New Social Movements and Communication in Digital Networks: A Critical Approach

Year 2019, , 3001 - 3020, 31.12.2019

Mehmet Fatih Çömlekçi

https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.601542

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Today when digital
communication networks have become a part of our daily lives, the use of these
new tools by the new social movements is discussed frequently. In an
environment where the political communication process is moving to social media
platforms, critical approaches against the social impacts of this trend have
also increased. The purpose of this study is to present a critical view to the
optimistic belief that new communication technologies contribute to the
democratic culture and expand the impact capacity of social movements per se,
through Arab Spring in the Middle East and 15-M movements in Spain, after
introducing the literature concerning new social movements and in this context,
the use of digital communication networks. In this respect, supporting processes that will make
the internet environment democratic and transparent instead of a technological
determinist approach that considers digital tools an essential element for
social change stands out as a more prudent approach. In sum, the study has stressed the
risks of new communication technologies, limitations of social media platforms
in the context of social change goals of social movements and the importance of
developing a critical and questioning approach to digital platforms.  

Keywords

New social movements, Arab Spring, Digital communication, Social media, Digital networks

Yeni Toplumsal Hareketler ve Dijital Ağlarda İletişim: Eleştirel Bir Yaklaşım

Abstract

Dijital iletişim ağların gündelik hayatımızın bir parçası
haline geldiği günümüzde, yeni toplumsal hareketlerin bu yeni araçları kullanım
biçimleri sıklıkla tartışılmaktadır. Toplumsal hareket iletişiminin sosyal
medya platformlarına taşınmaya başladığı bir ortamda, bu gidişatın toplumsal
etkilerine karşı eleştirel yaklaşımlar da çoğalmıştır. Çalışmanın amacı, yeni
toplumsal hareketler ve bu bağlamda dijital iletişim ağlarının kullanımına
ilişkin literatürü ortaya koyduktan sonra, Ortadoğu’daki Arap Baharı ve
İspanya’daki 15-M hareketleri üzerinden yeni iletişim teknolojilerinin
kendiliğinden demokratik kültüre katkı yaptığı ve toplumsal hareketlerin etki
kapasitesini genişlettiği yönündeki iyimser inanışa eleştirel bir bakış
getirmektir. Bu doğrultuda, dijital araçları toplumsal değişimin asli unsuru
olarak gören teknolojik determinist bir yaklaşım yerine, internet ortamını
demokratik ve şeffaf hale getirici süreçleri desteklemek daha bilinçli bir
yaklaşım olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Bu çerçevede çalışmada, yeni iletişim
teknolojilerinin getirdiği risklere, sosyal medya platformlarının toplumsal
hareketlerin sosyal değişim hedefleri bağlamındaki sınırlılıklarına ve dijital
platformlara karşı eleştirel ve sorgulayıcı yaklaşmanın önemine dikkat çekilmiştir. 

Keywords

Yeni toplumsal hareketler, Arap Baharı, Dijital iletişim, Sosyal medya, Dijital ağlar

References

• Algül, F. (2014). Yeni toplumsal hareketler ve sosyal medya: Kuzey ormanları savunması hareketine yönelik bir örnek olay incelemesi. Marmara İletişim Dergisi, (22): 139-152.
• Anderson, Lisa (2011). Demystifying the Arab Spring: parsing the differences between Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. Foreign Affairs, 2(7): 2-7.
• Anduiza, E., Cristancho, C., ve Sabucedo, J. M. (2014). Mobilization through online social networks: the political protest of the indignados in Spain. Information, Communication & Society, 17(6): 750-764.
• Balkin, J. (2004). Digital speech and democratic culture: A theory of freedom of expression for the information society. NYU Law Review, 79(1): 1-58.
• Bauman, Z., ve Lyon, D. (2013). Akışkan gözetim, İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
• Boutyline, A., ve Willer, R. (2017). The social structure of political echo chambers: Variation in ideological homophily in online networks. Political Psychology, 38(3): 551-569.
• Calhoun, C. (1993). New social movements of the early nineteenth century. Social Science History, 17(3): 385-427.
• Cammaerts, B. (2015). Social media and activism. (Ed. Robin Mansell, Peng Hwa) The International Encyclopedia of Digital Communication and Society, Oxford, 1027-1034.
• Castells, M. (1997). An introduction to the information age. City, 2(7): 6-16.
• Castells, M.. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. USA: Polity.
• Christensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means? First Monday, 16(2).
• Cohen, J. L., ve Arato, A. (1994). Civil society and political theory. UK: MIT Press.
• Çayır, K. (1999). Yeni sosyal hareketler. İstanbul: Kaknüs Yayınları.
• Dahlberg, L. (2001). The Internet and democratic discourse: Exploring the prospects of online deliberative forums extending the public sphere. Information, Communication & Society, 4(4): 615-633.
• Dahlgren, P. (2000). The Internet and the Democratization of Civic Culture. Political Communication, 17(4): 335-340.
• Davies, W. (2016). The age of post-truth politics. The New York Times, 24.
• Diani, M. (2000). Social movement networks. Virtual and real. Information, Communication & Society, 3(3): 386–401.
• Eltantawy, N., ve Wiest, J. B. (2011). The Arab spring, Social media in the Egyptian revolution: reconsidering resource mobilization theory. International Journal of Communication. 5(18): 1207-1224.
• Eurostat. (2017). Erişim 03.04.2019 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat
• Flesher Fominaya, C. (2014). Social movements and globalization: How protests, occupations and uprisings are changing the world. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Flesher Fominaya, C. (2015). Debunking Spontaneity: Spain's 15-M/Indignados as Autonomous Movement. Social Movement Studies, 14(2): 142-163.
• Fuchs, C. (2011). Web 2.0, prosumption, and surveillance. Surveillance & Society, 8(3): 288-309.
• Fuchs, C., ve Sandoval, M. (2015). Of capitalist and alternative social media, London: Routledge.
• Fuchs, C. (2017). Social media: A critical introduction. UK: Sage Publishing.
• Gerbaudo, Paolo (2012). Tweets and the Streets, London: Pluto Press.
• Gladwell, M. (2010). Small change. The New Yorker, 4: 42-49.
• Howard, P. N., ve Hussain, M.M. (2013). Democracy's fourth wave?: digital media and the Arab Spring. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.
• Keyes, R. (2004). The post-truth era: Dishonesty and deception in contemporary life. US: St. Martin's Press.
• Knibbs, K. (2013). Slactivists, unite! Social media campaigns aren't just feel-good back patting. Digital Trends, Erişim 22.06.2019. http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/slacktivists-unite-social-media-campaigns-arent-just-feel-good-back-patting/
• Marx, G., ve McAdam, D. (1994). Collective behavior and social movements: process and structure. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
• McChesney, R. (2015). Rich media, poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times. New York: New Press
• Meikle, G. (2002). Future Active: Media Activism and the Internet. New York, London: Routledge.
• Micó, J. ve Casero-Ripollés, A. (2014) Political activism online: organization and media relations in the case of 15M in Spain, Information. Communication & Society, 17(7): 858-871.
• Melucci, A. (1980). The new social movements: A theoretical approach. Social science information, 19(2): 199-226.
• Monterde, A., ve Postill, J. (2013). Mobile ensembles: The uses of mobile phones for social protest by Spain’s indignados. In Goggin, G. & Hjorth, L. (Eds.), Routledge Companion to Mobile Media. New York: Routledge.
• Morozov, E. (2012). The net delusion: The dark side of Internet freedom, New York: PublicAffairs.
• Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The Virtual Sphere: The Internet as a Public Sphere. New Media and Society, 4(1): 9-27.
• Papacharissi, Z., ve de Fatima Oliveira, M. (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on# Egypt. Journal of Communication. 62(2): 266-282.
• Parliament UK (2019). Disinformation and fake news: Final report, Erişim 22.06.2019. https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/digital-culture-media-and-sport-committee/news/fake-news-report-published-17-19/
• Postill, J. (2014). Democracy in an age of viral reality: A media epidemiography of Spain’s indignados movement. Ethnography. 15(1): 51-69.
• Reuters Digital. (2018). Reuters Institute Digital News Report. Erişim 22.06.2019. http://media.digitalnewsreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/digital-news-report-2018.pdf?x89475
• Rodriguez, C. (2000). Civil society and citizens’ media. (Ed Karin G. Wilkins) Redeveloping communication for social change, Theory, practice, power, s. 147-160.Rose, J. (2017). Brexit, Trump, and Post-Truth Politics. Public Integrity, 19(6): 555-558.
• Shehabat, A. (2015). Arab 2.0 Revolutions: Investigating Social Media Networks during waves of the Egyptian political uprisings that occur between 2011, 2012 and 2013. Humanities and Communication Arts University of Western Sydney: Master Thesis.
• Scheufele, D., ve Nisbet, M. (2002). Being a citizen online: new opportunities and dead ends. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 7(3): 55–75.
• Srinivasan, R. (2014) What Tahrir Square Has Done for Social Media: A 2012 Snapshot in the Struggle for Political Power in Egypt. The Information Society, 30(1): 71-80.
• Suiter, J. (2016). Post-truth Politics. Political Insight, 7(3): 25-27.
• Topal Demiroğlu, E. (2014). Yeni toplumsal hareketler: bir literatür taraması. Marmara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilimler Dergisi. 2(1): 133-144.
• Touranie, A. (1999). Toplumdan Toplumsal Harekete, Yeni Sosyal Hareketler/Teorik Açılımlar. Ed. Kenan Çayır, İstanbul: Kaknüs Yayınları.
• Tüfekçi, Z. (2014). Social movements and governments in the digital age: Evaluating a complex landscape. Journal of International Affairs, Volume 68(1): 1-19.
• Offe, C. (1985). New social movements: challenging the boundaries of institutional politics. Social research, 52(4): 817-868.
• Van Laer, J., ve Van Aelst, P. (2010). Cyber-protest and civil society: the Internet and action repertoires in social movements. Handbook on internet crime, s. 230-254.