Social Movements: The Sociotechnical Constitution of Collective Action

Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Sociology book series (BRIEFSSOCY)

Abstract

For some years, the field of research on social movements has undergone fundamental changes. This is due above all to the internet and social media platforms that have become an integral part of the emergence, organization and mobilization of protest. This article examines the role which these new technical infrastructures play in the development and stabilization of political protest and social movements. For this, it pursues two main objectives: One, a more precise identification of the technical foundations of collective behavior and action, which show the internet to be not only an enabling but also a regulatory and action-structuring infrastructure with a considerable degree of intervention. And two, the analysis of the new and close interplay of social and technical conditions under which collective protest and social movements take shape in the digital age, referred to as “technically advanced sociality”.

Keywords

Social protest Social movements Social media Connective action Technically advanced sociality Technology as institution 

References

  1. Ahrne, G., & Brunsson, N. (2011). Organization outside organizations: The significance of partial organization. Organization, 18(1), 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, A., & Aouragh, M. (2014). Egypt’s unfinished revolution: The role of the media revisited. International Journal of Communication, 8, 890–915.Google Scholar
  3. Andrejevic, M., & Gates, K. (2014). Big data surveillance: Introduction. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 185–196.Google Scholar
  4. Anduiza, E., Cristancho, C., & Sabucedo, J. (2014). Mobilization through online social networks: The political protest of the Indignados in Spain. Information, Communication & Society, 17(6), 750–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aouragh, M., & Alexander, A. (2011). The Egyptian experience: Sense and nonsense of the internet revolution. International Journal of Communication, 5, 1344–1358.Google Scholar
  6. Armstrong, D. (1981). A trumpet to arms. Alternative media in America. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bakardjieva, M. (2015). Do clouds have politics? Collective actors in social media land. Information, Communication & Society, 18(8), 983–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baringhorst, S. (2009). Politischer Protest im Netz – Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Mobilisierung transnationaler Öffentlichkeit im Zeichen digitaler Kommunikation. In F. Marcinkowski & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Politik in der Mediendemokratie, Politische Vierteljahresschrift. Sonderheft 42 (pp. 609–634). Wiesbaden: VS.Google Scholar
  9. Bauman, Z., & Lyon, D. (2013). Liquid surveillance. A conversation. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012a). The logic of connective action. Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012b). Digital media and the personalization of collective action. Social technology and the organization of protests against the global economic crisis. In B. D. Loader & D. Mercea (Eds.), Social media and democracy. Innovations in participatory politics (pp. 13–38). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action. Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bennett, W. L., Segerberg, A., & Walker, S. (2014a). Organization in the crowd: Peer production in large-scale networked protests. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 232–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bennett, W. L., Segerberg, A., & Walker, S. (2014b). Organizing in the crowd—looking ahead. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 272–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bimber, B. (2017). Three prompts for collective action in the context of digital media. Political Communication, 34(1), 6–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. J., & Stohl, C. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. Communication Theory, 15(4), 365–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Boyle, D. (1992). From Portapak to Camcorder: A brief history of guerilla television. Journal of Film and Video, 44(1/2), 67–79.Google Scholar
  19. Carty, V. (2015). Social movements and new technology. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  20. Castaneda, E. (2012). The Indignados of Spain: A precedent to Occupy Wall Street. Social Movement Studies, 11(3/4), 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope. Social movements in the digital age (2nd ed.). Cambridge/Malden: Polity.Google Scholar
  22. Crossley, A. D. (2015). Facebook feminism: Social media, blogs, and new technologies of contemporary U.S. feminism. Mobilization, 20(2), 253–268.Google Scholar
  23. Croteau, D., & Hoynes, W. (2014). Media/society. Industries, images, and audiences (5th ed.). Los Angeles/London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Dauvergne, P., & LeBaron, G. (2014). Protest Inc. The corporatization of activism. Cambridge/Malden: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  25. Davis, G. F., McAdam, D., Scott, W. R., & Zald, M. N. (Eds.). (2005). Social movements and organization theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. den Hond, F., de Bakker, F.G.A., & Smith, N. (2015). Social movements and organizational analysis. In D. Della Porta & M. Diani (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social movements (pp. 291–305). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Della Porta, D. (2014). Comment on organizing in the crowd. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 269–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2006). Social movements. An introduction (2nd ed.). Malden/Oxford/Carlton: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  29. Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (Eds.). (2015). The Oxford handbook of social movements. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Dobusch, L., & Quack, S. (2011). Interorganisationale Netzwerke und digitale Gemeinschaften. Von Beiträgen zu Beteiligung? In P. Conrad & J. Sydow (Eds.), Organisation und Umwelt. Managementforschung (Vol. 21, pp. 171–213). Wiesbaden: Gabler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dobusch, L., & Schoeneborn, D. (2015). Fluidity, identity, and organizationality: The communicative constitution of Anonymous. Journal of Management Studies, 52(8), 1005–1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dohrn, B., & Ayers, W. (2016). Young, gifted, and black: Black Lives Matter! In J. Conner & S. M. Rosen (Eds.), Contemporary youth activism. Advancing social justice in the United States (pp. 79–92). Santa Barbara: Praeger.Google Scholar
  33. Dolata, U., & Werle, R. (2007). Bringing technology back in. Technik als Einflussfaktor sozioökonomischen und institutionellen Wandels. In U. Dolata & R. Werle (Eds.), Gesellschaft und die Macht der Technik. Sozioökonomischer und institutioneller Wandel durch Technisierung (pp. 15–43). Frankfurt/New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  34. Dolata, U. (2013). The transformative capacity of new technologies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Dolata, U. (2017). Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook, Microsoft. Market concentration–competition–innovation strategies. SOI Discussion Paper 2017-01. Stuttgart: Institute for Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  36. Dolata, U., & Schrape, J.-F. (2016). Masses, crowds, communities, movements. Collective action in the internet age. Social Movement Studies, 15(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Earl, J., & Kimport, K. (2011). Digitally enabled social change. Activism in the internet age. Cambridge/London: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Earl, J., Hunt, J., Garrett, R. K., & Dal, A. (2015). New technologies and social movements. In D. Della Porta & M. Diani (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social movements (pp. 355–366). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Finkbeiner, F., Keune, H., Schenke, J., Geiges, L., & Marg, S. (2016). Stop-TTIP-Proteste in Deutschland. Wer sind, was wollen und was motiviert die Freihandelsgegner? Forschungsbericht Göttinger Institut für Demokratieforschung 2016-01. Göttingen: Göttinger Institut für Demokratieforschung.Google Scholar
  40. Freeman, J. (1972). The tyranny of structurelessness. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 17, 151–164.Google Scholar
  41. Gerbaudo, P. (2012a). Tweets and the streets. Social media and contemporary activism. London: Pluto.Google Scholar
  42. Gerbaudo, P. (2012b). The impermanent revolution: The organizational fragility of the Egyptian prodemocracy movement in the troubled transition. Social Justice, 39(1), 7–19.Google Scholar
  43. Gerbaudo, P. (2014). The persistence of collectivity in digital protest. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 264–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gerbaudo, P., & Treré, E. (2015). In search of the ‘we’ of social media activism: Introduction to the special issue on social media and protest identities. Information, Communication & Society, 18(8), 865–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gerlach, J. (2016). Fünf Jahre Arabellion: Das Ende eines Traums? Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik, 61(2), 47–56.Google Scholar
  46. Gillespie, T. (2010). The politics of ‘platforms’. New Media & Society, 12(3), 347–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Gillespie, T. (2014). The relevance of algorithms. In T. Gillespie, P. Boczkowski, & K. Foot (Eds.), Media technologies. Essays on communication, materiality, and society (pp. 167–194). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  48. Goodwin, J., & Jasper, J. M. (Eds.). (2015). The social movements reader. Cases and concepts (3rd ed.). Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  49. Grimmelmann, J. (2005). Regulation by software. The Yale Law Journal, 114, 1721–1758.Google Scholar
  50. Haunss, S. (2015). Promise and practice in studies of social media and movements. In L. Dencik & O. Leistert (Eds.), Critical perspectives on social media and protest. Between control and emancipation (pp. 13–31). London/New York: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  51. Hintz, A. (2015). Social media, censorship, privatized regulation and new restrictions to protest and dissent. In L. Dencik & O. Leistert (Eds.), Critical perspectives on social media and protest. between control and emancipation (pp. 109–126), London/New York: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  52. Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. (2013). Democracy’s fourth wave? Digital media and the Arab Spring. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Iglesias, P. (2015a). Explaining Podemos. New Left Review, 93, 7–22.Google Scholar
  54. Iglesias, P. (2015b). Spain on edge. New Left Review, 93, 23–42.Google Scholar
  55. Just, N., & Latzer, M. (2017). Governance by algorithms: Reality construction by algorithmic selection on the internet. Media, Culture and Society, 39(2), 238–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Karpf, D. (2012). The MoveOn effect. Transformation of American political advocacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Karpf, D. (2014). Comment on “Organization in the crowd: Peer production in large-scale networked protests”. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 261–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kavada, A. (2015). Creating the collective: Social media, the Occupy movement and its constitution as a collective actor. Information, Communication & Society, 18(8), 872–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kidd, D. (2003). Indymedia.org. A new communications commons. In M. McCaughey & M. Dyers (Eds.), Cyberactivism: Online activism in theory and practice (pp. 47–69). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Kneuer, M., & Richter, S. (2015). Soziale Medien in Protestbewegungen. Neue Wege für Diskurs, Organisation und Empörung? Frankfurt/New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  61. Leistert, O. (2015). The revolution will not be liked. In L. Dencik & O. Leistert (Eds.), Critical perspectives on social media and protest. Between control and emancipation (pp. 35–51). London/New York: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  62. Lessig, L. (1999). CODE and other laws of cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  63. Lim, M. (2012). Clicks, cabs, and coffee houses: Social media and oppositional movements in Egypt, 2004–2011. Journal of Communication, 62, 231–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Linde, H. (1972). Sachdominanz in Sozialstrukturen. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  65. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lyon, D. (2014). Surveillance, Snowden, and big data: Capacities, consequences, critique. Big Data & Society, July/December, 2014, 1–13.Google Scholar
  67. Mason, P. (2012). Why it’s kicking off everywhere: The new global revolutions. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  68. McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (Eds.). (1996). Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing structures and cultural framings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  69. McAdam, D., & Scott, R. W. (2005). Organizations and movements. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott, M. N. Zald, & N. Mayer (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 4–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. McDonald, K. (2015). From Indymedia to anonymous: Rethinking action and identity in digital cultures. Information, Communication & Society, 18(8), 968–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Melucci, A. (1996). Challenging codes. Collective action in the information age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Milan, S. (2015). From social movements to cloud protesting: The evolution of collective identity. Information, Communication & Society, 18(8), 887–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 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.Google Scholar
  74. Monterde, A., Calleja-López, A., Aguilera, M., Barandiaran, X. E., & Postill, J. (2015). Multitudinous identities: A qualitative and network analysis of the 15M collective identity. Information, Communication & Society, 18(8), 930–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Morris, A. D., & Staggenborg, S. (2004). Leadership in social movements. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 171–196). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  76. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. What the internet is hiding from you. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  77. Piven, F. F. (2013). On the organizational question. Sociological Quarterly, 54(2), 191–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Poell, T., Abdulla, R., Rieder, B., Woldering, R., & Zack, L. (2015). Protest leadership in the age of social media. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 994–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Poell, T., & Van Dijck, J. (2016). Constructing public space: Global perspectives on social media and popular contestation. International Journal of Communication, 10, 226–234.Google Scholar
  80. Popitz, H. (1992). Phänomene der Macht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  81. Rucht, D. (1984). Modernisierung und neue soziale Bewegungen. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  82. Rucht, D. (2013). Aufstieg und Fall der Occupy-Bewegung. In K. Sonntag (Ed.), E-Protest: Neue soziale Bewegungen und Revolutionen (pp. 111–136). Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.Google Scholar
  83. Rucht, D. (2014). Die Bedeutung von Online-Mobilisierung für Offline-Protest. In K. Voss (Ed.), Internet und Partizipation. Bottom-up oder Top down? Politische Beteiligungsmöglichkeiten im Internet (pp. 115–128). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Schrape, J.-F. (2016). Social media, mass media and the ‘public sphere.’ Differentiation, complementarity and co-existence. SOI Discussion Paper 2016-01. Stuttgart: Institute for Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  85. Schulz-Schaeffer, I. (2007). Technik als sozialer Akteur und als soziale Institution. Sozialität von Technik statt Postsozialität. TUTS-WP-3-2007. Berlin: Technische Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
  86. Simsa, R., Heinrich, M., & Totter, M. (2015). Von der Puerta del Sol ins Europaparlament. Organisationale Ausdifferenzierungen der spanischen Protestbewegung. Forschungsjournal Soziale Bewegungen, 28(3), 8–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Snow, D. A., Soule, S. A., & Kriesi, H. (Eds.). (2004a). The Blackwell companion to social movements. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  88. Snow, D. A., Soule, S. A., & Kriesi, H. (2004b). Mapping the terrain. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 3–16). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Tilly, C., & Tarrow, S. (2015). Contentious politics (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Treré, E. (2012). Social movements as information ecologies: Exploring the coevolution of multiple internet technologies for activism. International Journal of Communication, 6, 2359–2377.Google Scholar
  91. Van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity. A critical history of social media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Van Dijck, J., & Poell, T. (2013). Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication, 1(1), 2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Vasi, I. B., & Suh, C. S. (2016). Online activities, spatial proximity, and the diffusion of the Occupy Wall Street Movement in the United States. Mobilization, 21(2), 139–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Veg, S. (2015). Legalistic and utopian. Hong Kong’s Umbrella Movement. New Left Review, 92, 55–73.Google Scholar
  95. Yörük, E., & Yüksel, M. (2014). Class and politics in Turkey’s Gezi protests. New Left Review, 89, 103–123.Google Scholar
  96. Watkins, S. (2016). Oppositions. New Left Review, 98, 5–30.Google Scholar
  97. Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121–136.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Social Sciences (SOWI VI)University of StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations