Bridging Activism and Party Politics: Mapping Frame Alignment Processes in Politicians’ Use of Hashtags

IF 5.5 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Emma Östin, Simon Lindgren
{"title":"Bridging Activism and Party Politics: Mapping Frame Alignment Processes in Politicians’ Use of Hashtags","authors":"Emma Östin, Simon Lindgren","doi":"10.1177/20563051241245668","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of hashtags has become an effective tool for activists to mobilize public support. This study explores whether, and in what ways, such hashtags have been adopted by politicians in power. Conducting a systematic, cross-national analysis, we examine how politicians use, what we call, activism-related hashtags. Using data from the Twitter Parliamentarian Database, we analyze the hashtagging practices of politicians in 10 countries: Australia, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The analysis explores what types of hashtags politicians use, and to what extent these tags are activism-related. We also analyze what activist causes hashtags used by politicians are related to, to better understand what causes are the most palatable to politicians. We further analyze qualitatively how the activism-related hashtags are used by the politicians. Through a combination of thematic analysis and frame analysis, we find that, in relation to the wide range of hashtags that politicians use, activism-related hashtags constitute a limited share. Our analysis also indicates that although politicians do indeed use activism-related hashtags, this can be for many different reasons and purposes, beyond merely supporting the cause or position of the original activist initiative. We find that politicians may join in with the key contention behind the hashtag, renegotiate the meaning of the hashtag to be able to align party-political ideologies with it, or engage with it by questioning or subverting it.","PeriodicalId":47920,"journal":{"name":"Social Media + Society","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Media + Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051241245668","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of hashtags has become an effective tool for activists to mobilize public support. This study explores whether, and in what ways, such hashtags have been adopted by politicians in power. Conducting a systematic, cross-national analysis, we examine how politicians use, what we call, activism-related hashtags. Using data from the Twitter Parliamentarian Database, we analyze the hashtagging practices of politicians in 10 countries: Australia, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The analysis explores what types of hashtags politicians use, and to what extent these tags are activism-related. We also analyze what activist causes hashtags used by politicians are related to, to better understand what causes are the most palatable to politicians. We further analyze qualitatively how the activism-related hashtags are used by the politicians. Through a combination of thematic analysis and frame analysis, we find that, in relation to the wide range of hashtags that politicians use, activism-related hashtags constitute a limited share. Our analysis also indicates that although politicians do indeed use activism-related hashtags, this can be for many different reasons and purposes, beyond merely supporting the cause or position of the original activist initiative. We find that politicians may join in with the key contention behind the hashtag, renegotiate the meaning of the hashtag to be able to align party-political ideologies with it, or engage with it by questioning or subverting it.
架起激进主义与政党政治的桥梁:绘制政治家使用标签的框架调整过程图
使用标签已成为活动家动员公众支持的有效工具。本研究探讨了这些标签是否以及以何种方式被执政的政治家所采用。通过系统性的跨国分析,我们研究了政治家如何使用我们所说的与激进主义相关的标签。利用 Twitter 议员数据库的数据,我们分析了 10 个国家的政治家使用标签的情况:澳大利亚、丹麦、法国、德国、意大利、挪威、西班牙、瑞典、英国和美国。分析探讨了政治家使用的标签类型,以及这些标签在多大程度上与激进主义有关。我们还分析了政客使用的标签与哪些激进主义事业相关,以更好地了解哪些事业最适合政客。我们还进一步分析了政治家如何定性地使用与激进主义相关的标签。通过主题分析和框架分析相结合的方法,我们发现,在政治家使用的各种标签中,与激进主义相关的标签所占比例有限。我们的分析还表明,尽管政治家确实使用了与激进主义相关的标签,但这可能是出于许多不同的原因和目的,而不仅仅是支持最初激进主义倡议的事业或立场。我们发现,政治家们可能会加入标签背后的关键争论,重新协商标签的含义,使政党政治意识形态与之保持一致,或者通过质疑或颠覆标签来参与其中。
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
Social Media + Society
Social Media + Society COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
3.80%
发文量
111
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Media + Society is an open access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal that focuses on the socio-cultural, political, psychological, historical, economic, legal and policy dimensions of social media in societies past, contemporary and future. We publish interdisciplinary work that draws from the social sciences, humanities and computational social sciences, reaches out to the arts and natural sciences, and we endorse mixed methods and methodologies. The journal is open to a diversity of theoretic paradigms and methodologies. The editorial vision of Social Media + Society draws inspiration from research on social media to outline a field of study poised to reflexively grow as social technologies evolve. We foster the open access of sharing of research on the social properties of media, as they manifest themselves through the uses people make of networked platforms past and present, digital and non. The journal presents a collaborative, open, and shared space, dedicated exclusively to the study of social media and their implications for societies. It facilitates state-of-the-art research on cutting-edge trends and allows scholars to focus and track trends specific to this field of study.
×
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