How privacy governs community boundaries and inclusion in online social movements
Keywords:Privacy, Social Media, Governance, Participation, Social Movements
Social and political movements increasingly depend on online platforms for coordination, publicity and communication, and development of knowledge resources. The March for Science, Day Without Immigrants, and Women’s March movements present a unique opportunity to comparatively explore how participation in online social movements is governed, given their similar timelines and exogenous influences, and despite differences in specific policy issues and membership. This paper employs large social media data sets, contextualized by organizer interviews and participant surveys, to study how commons governance of appropriate information flows shaped membership and group boundaries. Privacy interests intersected with online political organizing on social media to shape participation in the individual satellite groups and overall movements studied, as well as interaction and exchange of knowledge resources between groups. This paper also discusses participants as a unique sort of “resource” managed by knowledge commons governance.
Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130-1132.
Bennett, W. L. (2012). The personalization of politics: Political identity, social media, and changing patterns of participation. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644(1), 20-39.
Blitzer, J. (2017). After an immigration raid, a city’s students vanish. The New Yorker.
Boettke, P. J., Lemke, J., & Palagashvili, L. (2012). The Relevance of the Municipality Debate for the Solution of Collective Action Problems. Digital Library of the Commons.
Boothroyd, S., Bowen, R., Cattermole, A., Chang-Swanson, K., Daltrop, H., Dwyer, S., ... & Samimi, S. (2017). (Re) producing feminine bodies: emergent spaces through contestation in the Women’s March on Washington. Gender, Place & Culture, 24(5), 711-721.
Breuer, A., Landman, T., & Farquhar, D. (2015). Social media and protest mobilization: Evidence from the Tunisian revolution. Democratization, 22(4), 764-792.
Brighenti, A. (2007). Visibility: A category for the social sciences. Current sociology, 55(3), 323-342.
Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. John Wiley & Sons.
Chaum, D. (2004). Secret-ballot receipts: True voter-verifiable elections. IEEE security & privacy, 2(1), 38-47.
Child, J. T., & Starcher, S. C. (2016). Fuzzy Facebook privacy boundaries: Exploring mediated lurking, vague-booking, and Facebook privacy management. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 483-490.
Clark, L. S. (2016). Participants on the margins:# BlackLivesMatter and the role that shared artifacts of engagement played among minoritized political newcomers on Snapchat, Facebook, and Twitter. International journal of communication, 10(26), 235-253.
Crawford, S. E., & Ostrom, E. (1995). A grammar of institutions. American Political Science Review, 89(3), 582-600.
Diani, M. (2007). Social Movements, Networks and. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology.
Eltantawy, N., & Wiest, J. B. (2011). The Arab spring| Social media in the Egyptian revolution: reconsidering resource mobilization theory. International Journal of Communication, 5, 18.
Entman, R. M., & Usher, N. (2018). Framing in a Fractured Democracy: Impacts of Digital Technology on Ideology, Power and Cascading Network Activation. Journal of Communication, 68(2), 298-308.
Fisher, D. R., Dow, D. M., & Ray, R. (2017). Intersectionality takes it to the streets: Mobilizing across diverse interests for the Women’s March. Science advances, 3(9), eaao1390.
Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public opinion quarterly, 80(S1), 298-320.
Forelle, M. C., Howard, P. N., Monroy-Hernández, A., & Savage, S. (2015). Political bots and the manipulation of public opinion in Venezuela.
Frischmann, B. M., Madison, M. J., & Strandburg, K. J. (Eds.). (2014). Governing knowledge commons. Oxford University Press.
Fuster Morell, M. "Governance of online creation communities for the building of digital commons: Viewed through the framework of the institutional analysis and development," In Brett M. Frischmann, Michael J. Madison, and Katherine J. Strandburg, eds., Governing knowledge commons, (Oxford University Press, 2014).
Gerbaudo, P. (2018). Tweets and the streets: Social media and contemporary activism. Pluto Press.
Gil de Zúñiga, H., Jung, N., & Valenzuela, S. (2012). Social media use for news and individuals' social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 17(3), 319-336.
Gillespie, T. (2010). The politics of ‘platforms’. New media & society, 12(3), 347-364.
Gittell, R., & Vidal, A. (1998). Community organizing: Building social capital as a development strategy. Sage publications.
Goldstein, J., & Keohane, R. O. (Eds.). (1993). Ideas and foreign policy: beliefs, institutions, and political change. Cornell University Press.
Green, R. (2012). Petitions, privacy, and political obscurity. Temp. L. Rev., 85, 367.
Gunitsky, S. (2015). Corrupting the cyber-commons: Social media as a tool of autocratic stability. Perspectives on Politics, 13(1), 42-54.
Hara, N., & Huang, B. Y. (2011). Online social movements. Annual review of information science and technology, 45(1), 489-522.
Harlow, S. (2012). Social media and social movements: Facebook and an online Guatemalan justice movement that moved offline. New Media & Society, 14(2), 225-243.
Joranson, K. "Indigenous knowledge and the knowledge commons," The International Information & Library Review 40, no. 1 (2008): 64-72.
Juris, J. S. (2012). Reflections on# Occupy Everywhere: Social media, public space, and emerging logics of aggregation. American Ethnologist, 39(2), 259-279.
Kelly Garrett, R. (2006). Protest in an information society: A review of literature on social movements and new ICTs. Information, communication & society, 9(02), 202-224.
Kwak, N., Lane, D. S., Weeks, B. E., Kim, D. H., Lee, S. S., & Bachleda, S. (2018). Perceptions of Social Media for Politics: Testing the Slacktivism Hypothesis. Human Communication Research, 44(2), 197-221.
Latonero, M., & Kift, P. (2018). On digital passages and borders: Refugees and the new infrastructure for movement and control. Social Media+ Society, 4(1), 2056305118764432.
Ley, B. L., & Brewer, P. R. (2018). Social Media, Networked Protest, and the March for Science. Social Media+ Society, 4(3), 2056305118793407.
Lyon, D. (Ed.). (2003). Surveillance as social sorting: Privacy, risk, and digital discrimination. Psychology Press.
Madison, M. J. (2014). Commons at the intersection of peer production, citizen science, and big data: galaxy zoo. Governing knowledge commons, 209, 215.
McGinnis, M. D. (2011). An introduction to IAD and the language of the Ostrom workshop: a simple guide to a complex framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39(1), 169-183.
Moss, P., & Maddrell, A. (2017). Emergent and divergent spaces in the Women’s March: the challenges of intersectionality and inclusion. Gender, Place & Culture, 24(5), 613-620.
Motta, M. (2018). The Polarizing Effect of the March for Science on Attitudes toward Scientists. PS: Political Science & Politics, 1-6.
Nahmias, L. (2018). ‘You can beat the establishment’: Ocasio-Cortez crashes Democratic primaries. Politico, July 5, 2018. Retrieved from https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/05/ocasio-cortez-democratic-primaries-establishment-2018-694789
Nissenbaum, H. (2009). Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press.
Obar, J. A., Zube, P., & Lampe, C. (2012). Advocacy 2.0: An analysis of how advocacy groups in the United States perceive and use social media as tools for facilitating civic engagement and collective action. Journal of information policy, 2, 1-25.
Ostrom, E. (2011). Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39(1), 7-27.
Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford University Press.
Park, N., Kee, K. F., & Valenzuela, S. (2009). Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(6), 729-733.
Pilisuk, M., McAllister, J., & Rothman, J. (1996). Coming together for action: The challenge of contemporary grassroots community organizing. Journal of Social Issues, 52(1), 15-37.
Rose, N. (1999). Powers of freedom: Reframing political thought. Cambridge university press.
Rose-Redwood, C., & Rose-Redwood, R. (2017). ‘It definitely felt very white’: race, gender, and the performative politics of assembly at the Women’s March in Victoria, British Columbia. Gender, Place & Culture, 24(5), 645-654.
Roth, S. (2018). Contemporary Counter-Movements in the Age of Brexit and Trump. Sociological Research Online, 1360780418768828.
Sanfilippo, M. R. (2015). Advocacy Organization Affiliations: Alliances and Perceived Common Interests between Socially, Politically, and Informationally Disadvantaged Communities. iConference 2015 Proceedings.
Sanfilippo, M. R., Frischmann, B. & Strandburg, K. J. (2018). Exploring Privacy as Commons. Journal of Information Policy, 8.
Solove, D. J. (2006). A taxonomy of privacy. University of Pennsylvania law review, 477-564.
Stacheli, L. A. (1996). Publicity, privacy, and women's political action. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 14(5), 601-619.
Strandburg, K. J. (2004). Privacy, rationality, and temptation: A theory of willpower norms. Rutgers L. Rev., 57, 1235.
Strandburg, K. J. (2006). Social norms, self control, and privacy in the online world. In Privacy and Technologies of Identity (pp. 31-53). Springer, Boston, MA.
Strandburg, K. J. (2008). Freedom of association in a networked world: First Amendment regulation of relational surveillance, Boston College Law Rev. 49, 741.
Strandburg, K. J. (2014). Membership lists, metadata, and freedom of association’s specificity requirement. ISJLP 10. 327.
Uldam, J. (2016). Corporate management of visibility and the fantasy of the post-political: Social media and surveillance. New Media & Society, 18(2), 201-219.
Wallace, T., & Parlapiano, A. (2017). Crowd scientists say Women’s March in Washington had 3 times as many people as Trump’s Inauguration. The New York Times, 22.
Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., Jenkins‐Smith, H. C., Nohrstedt, D., Henry, A. D., & DeLeon, P. (2011). A quarter century of the advocacy coalition framework: An introduction to the special issue. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 349-360.
LicenseAuthors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).