DO SOCIAL MEDIA UNDERMINE STRUCTURES? RETHINKING THE STRUCTURE-AGENCY DEBATE

Year 2024, Volume: 6 Issue: 4, 7 - 27, 30.10.2024

Burak Başkan

Abstract

The study reconsiders the structure-agency debate in a world dominated by internetisation and social media. To answer the question of whether social media weaken the structures embedded in societies, four phenomena are analysed: Dissemination and control of information are the main areas of conflict between actors and structures. The cyber public sphere has emerged as social media has become an important medium for shaping public opinion. Cyber activism, which has made important strides in moving political networks into the virtual world, has become an alternative to activism in the physical world. As individuals engage in human relations in virtual world just as in physical world, cyber identity has entered our lives. The study’s main finding is that although structures have developed new strategies and instruments to monitor, control and regulate the cyber world; social media continues to be a ground that increases the capacity of agencies for actors against structures.

Keywords

International politics, Political philosophy, Structure, Agency, Social media, Cyber identity

References

• Almond, Gabriel Abraham and Sidney Verba (1989). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. London: First Sage Printing.
• Archibugi, Daniel and Simona Iammarino (2002). “The Globalization of Technological Innovation: Definition and Evidence”. Review of International Political Economy, 9(1): 98-122. doi:10.1080/09692290110101126
• Baumeister, Roy F. and Debra G. Hutton (1987). Self-Presentation Theory: Self-Construction and Audience Pleasing. In: Mullen, B., Goethals, G.R. (Eds.) Theories of Group Behavior. Springer Series in Social Psychology: 71-87. New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4634-3_4
• Berger, Peter Ludwig (1963). Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective. New York: Anchor Books.
• Brown, Megan, James Bisbee, Angela Lai, Richard Bonneau, Jonathan Nagler and Joshua A. Tucker (2022). Echo Chambers, Rabbit Holes, and Algorithmic Bias: How YouTube Recommends Content to Real Users. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4114905
• Cambridge Dictionary (n.d.). Agency. Retrieved from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/agency. Accessed: 15.01.2014.
• Cambridge Dictionary (n.d.). Agent. Retrieved from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/agent. Accessed: 15.01.2014.
• Canada: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (2014). Iran: Treatment of anti-government activists by authorities, including those returning to Iran from abroad; overseas monitoring capabilities of the government (2012-2013).
• Carlsnaes, Walter (1992). The Agency-Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analyses. International Studies Quarterly, 36(3): 245-70.
• Charon, Joel (2011). The Perspective of Social Science. In J. O'Brien (Ed.), The Production of Reality: Essays and Readings on Social Interaction: 39-48. London: Sage.
• Coley, John D., Douglas L. Medin, Julia Beth Proffitt, Elizabeth Lynch, and Scott Atran (1999). Inductive Reasoning in Folkbiological Thought. In Douglas L. Medin & Scott Atran (Eds.), Folkbiology: 205-233. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
• Elder-Vass, Dave (2010). The Causal Power of Social Structures Emergence, Structure and Agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Friedrich Ebert Stiftung [FES] (2023). China’s regulations on algorithms: Context, impact, and comparisons with the EU. Retrieved from https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/bruessel/19904.pdf. Accessed: 14.10.2024.
• Freedom House (2016). Key Developments June 2015-May 2016. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/country/iran/freedomnet/ 2016#footnote53_4wf2cf6. Accessed: 16.10.2024.
• Geissler, Dominique, Dominik Bär, Nicolas Pröllochs and Stefan Feuerriegel (2023). “Russian Propaganda on Social Media During the 2022 Invasion of Ukraine”. EPJ Data Sci., 12(35): 1-20. doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00414-5
• Glucksmann, Miriam (1974). Structuralist Analysis in Contemporary Social Thought: A Comparison of the Theories of Claude Lévi-Strauss and Louis Althusser. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• González-Bailón, Sandra, David Lazer, Pablo Barberá, Meiqing Zhang, Hunt Allcott, Taylor Brown, Adriana Crespo-Tenorio, Deen Freelon, Matthew Gentzkow, Andrew M. Guess, Shanto Iyengar, Young Mie Kim, Neil Malhotra, Devra Moehler, Brendan Nyhan, Jennifer Pan, Carlos Velasco Rivera, Jaime Settle, Emily Thorson, Rebekah Tromble, Arjun Wilkins, Magdalena Wojcieszak, Chad Kiewiet de Jonge, Annie Franco, Winter Mason, Natalie Jomini Stroud, Joshua A. Tucker (2023). “Asymmetric Ideological Segregation in Exposure to Political News on Facebook”. Science, 381: 392-398. doi:10.1126/science.ade7138
• Gurak, Laura J. and John Logie (2003). Internet Protests, from Text to Web in M. McCaughey & M. D. Ayers (Eds.) Cyberactivism: Online Activism in Theory and Practise: 25-46. London: Routledge.
• Habermas, Jürgen (1991[1962]). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Berlin: Germany: Polity Press.
• Habermas, Jürgen, Sara Lennox and Frank Lennox (1974[1964]). The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article (1964). New German Critique, 3: 49–55. doi:10.2307/487737
• Hassani, Hossein, Xu Huang and Emmanuel Silva (2021). “The Human Digitalisation Journey: Technology First at the Expense of Humans?”. Information, 12: 267. doi:10.3390/info12070267
• Hay, Colin (1995). “Structure and Agency”. In Marsh, D. & Stoker, G. (Eds.), Theory and Methods in Political Science: 189– 208. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan Press.
• Hay, Colin (2002). Political Analyses: A Critical Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Hindess, Barry (1986). Actors and Social Relations. In M. L. Wordell & S. P. Turner (Eds.), Social Theory in Transition (113-126). London: Allen & Unwin.
• Huszár, Ferenc, Sofia Ira Ktena, Conor O’Brien, Luca Belli, Andrew Schlaikjer and Moritz Hardt (2022). “Algorithmic Amplification of Politics on Twitter”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 119(1): e2025334119. doi:10.1073/pnas.2025334119
• Inglehart, Ronald (1988). “The Renaissance of Political Culture”. The American Political Science Review, 82(4): 1203-1230.
• International Telecommunication Union [ITU] (2020). Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2020.
• Jenkins, Henry (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press.
• Jiang, Julie, Ren Xiang and Emilio Ferrara (2021). “Social Media Polarization and Echo Chambers in the Context of COVID-19: Case Study”. JMIRx Med, 2(3): e29570. doi:10.2196/29570
• Joseph, Jonathan (2002). Hegemony. A Realist Analysis. London: Routledge.
• Joseph, Jonathan (2008). “Hegemony and the Structure-Agency Problem in International Relations: A Scientific Realist Contribution”. Review of International Studies, 34(1): 109-128.
• Kharitonova, Yulia, Namita Singh Malik and Tianfang Yang (2023). “The Legal Issue of Deterrence of Algorithmic Control of Digital Platforms: The Experience of China, the European Union, Russia and India”. BRICS Law Journal, 10(1): 147-170. doi:10.21684/2412-2343-2023-10-1-147-170
• Klepper, David (2023). Deep dive into Meta’s algorithms shows that America’s political polarization has no easy fix. The Associated Press. 28 July.
• Kornieiev, Vitalii, Vyacheslav Ryabichev and Tetiana Glushkova (2022). “Fake News and Content Manipulation under Russian Information Aggression”. Przegląd Strategiczny, 15: 187-209. doi:10.14746/ps.2022.1.12 Kruse, Lisa, Dawn R. Norris and Jonathan R. Flinchum (2018). “Social Media as a Public Sphere? Politics on Social Media”. The Sociological Quarterly, 59(1): 62-84. doi:10.1080/00380253.2017.1383143
• Leadbeater, Charles (2008). We-Think. London: Profile Books.
• Loader, Brian D. and Dan Mercea (2011). “Networking Democracy?”. Information, Communication & Society, 14(6): 757-769. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2011.592648
• Lutz, Michael, Sanjana Gadaginmath, Natraj Vairavan and Phil Mui (2021). Examining political bias within YouTube search and recommendation algorithms. In 2021 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI): 1–7. doi:10.1109/SSCI50451.2021.9660012
• McAnulla, Stuart (2002). Structure and agency. In D. Marsh and G. Stoker (eds.), Theory and Methods in Political Science (pp. 271-291) (2nd Edition). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• McCaughey, Martha and Michael Ayers (2003). Introduction. In M. McCaughey and M. D. Ayers (Eds.) Cyberactivism: Online Activism in Theory and Practise. London: Routledge.25-46.
• MacKinnon, Rebecca (2011). “China’s “Networked Authoritarianism”. Journal of Democracy, 22(2): 32-46. doi:10.1353/jod.2011.0033
• Myburgh, Susan and Anna Maria Tammaro (2013). Exploring Education for Digital Librarians: Meaning, Modes and Models. Oxford: Chandos Publishing. doi:10.1016/B978-1-84334-659-3.50007-4
• Oremus, Will (2016). Who controls your Facebook feed. Slate. January 3.
• Overland, Indra (2018). Introduction: Civil society, public debate and natural resource management. In: I. Overland, (Eds.) Public Brainpower. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-60627-9_1.
• Ozdemir, Umut (2022). “Facebook-Cambridge Analytıca skandalının katılımcı kültür, dijital emek sömürüsü ve mahremiyetin ihlali çerçevesinde incelenmesi”. Egemia Ege Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Medya ve İletişim Araştırmaları Hakemli E-Dergisi, 10: 22-34.
• Sancar, Raziye (2023). “Cyber Identity: Determining the Meaning-Making Process of University Students in Terms of the Phenomenological Perspective”. Educational Media International, 60(1): 1–13. doi:10.1080/09523987.2023.2183570
• Sewell, William H. (1992). “A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation”. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1): 1–29.
• Shukri, Syaza (2023). “Digital Authoritarianism: Protecting Islam in Multireligious Malaysia”. Religions, 14(87): 1-14. doi:10.3390/rel1401008
• Shirky, Clay (2011). “The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change”. Foreign Affairs, 90(1): 28–41.
• Swed, Ori, Sachith Dassanayaka S. and Dimitri Volchenkov (2024). “Keeping It Authentic: The Social Footprint of the Trolls’ Network”. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 14(38). doi:10.1007/s13278-023-01161-1
• Taneja, Harsh and Angela Xiao Wu (2014). “Does the Great Firewall Really Isolate the Chinese? Integrating Access blockage with Cultural Factors to Explain Web User Behavior”. The Information Society, 30(5): 297–309. doi:10.1080/01972243.2014.944728
• USDOS - US Department of State (2017). Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2016 - Iran. Retrieved from https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local/1394534/466945_en.html. Accessed: 11.10.2024.
• Weber, Max (1968[1946]). On Charisma and Institution Building. S. N. Eisenstadt (Ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Zhao, Shanyang (2022). “Human Agency and Social Structure: From the Evolutionary Perspective”. The Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 52(3): 1–21. doi:10.1111/jtsb.12336