Ezequiel Ramon-Pinat e-mail(Login required)

Main Article Content

Authors

Ezequiel Ramon-Pinat e-mail(Login required)

Abstract

180

Social movements work in various overlapping dynamics: in the short term, trying to mobilize the largest number of sympathizers in their actions and in the long term, in a battle to change meanings and cognitive frameworks in a society. This article investigates how the Platform for Those Affected by Mortgages (PAH) uses Twitter in the two spheres above mentioned. The literature referring to collective mobilization explains activism in two complementary logics. A first one, rational, where participants only think about a concrete benefit, and a second, focusing on challenging established beliefs. As complex societies, the media and, more recently, social networks have gained in importance as a space where the legitimacy of these claims are discussed. In this analysis, frame theory has been applied to tweets referring to evictions published at the official account @LA_PAH. Twitter, unlike other social networks, allows quick mobilization to gather activists and stop evictions, a valuable and positive asset. However, it ends up giving a limited image, focused on avoiding evictions, instead of a message to establish housing access as a good that must be guaranteed, outside the market. The extreme cases, those about families including children and elderly, predominate in the posts. This visibility certainly generates empathy but leads to the false feeling that only the most vulnerable citizens are affected.

Keywords

Housing Rights, collective mobilization, social media, framing theory, Twitter, ciberactivism

References

Alemany, A. & Colau, A. (2012). Vidas hipotecadas. Romanyà Valls: Angle.

Andrejevic, M. (2007). iSpy: Surveillance and power in the interactive era. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

Belotti, F., Comunello, F. & Corradi, C. (2021). Feminicidio and# NiUna Menos: An analysis of Twitter conversations during the first 3 years of the Argentinean movement. Violence against women, 27(8), 1035-1063. https://www.doi.org/10.1177/1077801220921947

Bernárdez-Rodal, A., López-Priego, N. & Padilla-Castillo, G. (2021). Cultura y movilización social contra la violencia sexual a través de Twitter: el caso del fallo judicial ‘#LaManada’ en España. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 79, 237-262. https://www.doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2021-1502

Della Porta, D. & Diani, M. (2011). Los movimientos sociales. Madrid: Complutense/CIS.

Fuchs, C. (2014). Social media: A critical introduction. London: Sage.

Fuchs, C. & Mosco, V. (2012). Introduction: Marx is back–the importance of Marxist theory and research for critical communication studies today. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 10(2), 127-140. https://www.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v10i2.421

Gamson, W. A. (1992). Talking Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gamson, W. & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Construccionist Approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 1-38.

Gerbaudo, P. (2017). From cyber-autonomism to cyber-populism: An ideological history of digital activism. TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 15(2), 477-489. https://www.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v15i2.773

INE (2015). Estadísticas sobre ejecuciones hipotecarias (EH). Desde primer trimestre 2014 a primer trimestre 2015 inclusive. Madrid: Instituto Nacional de Estadística.

Mayer-Schönberger, V. & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Canada: Eamon Dolan/Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. & Zald, M. (2008). Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framings. New York: Cambridge University.

Melucci, A. (1989). Nomads of the present: Social Movements and individual needs in contemporany society. London: Hutchinson Radius.

Milan, S. & Treré, E. (2019). Big data from the South(s): Beyond data universalism. Television & New Media, 20(4), 319-335.

Núñez Puente, S., D’Antonio Maceiras, S. & Fernández Romero, D. (2021). Twitter activism and ethical witnessing: Possibilities and challenges of feminist politics against gender-based violence. Social Science Computer Review, 39(2), 295-311. https://www.doi.org/10.1177/0894439319864898

Observatori del conflicte social (2013). Anuari del conflicte social 2012. Barcelona: Aguilar.

Olsson, T. (2014). The architecture of participation. For citizens or consumers. Critique, Social Media and the Information Society. London: Routledge.

Pariser, E. (2017). El filtro burbuja. Cómo la red decide lo que leemos y lo que pensamos. Barcelona: Taurus.

Pérez Díaz, P. L., Berná Sicilia, C. & Arroyas Langa, E. (2016). The conversation on political issues on Twitter: an analysis of the participation and frames in the debate on the ‘Wert Law’ and evictions in Spain. OBETS Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 11(1), 311-330. https://www.doi.org/10.14198/OBETS2016.11.1.12

Ramon Pinat, E. (2019). La batalla de los escraches de la PAH llevada a la pantalla: YouTube vs. RTVE. Miguel Hernández Communication Journal, 10(1), 19-37.

Rivas, A. (1988). El análisis de marcos: una metodología para el estudio de los movimientos sociales. In P. Ibarra & B. Tejerina (Eds.), Los movimientos sociales. Transformaciones políticas y cambio cultural (pp. 181-215). Madrid: Trotta.

Sala, E. (2018). Crisis de la vivienda, movimientos sociales y empoderamiento: una revisión sistemática de la literatura. Documents d’anàlisi geogràfica, 64(1), 99-126.

Tilly, C. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. New York: Random House.

Toret, J. et al. (2015). Tecnopolítica y 15M: la potencia de las multitudes conectadas: un estudio sobre la gestación y explosión del 15M. Barcelona: UOC.

Metrics





Search GoogleScholar


Details

Article Details

Section
Special Issue: Social news diffusion: Platforms, publics, scenarios and dimensions of news sharing