Author: Gonzalo Romero Bonaplata

Contemporary social movements operate in a world radically reshaped by digital technology. Social media and the wider internet have dramatically reduced barriers to political participation, allowing movements to mobilise massive support for causes. Nevertheless, offline mobilisation remains essential as online-only campaigns repeatedly fail to bring lasting change. So, how exactly should social movements balance the fusion of online and offline mobilisation to influence public opinion?

This blog will examine the strengths and weaknesses of online mobilisation (including the risk posed by misinformation), the importance of offline mobilisation, examples of effective integration in shifting public opinion, and practical recommendations to utilise both methods and minimise misinformation effectively.

Social media websites like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram have undoubtedly become key tools for activism worldwide, providing unprecedented speed and scale. Online mobilisation allows rapid awareness-raising and mass engagement, with a single post potentially reaching millions of people in days. Even in authoritarian states, it is difficult to limit their influence; researchers found that during the 2017 Dey Protests in Iran, regions targeted by social media saw considerably higher protest turnout. However, it is important to interpret this correlation cautiously; perhaps areas already inclined to protest attracted increased digital attention rather than social media directly causing higher mobilisation rates.

The rather unchallenging action of simply liking, retweeting, or changing profile pictures rather than active engagement holds downsides for mobilisation; this is because online activism risks becoming trapped in superficial dynamics, which scholars refer to as ‘clicktivism‘ and ‘slacktivism’. Clicktivism refers to online activism such as signing a petition or sharing a hashtag—to support a cause; while it can rapidly raise awareness, some argue that unless it reaches critical mass, it rarely translates into meaningful social or political outcomes. Slacktivism, on the other hand, is more critical as it refers to the illusion of meaningful contribution, describing the complacency that arises when people feel they have fulfilled their social responsibilities through minimal online engagement. This then reduces their motivation to engage in necessary, sustained offline actions. Both terms highlight the potential shortcomings of purely digital activism.

Moreover, reliance on digital platforms for mobilisation exposes movements to significant misinformation risks. Digital misinformation spreads easily and undermines mobilisation by eroding public trust and creating divisions, thus reducing active participation and commitment necessary for sustained movements. The Brexit referendum shows how misinformation profoundly impacted public opinion and weakened collective action. Misconceptions created by misleading information exaggerated fears about immigration and freedom of movement, significantly impacting public opinion and mobilising voters around false narratives. Addressing misinformation proactively is thus crucial for sustaining effective mobilisation.

Traditional offline activism —such as street protests, strikes, and sit-ins—possesses obvious advantages not present in purely online mobilisation. Physical protests dramatically express collective grievances and exercise symbolic influence over policymakers. A key example of effective protesting was during the Arab Spring; street protests in public squares were instrumental in maintaining political pressure. People’s unwavering will to go outside and protest, even in the face of censorship and suppression, was essential in graphically illustrating public dissatisfaction with their leaders and garnering international attention.

However, the virtual realm played a key role in the Arab Springs. While offline protests dispel charges of slacktivism by revealing genuine commitment, the effectiveness of pure offline mobilisation is restricted by limitations of scale, access to resources, and exposure to repression. Online movements may not attract massive public attention without a viable digital strategy. Thus, the combination of both strategies is preferable and imperative.

Researchers have highlighted that online and offline collective action is not a zero-sum but a complementary duo of activities reinforcing each other. Online mobilisation enlarges offline participation and helps cement collective identity, the hallmark of protest continuity. Social media benefits movements through collective identity formation and storytelling, as manifested by the #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter movements, transforming individual grievances into a collective narrative of injustice.

The Black Lives Matter movement exemplified the effectiveness of synergising internet and offline techniques. It adeptly employed internet platforms for initial awareness-raising, information distribution, and extensive participant recruitment while orchestrating regular and sustained physical protests. In this manner, they converted digital fervour into concrete political influence and saw genuine results. It created momentum to push through organisational changes to the police force, which included implicit bias training, body-worn cameras, and bans on no-knock warrants. The movement also swayed public opinion as in 2017, the Pew Research Centre found that 54% of the white public saw black deaths at the hands of police as signs of a broader problem—a marked difference from white perceptions just a decade before, demonstrating BLM’s success in shifting public attitudes through integrated mobilisation.

Actively challenging misinformation and disinformation is critical for mobilisation effectiveness. Negative media coverage of transgender youth in Sweden illustrates this point clearly; misinformation discouraged public support and participation, directly reducing mobilisation around transgender rights. Similarly, the recent anti-immigration riots in the UK between July and August 2024 demonstrate misinformation’s tangible consequences; 29 anti-immigration riots took place across 27 cities, with 1,280 people arrested for their involvement—false narratives about immigration inflamed tensions, fracturing community solidarity and hence effective mobilisation. Practical approaches entail real-time fact-checking, open communication, and intervention by heterogeneous groups online to disrupt echo chambers and minimise misconceptions.

Modern social movements must strategically integrate online and offline mobilisation to influence public opinion effectively. Online activism’s strengths lie in spreading awareness and mobilisation rapidly. However, offline action remains the most effective way to demonstrate commitment, sustain pressure, and achieve genuine change. Social movements can maximise their reach and resilience by combining both approaches, fostering collective identities and countering misinformation to ensure that the pillars of mobilisation avoid crumbling. Both approaches have apparent weaknesses when used alone; thus, fusing digital and physical strategies and leveraging the unique strengths of each represent the most efficient way to shape public discourse and drive enduring social transformation.