Abstract
This article investigates two questions: One, how might the very differently structured social collectives on the internet—masses, crowds, communities and movements—be classified and distinguished? And two, what influence do the technological infrastructures in which they operate have on their formation, structure and activities? For this, we differentiate between two main types of social collectives: non-organized collectives, which exhibit loosely coupled collective behavior, and collective actors with a separate identity and strategic capability. Further, we examine the newness, or distinctive traits, of online-based collectives. We consider that newness to be comprised of the strong and hitherto non-existent interplay between the technological infrastructures that these collectives are embedded in and the social processes of coordination and institutionalization they must engage in order to maintain their viability over time. Conventional patterns of social dynamics in the development and stabilization of collective action are now systematically intertwined with technology-induced processes of structuration.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adler, E. (1992). The emergence of cooperation: National epistemic communities and the international evolution of the idea of nuclear arms control. International Organization, 46, 101–145.
Alexander, A., & Aouragh, M. (2014). Egypt’s unfinished revolution: The role of the media revisited. International Journal of Communication, 8, 890–915.
Andrejevic, M., & Gates, K. (2014). Big data surveillance: Introduction. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 185–196.
Anduiza, E., Cristancho, C., & Sabucedo, J. M. (2014). Mobilization through online social networks: The political protest of the Indignados in Spain. Information, Communication & Society, 17, 750–764.
Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action. Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15, 739–768.
Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bennett, W. L., Segerberg, A., & Knüpfer, C. B. (2017). The democratic interface: Technology, political organization, and diverging patterns of electoral representation. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1348533 (ahead-of-print).
Bennett, W. L., Segerberg, A., & Walker, S. (2014). Organization in the crowd: Peer production in large-scale networked protests. Information, Communication & Society, 17, 232–260.
Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. J., & Stohl, C. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. Communication Theory, 15, 365–388.
Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. J., & Stohl, C. (2012). Collective action in organizations: Interaction and engagement in an era of technological change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Blumer, H. (1939). Collective behavior. In A. Lee McClung (Ed.), New outline of the principles of sociology (pp. 166–222). New York: Barnes & Noble.
Brevini, B., Hintz, A., & McCurdy, P. (2013). Beyond WikiLeaks. Implications for the future of communications, journalism and society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Caren, N., & Gaby, S. (2012). Occupy online: How cute old men and Malcolm X recruited 400,000 U.S. users to OWS on Facebook. Social Movement Studies, 11, 367–374.
Carty, V. (2015). Social movements and new technology. Boulder: Westview Press.
Castells, C. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the internet age (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity.
Coleman, G. (2014). Hacker, hoaxer, whistleblower, spy: The story of anonymous. London: Verso.
Coleman, J. S. (1974). Power and the structure of society. New York: Norton & Company.
Cross, M. K. D. (2013). Rethinking epistemic communities twenty years later. Review of International Studies, 39, 137–160.
Dahrendorf, R. (1968). Essays in the theory of society. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Davis, G., McAdam, D., Scott, R. W., & Zald, M. N. (Eds.). (2005). Social movements and organization theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davis, J. W., & Meckel, M. (2012). Political power and the requirements of accountability in the age of WikiLeaks. Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 22, 463–491.
Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2006). Social movements: An introduction. London: Blackwell.
Dobusch, L., & Quack, S. (2011). Interorganisationale Netzwerke und digitale Gemeinschaften. Von Beiträgen zu Beteiligung? Managementforschung, 21, 171–213.
Dobusch, L., & Schoeneborn, D. (2015). Fluidity, Identity, and organizationality. The communicative constitution of anonymous. Journal of Management Studies, 52(8), 1005–1035.
Dobusch, L., Dobusch, L., & Müller-Seiz, G. (2017). Closing for the benefit of openness? The case of Wikimedia’s open strategy process. Organization Studies. Online first. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617736930.
Dolata, U. (2013). The transformative capacity of new technologies. A theory of sociotechnical change. London/New York: Routledge.
Dolata, U. (2017). Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook, Microsoft. Market concentration–competition–innovation strategies. Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies 2017-01.
Dunkel, W., & Kleemann, F. (Eds.). (2013). Customers at work: New perspectives on interactive service work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Durkheim, E. [1885] (1970). Regeln der soziologischen Methode. Neuwied: Luchterhand.
Earl, J., McKee Hurwitz, H., Mejia Mesinas, A., Tolan, M., & Arlotti, A. (2013). This protest will be tweeted: Twitter and protest policing during the Pittsburgh G20. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 459–478.
Eder, K. (1993). The new politics of class. Social movements and cultural dynamics in advanced societies. London: Sage.
Flowers, S. (2008). Harnessing the hackers: The emergence and exploitation of outlaw innovation. Research Policy, 37, 177–193.
Fournier, S., & Lee, L. (2009). Getting brand communities right. Harvard Business Review, 87, 105–111.
Fuchs, C. (2017). Social media: A critical introduction. London: Sage.
Fuchs, C., Boersma, K., Albrechtslund, A., & Sandoval, M. (2012). Internet and surveillance. The challenges of Web 2.0 and social media. London: Routledge.
Gamson, W. A. (2004). Bystanders, public opinion, and the media. In D. S. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 242–261). Maldon/Oxford: Blackwell.
Gerbaudo, P. (2012). Tweets and the streets: Social media and contemporary activism. London: Pluto.
Graham, M., & Dutton, W. H. (Eds.). (2014). Society and the internet. How networks of information and communication are changing our lives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haas, P. M. (1992). Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46, 1–35.
Hammon, L., & Hippner, H. (2012). Crowdsourcing. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 4, 165–168.
Haucap, J., & Heimeshoff, U. (2014). Google, Facebook, Amazon, eBay: Is the internet driving competition or market monopolization? International Economics and Economic Policy, 11, 49–61.
Haucap, J., & Heimeshoff, U. (2017). Ordnungspolitik in der digitalen Welt. In J. Haucap & Thiem, H. J. (Eds.), Wirtschaftspolitik im Wandel. Ordnungsdefizite und Lösungsansätze (pp. 79–132). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Hess, D., Breyman, S., Campbell, N., & Martin, B. (2007). Science, technology, and social movements. In E. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology (pp. 473–498). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hillery, G. A. (1955). Definitions of community: Areas of agreement. Rural Society, 20, 111–123.
Howe, J. (2006). The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired, 14(6). http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds_pr.html. Accessed 1 February 2018.
Karpf, D. (2012). The MoveOn effect. The unexpected transformation of American political advocacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Katzenbach, C. (2013). Media governance and technology. From ‘code is law’ to governance constellations. In M. Price, S. Verhulst, & L. Morgan (Eds.), Routledge handbook of media law (pp. 399–418). Abingdon: Routledge.
Kavada, A. (2015). Creating the collective: Social media, the Occupy movement and its constitution as a collective actor. Information, Communication & Society, 18, 872–886.
Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
König, R. (2013). Wikipedia: Between lay participation and elite knowledge representation. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 160–177.
Lessig, L. (1999). CODE and other laws of cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.
Lewis, S. C. (2012). The tension between professional control and open participation. Information, Communication & Society, 15(6), 836–866.
Losey, J. (2014). The anti-counterfeiting trade agreement and European civil society: A case study on networked advocacy. Journal of Information Policy, 4, 205–227.
March, J., & Simon, H. (1958). Organizations. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Marwell, G., & Oliver, P. (1993). The critical mass in collective action. A micro-social theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayntz, R. (2010). Global structures: Markets, organizations, networks—and communities? In M. Djelic, & S. Quack (Eds.), Transnational communities. Shaping global economic governance (pp. 37–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayntz, R., & Scharpf, F. W. (1995): Der Ansatz des akteurzentrierten Institutionalismus. In R. Mayntz & F. W. Scharpf (Eds.), Gesellschaftliche Selbstregelung und politische Steuerung (pp. 39–72). New York/Frankfurt a.M.: Campus.
McAdam, D., & Scott, R. W. (2005). Organizations and movements. In G. Davis, D. McAdam, R. Scott, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 4–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Michael, G. J. (2015). Who’s afraid of WikiLeaks? Missed opportunities in political science research. Review of Policy Research, 32(2), 175–199.
Milkman, R., Luce, S., & Lewis, P. (2012). Changing the subject: A bottom-up account of Occupy Wall Street in New York City. New York: The Murphy Institute, City University of New York.
Niederer, S., & Van Dijck, J. (2010). Wisdom of the crowd or technicity of content? Wikipedia as a sociotechnical system. New Media & Society, 12, 1368–1387.
O’Mahony, S., & Ferraro, F. (2007). The emergence of governance in an open source community. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1079–1106.
Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Ortmann, G. (2003). Regel und Ausnahme. Suhrkamp: Paradoxien sozialer Ordnung. Frankfurt a.M.
Papsdorf, C. (2009). Wie Surfen zu Arbeit wird. Crowdsourcing im Web 2.0. Frankfurt a.M.: Campus.
Parsons, T. [1937] (1949). The structure of social action. New York: Free Press.
Perrow, C. (1991). A society of organizations. Theory & Society, 20, 725–762.
Poell, T., & van Dijck, J. (2016). Constructing public space: Global perspectives on social media and popular contestation. International Journal of Communication, 10, 226–234.
Ritzer, G., & Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, consumption, prosumption. The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital “prosumer”. Journal of Consumer Culture, 10, 13–36.
Ritzer, G., Dean, P., & Jurgenson, N. (2012). The coming of age of the prosumer. American Behavioral Scientist, 56, 379–398.
Roberts, A. (2012). WikiLeaks: The illusion of transparency. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78, 116–133.
Rucht, D. (1994). Modernisierung und neue soziale Bewegungen. Deutschland, Frankreich und USA im Vergleich. Frankfurt a.M.: Campus.
Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play. Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder: Westview Press.
Schrape, J.-F. (2017). Reciprocal irritations: Social media, mass media and the public sphere. In R. Paul, M. Mölders, A. Bora, M. Huber, & P. Münte (Eds.), Society, regulation and governance: New modes of shaping social change? (pp. 138–150). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Smith, A. (2013). Civic engagement in the digital age. Report of the PEW Research Center.
Stäheli, U. (2012). Infrastrukturen des Kollektiven: alte Medien – neue Kollektive? Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kulturforschung, 2, 99–116.
Thackston, R., & Umphress, D. (2012). Micropreneurs: The rise of the MicroISV. IT Professional, 3(2012), 50–56.
Tilly, C., & Rule, J. (1965). Measuring political upheaval. Princeton: Center for International Studies.
Turner, R. H. (1978). The role and the person. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 1–23.
Van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity. A critical history of social media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vehlken, S. (2013). Zootechnologies: Swarming as a cultural technique. Theory, Culture & Society, 30, 110–131.
Verhoeven, I., & Duyvendak, J. W. (2017). Understanding governmental activism. Social Movement Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2017.1338942. (ahead-of-print).
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Werle, R. (2011). Institutional analysis of technical innovation. A review. SOI Discussion Paper 2011-4. Stuttgart: Institute for Social Sciences.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dolata, U., Schrape, JF. (2018). Collective Action in the Digital Age: An Actor-Based Typology. In: Collectivity and Power on the Internet. SpringerBriefs in Sociology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78414-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78414-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78413-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-78414-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)