Editorial Outside Reading: October 10

Editorial Outside Reading

“Twitter, Facebook, and Social Activism” by Malcolm Gladwell

The New Yorker October 4, 2010

“Twitter, Facebook, and Social Activism” by Malcolm Gladwell offers a critique of society’s dependency on social networking systems and its consequent lack of activism.  He argues that a culture based on constant communication tends to shy away from anything involving a risk, and people have thus become more reluctant to stand up for what they believe to be right.  In this editorial, Gladwell employs a strong voice and uses many techniques that ultimately leave little doubt in the reader’s mind of the validity of his argument.

Gladwell’s argument is very well constructed.  He begins with a discussion of the civil rights movement and the ends that Martin Luther King Jr. went to in order to be successful.  He navigates away from this history lesson fairly quickly, but by continually coming back to it his argument is strengthened.  Gladwell also brings in examples of activism, or perhaps attempted activism, in modern society.  He discusses the Save Darfur Coalition that has utilized Facebook in its attempt to rally support, and explains that their efforts have actually done little to help their cause.  “Facebook activism succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice but by motivating them to do the things that people do when they are not motivated to make a real sacrifice” (4).  As this example illustrates, Gladwell smoothly guides his reader to his thesis; he chooses strong evidence and along with refuting his opposition, is able to construct an argument that is difficult to contend with.

By employing a strong, mostly formal voice, Gladwell is able to smoothly communicate with the reader, but he maintains a slightly informal tone.  Because he occasionally uses the second person, this editorial would not be appropriate for an AP essay.  However, everything else about his argument is crafted in a way that would make for an AP level work.  Gladwell’s strong points include organization, clarity, and voice, while his weaknesses are limited to this use of second person.

Gladwell also uses irony to communicate his point.  At the end of his editorial, he shares a story of a young man who used Facebook to recover his friend’s lost phone.  The author of this story, Clay Shirky, finishes his account with the question, “What happens next?”  Gladwell immediately refutes this.  “What happens next is more of the same.  A networked, weak-tie world is good at things like helping Wall Streeters get phones back from teen-age girls.  Viva la revolución” (6).  This use of irony effectively leaves the reader thinking that any activism prompted by Facebook is absurd and empty, and left me completely agreeing with his editorial.