Digital Political Mobilization of Online Commenters on Publications about Politics and International Relations
Professor, National Research University Higher School of Economics in Nizhny Novgorod, firstname.lastname@example.org
elibrary_id: 417954 | ORCID: 0000-0001-8336-1044 | RESEARCHER_ID: L-6641-2015
The article comprises an empirical study unveiling the possibilities of a political mobilization among online commenters on political and international relations issues on the Internet. The theoretical frame has been formed by the ideas of social mobilization (Deutsch), the theory of communication as a ritual (Carey), the speech acts theory more recently interpreted by Ushakova and Pavlova, Oleshkov and Habermas. The aim of the research is to describe the possibilities of a political mobilization of participants in an online discussion through an intentionality analysis of online commenters reacting to Internet versions of mass media articles on politics and international relations. In order to achieve the aim there have been chosen 302 articles on politics with comments (27901 comments) published via open access information resources InoSMI.ru, gazeta.ru, Polit.Ru during 2015. Quantitative intent analysis was based on a list of intentions. There has been made an assertion that online commenting of articles on politics implies not only preliminary interiorization of political content by online commenters but also its active reproduction (symbolic reproduction of political values of the commenter, a statement of a political world image in a discussion) and defending opinions in a discussion with opponents. Therefore, digital ritual communication in the form of political content online commenting might be legitimately regarded as a means of political mobilization, as a steady frame of subject’s communication which provides the formation of new roles and social practices in the participants of online discussions about politics and international relations in the context of political socialization. It is suggested that political mobilization takes place most tensely and with most involvement alongside with the discussion of the material concerning relations of Russia with neighboring countries and armed activities of Russia whereas the mobilization is at its mildest in the discussions induced by the material about historical past.
Austin J.L. How to Do Things with Words. 2d ed. Ed. by M. Sbisà, J.O. Urmson. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1975. 174 p.
Baraniuk K. Corpus-Based Analysis as a Method to Identify Russian Trolling. – Activity Polish Political Science Yearbook. 2017. Vol. 46. No. 1. P. 239-255. https://doi.org/10.15804/ppsy2017115
Bereznyakov D.V. Professionalization in the Field of “New Media”: Several Comments to the Discussion. – Vestnik Novosibirsk State University. 2013. Vol. 12. No. 6. P. 124-128. (In Russ.)
Binns A. Don’t Feed the Trolls! Managing Troublemakers in Magazines’ Online Communities. – Journalism Practice. 2012. Vol. 6. No. 4. P. 547-562. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2011.648988
Bishop J. The Effect of De-Individuation of the Internet Troller on Criminal Procedure Implementation: an Interview with a Hater. – International Journal of Cyber Criminology. 2013. Vol. 7. No. 1. P. 28-48.
Cheng J., Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil C., Leskovec J. Antisocial Behavior in Online Discussion Communities. – Proceedings of ICWSM. 2015. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.00680 (accessed 22.08.2017).
Deutsch K.W. Social Mobilization and Political Development. – The American Political Science Review. 1961. Vol. 55. No. 3. P. 493-514. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952679
Globalnaya bezopasnost v tsifrovuyu epokhu: stratagemy dlya Rossii. Pod red. A.I. Smirnova [Global Security in the Digital Age: Stratagems for Russia. Ed. by A.I. Smirnov]. Moscow: VNIIgeosistem. 2014. 394 p. (In Russ.)
Goncharov D.V. Political Mobilization. – Polis. Political Studies. 1995. No. 6. P. 129-137. (In Russ.)
Habermas J. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. 1981. 2 Bände: Band 1: Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung. 533 p. Band 2: Zur Kritik der funktionalistischen Vernunft. 632 p.
Hardaker C. Trolling in Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Communication: From User Discussions to Theoretical Concepts. – Journal of Politeness Research. 2010. Vol. 6. No. 2. P. 215-242. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.011
Jones C. Slacktivism and the Social Benefits of Social Video: Sharing a Video to ‘Help’ a Cause. – First Monday. 2015. Vol. 20. No. 5. http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i5.5855
Kholmskaya M.R. Political Participation as the Subject of Research (A Review of Russian Scientific Literature). – Polis. Political Studies. 1999. No. 5. P. 170-176. (In Russ.)
Kirman B., Lineham C., Lawson S. Exploring Mischief and Mayhem in Social Computing or: How We Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Trolls. – CHI’12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM. 2012. P. 121-130.
Lamprianou I. Contemporary Political Participation Research: A Critical Assessment. – Democracy in Transition. Political Participation in the European Union. Ed. by K.N. Demitriou Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Springer. 2013. P. 21-42.
Lobanova O.Yu. Politicheskaya mobilizatsiya v gorodskoy srede [Political Mobilization in the Urban Environment]. Avtoref. dissertatsii na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni k. polit.n. Moscow: Lomonosov Moscow State University. 2015. 23 p. (In Russ.)
Martynov K. From Slavism to the Republic: Why the Internet Revolution Becomes a Reality. – Logos. 2012. Vol. 86. No. 2. P. 19-27. (In Russ.)
Morozov E. The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom. New York: PublicAffairs. 2011. 448 p.
Nikiporec-Takigava G.U. About Leadership in Network Social Movements. – PolitBook. 2016. No. 3. P. 50-65. (In Russ.)
Oleshkov M.Yu. Modelirovaniye kommunikativnogo protsessa [Modeling of the Communicative Process]. Nizhny Tagil. 2006. 336 p. (In Russ.)
Phillips W. This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 2015. 237 p.
Pooley J. James W. Carey and Communication Research: Reputation at the University’s Margins. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc. 2016. 234 p.
Radina N.K. Motivatsionnye osnovy kommentirovaniya materialov v seti internet: ob interpretatsii feministskiorientirovannykh tekstov [Motivational Basis of Online Materials Commenting: on the Interpretation of Feminist-Oriented Texts]. – Sila slabykh: gendernye aspekty vzaimopomoshchi i liderstva v proshlom i nastoyashchem.
Materialy Desyatoi mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii RAIZhI i IEA RAN, 7-10.09.2017, Arkhangel’sk. V 3-kh t. Otv. red. N.L. Pushkareva, T.I. Troshina [The Power of the Weak: Gender Aspects of Mutual Help and Leadership in the Past and in the Present. Materials of the 10th international scientific conference of RAIZhI and IEA RAN, 7-10.09.2017, Arkhangel’sk. In 3 vols. Ed. by N.L. Pushkareva, T.I. Troshina]. Moscow: N.N. Miklouho-Maklay Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, RAS. 2017. Vol. 3. P. 140-143. (In Russ.)
Radina N.K. The Intent-Analysis of Online Discussions (On the Example of Commenting on the Materials of the Internet Portal Inosmi.Ru). – Mediascope. 2016. No. 4. (In Russ.) URL: http://www.mediascope.ru/2238 (accessed 22.08.2017).
Slovo v deystvii: intent-analiz politicheskogo diskursa. Red. T.N. Ushakova, N. D. Pavlova [The Word in Action: the Intent Analysis of Political Discourse. Ed. by T.N. Ushakova, N.D. Pavlova]. SPb.: Aleteya. 2000. 316 p. (In Russ.)
Suler J. The Online Disinhibition Effect. – Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2004. Vol. 7. No. 3. P. 321-326. https://doi.org/10.1089/1094931041291295
Theocharis Y. The Conceptualization of Digitally Networked Participation. – Social Media + Society. 2015. Vol. 1. No. 2. P. 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115610140
Tsykunov I., Danilova Ye. Intent-Analysis of Tolerance in Federal and Regional Print Media. – Pravo znat: istoriya, teoriya, praktika. 2003. No. 1-2. P. 73-74. (In Russ.) URL: http://www.dzyalosh.ru/02-dostup/pravo/2003_73_74(1_2)/cikunov_1_2.html (accessed 22.08.2017).
Van Deth J.W. A Conceptual Map of Political Participation. – Acta Politica. 2014. Vol. 49. P. 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2014.6
Verba S., Nie N.H. Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 1987. XXIII, 428 p.
Wiener D. Negligent Publication of Statements Posted on Electronic Bulletin Boards: Is There Any Liability Left After Zeran. – Santa Clara Law Review. 1998. Vol. 39. No. 3. P. 905-939.
Yanitsky O. Mass Mobilization: Problems of Theory. – Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya. 2012. No. 6. P. 3-12. (In Russ.)
Radina N.K., Krupnaya D.A.,
Digital Policy Participation: Efficiency of E-Petitions Of Non-State Digital Platforms (Based on the Material of Change.org). – Polis. Political Studies. 2019. No6
Timofeyeva L.N., Ryabchenko N.A., Malysheva O.P., Gnedash A.A.,
The digital socio-political agenda and its conceptualization within the new media ecology framework. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No2
Bykov I.A., Hall T.E.,
Digital divide and the Internet-users political preferences in Russia. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No5
Introducing the section. The human dimension of politics. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No6
Digital Mythology and Donald Trump Electoral Campaign. – Polis. Political Studies. 2017. No5