Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study empirically analyzed the relationships between emerging media as tools in fomenting anti-government protest as well as government repression of political opposition. Using a dataset of 162 democratic and autocratic countries over 18 years, potential differences between these phenomena were examined. The results of a series of analytic models suggest that higher levels of internet and mobile phones are positively associated with more instances of both political protests and political repression, which have increased dramatically in recent years. The differences between democratic and autocratic countries' emerging media and sociopolitical instability trends are explored and discussed.

Keywords

Democracy and autocracy emerging media liberation and repression sociopolitical instability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aday

Farrell

Lynch

, et al. (2010) Blogs and Bullets: New Media in Contentious Politics, Washington, DC: United States Institute for Peace.

Bailard

(2012a) A field experiment on the Internet's effect in an African election: Savvier citizens, disaffected voters, or both?. Journal of Communication 62(2): 330–344.

Bailard

(2012b) Testing the Internet's effect on democratic satisfaction: A multi-methodologial, cross-national approach. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 9(2): 185–204.

Bailard

(2014) Democracy's Double-edged Sword: How Internet Use Changes Citizens' Views of Their Government, Baltimore, MD: JHU Press.

Bailard

(2015) Ethnic conflict goes mobile: Mobile technology's effect on the opportunities and motivations for violent conflict action. Journal of Peace Research 52(3): 323–337.

Bennett

Segerberg

(2013) The Logic of Connective Action, Kindle Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bimber

Flanagin

Stohl

(2005) Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. Communication Theory 15(4): 365.

Bimber

Flanagin

Stohl

(2012) Collective Action in Organizations: Interaction and Engagement in an Era of Technological Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Blattman

Miguel

(2010) Civil war. Journal of Economic Literature 48(1): 3–57.

10.

Brooking ET and Singer PW (2016) War goes viral. War goes viral. The Atlantic. Available at: www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/11/war-goes-viral/501125/ (accessed 3 January 2019).

11.

Bueno de Mesquita

Morrow

Siverson

, et al. (2004) Testing novel implications from the selectorate theory of war. World Politics 56(3): 363–368.

12.

Bueno de Mesquita B and Smith A (2011) The Dictator’s Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics. Kindle Edition. New York, NY: Public Affairs.

13.

Castells

(2007) Communication, power, and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication 1: 238–266.

14.

Castells

(2009) Communication Power, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

15.

Castells

(2012) Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

16.

Chen

(2012) Social Protest and Contentious Authoritarianism in China, New York: Cambridge University Press.

17.

Chenoweth

Stephan

(2011) Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, Kindle Edition. New York: Perseus Books Group.

18.

Corrales

Westhoff

(2006) Information technology adoption and political regimes. International Studies Quarterly 50: 911–933.

19.

Deibert

Rohozinski

(2010) Liberation vs. control: the future of cyberspace. Journal of Democracy 21(4): 43–57.

20.

Dencik

Cable

(2017) The advent of surveillance realism: public opinion and activist responses to the Snowden Leaks. International Journal of Communication 11: 763–781.

21.

Dimitrov

(2008) The resilient authoritarians. Current History 107(705): 24–29.

22.

Diamond

(2010) Liberation technology. Journal of Democracy 21(3): 69–83.

23.

Garrett

(2006) Protest in an information society: A review of literature on social movements and emerging media. Information Communication and Society 9(2): 202–224.

24.

Greenwald

(2014) No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US Surveillance State, New York, NY: Metropolitan Books.

25.

Groshek

(2009) The democratic effects of the Internet, 1994–2003: A cross-national inquiry of 152 countries. The International Communication Gazette 71: 115–136.

26.

Groshek

Bachman

(2014) A Latin Spring? examining digital diffusion and youth bulges in forecasting political change in Latin America. In: Welp

Breuer

(ed) Digital Opportunities for Democratic Governance in Latin America, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 17–32.

27.

Groshek

Christensen

(2016) Emerging media and press freedoms as determinants of nonviolent and violent political conflicts, 1990–2006. International Communication Gazette 79(4): 335–356.

28.

Howard PN and Hussain MM (2013) Democracy’s Fourth Wave?: Digital Media and the Arab Spring. Kindle Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

29.

Karatzogianni

(2015) Firebrand Waves of Digital Activism 1994–2014, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

30.

Kedzie

Aragon

(2002) Coincident revolutions and the dictator's dilemma. In: Allison

(ed) Technology, Development, and Democracy, Albany, NY: SUNY Press, pp. 105–130.

31.

Kim YM, Hsu J, Neiman D, et al. (2018) The Stealth Media? Groups and Targets behind Divisive Issue Campaigns on Facebook, Political Communication 35(4): 541.

32.

King

Pan

Roberts

(2013) How censorship in China allows government criticism but silences collective expression. American Political Science Review 107(2): 1–18.

33.

King

Pan

Roberts

(2017) How the Chinese Government fabricates social media posts for strategic distraction, not engaged argument. American Political Science Review 111(3): 484–501.

34.

Lorentzen

(2013) Regularizing rioting: Permitting protest in an authoritarian regime. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 8: 127–158.

35.

Lynch

(2011) After Egypt: The limits and promise of online challenges to the authoritarian Arab state. Perspectives on Politics 9(2): 301–310.

36.

McAdam

Tarrow

Tilly

(2001) Dynamics of Contention, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

37.

Magaloni

(2008) Credible power-sharing and the longevity of authoritarian rule. Comparative Political Studies 41(4–5): 715–741.

38.

Magaloni

(2010) The game of electoral fraud and the ousting of authoritarian rule. American Journal of Political Science 54(3): 751–765.

39.

Marshall

Cole

(2014) Global Report 2014: Conflict, Governance, and State Fragility, Vienna, VA: Center for Systemic Peace.

40.

Marwick A and Lewis R (2017) Media manipulation and disinformation online. Data & Society Report. Available at: https://datasociety.net/pubs/oh/DataAndSociety_MediaManipulationAndDisinformationOnline.pdf (accessed 3 January 2019).

41.

Morozov E (2009) Iran: Downside to the “Twitter Revolution.” Dissent. Available at: https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/iran-downside-to-the-twitter-revolution.

42.

Morozov

(2011) The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom, New York: Public Affairs Press.

43.

Olson

(1965) The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

44.

Papacharissi

Trevey

(2018) Affective publics and windows of opportunity: Social movements and the potential for social change. In: Meikle

(ed) Routledge Companion to Media and Activism, 1st ed, London: Routledge.

45.

Pierskalla

Hollenbach

(2013) Technology and collective action: the effect of cell phone coverage on political violence in Africa. American Political Science Review 107(2): 207–224.

46.

Poell

van Dijck

(2015) Social media and activist communication. In: Atton

(ed) The Routledge Companion to Alternative and Community Media, London: Routledge, pp. 527–537.

47.

Rod

Weidmann

(2015) Empowering activists or autocrats? The internet in authoritarian regimes. Journal of Peace Research 52(3): 338–351.

48.

Rosenberg M, Confessor N and Cadwalladr C (2018) How Trump consultants exploited the Facebook data of millions. New York Times, 17 March. Available at: www.nytimes.com/2018/03/17/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-trump-campaign.html.

49.

Schoemaker

(2014) Media and conflict: An assessment of the evidence. Progress in Development Studies 14(2): 181–195.

50.

Shirky

(2008) Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations, New York, NY: The Penguin Press.

51.

Shirky C (2011) The political power of social media. Foreign Affairs. Available at: www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/67038/clay-shirky/the-political-power-of-social-media (accessed 30 December 2011).

52.

Smyrnaios

(2018) Internet Oligopoly: The Corporate Takeover of Our Digital World, London, UK: Emerald Publishing.

53.

Svolik

(2012) The Politics of Authoritarian Rule, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

54.

Tarrow

(2005) The New Transnational Activism, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

55.

Thompson N and Vogelstein F (2018) Inside the two years that shook Facebook—and the world. Wired. Available at: https://www.wired.com/story/inside-facebook-mark-zuckerberg-2-years-of-hell/ (accessed 12 February 2018).

56.

Tufekci

(2017) Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest, New Haven: Yale University Press.

57.

van Dijk

(2005) The Deepening Divide: Inequality in the Information Society, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

58.

van Dijk

(2006) The Network Society: Social Aspects of New Media, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

59.

Vosoughi

Roy

Aral

(2018) The spread of true and false news. Science 359(6380): 1146–1151.

Emerging media,political protests,and government repression in autocracies and democracies from 1995 to 2012

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References