I like the idea of saying that protests are signals. It corresponds with Spence’s definition of signals. The costlier a protest is to organize, the more value it should have in the eyes of third parties. I also like thinking of protests as signals because it suggests that protests are informational. One of the main functions of protests is to communicate new information about a social issue to a broader public (even if only to let others know that some people are really pissed off about this issue!). If you just can’t get enough of protests (and believe me, I understand the fascination), I wrote a post addressing this question a few months ago.
A nice one (and at the right moment too!)
Advertisement
August 24, 2009 at 6:39 am |
Unless you consider there is strength in numbers and truth in the idea to divide and conquer , therefore when one becomes a group people will take a harder look at what the message might be and we do tend to stand stronger when there is support by our side. Thus just getting the information out to someone can have a positive impact on a cause especially if you get others to agree with your mission when they hear your point of view.
Just thought I’d stop by again…and say hello hoping all is well.
Dorothy from grammology
http://www.grammology.com
August 27, 2009 at 9:33 am |
Dear Dorothy,
Thanks for stopping by; yes, we are doing fine.