Social Media Activism

What does "chronically online" mean?

People use cancel culture because they want to set the standards of a certain political or controversial stance, which everyone is free and encouraged to do as long as the freedom of expression/speech exists. This is especially true for young people, who are allowed to have opinions on how societal beliefs can move forward in life. But they have no way to actually make a change without the use of social media, since technology is readily available to them unlike serious, large-scale events like protests, activism events, and more.

With the rise of social media in the 21st century comes a new slang term used to describe people who live in their screens: chronically online. This phrase supports the idea that certain happenings on social media don’t have a true impact on the real world. It’s often used as an insult, as chronically online people are seen as overly sensitive and stubborn when dealing with the plain reality of life.

A singer that many people are against is Brendon Urie from pop punk band Panic! At The Disco. Urie was allegedly a rapist and said many slurs that aren’t appropriate for him to say. People strongly encouraged others to stop listening to his music or support him in any way. Despite these efforts, no real, physical damage was done. Urie’s music is still popular, his videos on YouTube still have millions of views, and his fans are still loyal. People that are chronically online make no dent on things that were already absolute. Yes, although it’s important to spread the importance of hate and discrimination that minorities face, it is not guaranteed for any viewers to learn from observing the argument and immediately change their mindset they’ve had their entire life. This form of cancel culture is extremely ineffective and useless. Big, long term changes will not come through potential canceled politicians or celebrities. Focusing on arguments behind a screen that won’t directly affect people in real life will not help anything move forward.

The most that can be done is to spread awareness, which is not even promised that everyone will follow the suggestions. Sometimes, the act of canceling online blinds people from actual issues that need to be fixed as soon as possible. Activism enthusiasts can advocate for concrete problems on social media by asking for direct help, instead of squabbling over issues that don’t need immediate attention.

The big difference is that chronically online people don’t gain anything by using words through personal arguments, while effective strides online involve mass collaboration from a large number of people. This can come from a variety of methods: collecting public opinion through a poll, raising money, voting on a petition, creating an organization, and more. With enough people, money, and voices, a real contrast can be made in the world today that could go as far as reaching the government.

In the end, it’s important to value issues that can be directly and immediately helped in real life rather than arguing through a screen that brings us nowhere. As society develops through time, we must move along with it by keeping fresh perspectives that can find clean and efficient ways to go about problems. The endless different opinions presented on social media won't make it easy for us to find common ground. The birth of social media is still unstable and developing, and so are the minds of people.