Changing the Face of Advocacy? Explaining Interest Organizations’ Use of Social Media Strategies

Chalmers, Adam William; Shotton, Paul A.

doi:10.1080/10584609.2015.1043477

Cited by 69 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Chalmers and Shotton () approach interest groups' social media use from a different angle. Their findings suggest that social media use can be explained by how highly shaping their public image and lobbying debates through the news media ranks on their agendas.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interest group strategies have been extensively studied by academics over the last decade (e.g., Alexander & Nownes, 2008;Betzold, 2014;Constantelos, 2007;Dür & Mateo, 2013;Gullberg, 2008;Hamilton, Hyman, Torres, & Zúñiga, 2013;Klüver, Mahoney, & Opper, 2015;Lees-Marshment, 2003;Mahoney, 2007;Panagopoulos, 2006;Woll, 2012;Yadav, 2008;Junk, 2016). However, only recently have a few studies focused on the use of social media in interest groups' advocacy toolkits (see Obar, Zube, & Lampe, 2012;Jentges, Brändli, Donges, & Jarren, 2013;Brown, 2016;Chalmers & Shotton, 2016;van der Graaf, Otjes, & Rasmussen, 2016).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Observing the political voice of interest groups in the United States of America, Hong and Nadler (2016) concluded that the bias observed in the offline lobbying world is no better in the online lobbying world. Chalmers and Shotton (2016) approach interest groups' social media use from a different angle. Their findings suggest that social media use can be explained by how highly shaping their public image and lobbying debates through the news media ranks on their agendas.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Interest groups and social media: An examination of cause and sectional groups' social media strategies in the EU

Kanol¹,

Nat

2017

Journal of Public Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines social media use by cause and sectional interest groups in the European Union. The literature suggests that cause groups should focus on building a constituency more than sectional groups, because they do not offer exclusive benefits to their members. Cause groups face collective action problems more than sectional groups, so they have to take a proactive approach to community building. The nature of the causes cause groups lobby for is also more suitable for protest and thus calls to action. An in‐depth analysis of a random sample of 1,000 tweets by cause and sectional groups reveals differences with respect to social media use. Cause groups use social media to pursue two‐way communication with the public slightly—albeit not significantly—more than sectional groups. Cause groups mobilise the public to take action significantly and substantively more than specific interests.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interest groups and social media: An examination of cause and sectional groups' social media strategies in the EU

Kanol¹,

Nat

2017

Journal of Public Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fung et al () examine six such impacts, including the way digital technologies help citizens to engage directly with political elites or the ways that they enable interest groups to shape public opinion and mobilize their constituents. Recent scholarly work has provided ample examination of the utilization of social media and ICTs by interest groups to communicate with diverse audiences, such as politicians, members and other groups (Chalmers and Shotton ; Brown ; Van Der Graaf et al ). Other work has outlined how groups utilize such technology to pursue existing organizational imperatives and tasks they have long engaged in (Bimber et al ; Karpf ; Halpin ).…”

Section: Introduction: Digital Disruption Policy Advocacy and Democrmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do interest groups legitimate their policy advocacy? Reconsidering linkage and internal democracy in times of digital disruption

Fraussen

Halpin

2017

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ongoing embrace of interest groups as agents capable of addressing democratic deficits in governing institutions is in large part because they are assumed to contribute democratic legitimacy to policy processes. Nonetheless, they face the challenge of legitimating their policy advocacy in democratic terms, clarifying what makes them legitimate partners in governance. In this article we suggest that digital innovations have disrupted the established mechanisms of legitimation. While the impact of this disruption is most easily demonstrated in the rise of a small number of ‘digital natives’, we argue that the most substantive impact has been on more conventional groups, which typically follow legitimation logics of either representation or solidarity. While several legacy groups are experimenting with new legitimation approaches, the opportunities provided by technology seem to offer more organizational benefits to groups employing the logic of solidarity, and appear less compatible with the more traditional logic of representation.

show abstract

“…The potential overreliance of social media also raises concerns of excluding sex workers who lack online access (Beer, 2011). Critiques also include social media advocacy perpetuating continued dominance of those already with considerable influence and power (Chalmers & Shotton, 2015) as well as concerns with safety, trolling, and online assaults, which are the realities faced by many bloggers and online advocates, particularly amongst women. Cultural and Pedagogical Inquiry, Summer 2018, 10(1), pp.…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex Work and Social Media: Online Advocacy Strategies

Duke¹,

Sitter

Boggan³

2018

Cult. and Ped. Inq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online communication continues to provide opportunities to connect, mobilize and disseminate information amongst direct service organizations. While the use of social media among non-profits continues to expand, there is a paucity of research that documents the extent to which online channels – particularly social media – are adopted and used amongst organizations that support sex workers. Online advocacy efforts have grown over the last decade, with sex workers and non-profit organizations at the forefront. This article evaluates the presence and social media strategies amongst organizations providing direct services for sex workers in Canada. Eighty-seven organizations operating in Canada were examined to assess both the types of social media channels used, and the online strategies employed. Results indicate there is a propensity for agencies to engage in multiple social media platforms with spaces for service users to post information in lieu of static sites that predominantly support one-way communication. Recommendations and best practices include integrating postings across platforms for efficiency, developing and maintaining safe spaces online, and focusing on channels that support multilogue communication. Keywords: Sex work, social media, knowledge

show abstract

Changing the Face of Advocacy? Explaining Interest Organizations’ Use of Social Media Strategies

Cited by 69 publications

References 47 publications

Interest groups and social media: An examination of cause and sectional groups' social media strategies in the EU

Interest groups and social media: An examination of cause and sectional groups' social media strategies in the EU

How do interest groups legitimate their policy advocacy? Reconsidering linkage and internal democracy in times of digital disruption

Sex Work and Social Media: Online Advocacy Strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About