TL;DR : Protests incite change

People who are wary over the effectiveness of protests often don’t consider that change happens over a long period of time, not overnight. As Zeynep Tufekci argues, ['protests sometimes look like failures in the short term, but much of the power of protests is in their long-term effects, on both the protesters themselves and the rest of society'.] (https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/06/why-protests-work/613420/)

Protests incite change because they put pressure on governmental authorities and indicate that a large group of people all feel unhappy with policies or events that have happened and that they want those who are voted into power to use their authority to change things for the better.

We only need to look at recent events to illustrate how protests can create change. The tragic death of George Floyd at the hands of a police officer last spring was a catalyst for the Black Lives Matter protests, which generated mass media coverage, and opened a topic of conversation that we need to address police brutality. This week, Derek Chauvin, the police officer who forcefully restrained Floyd, has been convicted of murder. The case has been credited as a [turning point in American history for the accountability of law enforcement.] (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/20/derek-chauvin-verdict-guilty-murder-george-floyd)

For this reason, I think that protests do work.

TL;DR: Conversations cause change

Though often protests do not immediately result in changes in the eyes of the law, a large gathering can bring attention to an issue that otherwise wouldn’t have been discussed. Regardless of whether the protesters reach ten or ten thousand people, a conversation is sparked. Upon being exposed to the topic at hand, people open themselves up to an inner dialogue with themselves to assess their position on the issue and often bring the conversation to those around them as well. Though not everyone will adopt the viewpoints of those protesting, getting the conversation started is the beginning of radical change.
For instance, protests by the Black Lives Matter movement resulted in public awareness for police brutality and racial discrimination. [Numerous pieces of legislation] (https://www.dosomething.org/us/articles/black-lives-matter-protests-whats-been-achieved-so-far) were passed in favor of reforming the police. It was the conversation formed by protests that spread the word and forced people to listen.

BLM protests should be a clear example that protests don't always work, but i think they can, depending on what form of protest is used. I'd say marches work less so than strikes, for example. Marches, in my opinion, don't leverage any real economic or political pressure. But I wouldn't say that makes marches completely useless to protest campaigns across the board, since even those can take different forms.

TL;DR: Protests represent an instrumental tool to initiate social changes. However, protests themselves do not necessitate political success. The formats of protests also have an impact on their outcomes.

Protests represent a commonplace and important means of political expression. Its effectiveness, on the other hand, represents a complicated matter. While they have some meaningful impact on public opinion, these factors alone do not necessitate success. Furthermore, the specific forms of protest also matter in their effectiveness.

Protests can have a meaningful impact on public awareness and opinion. Studies have shown that protests can help draw public attention and raise the salience of an issue. On some less divided topics, they can also tilt public opinions in the favor of the protestors. Of course, public opinion does not always matter in initiating political changes, and its effectiveness in less democratic countries is highly compromised. However, public opinion still represents an important, while not sufficient, factor in political change. In that regard, protests do have a real-life impact.

The form of protests matters. Based on research conducted in the United States, political scientist Lisa Mueller finds that left-leaning groups in America are more likely to support coalition-building advocacy work. In other words, a political movement that encompasses organizations with different but non-contradictory goals is more likely to draw support.

Do protests work? The answer to this question depends on a few other factors. How would one define “work”? How are these protests being conducted?

This is gonna be sketchy, and I think I can have my mind changed... But I'm gonna argue... mostly yes. They don't work. But it depends what you mean by "work". If you mean that it's the quintessential force for change? NO. There's a million other forces at work that completely drown out the effectiveness of protests.

But if you mean it brings awareness to an issue? ABSOLUTELY... As such, I think protests were highly effective for the LGBT community in a very short period of time because awareness was the primary thing missing from public opinion. Meanwhile black people have been protesting for their rights basically forever, and have made lots of progress... but very very very very slowly, despite it being a more important and easier to understand issue. People didn't really know anything about the LGBT community or their problems. Pretty much everyone already knows black people have unique disadvantages to face. Or they at least heard of the issues.

Also, (and take into consideration that I'm not a history buff), the only highly successful protests I can think of off the top of my head that weren't because of awareness were the ones where their oppressive government did something egregious to the protestors, which unified the bulk of the people against the few in power.

But that's not because protests are effective. Martyrdom is effective. Protests sometimes lead to martyrdom. Therefore protests sometimes appear to be effective.