We propose a three-pronged framework to study discourses surrounding social media activism initiated by networked counterpublics: personalized expressions that share stories and support, demands for changes that address systematic problems, and contentions between various actors and perspectives. Situating our analysis in discourses related to sexual violence and gender justice activism on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit, we use supervised machine learning to quantify three discourses—networked acknowledgment, calls to action, and feminism contention—and apply time series analysis to model their interrelations. Results show that networked acknowledgment stimulated both calls to action and feminism contention and that calls to action predicted feminism contention across all platforms. These discourses were more sensitive to real-world events on Twitter and Facebook, but more ephemeral and cyclical on Instagram and more persistent and coupled on Reddit. Our findings speak to the opportunities and challenges in social media activism and underscore cross-platform similarities and differences.
AfnanT.HuangH.-Y.SclafaniM.BashirM. (2019). Putting a price on social movements: A case study of #MeToo on Instagram [Conference session]. 82nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Information Science & Technology (pp. 1–9). https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2
BailC. A.ArgyleL. P.BrownT. W.BumpusJ. P.ChenH.HunzakerM. F.VolfovskyA. (2018). Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(37), 9216–9221. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804840115
4.
Banet-WeiserS. (2018). Empowered: Popular feminism and popular misogyny. Duke University Press.
5.
BarberáP. (2020). Social media, echo chambers, and political polarization. In PersilyN.TuckerJ. Editor (Eds.), Social media and democracy: The state of the field, prospects for reform (pp. 34–55). Cambridge University Press.
6.
BarberáP.CasasA.NaglerJ.EganP. J.BonneauR.JostJ. T.TuckerJ. A. (2019). Who leads? Who follows? Measuring issue attention and agenda setting by legislators and the mass public using social media data. American Political Science Review, 113(4), 883–901. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055419000352
7.
BenklerY. (2006). The wealth of networks. Yale University Press.
8.
BennettW. L.SegerbergA. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge University Press.
9.
BodeL.HannaA.YangJ.ShahD. V. (2015). Candidate networks, citizen clusters, and political expression: Strategic hashtag use in the 2010 midterms. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716214563923
10.
BossettaM. (2018). The digital architectures of social media: Comparing political campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 US election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(2), 471–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018763307
11.
BoulianneS. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 524–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542
12.
BoydD. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In PapacharissiZ. (ed.), Networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39–58). Routledge.
BrunnerE. (2017). Wild public networks and affective movements in China: Environmental activism, social media, and protest in Maoming. Journal of Communication, 67(5), 665–677. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12323
15.
BrunnerE.Partlow-LefevreS. (2020). #MeToo as networked collective: Examining consciousness-raising on wild public networks. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 17(2), 166–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2020.1750043
16.
BucherT. (2012). Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society, 14(7), 1164–1180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812440159
17.
CasalóL. V.FlaviánC.Ibáñez-SánchezS. (2021). Be creative, my friend! Engaging users on Instagram by promoting positive emotions. Journal of Business Research, 130, 416–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.02.014
18.
CastellsM. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. John Wiley & Sons.
19.
ChettyN.AlathurS. (2018). Hate speech review in the context of online social networks. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 40, 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.05.003
20.
CinelliM.De Francisci MoralesG.GaleazziA.QuattrociocchiW.StarniniM. (2021). The echo chamber effect on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(9), e2023301118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023301118
CorreaT.ValenzuelaS. (2021). A trend study in the stratification of social media use among urban youth: Chile 2009–2019. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media, 1, 1–43. https://doi.org/10.51685/jqd.2021.009
23.
CouldryN. (2012). Media, society, world: Social theory and digital media practice. Polity.
24.
DejmaneeT.ZaherZ.SamanthaR.PapaM. J. (2020). #MeToo, #HimToo: Popular feminism and hashtag activism in the Kavanaugh hearings. International Journal of Communication, 14(2020), 3946–3963
25.
DevlinJ.ChangM. W.LeeK.ToutanovaK. (2018). Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805.
26.
DrüekeR.ZoblE. (2016). Online feminist protest against sexism: The German-language hashtag #aufschrei. Feminist Media Studies, 16(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2015.1093071
27.
EnjolrasB.Steen-JohnsenK.WollebaekD. (2013). Social media and mobilization to offline demonstrations: Transcending participatory divides?New Media & Society, 15(6), 890–908. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812462844
28.
FarrellT.FernandezM.NovotnyJ.AlaniH. (2019, June). Exploring misogyny across the manosphere in Reddit [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Web Science (pp. 87–96).
29.
FilebornB. (2017). Justice 2.0: Street harassment victims’ use of social media and online activism as sites of informal justice. British Journal of Criminology, 57(6), 1482–1501. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azw093
30.
FraserN. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/466240
31.
FreelonD.MarwickA.KreissD. (2020). False equivalencies: Online activism from left to right. Science, 369(6508), 1197–1201. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb2428
32.
FreelonD.McIlwainC.ClarkM. (2018). Quantifying the power and consequences of social media protest. New Media & Society, 20(3), 990–1011. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816676646
33.
GhaderyF. (2019). #MeToo—Has the ‘sisterhood’ finally become global or just another product of neoliberal feminism?Transnational Legal Theory, 10(2), 252–274https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2019.1630169.
34.
GhoshS.SuM. H.AbhishekA.SukJ.TongC.KamathK.ShahD. (2022). Covering #MeToo across the news spectrum: Political accusation and public events as drivers of press attention. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 27(1), 158–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220968081
GillR. (2017). The affective, cultural and psychic life of postfeminism: A postfeminist sensibility 10 years on. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 20(6), 606–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549417733003
37.
Gil de ZúñigaH.JungN.ValenzuelaS. (2012). Social media use for news and individuals’ social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 319-336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01574.x
38.
HabermasJ. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press.
HsuV. J. (2019). (Trans) forming #MeToo: Toward a networked response to gender violence. Women’s Studies in Communication, 42(3), 269–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2019.1630697
41.
InwoodM. J. (1992). A Hegel dictionary. Blackwell.
42.
JacksonS. J.BaileyM.WellesB. F. (2020). #HashtagActivism: Networks of race and gender justice. MIT Press.
43.
JacksonS. J.BanaszczykS. (2016). Digital standpoints: Debating gendered violence and racial exclusions in the feminist counterpublic. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 40(4), 391–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859916667731
44.
JaidkaK.ZhouA.LelkesY. (2019). Brevity is the soul of Twitter: The constraint affordance and political discussion. Journal of Communication, 69(4), 345–372. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz023
45.
JaneE. A. (2017). Misogyny online: A short (and brutish) history. SAGE.
46.
KavadaA.PoellT. (2021). From counterpublics to contentious publicness: Tracing the temporal, spatial, and material articulations of popular protest through social media. Communication Theory, 31(2), 190–208. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtaa025
47.
KellerJ. (2019). “Oh, she’s a Tumblr feminist”: Exploring the platform vernacular of girls’ social media feminisms. Social Media + Society, 5(3), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119867442
48.
KingG.LamP.RobertsM. E. (2017). Computer-assisted keyword and document set discovery from unstructured text. American Journal of Political Science, 61(4), 971–988. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12291
49.
KramerA. D.GuilloryJ. E.HancockJ. T. (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(24), 8788–8790. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320040111
50.
KwakN.LaneD. S.WeeksB. E.KimD. H.LeeS. S.BachledaS. (2018). Perceptions of social media for politics: Testing the slacktivism hypothesis. Human Communication Research, 44(2), 197–221. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqx008
51.
LawrenceE.RingroseJ. (2018). @NoToFeminism, #FeministsAreUgly, and misandry memes: How social media feminist humor is calling out antifeminism. In KellerJ.RyanM. E. (Eds.), Emergent Feminisms (pp. 211–232). Routledge.
52.
LinY.-R.KeeganB.MargolinD.LazerD. (2014). Rising tides or rising stars? Dynamics of shared attention on Twitter during media events. PLOS ONE, 9(5), e94093. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094093
53.
LinabaryJ. R.CorpleD. J.CookyC. (2020). Feminist activism in digital space: Postfeminist contradictions in #WhyIStayed. New Media & Society, 22(10), 1827–1848. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819884635
54.
ManikondaL.BeigiG.LiuH.KambhampatiS. (2018). Twitter for sparking a movement, Reddit for sharing the moment: #MeToo through the lens of social media. PsyArXiv.
55.
MargolinD.LiaoW. (2018). The emotional antecedents of solidarity in social media crowds. New Media & Society, 20(10), 3700–3719. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818758702
MassanariA. (2017). #Gamergate and the fappening: How Reddit’s algorithm, governance, and culture support toxic technocultures. New Media & Society, 19(3), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815608807
58.
MatassiM.BoczkowskiP. (2021). An agenda for comparative social media studies: The value of understanding practices from cross-national, cross-media, and cross-platform perspectives. International Journal of Communication, 15, 207–228.
59.
MuellerA.Wood-DoughtyZ.AmirS.DredzeM.NoblesA. L. (2021). Demographic representation and collective storytelling in the me too Twitter hashtag activism movement. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), 1–28.
60.
MutzD. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press.
61.
MwabaK.SenyurekG.UlmanY. I.MinckasN.HughesP.PaphitisS.AndrabiS.ben SalemL.AhmadL.AhmadA.MannellJ. (2021). ‘My story is like a magic wand’: A qualitative study of personal storytelling and activism to stop violence against women in Turkey. Global Health Action, 14(1), 1927331. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2021.1927331
62.
NauC.ZhangJ.Quan-HaaseA.MendesK. (2022). Vernacular practices in digital feminist activism on twitter: Deconstructing affect and emotion in the #MeToo movement. Feminist Media Studies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2022.2027496
63.
ÖzkulaS. M.ReillyP. J.HayesJ. (2022). Easy data, same old platforms? A systematic review of digital activism methodologies. Information, Communication & Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.2013918
64.
PapacharissiZ. (2016). Affective publics and structures of storytelling: Sentiment, events and mediality. Information, Communication & Society, 19(3), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2015.1109697
65.
PingreeR. J. (2007). How messages affect their senders: A more general model of message effects and implications for deliberation. Communication Theory, 17(4), 439–461. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00306.x
66.
Portwood-StacerL.BerridgeS. (2014). Introduction: Privilege and difference in (online) feminist activism. Feminist Media Studies, 14(3), 519–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2014.909158
67.
PrakasamN.Huxtable-ThomasL. (2020). Reddit: Affordances as an enabler for shifting loyalties. Information Systems Frontiers, 23(3), 723–751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-10002-x
68.
Quan-HaaseA.MendesK.HoD.LakeO.NauC.PieberD. (2021). Mapping #MeToo: A synthesis review of digital feminist research across social media platforms. New Media & Society, 23(6), 1700–1720. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820984457
69.
Rodino-ColocinoM. (2018). Me too, #MeToo: Countering cruelty with empathy. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 15(1), 96–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2018.1435083
70.
Shane-SimpsonC.ManagoA.GaggiN.Gillespie-LynchK. (2018). Why do college students prefer Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram? Site affordances, tensions between privacy and self-expression, and implications for social capital. Computers in Human Behavior, 86, 276–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.041
71.
SolimanA.HaferJ.LemmerichF. (2019, September). A characterization of political communities on Reddit [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 30th ACM conference on hypertext and Social Media (pp. 259–263). https://doi.org/10.1145/3342220.3343662
72.
SquiresC. R. (2002). Rethinking the black public sphere: An alternative vocabulary for multiple public spheres. Communication Theory, 12(4), 446–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00278.x
73.
StewartM.SchultzeU. (2019). Producing solidarity in social media activism: The case of My Stealthy Freedom. Information and Organization, 29(3), 100251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2019.04.003
74.
SukJ.AbhishekA.ZhangY.AhnS. Y.CorreaT.GarloughC.ShahD. V. (2021). #MeToo, networked acknowledgment, and connective action: How “empowerment through empathy” launched a social movement. Social Science Computer Review, 39(2), 276–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319864882
75.
SwansonN. R.GrangerC. W. (1997). Impulse response functions based on a causal approach to residual orthogonalization in vector autoregressions. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92(437), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1997.10473634
TufekciZ. (2014, May). Big questions for social media big data: Representativeness, validity and other methodological pitfalls [Conference session]. Eighth international AAAI conference on weblogs and social media.
78.
ValenzuelaS.KimY.Gil de ZúñigaH. (2012). Social networks that matter: Exploring the role of political discussion for online political participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24(2), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edr037
79.
Van KleefG. A.De DreuC. K. W.MansteadA. S. R. (2010). An interpersonal approach to emotion in social decision making. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 45–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(10)42002-X
80.
WeldonS. L. (2006). Inclusion, solidarity, and social movements: The global movement against gender violence. Perspectives on Politics, 4(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592706060063
81.
WonnebergerA.HellstenI. R.JacobsS. H. (2021). Hashtag activism and the configuration of counterpublics: Dutch animal welfare debates on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society, 24(12), 1694–1711. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1720770
82.
YarchiM.BadenC.Kligler-VilenchikN. (2021). Political polarization on the digital sphere: A cross-platform, over-time analysis of interactional, positional, and affective polarization on social media. Political Communication, 38(1–2), 98–139https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1785067.
83.
ZhangY.ShahD.FoleyJ.AbhishekA.LukitoJ.SukJ.KimS. J.SunZ.PevehouseJ.GarloughC. (2019). Whose lives matter? Mass shootings and social media discourses of sympathy and policy, 2012–2014. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 24(4), 182–202. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmz009
84.
ZhangY.ShahD.PevehouseJ.ValenzuelaS. (2022). Reactive and asymmetric communication flows: Social media discourse and partisan news framing in the wake of mass shootings. The International Journal of Press/Politics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612211072793
85.
ZhangY.WellsC.WangS.RoheK. (2018). Attention and amplification in the hybrid media system: The composition and activity of Donald Trump’s Twitter following during the 2016 presidential election. New Media & Society, 20(9), 3161–3182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817744390
86.
ZhuY. Q.ChenH. G. (2015). Social media and human need satisfaction: Implications for social media marketing. Business Horizons, 58(3), 335–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.01.006
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
