Spencer Hu
shu2@uwyo.edu
This last weekend you undoubtedly saw a torrent of people changing their Facebook profile photos to a temporary version that has a French flag color overlay. In response to this I also saw many of my friends posting about how this is a form of armchair activism or “slacktivism.” This got me thinking, because I was one of the people who participated in changing my profile picture. Honestly, I didn’t think much about changing it since Facebook essentially shoved the option down my throat that morning. Yet having participated, I was all of the sudden part of the crowd that was being criticized of being an armchair activist and the worst part was- they weren’t wrong.
One friend in particular posted about how Facebook redefined “the least you can do” by creating this option, how saying your thoughts and prayers go out doesn’t truly do anything and how if we truly wanted to make a difference and help we should be donating to the cause. Something about this post made me uncomfortable. It made me consider what motivation I must have had for changing my profile photo. Was I concerned with showing solidarity? Or was I concerned with what showing solidarity did for my vanity? I mean, I might have done it just because it was convenient. I’ve thought really hard and spiraled about it to the point that it would be impossible for me to know why I did it at all. Again, my friend’s assessment didn’t completely miss the mark and I have no doubt that many people did participate to boost their own ego as a “good” person.
This situation really made me question the value of the action. Was it worth performing and is it all based in our questionable want to seem moral and caring? Is it better or worse to have changed your picture? If we measure the action from what good actually comes of it, it’s hard to say if it is worthwhile. As my friend pointed out in their post, the picture change being only temporary downplays the significance of the attack as something that will pass, something that the news will stop caring about at one point or another. It belittles the event as a whole and to an extent, I can concede to that. At the same time, I refuse to believe the people who did participate did so to belittle the event. It just so happened that the way the action was framed made it seem this way. Is donating a superior alternative? Well, yes and no. First let’s recognize that the two actions are not mutually exclusive. Yes, because in some practical ways it can be helpful in the future, but no because it’s not immediate. During a crisis situation people need relief, fast. I think the profile picture change is a form of relief.
Now I can’t completely say I know how these pictures would make someone feel, but you can never know who it’ll help. When I think back to crisis situations in my life (that can in no way compare to what people in Paris must be feeling), knowing people cared was some of the biggest help during those times. Practical help was nice. Food to feed myself with, clothes to keep myself warm with and gifts to break up the monotony of the struggle were all nice. However, nothing really compared to the symbolism of what being provided those things meant- that I wasn’t alone and that people cared.
Yes, changing my profile picture is highly unlikely to help many people, but if it helps anyone, it was worthwhile for me to participate. Yes, it’s the least I can do, but considering what I am capable of as a poor college student in Wyoming, it’s also, in some ways, the most I can do. Yes, it’s a bit of slacktivism and it’s a bit vain, but it’s a part of something that’s so much bigger than myself, being motivated by vanity or otherwise, shouldn’t be an issue.
