Adrienne A. Wallace
Introduction
Political participation is not a new concept. However, digital technologies have introduced new opportunities to engage in a full range of civic activity that can lead to a more equal engagement of democracy within a system.1 While prominent social movements mediated online are not difficult to come by now, one only has to login to Twitter and check out whatâs trending. Some have more lasting impact than others. Movements in the last few years that will be examined in this chapter are Black Lives Matter, an African American led movement campaigning against violence and systemic racism, and the MeToo movement, which has been used to empower women through empathy and strength in female numbers.
Both of these campaigns have illustrated highly sophisticated methods of collective action (CA) without formal channels of communication to support their political and social objectives. The use of social media channels like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, Tumblr, blogs, and photo sharing sites illustrates the flexibility of information communication technology (ICT) platforms in supporting CA and social movements.2 While the mediums themselves are both inexpensive to operate and instantaneous, multiple messages can be conveyed clearly and consistently over the course of movement evolution.
As more of the world becomes connected online, revolutionaries3 across the globe are empowered to take political action. The use of ICTs is critical in developing, sustaining, and executing modern social movements.4,5 This chapter examines the role social media plays in social movement organization and formation through CA, identifying the use of social media to generate press and sustainability factors to demonstrate success or lack thereof in these popular social movements.
Theories of Social Movements and Social Media
Political science researcher Sidney Tarrow defines a social movement as collective challenges [to elites, authorities, other groups, or cultural codes] by people with common purposes and solidarity in sustained interactions with elites, opponents, and authorities. He specifically distinguishes social movements from political parties and advocacy groups.6 CA is a political science and economics theory developed by American economist Mancur Olson in 1965 that can be defined as all activity of common or shared interest among two or more individuals. It is concerned mostly with concentrated efforts versus diffusion of cost.7 Olsonâs classic work is set to explain and illustrate how collective failure occurs when individuals pursue self-interest. The argument assumes that every person individually acts rationally, but if everyone chooses not to act â in respect to individual costs and benefits â no CA would occur.8 Collective identity and frame alignment were developed from CA theory to demonstrate how individuals communicate to frame or analyze grievances that are part of the collective. Though these frameworks predate the internet, it is of interest to use them to assess online assembly through social media for illustrating social mediaâs impact on social movements.
ICTs are critical in developing and executing modern social movements but have mixed outcomes regarding sustainability. Prolific proponent of the networked society, notable sociologist Manuel Castells describes mass media being displaced by mass self-communication in altering the communication model from one-to-one to many-to-many.9 Social media tends to be decentralized, nonmarket, peer-produced, nonproprietary, open-sourced, commons-based, and provide free or inexpensive access and distribution.10 In order for a social movement driven by social media to live or to be an event, the activism must be displayed not only through social media but also have a presence in the world on public display in plain view. As a result of the change in power dynamics between traditional media and social media, activist groups advocating social change have strained relationships with traditional mainstream media. Yet, social movements still rely on mainstream media for legitimacy of actions.11
Tarrow12 reminds us that, as shown in the daily news cycle, the notion of social movements, which he defines as âcollective challenges, based on common purposes and social solidarities, in sustained interaction with elites, opponents, and authoritiesâ performing âsequences of contentious politics that are based on underlying social networks and resonant collective action frames, and which develop the capacity to maintain sustained challenges against powerful opponents.â13 Sustaining this activity, however, defines the social movement. Tarrow maintains four characteristics, or what he calls prerequisites of sustainable social movements: (1) political opportunities, (2) diffuse social networks, (3) familiar forms of CA, and (4) cultural frames that can resonate throughout a population.14
A grievance in of itself cannot create a movement as there are âfree ridersâ or those who cannot be excluded from obtaining the benefits of a collective good once the good has been produced and then has little incentive to be a voluntary contributor to attainment of that good.15,16 To Tarrow, social movements are âcollective challenges, based on common purposes and social solidarities, in sustained interaction with elites, opponents, and authorities.â17 Riots arenât a social movement â movements are triggered and sustained by the ebb and flow of political struggle.18 He discusses the cycles of contention as information spreads about the susceptibility of a polity to challenge, additional activists and also âordinary peopleâ may âbegin to test the limits of social control.â19 Meaning, the success of one movement contributes to greater opportunities of success for other movements. When the resulting cycles of contention spread to an extreme, revolution may occur. âThe difference between movement cycles and revolutions is that, in the latter, multiple centers of sovereignty are created, turning the conflict between challengers and members of the polity into a struggle for power.â20
In addition to multifactored models of social movement formation, resources, organization, political opportunities, and consistent grievances are all requisites for CA.21 While Tarrow emphasizes the âsuddenâ nature of revolutions and social movement in acquisition of resource, the history of the grievance is of lesser significance than is the political opportunity, which, in this case, is for mobilization of actors.
The nature of these episodes, while similar, is not beyond empirical explanation; as identified in sociologist Neil Smelserâs work,22 interdeterminacy is not an explanation for CA. Agitation by a minority against a majority in the name of a generalized belief is the very core of social movements, revolutions, and what Smelser calls norm-oriented movement,23 where actors attempt to affect change with social movement at the epicenter. Norm-oriented movements are a precursor for collective outburst (i.e., revolutions) and general social movements in Smelserâs opinion.24
Tarrow25 demonstrates that political alliances and processes help shape success and failure of social movements, while sociologist J. Craig Jenkins26 argues that formal organization is not incompatible in creating a social movement. However, he wouldnât agree that it is the most important scalable variable needed to issue success to the movement. It stands to mention, particularly in the cases illustrated in this chapter, that at minimum, it does aid in the efficacy of social movement sustainability. Their impact on Tarrow is noted; formal organization is not incompatible in the creation of social movements and nor is it obvious for their impact on CA,27,28 wherein rational choice and eyes on greater good are well supported in Black Lives Matter and MeToo.
Complexity is the one area that social movement theorists do agree on. After that, opinions and reports clash on this topic from one theorist to another. Traditionally, the problem has been explaining individual participation in social movements. Jenkins29 says that traditional theories share the assumptions that movement participation was relatively rare, discontents were transitory, movement and institutionalized action were sharply distinct, and movement actors were arational, if not outright irrational. Social movements are traditionally seen as having roots in personal and institutional change.30 Olson attempted to make the case for economy based on the actions of an individual (rational choice). In the Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Olson provides an important analysis of the problems of public good cost based on activ...
