See this poll on: https://poll.fm/7930753/embed
Give others the chance to vote.
Share this poll, because the more votes the better.
Create your own.
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
I want to say that this is the lazy man's way of protesting, but I can see how it has it merits. You can reach thousands of people all over the world in a instant. However, the civil rights leaders of the 50's and 60's didn't have facebook or twitter, and they still managed to mobilize people. I feel that when something is to easy, it loses it's value. Basically anyone with a smart phone, tablet, laptop, etc etc. can start up any cause and call themselves a activist.
These past few weeks are examples of what happens when the mentality of people who want to use Twitter for social change comes head to head with people's unwillingness to get all of the details before jumping on board with something and wanting to be the center of attention. This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. Mass confusion, frustration etc. Even so, I don't think activism on Twitter has jumped the shark. Far from it. Twitter has been, and continues to be, an effective tool for social change. Social media spaces are the only places some people have to engage in these types of discussions, thereby becoming part of a greater movement that is slowly leading to change. Despite the various Ashy Larry's (shoutout to The Pretty Brown Girl (@thepbg) for creating that phrase) who constantly claim "it's just Twitter", the platform has been and continues to be a vehicle for mind changing dialog both online and off. Exposure to these issues via online interaction often leads to offline discussions with people who may vehemently disagree, which eventually leads to social change in attitudes regarding various issues facing our community. And let's not forget about the hard changes "Twitter Activism" has led to, such as the pulling of Juror B37's book deal after the Zimmerman Verdict, and the role it played in the growth of the Trayvon Martin case itself, a fact that was recently pointed out on this show. I don't see that power ending simply because of a few misused hashtags and a couple of bandwagon jumpers looking for their 15 minutes of E-fame.
I respect the efficacy of the Park's comment to care about her original intentions. Many Asian Americans detest that their perceived meekness cause them to be an acceptable punchline of "everyone's" jokes. They admit that their parents/grandparents allowed it to occur but they want to end it now. It also highlighted two interested points about white liberals. Firstly, it took the #cancelColbert hashtag for people to pay attention to any Asian American cause. Park and other "activist" are always starting causes but it was this one that gained the most traction. Secondly, the reaction from Colbert fans were not too different from those that were upset about white liberals trying to cancel Duck Dynasty. And I'm not implying that the original infractions were equal. I am not in favor in canceling Colbert and was not offended at all by joke. I guess my point is that when you are a silenced minority you have to take your opportunities whenever you can. And you have to go after something they care about.