Concluding Words
The 21st century is the age of the internet. People learn, share, express, and construct in the virtual space, which not only mirrors the offline world, but also changes how people think and behave in the offline world. At such a time, social movements inevitably also have an “online” dimension, with the #MeToo movement being an iconic example.
Though the #MeToo movement got its name and fame from social media, its pattern of development had similarities with previous feminist movements in the pre-Twitter age – wide social attention sparked by high profile key events. Whether it was the woman throwing her bra into the Freedom Trash Can in the 1968 Miss American Pageant protest, or Anita Hill testifying against Clarence Thomas for sexual harassment in 1991, they both, consciously or unconsciously, garnered public attention by doing things that were shocking and unexpected to public belief. For the #MeToo movement, the exposure of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual assault history was no doubt the bomb that caused an explosion of public discussion. But following him, many more high profile men were found guilty of sexual misconduct. They were adored, admired, and revered, thus their falls from the pedestal were like pebbles thrown into a pond, causing splashes of discussions.
But #MeToo’s internet dimension also gave it a character distinct from previous feminist movements – the ability of non-celebrity individuals to shape public discourse. In this aspect, #MeToo shared more similarities with the #BlackLivesMatter movement. In the #BlackLivesMatter movement, the use and emergence of relevant hashtags on social media platform marked the virtual conversation where people proposed and defended their interpretations of the social values at stake. In #MeToo, besides the social media platform, internet users also shaped the public discussion on Wikipedia by editing the profiles of the men who were taken down during the movement. The editing and re-editing process shows that a shift in perception of these men occurred after their sexual misconducts were exposed.
Using data scraped from the edit history of the Wikipedia pages of the high profile men, I find that the dismissal of these men had two major effects on the public perception of them. First, the dismissals attracted more editors to edit the Wikipedia pages of the men in question, as the number of edits made on these pages shot up after their removals. Second, the dismissals shifted people’s attention from the men’s career and personal lives to their sexual misconducts, as the most edited section of their profiles was “sexual assault/harassment allegations” after their dismissals. Before the dismissals, editors focused more on personal life and careers. As I dive into the editing history of individual editors, I find the same pattern. For some editors, they had previously had no editorial interest in these men in question, but after their removal, they started to contribute to these pages, showing how a high profile event raised people’s awareness of these men. For others who have been dedicated contributors to the page of a celebrity, we could see that their editorial focus also shifted to sexual misconducted related content.
The study of the configuration of the #MeToo movement on Wikipedia shows how offline events interact with online public discourse in a social movement. While the internet is a powerful space to start conversations, explosive offline events serve as strong catalysts for online discussions. For social movement leaders in the internet age, it would be a viable strategy to create real-life events that get people’s attention and transform it into viral online discussions that could cross regional limitations.
