An Evolution of Hashtags: A Comparative Analysis of Hashtag Usage Following the Deaths of Michael Brown and George Floyd

IF 2.1 3区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Sara C. Francisco, C. McMillan
{"title":"An Evolution of Hashtags: A Comparative Analysis of Hashtag Usage Following the Deaths of Michael Brown and George Floyd","authors":"Sara C. Francisco, C. McMillan","doi":"10.1177/21533687241226673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent instances of racial injustice and the growth of the Black Lives Matter movement have spurred conversations about police reform across the United States. Exposure to police aggression through the second-hand accounts of family members, friends, and the media is known to shape individuals’ perceptions of law enforcement. However, it remains unclear whether social media platforms can also facilitate vicarious exposure to racialized police violence. The current study addresses this gap by focusing on patterns of hashtag usage in a sample of over 350,000 tweets related to law enforcement. Tweets in our sample were posted following the murders of Michael Brown in 2014 and George Floyd in 2020, enabling us to make comparisons across the two sociotemporal contexts. We find that police-related hashtags were more common in 2020 than 2014. Additionally, from the reconceptualization of our data as hashtag co-occurrence networks, we find that Twitter conversations about law enforcement were more likely to occur in disconnected, polarized clusters during the latter period. Findings demonstrate that there is a polarization of online discourse around struggles for racial justice, which limits the ability for social media platforms to expose members to the public to new perspectives on police reform.","PeriodicalId":45275,"journal":{"name":"Race and Justice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Race and Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21533687241226673","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent instances of racial injustice and the growth of the Black Lives Matter movement have spurred conversations about police reform across the United States. Exposure to police aggression through the second-hand accounts of family members, friends, and the media is known to shape individuals’ perceptions of law enforcement. However, it remains unclear whether social media platforms can also facilitate vicarious exposure to racialized police violence. The current study addresses this gap by focusing on patterns of hashtag usage in a sample of over 350,000 tweets related to law enforcement. Tweets in our sample were posted following the murders of Michael Brown in 2014 and George Floyd in 2020, enabling us to make comparisons across the two sociotemporal contexts. We find that police-related hashtags were more common in 2020 than 2014. Additionally, from the reconceptualization of our data as hashtag co-occurrence networks, we find that Twitter conversations about law enforcement were more likely to occur in disconnected, polarized clusters during the latter period. Findings demonstrate that there is a polarization of online discourse around struggles for racial justice, which limits the ability for social media platforms to expose members to the public to new perspectives on police reform.
标签的演变:迈克尔-布朗和乔治-弗洛伊德死亡后的标签使用对比分析
最近发生的种族不公正事件和 "黑人的生命很重要 "运动的发展,引发了全美范围内关于警察改革的讨论。众所周知,通过家人、朋友和媒体的二手报道接触警察的侵犯行为会影响个人对执法的看法。然而,社交媒体平台是否也能促进对种族化警察暴力的代入,目前仍不清楚。本研究通过关注超过 350,000 条与执法相关的推文样本中的标签使用模式,弥补了这一空白。我们的样本中的推文是在 2014 年迈克尔-布朗(Michael Brown)和 2020 年乔治-弗洛伊德(George Floyd)谋杀案发生后发布的,这使我们能够对两种社会时间背景进行比较。我们发现,与警察相关的标签在 2020 年比 2014 年更为常见。此外,通过将我们的数据重新概念化为标签共现网络,我们发现在后一时期,有关执法的推特对话更有可能发生在互不关联的两极分化集群中。研究结果表明,围绕种族正义斗争的网络讨论出现了两极分化,这限制了社交媒体平台向公众展示警察改革新观点的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Race and Justice
Race and Justice Multiple-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
19.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Race and Justice: An International Journal serves as a quarterly forum for the best scholarship on race, ethnicity, and justice. Of particular interest to the journal are policy-oriented papers that examine how race/ethnicity intersects with justice system outcomes across the globe. The journal is also open to research that aims to test or expand theoretical perspectives exploring the intersection of race/ethnicity, class, gender, and justice. The journal is open to scholarship from all disciplinary origins and methodological approaches (qualitative and/or quantitative).Topics of interest to Race and Justice include, but are not limited to, research that focuses on: Legislative enactments, Policing Race and Justice, Courts, Sentencing, Corrections (community-based, institutional, reentry concerns), Juvenile Justice, Drugs, Death penalty, Public opinion research, Hate crime, Colonialism, Victimology, Indigenous justice systems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信