Mediacheck

Malcolm Gladwell's Wrong about Digital Advocacy

Social media's 'weak ties' should not be underestimated.

By Michael Geist, 20 Oct 2010, TheTyee.ca

MalcolmGladwell

Gladwell: What gets on the radar?

Related

Malcolm Gladwell, the best-selling Canadian writer for the New Yorker, recently turned his attention to the use of Twitter, Facebook, and the Internet for digital advocacy. Gladwell dismissed claims that digital advocacy has been an effective tool, lamenting that "people have forgotten what advocacy is about."

He suggested that effective advocacy that leads to broad social or political change requires "strong ties" among people who are closely connected, committed to the cause, and well organized. When Gladwell examined digital advocacy initiatives he found precisely the opposite -- weak ties between people with minimal commitment and no organizational structure.

The Gladwell article was published two days after Canada, the United States, the European Union and a handful of other countries concluded negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. As I noted in last week's column, although some issues must still be sorted out, the countries have agreed on a broad framework and announced that no further negotiation rounds are planned.

With the draft agreement now public, it is apparent that one of the biggest stories over the three-year negotiation was the willingness of the U.S. to compromise on the rules associated with the Internet. When it first proposed the Internet chapter, the U.S. demanded new liability requirements for Internet providers (including the possibility of terminating subscriber access based on multiple allegations of infringement) as well as tough digital lock rules that went far beyond current international treaty requirements.

The near-final version is a far cry from the initial U.S. proposal, with the Internet provider provisions removed from the treaty and the digital lock provisions rendered more flexible to accommodate the wide range of global approaches to the issue.

Several factors are likely responsible for the dramatic shift. Unexpected political developments in Europe and the U.S. led to an aggressive European Parliament demanding greater protections for privacy and civil liberties in the agreement, while the upcoming U.S. Congressional elections may have increased pressure to conclude the agreement quickly, regardless of how imperfect it might be from a U.S. perspective.

The lack of transparency associated with the agreement may have also weakened the U.S. position, since it left negotiators unable to respond to public criticism, which steadily mounted as politicians, business and the public grew wary of a treaty being negotiated in secret locations behind closed doors.

A case study in raised awareness

Contrary to Gladwell's expectations, yet another critical factor was the role of loosely connected groups around the world who used the Internet to raise awareness with the public, politicians, and the media. Unlike many advocacy efforts in this field that are limited to domestic or local activities, non-governmental groups from the U.S., Europe, New Zealand, and Canada worked in parallel to turn ACTA into a political hot potato.

Their work was supported by dozens of academics, university clinics, activists and interested individuals around the world, who published papers, blog posts and tweets on ACTA and its potential effects. Concerned citizens took that information and created wikis to allow for further analysis or translated the materials into Spanish, French, and other local languages.

The steady stream of information about ACTA took a relatively obscure issue and gradually moved it onto the political radar screen, leading to Parliamentary hearings in Europe and uncomfortable questions in many national legislatures (including Canada's House of Commons).

While digital advocacy alone was not responsible for these efforts, it played a crucial role, providing instant dissemination of leaked documents and expert analysis. The battle over ACTA may not be the equivalent of the fight for civil rights in the 1960's, but the relative success in changing the terms of the agreement that was a top U.S. priority demonstrates the power of digital advocacy and the potential for weak ties and loosely organized groups to come together to influence global policy.  [Tyee]

6  Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • Urbanismo

    1 year ago

    Gladwell rocks . . .

    Well, Mr. " . . . Gladwell dismissed claims that digital advocacy has been an effective tool, lamenting that "people have forgotten what advocacy is about.""

    Good for Malcolm Gladwell, and oh boy, how out of character for a Canadian.

    He is absolutely right.

    Blogs are an opportunity for limp wristed gossips and soft bellied ignoramuses to get it off without consequences: believing they are . . . errrrr . . . being effective.

    Big deal to day forgotten tomorrow: MSM in drag . . .

    The big guys love the blogs: they give vent to blow off harmlessly.

  • airwin

    1 year ago

    The big guys hate internet advocacy

    Urbanismo: you sound defeatist this morning. :-) There are other examples of successful internet advocacy beyond the fight against ACTA that Michael was discussing. For example, the fight against European patents and the fight against SCO's stupid Linux lawsuits lead by Pamela Jones of Groklaw. Also, don't forget that Obama got elected because of an extremely good internet campaign which raised a lot of cash and awareness at a time when it was desperately needed. At the time he was just a little guy. It's ironic that now he is a big guy his administration is doing everything possible to curtail internet freedom.

    I don't follow the right wing that much, but my understanding is they are very good at internet advocacy. The left wing ignores or is defeatist about internet advocacy at its extreme peril.

  • laniwurm

    1 year ago

    yeah, but ...

    The problem with this article and other criticisms I've seen of Gladwell's piece is that he isn't actually talking about advocacy, but rather activism aimed at producing social change. If your objective is to communicate with other activists around a particular issue, promote a position regarding a piece of legislation or international agreement, inform people about an issue, or to organize a flash mob pillow fight, there's nothing in Gladwell's article that takes issue with the efficacy of social media.

    In this case, the critique comes off as especially disingenuous since Geist conveniently misquotes Gladwell. He doesn't say "people have forgotten what advocacy is about" but rather "we seem to have forgotten what activism is." Case in point.

    The offending article can be found here: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=all

  • VivianLea Doubt

    1 year ago

    advocacy...activism...

    "influence global policy" - these are all different things.I must note, too, because Gladwell doesn't, that the hierarchical organization of the civil rights movement brought tremendous criticism - from women, particularly, but other participants also who thought that talent was being wasted and ignored...

    Yes, the soft ties of social media work better possibly for raising awareness than for generating sit-down strikes - and so what? Activists will want to use all tools at their disposal ( as will those who advocate, and those who wish to influence global policy), and I confess to being puzzled why there is so much disparagement of social media. I cannot help but compare it to the party members in my riding who complained endlessly about automated phone calls to notify them of upcoming events - they lamented the days of the good old telephone tree. Sigh.

    We need to use all the tools at our disposal, us lefties. Something wrong with a flash mob? Golly, even staging a flash mob pillow fight would be preferable to watching the same old, exact same old people turn out to 'activist' gatherings year after year...and get ever older, and grayer, and less able to be active, never mind activists.

  • jeanhebert

    1 year ago

    why are we even reading Gladwell in the first place?

    Gladwell would do well take aim at the use of the telephone by 1960s civil rights activists. Imagine the achievements in social justice had we only dusted off the old Chappe telegraph.

  • VivianLea Doubt

    1 year ago

    laughing...

    I just wanted to say, jeanhebert, that the pleasure of getting to laugh out loud in the morning is appreciated.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.