Diological and Symmetrical Principles in the Use of Twitter by the Ahbap Organization

Öz

Human disciplines such as business, politics, sociology, marketing, and communication have not remained inert to developments in technology and have experienced and continue to experience change within themselves. In particular, innovations, new tools, and new systems in the field of communication, which form the general context of this study, have been the subject of numerous studies in the literature. These innovations in the field of communication are undoubtedly new media environments. In both interpersonal and corporate communication today, a process mediated by new media-based technologies can be observed. It is necessary to improve the use of new media, which offers advantages especially to non-governmental organizations and to educate these organizations. From this point of view, the role of non-governmental organizations in the new media was examined using models of dialogic communication and public relations. This research aims to examine the use of Twitter, one of the social media platforms that has recently increased in popularity, by AHBAP, an activist group that defines itself as a goodness activist, in the context of dialogical principles and public relations models (press agency, public information model, two-way asymmetric and two-way symmetry model). Content analysis technique was used in the study and the posts made between January 01, 2022 and March 01, 2022 were analyzed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Digital activism
• dialogic communication
• ngo
• public relations models
• social media

Ahbap Oluşumunun Twitter Kullanımında Diyolojik ve Simetrik İlkeler

Öz

Ekonomi, politika, sosyoloji, pazarlama, iletişim gibi beşeri disiplinler teknoloji alanında yaşanan gelişmelere kayıtsız kalmamış, kendi içlerinde bir dönüşüm yaşamış ve yaşamaya da devam etmektedir. Özellikle, bu çalışmanın da genel bağlamını oluşturan iletişim konusundaki yenilikler, yeni araçlar, yeni sistemler alan yazında birçok çalışmanın konusunu oluşturmuştur. İletişim alanında sözü edilen bu yenilikler şüphesiz yeni medya ortamlarıdır. Günümüzde hem kişiler arası iletişim hem de kurumsal iletişimde yaygın bir biçimde yeni medya temelli teknolojiler ile aracılanan bir süreç gözlemlenmektedir. Özellikle sivil toplum kuruluşları açısından potansiyel pek çok avantajı olan yeni medya kullanımı konusunda sivil toplum kuruluşlarının farkındalıklarının ve kullanım becerilerinin artırılması bir gerekliliktir. Bu noktadan hareketle sivil toplum kuruluşlarının yeni medyadaki rolleri diyalogsal iletişim ve halkla ilişkiler modelleri etrafında merak edilmiştir. Bu araştırmada bir aktivist grup olan ve kendisini iyilik aktivisti olarak tanımlayan AHBAP oluşumunun Twitter kullanımı diyalogsal prensipler ve halkla ilişkiler modelleri (basın ajansı, kamuoyu bilgilendirme modeli, iki yönlü asimetrik ve iki yönlü simetri model) bağlamında ele alınmaktadır. Çalışmada içerik analizi tekniği kullanılmış olup, 01 Ocak 2022- 01 Mart 2022 tarih aralığında yapılan paylaşımlar incelenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dijital aktivizm
• diyalogsal iletişim
• stk
• halkla ilişkiler modelleri
• sosyal medya

Kaynakça

1. Aksu, O. (2017). Yeni toplumsal hareketler bağlamında sosyal medya kullanımı analizi: Kadın dernekleri. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(3), 146-159. Albanna, H., Alalwan, A. A. and Al-Emran, M. (2022). An integrated model for using social media applications in non-profit organizations. International Journal of Information Management, 63, 1-15. Alemdar, M. Y. ve Kocaömer, C. (2019). Çevreci sivil toplum kuruluşlarının instagram paylaşımlarını diyalogsal ilkeler ve halkla ilişkiler modelleri bağlamında okumak. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, (59), 299-331.
2. Alemdar, M., Elgün, A. ve Maden, D. (2018). Türkiye’de kadın sivil toplum kuruluşlarının twitter kullanımına yönelik bir araştırma. S. Mavruk Biçer (Ed.). Bilge kağan 1. international science congress, içinde (ss. 251-261). Adana: İdea Modern
3. Altuntaş, B. ve Alemdar, M.Y. (2022). Dijital feminist aktivizmde iletişim ağı olarak Twitter kullanımı. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(2), 862-891.
4. Avidar, R. (2013). The responsiveness pyramid: Embedding responsiveness and interactivity into public relations theory. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 440-450.
5. Baumgarten, C. (2011). Chirping for charity: How US nonprofit organizations are using Twitter to foster dialogic communication. The Elon Journal Of Undergraduate Research In Communications, 2(2), 5-14.
6. Beverly, J. A. (2013). Public relations models and dialogic communication in the twitterverse: An analysis of how colleges and universities are engaging their public through Twitter. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Southern Mississippi, Mississippi.
7. Bosch, T. (2017). Twitter activism and youth in South Africa: The case of #rhodesmustfall. Information, Communication & Society, 20(2), 221-232.
8. Büscher, B., Koot, S. and Nelson, I. L. (2016). Nature 2.0: New media, online activism and the cyberpolitics of environmental conservation. Geoforum, 100(79), 111-113.

9. Brodock, K. (2010). Economic and social factors: the digital (activism) divide. M. Joyce (Ed.), Digital activism decoded: The new mechanics of change in (pp. 71-85). New York: International Debate Education Association.
10. Carty, V. and Onyett, J. (2006). Protest, cyberactivism and new social movements: The reemergence of the peace movement post 9/11. Social Movement Studies, 5(3), 229–249.
11. Ciszek, E. L. (2017). Todo mejora en el ambiente: An analysis of digital lgbt activism in Mexico. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 41(4), 313-330. Considine, S. (2009). Homepage: Internet activism and women. Field:journal, 3(1), 133-142.
12. Di Lauro, S., Tursunbayeva, A. and Antonelli, G. (2019). How nonprofit organizations use social media for fundraising: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Business and Management, 14(7), 1-22.
13. Dumitrica, D. (2021). Integrating social media in ngo strategic communication: Lessons from dutch ngos' communication practices. G. Sorce (Ed.), Global perspectives on ngo communication for social change in (pp. 73-89). New York: Routledge.
14. Edwards, F., Howard, P.N. and Joyce, M. (2013, November 20). Digital activism and non‐violent conflict. Retrieved from https://dpp.ceu.edu/sites/spp.ceu.hu/files/attachment/article/418/usipdigitalactivismreportv6.pdf, in 28.03.2023
15. Foronda-Robles, C. and Galindo-P´erez-de-Azpillaga, L. (2021). Territorial intelligence in rural areas: The digitization of non-profit associations through social media. Technology in Society, 4(64), 1-11.
16. Fuchs, C. (2006). The self-organization of cyberprotest. K. Morgan, Konrad, C. Brebbia and J. Spector (Eds.), The internet society II. advances in education, comerce & governance in (pp. 275-295). Southampton/Boston: WIT Press
17. Gao, F. (2016). Social media as a communication strategy: Content analysis of top nonprofit foundations’ micro-blogs in China. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 10(4), 255-271.
18. George, J. J. and Leidner, D. E. (2019). From clicktivism to hacktivism: Understanding digital activism. Information and Organization, 29(3), 100249.
19. Ghobadi, S. and Clegg, S. (2015). These days will never be forgotten…: A critical mass approach to online activism. Information and Organization, 25(1), 52-71.
20. Greenberg, J. and MacAulay, M. (2009). Npo 2.0? Exploring the web presence of environmental nonprofit organizations in Canada. Global Media Journal: Canadian Edition, 2(1), 63-88.
21. Grunig, J. E. (1990). Theory and practice of interactive media relations. Public Relations Quarterly, 35(3), 18-23.
22. Grunig, J. E. (1989). Sierra club study shows who become activists. Public Relations Review, 15(3), 3–24.
23. Gümüş, N. ve Ağaçci, L. (2018). Sivil toplum örgütlerinin pazarlama iletişiminde sosyal medya kullanımı: Kızılay ve yeşilay üzerinde bir araştırma. Third Sector Social Economic Review, 53(2), 637-661.
24. Hether, H. J. (2014). Dialogic communication in the health care context: A case study of kaiser permanente's social media practices. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 856-858.
25. Holtzhausen, D. R. (2007). Activism. E. L. Toth (Ed.), The future of excellence in public relations and communication management: Challenges for the next generation in (pp. 357-380). New York: Routledge.
26. Jahng, M. R. and Lee, N. (2018). When scientists tweet for social changes: Dialogic communication and collective mobilization strategies by flint water study scientists on Twitter. Science Communication, 40(1), 89-108.
27. Joyce, M. (2010). Digital activism decoded: The new mechanics of vhange. New York: International Debate Education Association.
28. Jun, J. (2011). How climate change organizations utilize websites for public relations. Public Relations Review, 37(3), 245-249.
29. Kent, M.L. and Taylor, M. (1998). Building dialogic relationships trough the world wide web. Public Relations Review, 24(3), 321-334.
30. Kim, D., Chun, H., Kwak, Y. and Nam, Y. (2014). The employment of dialogic principles in website, Facebook, and Twitter platforms of environmental nonprofit organizations. Social Science Computer Review, 32(5), 590-605.
31. Kiraz, S. ve Kestel, S. (2017). Kadınların madun sorunsalı ve bir alternatif olarak yeni medyada dijital aktivizm: Change.org. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, (53), 139-163.
32. Köseoğlu, Ö. ve Köker, N. E. (2014). Türk üniversiteleri Twitter’ı diyalogsal iletişim açısından nasıl kullanıyor: Beş Türk üniversitesi üzerine bir içerik analizi. Global Media Journal: Turkish Edition, 4(8), 213-238.
33. Lim, W. M., Lim, A. L. and Phang, C. S. C. (2019). Toward a conceptual framework for social media adoption by non-urban communities for non-profit activities: Insights from an integration of grand theories of technology acceptance. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, (23), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3127/AJIS.V23I0.1835
34. Lovejoy, K., Waters, R. D. and Saxton, G. D. (2012). Engaging stakeholders through Twitter: How nonprofit organizations are getting more out of 140 characters or less. Public Relations Review, 38(2), 313-318.
35. Lovejoy, K. and Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 17(3), 337-353.
36. Mavnacıoğlu, K. (2022). Dijital çağda pazarlama iletişimi etiği üzerine bir değerlendirme. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(1), 52-66.
37. Misgav, C. and Fenster, T. (2018). Day by day-protest by protest: Temporal activism and the feminist Mizrahi right to the city. Cities, (76), 29-35.
38. Mitu, B. and Camacho Vega, D. O. (2014). Digital activism: A contemporary overview. Revista de Stiinte Politice, (44), 103-112.
39. McQueen, D. (2018). Turning a deaf ear to the citizen’s voice. Digital activism and corporate (Ir) responsibility in the North Dakota access pipeline protest. G. Grigore, A. Stancu and D. McQueen (Eds.), Corporate Responsibility and Digital Communities, in (pp. 51-78) London: Palgrave MacMillan.
40. Nchabeleng, M., Botha, C. J. and Bisschoff, C. A. (2018). The uses, benefits and limitations of social media for public relations in South African non-governmental organisations. Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, 12(3), 13-25
41. Njeri, P. N. and Mberia, H. (2018). Effects of social media usage on non-governmental organizational performance: A case of selected ngos in Nairobi County. International Journal of Recent Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(4), 169-175.
42. Özçifçi, V. (2020). Sosyal medyanın tüketicilerin satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkisi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 6(1), 206-223.
43. Pathak, J. P. (2013, December 10). Popular culture: A cliche or empowering the masses? Kolkata. Ugc sponsored national seminar, Gauhati University: Department of English Netaji Nagar College,.
44. Phillip D. and Young P (2009). Online public relations: A practical guide to developing an online strategy in the world of social media (2nd ed.). London: Kogan Page Limited.
45. Rashid, A. A., Idris, M. I., Zulkiflee, N. S., Yahaya, A. Y. and Ramesh, P. (2021). The correlation of social media activity and engagement of a health ngo with the outcome of fundraising efforts during the covid-19 pandemic. Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science, 20(5), 148-154.
46. Ruelle, O. and Peverelli, P. (2017). The discursive construction of identity through interaction on social media in a Chinese ngo. Chinese Journal of Communication, 10(1), 12-37.
47. Saatçioğlu, E. (2017). Sivil toplum örgütlerinin sosyal medya kullanımları: Greenpeace Türkiye Facebook sayfası örneği. Selçuk İletişim, 10(1), 158-187.
48. Sandoval-Almazan, R. and Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2014). Towards cyberactivism 2.0? Understanding the use of social media and other information technologies for political activism and social movements. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 365–378.
49. Tao, W., Li, Z. C., Chen, Z. F. and Ji, Y. G. (2021). Public responses to nonprofit social media messages: The roles of message features and cause involvement. Public Relations Review, 47(2), 1-13.
50. Toledano, M. (2016). Advocating for reconciliation: Public relations, activism, advocacy and dialogue. Public Relations Inquiry, 5(3), 277–294.
51. Türkal, İ. ve Güllüpunar, H. (2017). Diyalogsal halkla ilişkiler bağlamında sosyal medya kullanımı: Türkiye’de ilk 100’de yer alan şirketler üzerine bir inceleme. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 5(2), 591-618.
52. Uysal, N. and Yang, A. (2013). The power of activist networks in the mass self-communication era: A triangulation study of the impact of wikiLeaks on the stock value of Bank of America. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 459–469.
53. Wang, Y. and Yang, Y. (2020). Dialogic communication on social media: How organizations use Twitter to build dialogic relationships with their publics. Computers in Human Behavior, (104), 1-8.
54. Waters, D.R. and Jamal, Y.J. (2011). Tweet, tweet, tweet: A content analysis of nonprofit organizations twitter updates. Public Relations Review, 37(3), 321-324.
55. Weberling, B. (2012). Framing breast cancer: Building an agenda through online advocacy and fundraising. Public Relations Review, 38(1), 108-115.
56. Xiong, Y., Cho, M. and Boatwright, B. (2019). Hashtag activism and message frames among social movement organizations: Semantic network analysis and thematic analysis of twitter during the #metoo movement. Public Relations Review, 45(1), 10-23.
57. Yang, A. and Taylor, M. (2010). Relationship-building by Chinese engos’ websites: Education, not activation. Public Relations Review, 36(4), 342–351.
58. Yegen, C. (2014). Bir dijital aktivizm biçimi olarak slaktivizm: Change.org örneği. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi İletişim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(2), 84-108
59. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (9.Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin
60. Yue, C. A., Qin, Y. S., Vielledent, M., Men, L. R. and Zhou, A. (2021). Leadership going social: How us nonprofit executives engage publics on Twitter. Telematics and Informatics, (65), 1-15.