All that is part of why I wrote "can be faster" instead of "is faster." In any case, what I've seen recently hints to me that these tags are still relevant enough to be used, even in places where seemingly every normal young student has a working smart phone and not a few students involve themselves in political activism. If there's enough room at the bottom of the paper, I don't see the use of tags per se as a general problem, such as in terms of perception.
You could even frame the whole thing as being environmentally conscious, which is BS, but still.
That reminds me:
Although the two things don't exactly match, I see the use of paper tags as something akin to the use of paper flyers themselves. I even think of the use of paper in offices today, years after the "paperless office" was first promised.
Of course, few people would like to return to an all-paper office--
The point is, there are more effective (and less analog) ways to capture a youth audience and hold their attention. The fact there are these shreds of paper kids can and will lose for one event and no Facebook or Instagram profile for them to follow the entire movement shows a tone deafness that makes the age of the organizer irrelevant.
I do agree that now there are more effective ways. I just don't think that paper tags are ineffective just yet, even in areas where most interested passers-by will have something digital handy.
I also agree that the lack of anything newer than e-mail will be a problem. As lots of people reading this have probably seen online and on paper--I'm not revealing secrets to Hillary supporters--it's not hard to provide a pretty good deal of information about social media in a relatively small space.
If the tags dissapeared it would indicate how huge her support is. The tags are probably still all there.