Mobilization Of Political Protest In The Russian Segment Of Social Media (2021): Triggers, Audience, Communication Channels

Abstract

The article presents the results of applied political research, the purpose of which is to determine the scale, mobilization potential, social base, and digital communication technologies of protest-oriented information flow in the Russian segment of social media on the eve of the Single Voting Day of 2021. The cognitive mapping implemented in the study made it possible to identify the meaningful characteristics of the information flow. The social media analysis made it possible to determine the dynamic and structural characteristics of the information flow, the gender and age specifics of the users involved in it, as well as quantitative characteristics of the activity of key communities forming protest information flows. The method of social
graphs revealed the structure of interaction between the opposition and protest communities of Telegram in 2021. The event analysis carried out during the study made it possible to fix the key peaks of growth in the dynamics of user activity around protest events and discourses. On this basis, it was possible to identify the triggers used to involve users in protest information flows (elections, law enforcement agencies, vaccination, socio-economic problems), typologize the communities forming the protest information flow (protest aggregator communities, news aggregator communities, local analytics communities), and model of mass protest mobilization (primary trigger — secondary trigger — offline protest).

References

Azarov, A. A., Brodovskaia, E. V., Bubnov, A. Iu. et al. “Predictor Mining: primenenie metodov intellektual’nogo analiza dannykh v zadachakh sotsial’nogo komp’iutinga, ”Trudy SPIIRAN, No. 3, 2013, pp. 136–161.
Backstrom, L., Boldi, P., Rosa, M. et al. “Four Degrees of Separation,” WebSci’12: Proceedings of the 4th Annual ACM Web Science Conference, eds. N. Contractor, and B. Uzzi. New York: The Association for Computing Machinery, 2012, pp. 33–42.
Bennett, L. W., and Segerberg, A. The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Boulianne, S., and Theocharis, Y. “Young People, Digital Media, and Engagement: A Meta-analysis of Research,” Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 38, No. 1, 2018, pp. 111–127.
Brodovskaia, E. V., and Tiukov, N. A. “Metodologiia i metodika prikladnogo politicheskogo issledovaniia grazhdanskogo aktivizma v sotsial’nykh media sovremennoi Rossii,” Vlast’, No. 2, 2020, pp. 199–204.
Brodovskaia, E. V., Davydova, M. A., and Eremin, E. A. “Prolongirovannye politicheskie protesty v Rossii i v Respublike Belarus’ letom — osen’iu 2020 goda: referentnost’ rossiiskoi auditorii sotsial’nykh media,” Gumanitarnye nauki. Vestnik Finansovogo universiteta, No. 1, 2021, pp. 6–13.
Brodovskaia, E. V., Dombrovskaia, A. Iu., Likhacheva, E. V. Et al. “Spetsifika ispol’zovaniia aitrekerov v sochetanii s fokusirovannym interv’iu pri attestatsii setevogo kontenta,” Chelovecheskii kapital, No. 1, 2021, pp. 73–82.
Brodovskaia, E. V., Nikulin, E. R., and Davydova, M. A. “Massovye politicheskie protesty v Respublike Belarus’ letom — osen’iu 2020 goda: prichiny vozniknoveniia, sotsial’naia baza, tsifrovaia infrastruktura,” Zhurnal politicheskikh issledovanii, No. 1, 2021, pp. 23–35.
Dijk, T. van. Diskurs i vlast’: Reprezentatsiia dominirovaniia v iazyke i kommunikatsii. Moscow: Librokom, 2013.
Dotsenko, E. L. Psikhologiia manipuliatsii: fenomeny, mekhanizmy i zashchita. Moscow: CheRo: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo universiteta, 1997.
Earl, J., and Kimport, K. Digitally Enabled Social Change: Activism in the Internet Age. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2011.
Fairclough, N. Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman, 1995.
Fairclough, N., and Wodak, R. “Critical Discourse Analysis,” Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Vol. 2, ed. T. van Dijk. London: Sage, 1997, pp. 258–284.
Gradosel’skaia, G. V. Setevye izmereniia v sotsiologii. Moscow: Novyi uchebnik, 2004.
Harre, R. “The Second Cognitive Revolution, ” American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 36, No. 1, 1992, pp. 5–7.
Jost, T. J., Barbera, P., Bonneau, R. et al. “How Social Media Facilitates Political Protest: Information, Motivation, and Social Networks, ”Advances in Political Psychology, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2018, pp. 85–118.
Kahne, J., and Bowyer, B. “The Political Significance of Social Media Activity and Social Networks,” Political Communication, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2018, pp. 470–493.
Kara-Murza, S. G. Manipuliatsiia soznaniem. Moscow: Algoritm, 2000.
Laclau, E., and Mouffe, Ch. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Towards Radical Democratic Politics. 2nd ed. London; New York: Verso, 2001.
Lebedeva, M. M. Tekhnologiia vedeniia peregovorov. Moscow: Aspekt press, 2010.
Osipova, O. S., Bagdasarova, R. A., and Lukushin, V. A. “Sovremennye media kak instrument sovershenstvovaniia dialoga vlasti i obshchestva,” Gumanitarnye nauki. Vestnik Finansovogo universiteta, No. 1, 2021, pp. 20–28.
Potter, J., Edwards, D., and Wetherell, M. “A Model of Discourse in Action, ”American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 36, No. 3, 1993, pp. 383–401.
Sloam, J. “Diversity and Voice: The Political Participation of Young People in the European Union,” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 18, No. 3, 2016, pp. 521–537.