Here’s an example of how hard it is to distinguish the different types of virtual activism and determine an impact of each:
Earth Action Center, an initiative of Natural Resources Defence Council sends out an (1) email blast, asking people to (2) watch a flash activism cartoon, which prompts viewers to (1) do their own email blast to a US congress person or (3) send them an e-card.
So which is the most effective? The postcard, the cartoon or the initial email? That’s why it’s important to look at the basket of techniques. Even so, an non-governmental organization still would like to know which egg in the basket is the best one to invest in.
Wouldn’t the combination of the three be the most effective? How can NGOs get their message across to the general public if the don’t a) send the e-mail blast to reach as many people as possible, b) prompt people to visit the site/watch a flash cartoon/learn more about the issue, and c) invite the readers, who are (hopefully) now receptive to the issue, to start spreading the message through their own cyberactivism? It seems to me that the most successful web campaigns (like the nike “ID” shoe campaign which took place in the late 1990s) did all three. So I guess it would be hard to know which egg to invest in, if it is the combination that “makes” the basket…
Too true. The thing is, ngos may still want to know what’s most effective. Flash cartoons are quite expensive in terms of time. Perhaps it’s a better use of limited resources to send out 1 million email alerts.