Online protests have become an integral part of social media as a way for people to express their concerns and call for a systematic change.
However, policy changes in these platforms and the internet culture have shifted how impactful virtual mobilizations have become.
The effectiveness of the online protests has been raised against the recently concluded online movement to call for a ceasefire in the war-torn Gaza.
Also Read: FBI Urged to Investigate Online Pro-Palestine Protesters
Social Media Became More Unfavorable to Protesters
One of the most noticeable impacts of online protest was how these big social media platforms handle movements.
Several companies like Meta have been repeatedly accused of censoring pro-Palestine posts on Facebook and Instagram even before the Oct. 7 incident erupted.
Before that, online watchdogs also criticized Meta for silently removing protest posts against corruption and authoritarian government in Iran between 2017 and 2018.
The same, to some degree, happens on X (formerly Twitter) for limiting the reach of certain posts because it supposedly violates the anti-hate speech policy on the platform.
These censorships hinder protesters from reaching other people and spreading their calls to action.
Related Article: Meta Censors Pro-Palestine Content on Facebook, Instagram - Human Rights Group
Unfocused Protests
Since most online protests are decentralized with no official body leading the movement, online actions tend to differ in priorities.
Instead of one united advocacy, people are urging different demands, albeit of the same importance, across social media.
Coordination also becomes more difficult as misinformation has muddied the communication among protesters as it becomes more disorganized.
Slacktivism
One of the most glaring issues in the current online protests is the so-called "slacktivism" or the act of supporting in political movement with little to no actual participation in the actual issue.
It did not help that online protests became synonymous with cancel culture, further discouraging others from joining the call.
The idea of "us vs. them" has become more prevalent and shifts the focus towards doubters, contrarians, and the uninformed. In most cases, debates turn to insults and harassment.
A good example was the call for boycott of companies that expressed support to Israel.
Many pro-Palestine accounts become more concerned about who is joining the movement rather than the actual corporations and executives that are involved with the decision.
As it stands now, there are many problems with the current way online protests are being held.
However, it does not mean that it leaves no good impact on the main issue. More people now are aware, one way or another, of issues happening outside their countries.
The only challenge remaining, and its biggest hurdle yet, is finding the right platform and avenue to express their concerns and make it reach the people responsible.
