We argue that investigating single moments of protest offers only snapshots of how digital technologies are used in contentious politics, and entails the risk of focusing on a single platform rather than the mosaic of online and offline repertoires. Our analysis documents the eventful history of changing digital repertoires of contention in the context of messaging, blogging, and social networking sites in Iran. Building on theoretical foundations of eventful histories and digital formations, this article investigates the interrelated nature of contentious politics and digital technologies. The spread of the Internet coupled with knowledgeable users has led to the use of digital media as a tool for advocacy and activism. But, as political and economical power has gradually moved to the international level, the internet has enabled social movements to follow that transition and operate more globally. With the internet, social movements have not become a more powerful force in society. In addition, it seems that the new media are loosing their newness quickly, and more fundamentally are unable to create stable ties between activists that are necessary for sustained collective action. In some cases, the internet has made collective action still not easy enough, while in others it has made it perhaps too easy reducing the final political impact of a certain action. There is the ‘classical’ problem of digital divide. At the same time, a naive internet-optimism is avoided, by pointing out several limitations. We build a strong case in favour of the internet as it has given social movements new and improved opportunities to engage in social and political action. In this ar ticle, we present the ‘state-of-the-art’ literature on action repertoires of social movements in an internet age. The Zapatista uprising, which started in 1994, and the ‘Battle of Seattle’ in 1999 are but two iconic examples that are so often used to illustrate how the internet has shaped and is shaping social movements and the tactics they use to pursue their claims.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |