> That's a tempting idea, but this article got > me thinking it is just not true. > Small Change Why the revolution will not be > tweeted. by Malcolm Gladwell
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/malcolm_gladwell/search?contributorName=malcolm%20gladwell> > Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell#ixzz12BH0HcYw > Gladwell's observation is that social media is a > great place for people who don't want to put much > energy into their "activism." > Nick The article started out to say the opposite and that the Internet actually help organize revolts in Moldova and Iran, then it contradicted those claims, but not very convincingly. It's probably true that my generation was more active without the Internet, but we had television. I hitched cross country to attend every single anti-Vietnam moratorium. I was in Ohio in an 18 wheeler listening to CB radio chat about a demonstration at Kent state, so I had my ride let me out. The campus was barricaded. I hitched a ride to L.A. from some really freaked out organizers!~) One reason why this generation is less than enthusiastic about protesting the government is they feel powerless. That's why they woke up briefly and got behind Obama. There was tremendous buzz about him on the Internet and now there is apathy about his presidency. Before that millions turned out to protest Bush's policies. Another reason for the lack of solidarity in America is people are growing weary of all the negativism and polarization. They just want to nerd out online, play video games or watch "Jersey Shore". Maybe I've wasted twenty years of my life advocating for a Virtual Town Hall. I think this will be my last election. Jon _______________________________________________ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
