Recently, the Internet experienced an all-too-common event: mass hysteria. Interestingly, it was entirely apolitical; the dress didn't ask of you moral outrage or help to those in need. The dress was also not really a meme- it wasn't remixed and shared as different versions, and there were remarkably few images of the dress. The dress simply asked a question- what color do you see?
The explosion of discussion reminded me of how unpredictable the trends of the Internet are. Political firestorms, memes, and "challenges" spread incredibly fast, and die as quickly as they came. This leads to a general denouncement of "slacktivism" (slacking-activism), where its detractors accuse others of not truly making a difference on the issues they rail against. To get to the bottom of this issue, one only needs to see if any recent explosions had any effect.
The more recent campaigns that come to mind are #Ferguson and the Ice Bucket Challenge. We can't measure how #Ferguson affected racial and socio-political tensions across the nation, but the Ice Bucket Challenge should have a measurable impact. Sure enough, it had a huge actual impact. Even if one downplays the social effects of the campaign, there is now downplaying the $100 million dollars raised.
The difference between the Ice Bucket Challenge and many other failed campaigns is action-ability. The Ice Bucket Challenge was simple- Apply ice water to head and give money to this charity. You can't contribute to fighting systematic racism and oppression in a quick ten minute package. So slacktivism is much like the inhabitants of the internet; it may excel at small, short-term goals but it isn't much good at long-term endeavors.
