Modern Protests as a Form of Social and Political Expression

Protesters do what they do best outside one of the Church of Scientology's churches. From News.com. Used without permission; any cease and desist orders should be sent to thebigniceguy@live.com. I will comply without fail to any such requests sent to me by representatives of either News.com or the Church of Scientology.

I am not a big fan of protests. Aside from the fact that, generally, I find them rather annoying (this is probably because they usually clash with my political beliefs), it also seems to me that, if they are not planned and executed correctly, they are largely ineffective as a means of political expression. In other words, if you're going to do a protest, you have to do it right.

The way I see it, there are various things you need if you are going to conduct a successful protest of any sort:

1. Leadership. Though Anonymous seems to be doing just fine without any identifiable leaders, it is generally a good idea to have someone to keep control, lest your protest dissolve into complete and utter chaos. Protests have the potential to be a good thing; riots, on the other hand, generally do not.
2. Legal counsel. While it can certainly be tempting (I suppose) to simply park your protest on the nearest street corner, there's a certain degree of red tape you might need to cut through if you don't want to get arrested for trespassing, disturbing the peace, or some other unpleasant ordinance. If charges are brought against you, it's a good thing to have someone to defend you in court.
3. Backup. By 'backup', I don't mean heavies with blackjacks and pistols. I mean verifiable, legitimate facts to back up the reason you're having a protest in the first place. It's all good and well if someone told you that ethical and moral injustices are being committed, but if you don't have proof, you'll simply be scoffed at by the news media, the world at large, your target, and me. (I find myself scoffing at a lot of protests these days.)
4. A narrow scope. The other day, I saw a group of students protesting religion as a whole. What they hoped to actually accomplish is beyond me, since they were targeting the majority of the entire world. If, on the other hand, they had targeted, say, Catholicism, and had brought up the scandals therein, their protest might have been a little more effective. (For the record, I personally have nothing whatsoever against Catholicism.)
5. A large scale. If you're going to protest something, you have to have a large and diverse audience with which to get your point across. Senators, CEOs and the like aren't going to pay attention to ten people waving a few banners in front of a local office. Make it big, and if you can't, then ask yourself why you can't. Are not enough people interested in your cause for it to be worthwhile?

In my experience, most protests don't have any of these things (except perhaps for leadership, but in most cases the leadership isn't very good). In fact, most of them seem random, disorganized, and just plain unprofessional. It is entirely possible to make your voice heard without resorting to gathering up as many people as you can and screaming at the walls of skyscrapers, while the executives behind those walls look down and laugh. If you genuinely want to make change, then you have to have more than passion and a few clever chants up your sleeves.

My verdict, then, is that modern protests are a largely ineffective method of social and political expression. After all, no matter what you're saying, no one will listen to you if you're just one of a ragtag group of anarchists, rebels, liberals, or whatever you are. Have some pride. Show some professionalism. Actually say something, for goodness' sake.

Otherwise, you're just another article on page D of the local paper.

EDIT: Oh, and for the record, Anonymous is doing a pretty good job. Just sayin'. I have no desire to face the combined wrath of all facets of the internet.

The Rundown
Organization: 4/10. Protests these days seem to be quite random and generally lack organization.
Outreach: 3/10. Aside from Cindy Sheehan, Anonymous, and a handful of others, most protestors don't really make even a temporary mark in the day's news.
Effectivenes: 3/10. Not much changes when a few people yell and shout outside for a few hours.
Legality: ?/10. Who knows what kind of representation protesters have?
Overall: 3.3x/10. For the record, x represents the '?' I gave protests in the Legality category.