault survivors who felt encouraged by Milano’s tweet to share their story did so using the hashtag. #BlackLivesMatter and #Metoo are just some examples of how hashtag activism can be successful

Slacktivism

However, since its inception, hashtag activism, digital activism, and online activists have come under much scrutiny, with many arguing against digital activism and activists. ‘Slacktivism’ is a term first coined by Canadian journalist Malcolm Gladwell in his article Small Change: Why the revolution will not be tweeted published in The New Yorker in 2010. Hill (2014) argues that digital activism is a lazy form of activism, with Morozov describing slacktivism as “what happens when the energy of otherwise dedicated activists is wasted on approaches that are less effective than the alternatives (Milne, 2019).