The beginning of June 2020 was marked with protests, as George Floyd’s death took place in late May that year. Protests mounted as people demanded justice. However, protesters and organizers alike faced a problem as the COVID-19 pandemic hit, preventing some people from safely coming to these protests. Social media served as a solution to this problem by allowing users to engage and repost information shared from its users. This solution has been used across the world, but social media is used as more of a complementary means to the protest, rather than a replacement.

The 2019 pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong are examples of using social media in a complementary way for protests, with protesters using it for “documentation, organization and assembly of the large-scale demonstrations,” according to CNBC. The yearlong protest kicked off in June 2019 with a focus on a particular bill that would allow people to be extradited for crimes in places where Hong Kong has no jurisdiction or authority to oversee cases, such as mainland China. The protest continued with social media connecting thousands, even allowing protestors to vote on dates and times to organize in online forums. Protesters also used social media to control the narrative of media around the protest both locally and globally.

Outside of these direct applications of organizing protests, social media allows those from marginalized communities to be heard on a magnified level. Social media also allows people to participate in activism in ways they may not have been able to before, whether due to an inability to travel, physically participate in the protest or general safety concerns.

However, the very essence of social media is harmful to activism and its end goal. The exposure of your actions to other people creates a type of accountability and surveillance behavior within the platform, where users know with a simple scroll on their timeline or glance at your page if you liked a certain post and what you reposted. This is especially prevalent within Generation Z, whose social media activity often reflects their values and stances so much so that it has become an indicator for employers, and is often used as a judgment of character.

This surveillance behavior applies pressure on social media users to speak out and participate more, particularly during unrest. For many, a lack of activism on social media was a statement that would not be tolerated. As unrest ramped up, the pressure for input increased. The expectation of celebrities and normal people alike to voice input in these conversations can lead to dishonest motivation, with many participating due to external motivators and shame rather than true, internal motivation. Some users on Instagram have shared resources and links to fundraisers to help while others posted black squares in “solidarity” with the Black Lives Matter movement. This expectation to participate drowns out those whose voices need to be amplified and turns the initial attempt at education and fundraising into a competition of aesthetics and popularity — even if that is the very thing they are protesting against.

Some of this branding happens with no ill will, as activists create their social injustice infographics in a more marketed manner in an attempt to target a larger audience. Activism, or the performance of it, has become so widespread that “the design app Canva has its own activism templates” to use for Instagram Stories, according to teenvogue.com.

This branding of activism was noticed by companies, who quickly hopped on the wave. More than half of Americans affirmed that brand activism impacts whether they buy a brand’s products and their perception of the brand. Many brands, from Target to L’Oréal, have publicly supported Black Lives Matter since June 2020. For these brands, activism is good PR. With just a single post — without the cost of becoming cruelty-free, sustainably sourced or having livable wages and conditions for their employees — they are painted as ethical brands. The appropriation of activism by brands continues to promote activism that is performative rather than impactful, with selfies being replaced with black squares and templates that disappear after 24 hours. This is not to say that everyone who participates in social media activism is performative, as some do not have the time or money to actively participate, but low-cost participation like social media reduces the legitimacy of the movement.

Activism through social media has been stripped down and oversimplified to become palatable, destroying the impact of activism by making it trendy. Social media and its algorithm encourage short videos and digestible material to keep the users on the platform longer, meaning posts about social justice need to be as quick as a dancing video for social media to boost it. Injustice shouldn’t have to be palatable to people, but social media encourages that. While social media is seen as the new age of activism, it still poses a problem that all activist platforms face, which is becoming more algorithm-friendly to reach more people and not oversimplifying or diminishing their goals.

Kadijah Kaba is a senior majoring in political science.