Online vs offline protest, how effective it is?
Originally published on Global Voices
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay. Used under a Pixabay license.
This post is part of Global Voices’ September 2026 Spotlight series, “Protest in Democracy.” With this Spotlight, we seek to explore the many forms of protest, the tactics states use to delegitimize and suppress them, and the complex relationship between protest and democracy. You can support this coverage by donating here.
The growing popularity and expanding use of social media have influenced the ways people express themselves. While protests once involved taking to the streets with banners and chants, such activities can now be carried out in the virtual realm. Messages and slogans are now conveyed through hashtags, digital posters, or videos posted across various social media channels. Events such as the Arab Spring and the Occupy Movement have further reinforced the phenomenon of online protest.
Both of them are effective, no?
What is the difference between online and offline protests? According to anthropologist Yatun Sastramidjaja, writing for the University of Amsterdam, there is no significant difference between offline and online protest, other than the setting — the real world versus the virtual world. Despite this difference in location, both forms can mobilize crowds, voice opinions, and support one another. A protest that begins online can spill over into the streets, as seen with the Arab Spring and the Occupy Movement. Such online-initiated protests can also raise awareness of specific issues, subsequently leading to offline protests.
These online movements are compelling because they tap into modern cultural trends, such as memes, hashtags, posters, and online petitions. Well-executed campaigns often employ dedicated graphic designers to select specific colors and typefaces that convey underlying meaning, carefully tailored to the nature of the protest. These chosen visual elements are then applied consistently across all online platforms, including websites, social media channels, posters, and other communication media. In essence, the protest is treated much like a product brand, requiring a clear and powerful identity.
This approach is indeed effective for embedding a social movement in people's minds, reaching both those accustomed to participating in protests and those drawn to the specific issues raised or the branding created by the organizers. It also proves effective across diverse demographics with varying modes of self-expression. These online protests have successfully mobilized a wide range of groups, including K-Pop fans from all over the world.
K-Pop, especially its fandom, is cited here as a prime example of youth culture that exerts influence across various spheres. In Korea, it played a role in the ousting of President Yoon, while in other countries — including Indonesia — K-Pop fandoms have actively participated in protests addressing social and political issues. Interactions among K-Pop fans typically take place online (on platforms like X, Facebook, and TikTok); consequently, movements often begin as online protests, with some individuals subsequently taking to the streets alongside other demonstrators.
But then, there are some disadvantages.
Although online protest is gaining popularity — especially among young people — it also has several drawbacks. One of them is uneven internet connectivity.
In her book “Social Media and Politics in Southeast Asia,” Merlyna Lim notes that early studies of digital networks hailed them as a new space for democratic processes, as they could transcend country borders and ultimately spur participation and social movements. But nowadays, the current distribution of digital technology is uneven; consequently, even though it can transcend national borders, the individuals involved are still primarily those who already possess good access to digital technology. Lim stated:
I contend that, setting aside the issue of unequal access, digital networks are not egalitarian networks where citizens have equal opportunities to participate in public discourse. First and foremost, the internet is never inherently egalitarian. Instead, the structure of the internet exhibits the characteristics of a scale-free network—a network in which the degree distribution follows a power law.
This uneven distribution of connectivity will hinder civil society organizations seeking to recruit new members from demographics different from their existing base. Furthermore, existing echo chambers are made worse by internet algorithms that suggest topics based on a user's interests, creating a limiting environment. For instance, if you are interested in environmental activism, your inbox will be flooded with suggestions on similar topics, and you will likely not see other appeals for activism that might also interest you, since the algorithm has latched on to your response to environmental activism.
Another concern is the assumption that people who participate in online protests are not necessarily willing to take to the streets or remain consistently engaged with the issues raised. Many people participate in online activism because, aside from the ease of doing so (such as posting memes or online posters), they can also take shelter behind anonymity. This differs from actually taking to the streets, which carries a higher risk of clashes with security forces. In response to this, the Open Society Foundation (OSF) has the view that online protests attract young people who are engaging with social issues for the first time, and it is the first step on the ladder to offline activism.
It is undeniable that there are various shortcomings, but in this short article, OSF suggests that civil society organizations (CSOs) can develop long-term strategies by incorporating online movements to champion specific issues. This involves planning for both online and offline engagement, as well as facilitating a seamless transition between the two. In essence, CSOs must devise ways to sustain public interest so that those initially engaged online remain committed to the cause over the long term and are willing to participate in offline activities.
To address the disparity in internet access, CSOs must continue to conduct face-to-face educational sessions and discussions that reach individuals with poor internet connectivity. Ultimately, even if access remains unequal, both online and offline activism can contribute meaningfully to a movement and complement each other.
