I Can’t Open Instagram Anymore
By Preeti Kulkarni
I can’t open Instagram anymore. Every time I open it, I see a line of infographics reposted by various well-meaning acquaintances, designed to spread awareness about the various evils plaguing our society that always feel one-note and performative.
I think it’s important to preface that I have no problem with people using their platforms to spread awareness about the causes or issues they value. I also don’t think that social media being used as a platform for that expression is inherently bad. I think it serves a pressing function in our current societal landscape. It served as a way for us to connect with our loved ones and find communities beyond the bounds of physical spaces, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. That ability to connect across multiple platforms is incredible. It is foundational to how my generation interacts with each other and forms bonds that transcend time and place. It is essential. I believe the kind of engagement that it can promote pushes society forward and could allow digital citizens to absorb perspectives and ideas that they would otherwise disavow.
However, I take issue with the lack of critical thinking that convolutes important conversations that could be possible if given more room. I think most conflicts and societal evils are complex and dense. Instagram only allows for ten slides of content for a typical post, usually needing an image of some kind to capture an audience’s attention, and limiting the amount of text on those slides to cater to our plummeting attention spans. Instagram Reels and TikTok allow for 2-3 minutes of content maximum.
There are very few things that can be summarized or discussed in such short-form content. Thus, consumers of this content, myself included, tend to miss the bigger picture of what these well-meaning creators and accounts want to emphasize. These kinds of creators also push others to repost, engage, and express vehement support for causes that require more analysis than a 10-page infographic to begin to address.
A blog news post by the University of Sussex splits digital activism into two categories: citizen journalism and viral campaigns. Citizen journalism is when “members of the public use social media to document and share breaking developments of protests on the ground or acts of violence as they’re happening” (University of Sussex). Social media users then create hashtags that spark viral campaigns, often in response to citizen journalism.
Digital activism of this kind creates a marketplace of ideas and empowers voices that would not otherwise receive a platform. However, it also heightens a phenomenon called “Slacktivism”. Reposting an infographic or using a viral hashtag can only amplify a voice for a limited time. Without consistent and critical engagement with the amplified societal issues of the moment, social media activism is akin to virtue signaling.
As Mishima Nixon, a student and writer from the University of Iowa said in 2021, “A popular line that gets thrown around: “No one’s talking about this,” in which “this'' can mean a lot of different things” (Nixon). This sentiment could not ring more true, especially in a post-pandemic world. In fact, I believe this pressure “that ordinary civilians [feel]... [to] become passionate activists in response to every global event” has intensified and reached a boiling point (Nixon).
I would be remiss to ignore the impact of algorithms in this conversation. Social media algorithms are designed to feed users content that the platform thinks the user will engage with. The rise of facial recognition algorithms and artificial neural networks has led to a prevalence of false content, such as deep fakes. The social media ecosystem can thus promote misinformation and perpetuate silos of information, known as filter bubbles. Not only does the restriction placed on content not allow for nuance and puts pressure on people to engage without analysis, but the platform design makes it difficult for users to access other kinds of information altogether.
By engaging in “Slacktivism”, we are stifling our intellectual growth, backing ourselves into a corner of information that reinforces our preconceptions. In most articles I found through a quick Google search, a key aspect of effective activism is “inviting other perspectives to the table” (NBC News). Without breaking away from our filter bubbles, we cannot critically engage with information and other perspectives, which renders digital activism pointless.
That’s why I can’t open Instagram anymore. I cannot stand to see important conversations consistently diluted with no reproach. We must make a conscious effort to engage with other perspectives when learning about issues online. Otherwise, we will be stuck in a constant loop of frustration and superficial understanding.
