Does Internet Slacktivism Hurt or Help Real Activism?

What is "Slactivism"? The term comes from the combination of "activist" and "slacker", and is used to deride those who will join in on-line "feel good" campaigns without actually doing anything constructive for the causes they claim to support. Examples of "slacktivism" include:

* Signing on-line petitions
* Adding a Twibbon to your avatar or icon
* Posting "memes" to your Facebook status about how bad cancer is, or how everyone deserves equal rights
* Blogging about a cause
* Retweeting messages about social justice or awareness campaigns

The slacktivist will often jump on every such campaign that comes along as they require virtually no effort nor personal risk. But the slacktivist rarely will take the next step of actually contributing money to a charitable cause or social justice organization; the slacktivist doesn't attend political protests or demonstrations and put themselves in danger of arrest or physical harm. The slacktivist feels he has done all he needs to do by "spreading the word" on the internet - mostly to other slacktivists who in turn will do nothing more.

Some say slacktivism still helps the cause of real activism - or at least does not harm it. Those who care enough about a particular cause will still get out there and rally, go door to door or contribute financially to the efforts in which they believe. That slacktivist campaigns still help increase the public awareness of important issues and even if only one out of every 1,000 people who hear of a cause get off their computer to do something about it, that's still better than nothing. But what do you think? Is slacktivism a real problem that's harming good causes by breeding complacency and laziness? Or is it an effective new way to spread the word and affect real change?

(Photo credit: kevinrosseel on morguefile.)