Internet organizing is a double-edged sword for 21st century protest groups, and could make marching obsolete.

Unlike the protests of the 1960s, advocacy groups attract legions of activists to a march, only to have any central message of the demonstration diluted with many diverse causes.

From anti-war protests to demonstrations at London’s G-20 summit to protests like Friday’s March on Wall Street, many different advocacy groups often gather under one banner, claiming their issues are interrelated.

To gain mainstream public attention, a successful protest march needs a villain to dramatize issues, and it’s hard to make broad global issues into a villain, explains Norm Ornstein, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

“If you have a myriad of issues you can attract more people, but your goal should be to focus attention on a central issue,” said Ornstein. “I think going back to the Civil Rights Movement you had a focal point. Civil rights was an easy thing to focus on, in a way. It’s a transcendental issue that had been around for decades.”

The rise of the Internet made it easier to organize protests more often and spread awareness about various issues, but the overwhelming result of Internet outreach dilutes the central message of a protest, explained Ornstein.

“Before the modern communications, you didn’t have people holding marches as much in the ‘60s, so the big ones about civil rights became news,” he said. “It’s a very different matter when you’ve got the Internet with a million blogs, lots of different ways to turn.”

Advocacy group directors also recognize this and are trying to make these diverse messages easier to understand, said Capt. Michael McPhearson, co-chair of United for Peace and Justice, which is the coalition organizing a March on Wall Street on Friday. McPhearson served with the Army in the first Gulf War.

“The movements from the ‘60s have matured and branched out, but you don’t see the same upswing of people getting involved,” said McPhearson, who is also the director of Veterans for Peace. “If we need to find our voice again and become more relevant in the current political situation it’s because of our success, the things that happened because of our actions.”

One group seeking to revamp its appeal in the absence of a perceived adversary like former President Bush is World Can’t Wait, said Debra Sweet, the group’s director.

“We wanted to drive out the Bush Regime with a popular movement, creating a political situation where they would have to leave office in disgrace,” said Sweet. “We had a meeting two weeks after the [2008] election on how to remake ourselves…Unless people take a very strong stand against the new escalation in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, you don’t really have an anti-war movement.”

Because protest marches are no longer an easy-to-interpret rarity, Ornstein said the lack of media attention might make marches obsolete as opposed to Internet advocacy and direct political fundraising.

“(The 1999 World Trade Organization protests in Seattle) about globalization would’ve been a yawner to the media if it hadn’t been for the violence,” said Ornstein.  “I think marching has less of an impact without an issue that captures a much larger set of hearts and minds. With Vietnam we had a draft and 55,000 Americans dead, which makes a big difference in getting people to understand what’s at stake. It’s been harder to get that same sympathy for Iraq.”

The peace movement is also a victim of its own success after the Democratic Party channeled the anti-Bush thunder generated by advocacy groups to win elections in 2006 and 2008. Like Sweet, some protesters felt betrayed when Democrats, who won thanks to sentiment against the Iraq War or domestic wiretapping, went on to compromise with Bush by funding and legalizing them.

“I think elections are designed to sap people’s anger and will to take to the streets,” said Sweet. “People are saying that the role of a protest movement now is to hold President Obama’s feet to the fire. We’re saying we should hold our own feet to the fire and stand up against issues we oppose.”

On March 21, the first major nationwide anti-war protest of the Obama administration targeted Obama’s escalation of military funding, again trying to connect diverse issues. Even if some protesters think Obama’s policies have not gone far enough, he is taking a similar approach by claiming that his diverse ambitions are related, linking them to a waning economy.

This provides a foundation of relevancy for future protests like Friday’s March on Wall Street, said Leslie Cagan, national director of United for Peace and Justice.

“We’re trying to make this an open protest, but also tie the issues together, namely to the federal budget,” said Cagan. “Why should everybody have to organize their own protests to express their opinions?… When there’s an opportunity, people gravitate to it.”

Popularity: 1% [?]