The subject at hand is activism, especially the slacktivism, which according to Gladwell is a powerful mechanism to engage, motivate critical populations and the powerless to collaborate and to coordinate an action.

The success of an action can only be assessed if the goals are clear and, necessarily, the purpose of any action within this context is to address a problem and thus to challenge the [state of affairs]. His arguments are about how deeply these actions go in order to change it.

The author says that slacktivism doesn´t really change the status quo, but recognizes that it has upended the traditional relationships between political authority and popular will. This is already a great change and today there are several researches towards the emergence of a shared [governance/governability].

One of the author´s main arguments is that slacktivism does not attack deeply rooted problems, but there are several deeply rooted problems that are attacked simply by giving voice and distributing the power that otherwise could be more centralized. On the other hand, I agree that it is hard to make “choices about tactics or strategy or philosophical direction when everyone has equal say”. This issue could also be addressed by the field of participatory design for example, with new techniques that are emerging.

Another argument presented by the author regarding the distinction between “real activism” and slacktivism is about taking risks (for example, to be arrested or killed) and he points to the need of more research about it, because there is a pattern that indicates that slacktivism is a low-risk strategy. Something to consider is that taking this kind of risk is just a criterion, among others (distinctions between kinds of risks could also be better examined), and it doesn´t mean that some action that started as “slack” can´t be articulated to a variety of other actions.

The characteristic of being self-organizing is not a distinction, according to the author, who uses examples to illustrate movements that did not even depend on social media.

Finally, the author doesn´t emphasize it, but the weak ties are good for diffusion of innovation and interdisciplinary collaboration, which in turn are related to culture, education and distribution of power and are key points to changing the status quo.