Within the last few years, the internet’s court of public opinion has become a brutal and unforgiving battleground, hashing out its verdict on social issues against a backdrop of progressiveness.
Online activism is becoming a staple on all social media platforms and major news sites.
At its best, it’s brought national attention to issues that have been simmering under mainstream awareness like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter, which trended and were also covered by online journalists. At its worse, it’s a self-congratulatory pat on the back for self-perceived wokeness. Beyond that, it’s a willfully misguided pitchfork-wielding mob that leads to Cancel Culture and unproductive in-fighting.
In recent news, the pitfalls of online activism have become more apparent.
When the allegations of Johnny Depp’s abuse of then-wife Amber Heard first broke, Twitter users were quick to condemn the actor despite his claim of actually being the victim. Heard was applauded for her bravery in speaking out, while Depp was blacklisted in the industry.
But when audio surfaced last week of Heard explicitly admitting to abusing Depp, #IStandWithAmber quickly flipped to #JusticeForJohnnyDepp.
However, the damage was already done. Regardless of whose side the consensus takes, the fallout from this situation highlighted the inherent wrongness of reactionary responses.
The #MeToo movement heralded the era of finally listening to the victim, yet this situation reinforced the old mentality that proof is a prerequisite to having your claim heard. In the rush to defend Heard, many neglected to contextualize that men can also be victims of abuse and women can be abusers.
In today’s climate, round the clock coverage on controversy demands instant backlash against the perceived enemy. Staying quiet can be misconstrued as truancy from your beliefs.
It’s okay to admit to needing more information before forming your opinion. Waiting to contextualize the facts is crucial since misinformed opinions are a disservice to the cause you champion.
True activism is done for selfless reasons — not for clout or a sense of self-righteous authority.
Actress-activist Rose McGowan recently came for Natalie Portman’s neck in regard to Portman’s display at the Oscars, where she wore a cloak with the names of all the female directors snubbed of nominations.
In her Facebook rant, McGowan calls Portman’s actions “lip service,” stating, “The kind of protest that gets rave reviews from the mainstream media for its bravery. Brave? No, not by a long shot. More like an actress acting the part of someone who cares. As so many of them do. I find Portman’s type of activism deeply offensive to those of us who actually do the work.”
While constructive criticism keeps conversations on a healthy path of growth, there’s a line between fruitful commentary and policing the purity of others’ contributions.
Was Portman’s subtle nod absolutely groundbreaking? No, but McGowan doesn’t get to determine who’s done enough within the discourse of feminism. There’s probably aspects she’s missed too. Being the loudest in the room means nothing if you’re using your voice to knock your fellow activists down.
Davina Britt of African-American magazine, MadameNoir, best describes the solidarity feminism needs in her article, “You Can Fix Your Sister’s Crown Without Letting Everyone Know It Was Crooked In The First Place.”
Being mindful of your opinions and activism is a hallmark of maturity and requires reevaluation when we gain new information and experiences.
On a college campus in one of the most liberal cities in the U.S., it’s easy to assume your views are right when they match the consensus of your peers. But in the march toward progressiveness, it’s important that the thoughts we voice are consistent with our actions.