Unsocial media and American politics

In social media, there's screaming but no sound. Welcome to politics in the new millennium.

We still have months to go before the November election, but it seems like we're in extra innings already, doesn't it? Extra innings with opposing fans, shouting on either side of us. But here, the game doesn't stop when something is thrown onto the field.

Much of the campaign rhetoric is tiresome given the (unprecedented in our lifetimes) nature of the candidate exchanges. If the rise of Donald Trump's campaign is, as a smart friend of mine believes, a function of social media as F.D.R. was to radio and J.F.K. to television, then maybe it makes some kind of sense that places like Twitter and Facebook become the dumping ground for the good and bad observations among those who will help decide on our next iteration of leadership.

It reminds me of the promotion campaign for the 1979 movie "Alien."

Poster from 1979 movie hit "Alien"

"In space, no one can hear you scream"
Just change the word "social media" for "space."

Opposing forces compete

At the same time, like the candidates, the president and members of Congress, so many of us are talking past one another. It is the political equivalent of group therapy without any healing. Hey, I feel better, but I don't care about you. Not the way a civil society works. But apparently plenty of folks think civility isn't a priority these days. It is true of participants on both Facebook and Twitter, but a smaller cross-section of the population Tweets. (Last check the stock market valued Twitter at $12 billion and Facebook at $300 billion, for example).

Having said all of that, I offer my estimate of how many Facebook posts are faring these days (those with political themes)

% of people who post political things on Facebook: 25
% of people who convert others to their way of thinking: 0.0 (Donald Trump himself is statistically insignificant)
% of people who aggravate others with their political posts: 67.9
% of people who aggravate others, but feel better somehow for doing it 65.9
% of time wasted by posting political items to FB: 99.6. (doesn't include journalists or political pros who are looking to get traffic for content or get out the vote/fundraise).
% effectiveness of all candidates in helping to drive the divisive behavior 100%

If there's any good news here, it is that people are participating in the democracy. It beats open warfare in the street. At least we have that going for us.

Follow me on Twitter: @Hamrickisms

Slacktivism -- Or Couch Potato Activism

In reading about the quandary whether journalists should be restrained by their employers from being involved in politically-charged causes, I happened upon one of the best new words I've seen in a while.

"Slacktivism" refers to the all-too-common modern meaningless gestures undertaken by people intended to align them with a cause, but where the actions have no meaningful impact.  The word itself, which apparently has been around for years, combines "slacker" and "activism". It would appear to be an oxymoron, reflecting at least in part how potentially good intentions miss their marks.

For years, I've pondered why people post angry bumper stickers communicating negative or even hateful messages that they might otherwise be unwilling to communicate when they are not sheltered by the armor of their automobile.  In many cases, the communication fails to persuade or invite sympathy. Instead, it infuriates and often fails to illuminate. That's not to say that expressing anger doesn't also have a place.

More common in recent times has been the Facebook post where someone urges others to repost a message under the guise that there's some real outcome other than the appearance of the post itself.  How in the world does that help someone suffering a devastating illness or having served in the military. I would suggest it does nothing to help.  In fact, it might do damage, by giving cover to someone who might otherwise be poised to take actual action, but otherwise believes wrongly that they are assisting a potentially valid cause by posting a status update.  Most common seem to be political issue postings, followed by those concerned with medical or health challenges.  Just like the bumper sticker behavior, the social media iteration of "slacktivism" can risk alienating people.  That would seem to be the opposite of what was intended.

Between the Occupy and Tea Party movements, or the fallout surrounding the Susan G. Komen controversy funding of Planned Parenthood, there are plenty of instances where people are trying to gauge appropriate levels of activism.  In a vibrant democracy, and in an increasingly connected world, that would seem to be necessary.

There is much to be said for being truly invested in a cause, whether it is enlisting, joining a revolution, working on the ground in a developing country, all at one extreme, volunteering at a nursing home, being a discerning philanthropist, or donating blood.  As for hope for the future, it is heartening to see the high level of involvement among many of today's college students, whether they are required to perform community service, or choose to jump in because their hearts tell them to.   

Something quite encouraging happened just today. I had two young people knock on my door to stump for their respective candidates for the U.S. Congress. Kudos to them for working on a cause they believe in.

In a perfect world, which we don't have, we would engage others in an actual conversation about a would-be call to action.  Unfortunately, the less we converse in a constructive fashion, the more likely we are to lose the ability to achieve positive outcomes.

Check out the Wikipedia entry on "slacktivism".  Thanks to Poynter.org for shedding some light on this.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/top-stories/167970/live-chat-wednesday-should-journalists-show-support-for-trayvon-martin-ask-for-scott-walkers-recall/

My hope for 2012 -- understanding technology's limits

For most Americans, access to information, and technology facilitating that access is a given.  How is it then, that it seems like a tremendous challenge to attain greater knowledge?  Living around Washington, I regularly see people driving poorly, with a cell phone affixed to their ears. People walk onto elevators looking only at a mobile device, ignoring the person standing right beside them.

Walking down the street, or through an airport, people are checking their social media, or status updates, without being aware of their surroundings.   There have been numerous reports lately where people are having new iPhones stolen right out of their hands, oblivious to the threats approaching them on the street. One can imagine someone checking to see what the weather is on a mobile device, while standing outside.

We all are working to adapt to the amazing changes in technology that surround us.  It is a challenge. There's a learning curve to understanding the new GPS in a car, on a cable set-top box or included in a new mobile phone. But assimilating that technology into the human experience is something else completely. By the way, I love new gadgets and apps as much as the next person. But I worry sometimes that we've lost focus and  connections with one another.

My prayer for the year ahead is that we remember that none of this technology ultimately has much value if we fail to understand we need each other to make our communities and our greater society work. There's no app for that.

If we strive only for improved technology, but accept diminished human relations, we've failed.

(Do you have some ideas how we can both embrace technology and others at the same time? Feel free to share them in the comments section.)