INTRODUCTION

As far as we know, Social media defined “activities, practices, and behaviors among communities of
people who gather online to share information, knowledge, and opinions using conversational media”
(Safko & Brake, 2009, p.6), is a new platform through which extensive consumer interaction occurs.

The ability to share photos, opinions, events, etc in real-time has transformed the way we live and, also, the
way we do business. Retailers who use social media as an integral part of their marketing strategy usually
see measurable results. But the key to successful social media is to not treat it as an extra appendage but
to treat it with the same care, respect, and attention you do all of your marketing efforts. A basic literature
review about the impact of social media on social movements is provided. Support of social media for the
diffusion of information about, and the activation and operational process of social movements is explained
to furnish a clear understanding of the phenomenon. The section begins by defining and explaining what is
meant by social movements, and proceeds by discussing how and why social media affect social
movements. Social movements have become important actors in our everyday life as they both initiate
social change and are created by social change (Delia & Diani, 2006; Tilly, 2004). They are described as
communities that are made up of people and organizations that aim to change social order (Bauermeister,
2014; McAdam & Snow 2010; Snow et al., 2007). To sum up, social movements can be said to emerge due
to various factors including economics, institutional and social contexts. The interaction effect of these
factors, rather than a single variable, enables the formation of a social movement. Therefore, it would be
misleading to propose that social movements are a result of social media usage. However, the support of
social media for social movements is obvious and undeniable (Lopes, 2014).

While technology, population, environment factors, and racial inequality can prompt social change, only
when members of a society organize into social movements does true social change occur. The phrase
social movements refers to collective activities designed to bring about or resist primary changes in an
existing society or group. Wherever they occur, social movements can dramatically shape the direction of
society. When individuals and groups of people civil rights activists and other visionaries, for instance
transcend traditional bounds, they may bring about major shifts in social policy and structures. Even when
they prove initially unsuccessful, social movements do affect public opinion. In her day, people considered
Margaret Sanger's efforts to make birth control available extreme and even immoral, yet today in the United
States, one can easily purchase contraceptive products. Social scientists interest themselves in why social
movements emerge. Do feelings of discontent, desires for a “change of pace,” or even yearnings for
“change for the sake of change” cause these shifts? Sociologists use two theories to explain why people
mobilize for change: relative deprivation and resource mobilization.

Relative deprivation

The concept of relative deprivation has important consequences for both behavior and attitudes, including
feelings of stress, political attitudes, and participation in collective action. It is relevant to researchers
studying multiple fields in social sciences. When members of a society become dissatisfied or frustrated
with their social, economic, and political situation, they yearn for changes. Social scientists have long noted
that the actual conditions that people live under may not be at fault, but people's perceptions of their
conditions are. Relative deprivation refers to the negative perception that differences exist between wants
and actualities. In other words, people may not actually be deprived when they believe they are. A relatively
deprived group is disgruntled because they feel less entitled or privileged than a particular reference group.
For example, a middle‐class family may feel relatively deprived when they compare their house to that of
their upper‐class physician. For social discontent to translate into social movement, members of the society
must feel that they deserve, or have a right to, more wealth, power, or status than they have. The
dissatisfied group must also conclude that it cannot attain its goals via conventional methods, whether or
not this is the case. The group will organize into a social movement only if it feels that collective action will
help its cause. The relative‐deprivation theory takes criticism from a couple of different angles. First, some
sociologists note that feelings of deprivation do not necessarily prompt people into acting. Nor must people
feel deprived before acting. Moreover, this theory does not address why perceptions of personal or group
deprivation cause some people to reform society, and why other perceptions do not.

Resource mobilization

Resource mobilization deals with how social movements mobilize resources: political pull, mass media,
personnel, money, and so forth. A particular movement's effectiveness and success largely depends on
how well it uses its resources. Members of a social movement normally follow a charismatic leader, who
mobilizes people for a cause. Charisma can fade, and many social movements collapse when this
happens. Other movements, such as bureaucratic ones, manage to last, however, usually because they
are highly organized. Norms of behavior develop as people become part of a social movement. The
movement may require its members to dress in special ways, boycott certain products, pay dues, attend
marches or rallies, recruit new members, and use new language. Concerning the latter, recent social
movements have given rise to new terms like Hispanic American, African American, feminists, and
psychiatrically disabled. For a social movement to succeed, leaders must heighten their followers'
awareness of oppression. To stimulate their social movement in the 1960s and 1970s, feminists convinced
women that they were being discriminated against in various arenas, including work, school, and home.
Unlike the relative‐deprivation theory, the resource‐mobilization theory emphasizes the strategic problems
faced by social movements. Specifically, any movement designed to stimulate fundamental changes will
surely face resistance to its activities. Critics feel the theory does not adequately discuss the issue of how
opposition influences the actions and direction of social movements. And why and how social media helps
social movements? Social media are an active part of our lives. According to Bullas (2014), the percentage
of all Internet users that are active on social media is 72%. 71% of social media users prefer to use a
mobile device, which makes social media more accessible anytime and anywhere in return. The Digital
Yearbook developed by Global Web Index (We Are Social, 2016) states that 3.419 billion people all around
the World use the Internet; that there are 2.307 billion active social media users. Facebook is the biggest
social media platform with over 1.15 billion Facebook users. Facebook is followed by Twitter with over 550
million registered users. Pinterest and Instagram are also influential social media channels which are
becoming increasingly popular. Other social media platforms include LinkedIn, YouTube, Tumblr, Vine,
Slideshare and many others (Bullas, 2004; Akçay, 2011). Therefore, it is not surprising that social media
affects every aspect of individuals’ lives, including their activism as well.

ANTI-CONSUMPTION AS A SOCIAL MOVEMENT

Anti-consumption, the attitude, and behavior of staying away from consumption of certain goods and
services (Cherrier, 2009), is a relevant social movement, opposing the dominating trend of consumerism
and overconsumption. Its aim is to change several fundamentals of social order related to consumption and
marketing (Kozinets & Handelman, 2004). It advocates an alternative way of living, opposing modernism
and its outcome, consumerism, in the society; and is the byproduct of a postmodern way of thinking.
Staying away from excessive consumption, caring about the environment and underprivileged people is, for
example, an anti-consumption lifestyle alternative. Voluntary simplicity and brand avoidance are different
labels for anti-consumption behaviors (Iyer & Muncy, 2009).
Anti-Consumption on Social Media

The anti-consumption social movement benefits from the Internet in general, and social media tools in
particular (Dahl, 2014; Hollenback & Zinkhan, 2006). Today online communities against the consumption of
some brands are created by consumers who are dissatisfied or by people who simply hate a brand just like
brand loyal consumers who establish online brand communities to promote a brand (Cromie & Ewing,
2009; Kozinets & Handelman, 2004). These virtual anti-consumption communities are effective in affecting
purchasing decisions of potential consumers (Veloutsou & Moutinho, 2009). They are built upon virtual
social interactions and possess characteristics of what is described as community since they rely upon one
another, make joint decisions, have standard rules and procedures for socializing and communication, and
are committed to each other. These virtual groups help members with social identification as well
(Hollenback & Zinkhan, 2006). Furthermore, compared to offline communities, these virtual communities
are more durable because there is continuous communication, linking conversations across Websites, and
archiving of communication and information (Renninger & Shumar, 2002).

Two important conclusions resulted from the theoretical explorations around social movements. First, the
study of social movements requires a theoretical framework that captures the dynamism and diversity of
collective actors and strategies, rather than construing movements’ impacts as linear accounts. This
conclusion leads me back to the critique of dominant sociological accounts of social movements in
Portugal, which often portray activism as being historically weak and ineffectual (Rodrigues, 1995; Sousa
Santos, 1992). These accounts were disputed insofar as they disregard the situated history and the impact
of moments of intense activism and mobilization around specific issues. Moreover, they also fail to
acknowledge social movements’ outcomes, which is a necessary step in understanding their influence. I
contended that this downplaying of activism contributed to further silence the potential power of collective
action. This resonates with the absence of narratives of influence (Meyer, 2006) not only in political or
media accounts, but also among activists themselves. A second conclusion from the overview of social
movements’ literature is that it is fundamental to take into consideration social movements’ own
contradictions and tensions. To the extent that they push for negotiation, reciprocal compromise and
adjustment, activism may in fact benefit from conflict, rather than relying exclusively on homogenous
strategies or ideologies. Arguably, tensions and contradictions are a crucial part of the dynamics that
enable impact in the sphere of politics, law and media. However, it can still be considered as a social
movement because many people are employing practice, which go against consumption. Business
organization should start to think of strategies either to fence off these group or collaborate with them and
gain at least some of their support through social responsibility projects. How do to this is another swath of
research. Further research is encouraged on the impact of social media on social movement, and detailed
understanding of the anti-consumption ideology.

Reference

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137296405_8

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316511433_The_Impact_of_Social_Media_on_Social_Movement
s_The_Case_of_Anti-Consumption