Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Language and Politics
Vol. 15:6 (2016) ► pp.688–709

“Imagine” – Participative strategies of two online minorities within Italian context

 | Faculty of Psychology, Uninettuno University
Within the field of political psychology studies, the main goal of the present study is to investigate in depth the role played by two different forms – E-Tactics vs E-Movement – of social media activism on the quality of discourses and their possible level of acquired empowerment. Two Italian cases of e-minorities (Teatro Valle Occupato and Roars) will be analysed in terms of argumentative moves following a pragma-dialectic perspective in order to observe how they can construct a possible process of conscientization. Results, achieved by means of quanti-qualitative methods, highlight how E-Tactics (Teatro Valle Occupato), differently from E-Movement (Roars), can better promote normative but also creative forms of argumentations, as activists can claim for their rights but mainly also promote value change. This type of activism is strongly correlated to political participation, differently from E-Movement, mainly oriented to individual empowerment.
Keywords: e-minority, participative networks, social media interaction, argumentative moves, empowering strategies.
Article outline
  • 1.Participation through media
  • 2.Can media-activism be a form of empowerment?
  • 3.The qualitative side of participation: the argumentative point of view
  • 4.Teatro Valle Occupied and Roars Italian Researchers: A comparative analysis of two medias-activism
    • 4.1Description of the two cases
    • 4.2Corpora and procedure
    • 4.3.Media-activism and argumentative moves
  • 5.E-minorities and empowerment
  • 6.The relation between quality of argumentations and level of empowerment
  • 7.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 9 February 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.15.6.02der
References (30)
References
Bennett, W. Lance, and Alexandra Segerberg. 2012. “The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics”, Information, Communication & Society 15.5: 739–768. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolasco, Sergio. 2013. L’analisi automatica dei testi. Fare ricerca con il text mining. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
Chadwick, Andrew. 2013. The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford: Oxford University Press DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Catherine, and Sandra Jovchelovitch. 2000. “Health, community and development: Towards a social psychology of participation.” Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 10.4: 255–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carpini, Michael Delli, Fay Lomax Cook and Lawrence R. Jacobs. 2004. “Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature.”, Annual Review Political Science. 71:315–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahlberg, Lincoln. 2001. “Computer‐mediated communication and the public sphere: A critical analysis.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 7.1. Accessed October 2001 DOI logo.Google Scholar
D’Errico Francesca. 2016. “With different words. the arguments that can empower an e-minority”, Computers in human behaviour, 611: 205–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D’Errico Francesca, Isabella Poggi. 2014. “Acidity. The hidden face of conflictual and stressful situations.”, Cognitive Computation. 6.4: 661–676. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D’Errico, Francesca, Isabella Poggi and Rocco Corriero. 2014. Aggressive language and insults in digital political participation. In Proceedings of Multiconference on computer science and Information systems: Web Based Communities and Social Media 2014. MCCSIS, pp. 105–114.Google Scholar
D’Errico Francesca, Isabella Poggi and Rocco Corriero. 2015. “When minorities’ group discussions in social media become a resilient strategy.” In: Proceeding. Emotion and Sentiment in Social and Expressive Media edited by Ceur Essem: 116–126Google Scholar
Earl, Jennifer, and Katrina Kimport. 2011. Digitally enabled social change: Activism in the Internet age. Mit Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekman, Joakim, and Erik Amnå. 2012. “Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new typology.”, Human affairs 22.3: 283–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freire, Paulo. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Graham, Todd, and Tamara Witschge. 2003. “In search of online deliberation: Towards a new method for examining the quality of online discussions.” Communications 28.2: 173–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jurge. 1984. The theory of communicative Action, vol. One. Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Heidar, Knut. 2006. Party membership and participation. In: Richard Kats & William Crotty (eds) Handbook of party politics, 301–315. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, Deanna. 1991. The skills of argument. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lášticová, Barbara. 2014. “New media, social capital and transnational migration: Slovaks in the UK.”, Human Affairs 24.4: 406–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lebart, Ludovic and André Salem. 1994. Statistique textuelle. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
Mucchi Faina, Angelica and Giancarla Cicoletti. 2006. “Divergence vs. ambivalence: Effects of personal relevance on minority influence. European.”, Journal of Social Psychology 36.1: 91–104.Google Scholar
Moscovici, Serge. 1981. Psicologia delle minoranze attive. Torino: Boringhieri.Google Scholar
Nelson, Nici, and Susan Wright. 1995. “Power and participatory development: theory and practice.” Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd (ITP). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poggi Isabella, Francesca D’Errico and Laura Vincze. 2011. “Agreement and its multimodal communication in debates. A qualitative analysis.”, Cognitive Computation. 3.3: 466–479 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Robert. 1994. “Social capital and public affairs.” Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 47.8: 5–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siddiquee, Asiya, and Carolyn Kagan. 2006. “The internet, empowerment, and identity: an exploration of participation by refugee women in a Community Internet Project (CIP) in the United Kingdom (UK).” Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 16.3: 189–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun A. 1989. “Race, riots and the press An analysis of editorials in the British press about the 1985 disorders.”, International Communication Gazette 43.3: 229–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Norman H. Nie, and Jae-On Kim. 1978. Participation and Political Equality: A Seven-Nation Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas, Christopher Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2008. Argumentation schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, Marc and Julian Rappaport. 1988. “Citizen participation, perceived control, and psychological empowerment.” American Journal of community psychology 16.5: 725–750. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gil de Zúñiga, Homero, Nakwon Jung, and Sebastián Valenzuela. 2012. “Social media use for news and individuals’ social capital, civic engagement and political participation.”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17.3: 319–336. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Scardigno, Rosa, Carmela Sportelli, Paolo Giovanni Cicirelli, Angelica Lops & Francesca D’Errico
2024. Online Mothering: The Empowering Nature of a Hashtag Movement Founded on Social Sharing and Stereotype Deconstruction. Societies 14:5 ► pp. 67 ff. DOI logo
Scardigno, Rosa, Giuseppe Mininni, Paolo Giovanni Cicirelli & Francesca D’Errico
2022. The ‘Glocal’ Community of Matera 2019: Participative Processes and Re-Signification of Cultural Heritage. Sustainability 14:19 ► pp. 12673 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.