Subject: Slacktivism and 'bumper sticker philanthropy'

Whilst I share your scepticism about the efficacy of online petitions, I came across this UK Fundraising article today, describing how social media has contributed to the success of their Haiti fundraising campaign.

Find it amusing that you're prepared to go online here to condemn 'slacktivism' "despite an admitted lack of much personal research into how effective this model is".

Slightly more seriously, it's fairly clear that the online attitude-striking represented by polls, petitions, twitter memes and facebook groups does have an impact on the media and politicians, who can tell what people are thinking and trim their sails to suit. That's probably a good thing and may be as much as we can expect.

We all know that turning slacktivism into engagement or long-term activity is very hard indeed - just ask the US Democrats what happened to all the support for healthcare reform pre-election. On the other hand, my Twitter avatar is still green, I now follow @persianbanoo

and at least can't avoid facing the daily diet of prison, beatings and death meted out to anyone suspected of opposition to the theocracy.

It wasn't my intention to 'condemn' as such: more to solicit some - better informed - responses from others on the topic, since the little I have read has been almost uniformly negative.

I would certainly hold my hands up (again) and claim no great knowledge, so am grateful to read your replies.

A related piece about Facebook groups on the Guardian site.

And here's a piece by journalist Marcia Stepanek following on from the Debunking the Myth of Social Media panel debate at SXSW2010.

Includes five 'commonly held misperceptions about the use of social media in advocacy' and a lot of links to further reading.