Picture this, you’re on your phone and you’re scrolling through social media when you stumble upon a post. It was an image with a simple sticker with a simple text: post this on your story or you don’t support the LGBTQIA+ community. Seeing so many reposts, you felt this pressure to share it as well, and you do. You post it on your story and you go about your day. Have you ever wondered, why would you feel pressured? Is there a reason to be pressured? 

Social media has changed the way activism works in the digital age. It has put an emphasis on needing to publicize your political and socio-economical advocacies and views. It has created a divide between sides, turning real world issues into black and white issues. It has not allowed proper and conducive discussions to be had because people will not listen. And most of all, it has allowed people to construct activism to become a societal standard.

On social media, there is a need to make your support public as well as a need to pick sides on issues. Otherwise, you may be subjected to public criticism, or worse, to become “cancelled”. People may look through your past posts and bring up them again with an aim to “cancel” you, to which people may follow along just to avoid becoming a victim to it as well. There is a need to be pristine and good on social media, but why is there such a standard? 

There is a theory that connects the psyche of a person to their actions, which can be used to explain why these circumstances happen. The Social Desirability Bias, as introduced by Allen Edwards in 1960, proposes that a persons actions stems as a result of wanting to be perceived a certain way by society. This theory relates to the motivations people may have in participating in performative activism. 

People on social media want to be perceived as good; therefore, they use LGBTQIA+ issues in order to create a good impression. They create this image of themselves as an ally to the LGBTQIA+ community while using the community for their own gain. The same can be said for brands, where they may feel the need to use rainbows and LGBTQIA+ figures in their advertisements during pride month for engagement and money. Franchises may feel the need to insert and include LGBTQIA+ characters into shows and movies, all while falling short in actual proper representation. The need to be perceived as an ally pushes people and corporations to do this is to cater to a large community— a community starved of proper representation. 

The theory serves as an explanation as to why people feel the need to make activism competitive. Why online activism is followed by a pressure to participate, otherwise you are not perceived as good. If you aren’t perceived as good, then you wouldn’t fit in to society’s standards. Hence, why you can find posts of people saying: “You’re a bad person if you dont…” Naturally, people want to be seen as good, and they interact with the post. After that, no further effort or action is done in support of the issue at hand. 

The theory implies that people simply participate in activism, yet in the end, they do not particularly care about the issue. There is no genuine concern and support, but there is a fear of being ostracized by society for not doing so. This, in turn, creates echo chambers; mirroring what one another says without giving any actual thought. 

Activism is not a competition, but a collaboration between people and communities. This theory highlights the need to look within oneself and realize the motivations of participating in activism.