Historically, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have relied on mainstream news media to expose human-rights violations and encourage governments to pressure the perpetrators. Thanks to the Internet, NGOs are crafting new strategies for conducting information politics. Despite the obvious democratization of access to the means of communication, however, the new media may in fact represent a more challenging environment in which to be heard for some groups seeking global attention. We draw on agenda-setting research to develop a theory of global attention bottlenecks and use it to explain the success of 257 transnational human-rights groups at generating attention in both international mainstream news media and social media outlets. We conclude that most NGOs lack the organizational resources to compete effectively for either traditional news coverage or for public attention and that the Internet is unlikely to resolve the problem of global communication.
BenklerYochai. 2007. The Wealth of Networks. New Haven: Yale University Press.
2.
BennettW. LanceLawrenceRegina G.LivingstonSteven. 2008. When the Press Fails: Political Power and the News Media from Iraq to Katrina. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
BobClifford. 2005. The Marketing of Rebellion: Insurgents, Media, and International Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BobClifford, ed. 2009. The International Struggle for Human Rights. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
5.
BogertCarol. 2011. “Whose News? The Changing Media Landscape and NGOs.” In World Report (Events of 2010), 24–36. New York: Human Rights Watch.
6.
BurgermanSusan. 2001. Moral Victories: How Activists Provoke Multilateral Action. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
7.
CarminesEdward G.StimsonJames A.1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
8.
ChengXuDaleCameronLiuJiangchuan. 2008. “Statistics and Social Network of YouTube Videos.” 16th International Workshop on Quality of Service. Enschede, The Netherlands, 229–38.
9.
ChouliarakiLillie. 2008. “The Symbolic Power of Transnational Media.” Global Media and Communication4:329–51.
10.
CmielKenneth. 2004. “The Recent History of Human Rights.” American Historical Review109:117–35.
11.
CooleyAlexanderRonJames. 2007. “The NGO Scramble: Organizational Insecurity and the Political Economy of Transnational Action.” International Security27:5–39.
12.
CottleSimon. 2008. “Reporting Demonstrations: The Changing Media Politics of Dissent.” Media, Culture, & Society30:853–72.
13.
CottleSimonNolanDavid. 2007. “Global Humanitarianism and the Changing Aid-Media Field: ‘Everyone Was Dying for Footage.’” Journalism Studies8:862–78.
14.
DanelianLucius H.PageBenjamin I.1994. “The Heavenly Chorus: Interest Group Voices on TV News.” American Journal of Political Science38:1056–1078.
15.
DeibertRonald J.2000. “International Plug ’n Play? Citizen Activism, the Internet, and Global Policy.” International Studies Perspective1:255–72.
16.
DownsAnthony. 1972. “Up and Down with Ecology. The Issue Attention Cycle.” Public Interest28:38–50.
17.
EarlJenniferKimportKatrina. 2011. Digitally Enabled Social Change: Activism in the Internet Age. Cambridge: MIT. Press.
18.
FarrellHenryDreznerDaniel W.2008. “The Power and Politics of Blogs.” Public Choice134:15–30.
19.
FinnemoreMarthaSikkinkKathryn. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change.” International Organization52:887–917.
20.
FloriniAnn M.2000. The Third Force: The Rise of Transnational Civil Society. New York: Carnegie Endowment.
21.
FranksSuzanne. 2010. “The Neglect of Africa and the Power of Aid.” The International Communication Gazette72:71–84.
22.
FroehlingOliver. 1997. “The Cyberspace ‘War of Ink and Internet’ in Chiapas, Mexico.” Geographical Review87:291–307.
23.
HilgartnerStephenBoskCharles L.1988. “The Rise and Fall of Social Problems: A Public Arenas Model.” American Journal of Sociology94:53–78.
24.
HindmanMatthew T.2008. The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
25.
HowardPhilip N.DuffyAidenFreelonDeenHussainMuzammilMariWillMazaidMarwa. 2011. “Opening Closed Regimes: What Was the Role of Social Media during the Arab Spring?” Working Paper 2011.1. Seattle: University of Washington. Project on Information Technology and Political Islam.
KeckMargaret E.SikkinkKathryn. 1998. Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28.
KhagramRikerSikkinkKathryn. 2002. Restructuring World Politics: Transnational Social Movements, Networks, and Norms. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
29.
KingstonLindsey N.StamKathryn R.2013. “Online Advocacy: Analysis of Human Rights NGO Websites.” Journal of Human Rights Practice5:75–95.
30.
KoopmansRuud. 2004. “Movements and Media: Selection Processes and Evolutionary Dynamics in the Public Sphere.” Theory and Society33:367–91.
31.
KronJoshGoodmanJ. David. 2012. “Online, A Distant Conflict Soars to Topic No. 1.” New York Times, March8, p. A1.
32.
KwakHaewoonLeeChanghyunParkHosungMoonSue. 2010. “What is Twitter, a Social Network or a News Media?” Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web, Raleigh, NC, 591–600.
McCombsMaxwellZhuJian-Hua. 1995. “Capacity, Diversity, and Volatility of the Public Agenda Trends from 1954 to 1994.” Public Opinion Quarterly59:495–525.
35.
MurdieAmandaPeksenDursun. 2014. “The Impact of Human Rights INGO Shaming on Humanitarian Interventions,” Journal of Politics, 76: 1-14
36.
NeumanRussell. 1990. “The Threshold of Public Attention,” Public Opinion Quarterly54:159-176.
37.
PowersMatthew. 2014. “The Structural Organization of NGO Publicity Work: Explaining Divergent Publicity Strategies at Humanitarian and Human Rights Organizations.” International Communication Journal8:18.
38.
PriceRichard. 1998. “Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land Mines.” International Organization52:613–44.
39.
PriceRichard. 2003. “Transnational Civil Society and Advocacy in World Politics,” World Politics55:579–606.
40.
RamosHowardRonJamesThomsOskar. 2007. “Shaping the Northern Media’s Human Rights Coverage, 1986-2000.” Journal of Peace Research44:385–406.
41.
Risse-KappenThomasRoppStephen C.SikkinkKathryn. 1999. The Power of Human Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
RonJamesRamosHowardRodgersKathleen. 2005. “Transnational Information Politics: NGO Human Rights Reporting, 1986-2000.” International Studies Quarterly49:557–87.
43.
SchattschneiderE. E.1960. The Semisovereign People. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
44.
ShipperApichai R.2012. “Influence of the Weak: The Role of Foreigners and NGO Networks in Democratizing Northeast Asia.” International Studies Quarterly56:689–703.
45.
ShirkyClay. 2011. “The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change.” Foreign Affairs90:28–43.
46.
ThrallA. Trevor. 2006. “The Myth of the Outside Strategy: News Coverage of Interest Groups.” Political Communication23:407–20.
47.
WaisbordSilvio. 2011. “Can NGOs Change the News?” International Journal of Communication5:142–65.
48.
WaldorfLars. 2012. “White Noise: Hearing the Disaster.” Journal of Human Rights Practice4:469–74.
49.
WalkerJack L.1983. “The Origins and Maintenance of Interest Groups in America.” American Political Science Review77:390–406.
50.
WebsterJames G.2011. “The Duality of Media: A Structurational Theory of Public Attention.” Communication Theory21:43–66.
51.
WuDenis H.2000. “Systemic Determinants of International News Coverage: A Comparison of 38 Countries.” Journal of Communication50:110–30.
52.
WuDenis H.2007. “A Brave New World for International News? Exploring the Determinants of the Coverage of Foreign News on US Websites.” International Communication Gazette69:539–51.
53.
ZhuJian-Hua. 1992. “Issue Competition and Attention Distraction: A Zero-Sum Theory of Agenda-Setting.” Journalism Quarterly69:825–36.
