The Swarm versus the Grassroots: places and networks of supporters and opponents of Black Lives Matter on Twitter

IF 2.5 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Sander van Haperen, J. Uitermark, W. Nicholls
{"title":"The Swarm versus the Grassroots: places and networks of supporters and opponents of Black Lives Matter on Twitter","authors":"Sander van Haperen, J. Uitermark, W. Nicholls","doi":"10.1080/14742837.2022.2031954","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While activists have effectively used the #blacklivesmatter hashtag to organize protests against police brutality and racism, this success has also drawn out many who use the hashtag to express their opposition. How do supporters of the Movement for Black Lives and their opponents coordinate on Twitter? Drawing on a corpus of 18.5 million tweets, this paper compares coordination among supporters and opponents of #blacklivesmatter in terms of relations and spatialities. We elaborate two different models of coordination: the swarm and the grassroots. Compared to their adversaries, supporters of #blacklivesmatter are more strongly rooted in places and embedded in local relations, suggesting that their online activism builds on grassroots communities. Opponents can be differentiated into two categories. One group consists of conservatives that are rooted in places but in a markedly different geography than supporters; they are more often located outside of major cities and outside of the coastal states. A second group of digitally networked extreme right opponents coordinates more in the fashion of a swarm: they synchronize without being rooted in places or embedded in local relations. These findings demonstrate that movements and countermovements benefit from the affordances of social media in different ways.","PeriodicalId":47507,"journal":{"name":"Social Movement Studies","volume":"21 1","pages":"171 - 189"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Movement Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2022.2031954","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

ABSTRACT While activists have effectively used the #blacklivesmatter hashtag to organize protests against police brutality and racism, this success has also drawn out many who use the hashtag to express their opposition. How do supporters of the Movement for Black Lives and their opponents coordinate on Twitter? Drawing on a corpus of 18.5 million tweets, this paper compares coordination among supporters and opponents of #blacklivesmatter in terms of relations and spatialities. We elaborate two different models of coordination: the swarm and the grassroots. Compared to their adversaries, supporters of #blacklivesmatter are more strongly rooted in places and embedded in local relations, suggesting that their online activism builds on grassroots communities. Opponents can be differentiated into two categories. One group consists of conservatives that are rooted in places but in a markedly different geography than supporters; they are more often located outside of major cities and outside of the coastal states. A second group of digitally networked extreme right opponents coordinates more in the fashion of a swarm: they synchronize without being rooted in places or embedded in local relations. These findings demonstrate that movements and countermovements benefit from the affordances of social media in different ways.
蜂群对草根:推特上黑人生命也重要的支持者和反对者的地点和网络
虽然活动人士有效地利用“黑人的生命也重要”这一标签来组织抗议警察暴行和种族主义,但这一成功也吸引了许多人使用这一标签来表达他们的反对意见。“黑人生命运动”的支持者和他们的反对者是如何在Twitter上协调的?本文利用1850万条推文的语料,从关系和空间性的角度比较了#黑人生命很重要#的支持者和反对者之间的协调。我们阐述了两种不同的协调模式:群体和基层。与他们的对手相比,“黑人的生命也重要”的支持者更扎根于地方,融入当地关系,这表明他们的在线行动建立在基层社区的基础上。反对者可以分为两类。一个群体由保守派组成,他们扎根于地方,但与支持者的地理位置明显不同;他们通常位于大城市和沿海州以外的地方。第二组数字网络化的极右对手更像是一群人:他们不扎根于某个地方,也不根植于当地关系,而是同步行动。这些发现表明,运动和反运动以不同的方式受益于社交媒体的支持。
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
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
9.70%
发文量
55
×
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