Abstract
The Women’s March’s transition from grassroots protest to a more formalized organizational structure has evolved to include a digital communication strategy aimed at mobilizing the everyday activist through collective action. This case study focused on both the evolution of the organizational structure and protest participants’ perceptions of and interactions with the social movement organization’s (SMO) digital communication strategy. The study examines the balance between traditional in-person protest and digital activism through collective and connective action to mobilize stakeholders toward an SMO’s desired outcomes and stated accomplishments. One area that warrants further investigation is how stakeholders perceive and interact with digital communication strategies employed by the SMO. In other words, where do traditional activism and collective action intersect with digital activism and connective action powered by stakeholder outreach? To address this central question, the chapter examines the structural progression of the SMO demonstrated through the womensmarch.org website, analyzes the outcomes claimed by the organization through a series of stakeholder emails, and incorporates direct protester statements about perceptions of and interactions with the organization’s digital communication.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Following Markham and Buchanan (2012), Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (Version 2.0), identifiable details from protesters’ statements were excluded to protect their privacy.
References
Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
Bennett, L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661
Blumer, H. (1995). Social movements. In S.M. Lyman (Ed.), Social movements: Critiques, concepts and case studies (pp. 60–83). Macmillan. (Reprinted from New outline of the principles of sociology (pp. 199–220) by A. M. Lee, Ed, 1951, Barnes & Noble)
Botan, C. H., & Taylor, M. (2004). Public relations: State of the field. Journal of Communication, 54(4), 645–661.
Breines, W. (2006). The trouble between us: An uneasy history of white and black women in the feminist movement. Oxford University Press.
Brewer, S., & Dundes, L. (2018, July). Concerned, meet terrified: Intersectional feminism and the Women’s March. Women’s Studies International Forum, 69, 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2018.04.008
Chadwick, A. (2007). Digital network repertoires and organizational hybridity. Political Communication, 24(3), 283–301.
Chadwick, A. (2011). The political information cycle in a hybrid news system: The British Prime Minister and the “bullygate” affair. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 16(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161210384730
Collins, P. H. (2002). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1, article 8. http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8.
Daymon, C., & Holloway, I. (2010). Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications. Routledge.
Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2009). Social movements: An introduction. John Wiley & Sons.
Garza, A. (2017). Herstory. blacklivesmatter.com. http://blacklivesmatter.com/herstory/
George, J. J., & Leidner, D. E. (2019). From clicktivism to hacktivism: Understanding digital activism. Information and Organization, 29(3), 235–249.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
Gupta, D. (2009). The power of incremental outcomes: How small victories and defeats affect social movement organizations. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 14(4), 417–432. https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.14.4.mw77710825j7g023
Heaney, M. T. (2019, July 8). Is the Women’s March focused on white women—or does it promote intersectional activism? The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/is-womens-march-focused-white-women-or-does-it-promote-intersectional-activism/
Heath, R. L. (1993). A rhetorical approach to zones of meaning and organizational prerogatives. Public Relations Review, 19(2), 141–155.
Heath, R. L. (2008). Power resource management: Pushing buttons and building cases. In T. L. Hansen-Horn & B. D. Neff (Eds.), Public relations: From theory to practice (pp. 2–19). Pearson Education.
Heath, R. L., & Palenchar, M. J. (2009). Strategic issues management: Organizations and public policy changes (2nd ed.). Sage.
hooks, b. (1982). Ain’t I a woman: Black women and feminism. South End Press.
Jackson, P. (1982). Tactics of confrontation. Gray zones, redlines, and conflicts before war. Naval War College Review, 70(3), 39–62.
Jahng, M. R., & Lee, N. (2018). When scientists tweet for social changes: Dialogic communication and collective mobilization strategies by Flint water study scientists on Twitter. Science Communication, 40(1), 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017751948
Leong, C., Pan, S. L., Bahri, S., & Fauzi, A. (2019). Social media empowerment in social movements: Power activation and power accrual in digital activism. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(2), 173–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2018.1512944
Markham, A., & Buchanan, E. (2012). Ethical decision-making and Internet research 2.0: Recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee. The Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR). https://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf
McCracken, G. (1988). The long interview. Sage.
Moraga, C., & Anzaldúa, G. (Eds.). (2015). This bridge called my back: Writings by radical women of color (4th ed.). SUNY Press.
North, A. (2018, December 21). The Women’s March changed the American left. Now anti-Semitism allegations threaten the group’s future. Vox.com. https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/12/21/18145176/feminism-womens-march-2018-2019-farrakhan-intersectionality
Roth, B. (1999). The making of the vanguard center: Black feminist emergence in the 1960s and 1970s. In D. R. Grayson & K. Springer (Eds.), Still lifting, still climbing: African American women’s contemporary activism (pp. 70–90). New York University Press.
Sarmiento, I. G. (2020, January 17). After controversial leaders step down, The Women’s March tries again in 2020. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2020/01/17/797107259/after-controversial-leaders-step-down-the-wmens-march-tries-again-in-2020
Selander, L., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (2016). Digital action repertoires and transforming a social movement organization. MIS Quarterly, 40(2), 331–352.
Silliman, J., Fried, M. G., Ross, L., & Gutierrez, E. (2004). Undivided rights: Women of color organizing for reproductive justice. South End Press.
Snow, D. A. (2004). Framing processes, ideology, and discursive fields. The Blackwell companion to social movements, 1, 380–412. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470999103.ch17
Sommerfeldt, E. J. (2011). Activist online resource mobilization: Relationship building features that fulfill resource dependencies. Public Relations Review, 37, 429–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.03.003
Sommerfeldt, E. J. (2013). Online power resource management: activist resource mobilization, communication strategy, and organizational structure. Journal of Public Relations Research, 25(4), 347–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2013.806871
Sommerfeldt, E. J., & Yang, A. (2017). Relationship networks as strategic issues management: An issue-stage framework of social movement organization network strategies. Public Relations Review, 43(4), 829–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.06.012
Stockman, F. (2018, December 23). Women’s march roiled by accusations of anti-semitism. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/23/us/womens-march-anti-semitism.html
Sullivan, K. (2019, September 16). 3 Founding members of Women’s March leaving after allegations of Anti-Semitism. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/16/politics/womens-march-board-members-leaving/index.html
Tarrow, S. (1992). Mentalities, political cultures, and collective action frames. In A. D. Morris & C. McClurg Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 174–202). Yale University Press.
Thompson, B. (2002). Multiracial feminism: Recasting the chronology of second wave feminism. Feminist Studies, 28(2), 337–360. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178747
Valk, A. M. (2008). Radical sisters:Second-wave feminism and black liberation in Washington (Vol. 118). University of Illinois Press.
Veil, S. R., Reno, J., Freihaut, R., & Oldham, J. (2015). Online activists vs. Kraft foods: A case of social media hijacking. Public Relations Review, 41(1), 103–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.017
Vijay, D., & Kulkarni, M. (2012). Frame changes in social movements: a case study. Public Management Review, 14(6), 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2011.642630
Xiong, Y., Cho, M., & Boatwright, B. (2019). Hashtag activism and message frames among social movement organizations: Semantic network analysis and thematic analysis of Twitter during the# MeToo movement. Public Relations Review, 45(1), 10–12.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nicolini, K.M., Hansen, S.S. (2023). Mobilizing the Everyday Activist: Digital Communication Toward Action as the Women’s March Advances from Grassroots Activism. In: Wiesslitz, C. (eds) Women’s Activism Online and the Global Struggle for Social Change. Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31621-0_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31621-0_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-31620-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-31621-0
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)