Information Streams for Inter-ethnic Relations in Crimea and Sevastopol: SMA and Discourse Analysis of Posts in Social Networks of Runet

  • Elena Brodovskaya
  • Anna DombrovskayaEmail author
  • Irina Batanina
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 947)


The article is devoted to the results of the Social Media Analytics study of dynamic, technological and substantial markers of social media Russian-writing flows on interethnic and inter-religious relations in Crimea and Sevastopol. The study assessed the extent of the social media Russian-writing messages representing the forming of negative interethnic and inter-religious attitudes among Crimean and Sevastopol inhabitants. The logic of study leads from the development of social and cultural contexts to shaping of digital patterns of interethnic and inter-religious relations and from accumulating of relevant social media streams to the analysis of metrics of information flows. The authors consider Russian state policy on inter-ethnic and inter-religious relations and publication activity of social media leaders of mass opinion the main factors of changes in the proportion of social media documents concerning on the interactions between ethnic Russians and Ukrainians, and between ethnic Russians and Crimean Tatars. The main prospect of the study is the development of digital markers for the automatic uploading Ukrainian-writing and Crimean Tatar-writing streams to compare their characteristics, reflecting the inter-ethnic and inter-religious relations in Crimea and Sevastopol.


Inter-ethnic relations Inter-religious relations Socio-cultural integration of crimean society Social media Internet communication SMA-study Digital markers Discourse analysis 



The study is implemented with the funds of the grant of Russian Foundation for Basic Research “Ukrainian information flows in the Crimean segment of social media: risks and technologies to overcome the negative effects of anti-Russian rhetoric in the online environment (№ 18-011-00937 for 2018-2020).


  1. 1.
    Alexander, J.: On smart frameworks of “Strong Program”. Sociol. Rev. 9(2), 5–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allport, F.H.: Social Psychology. Routledge, London (1924)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berger, P.L., Luckmann, T.: The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, Garden City (1966)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bergman, M.L., Kasper, G.: Perception and performance in native and nonnative apology. In: Kasper, G., Blum-Kulka, S. (eds.) Interlingua Pragmatics, pp. 82–107. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brodovskaya, E.V., Dombrovskaya, A., Karzubov, D.: Online mobilization of mass protests in Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, and Kazakhstan (2013–2016.): the results of comprehensive comparative empirical study. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Electronic Governance and Open Society: Challenges in Eurasia St. Petersburg, Russia, 04–06 September 2014, pp. 32–36. ACM, New York (2017). –Accessed 21 Jan 2018
  6. 6.
    Castells, M.: The Rise of the Network Society. The Information Age: Econimy, Society and Culture, vol. 1, 2nd edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken (2009). New Preface editionCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dalton, R.J., Cain, B.E., Scarrow, S.E.: Democratic public and democratic institutions. In: Cain, B.E., Dalton, R.J., Scarrow, S.E. (eds.) Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies, pp. 250–275. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van Dijk, T.: Ideology and Discourse. A Multidisciplinary Introduction. English version of an Internet course for the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC) (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Durkheim, E.: The rules of sociological method. In: Solovay, S.A., Mueller, J.M. (eds.). Collier-Macmillan Limited, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Edwards, D., Potter, J.: Discursive Psychology. Sage, London (1992)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fairclough, N.: Analysing Discourse: Texstual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge, London (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jenkins, H.: Convergence: Where Old and New Media Collide. NYU press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gamson, W., Croteau, D., Hoynes, W., Sasson, T.: Media images and the social construction of reality. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 18, 373–393 (1992). Accessed 25 Mar 2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goldstone, J.A.: Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modern World. University of California Press, Berkeley (1993)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Green, S.: Twitter and Russian protest: memes, networks and mobilization. In: Gurr, T. (ed.) Why Men Rebel. Princeton University Press (1974). Accessed 14 Apr 2018
  16. 16.
    Howard, P.N., Parks, M.R.: Social media and political change: capacity, constraint and consequence. J. Commun. 62, 359–362 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Laclau, E., Mouffe, C.: Hegemony and the Socialist Strategy. New York (1985)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lakoff, G., Johnsen, M.: Metaphors We Live By. The university of Chicago press, London (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lebon, G.: Psychology of the Masses and Peoples. Social and Human Sciences. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Episode 11: Sociology. Abstract J. 2, 166–189 (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Livingstone, S., Couldry, N., Markham, T.: Youthful Steps towards civic participation: does the internet help? In: Loader, B. (ed.). Young Citizens in the Digital Age. Political Engagement, Young People and New Media, pp. 21–34. Routledge, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lippmann, W.: Public Opinion. New York (1922)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marcuse, H.: On Concrete Philosophy. In: Marcuse, H., Abromeit, J., Wolin, R. (eds.) Heideggerian Marxism. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McCarthy, J.D., Zald, M.N.: Resource mobilization and social movements: a partial theory. Am. J. Sociol. 82, 1212–1241 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    McCombs, M., Reynolds, A.: News influence on our pictures of the world. In: Bryand, J., Zillmann, D. (eds). Mahwah “Media Effects” (2002)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Merton, R.K.: Social structure and anomie. Am. Sociol. Rev. 3, 672–682 (1938)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Noveck, B.S.: Wiki Government: How Technology Can Make Government Better, Democracy Stronger, and Citizens More Powerful. Washington (2009)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pierson, P., Skocpol, T.: Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science in Political Science: The State of the Discipline. In: Katznelson, I., Milner, H. (eds). Norton, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Polat, R.K.: The internet and political participation: exploring the explanatory links. Eur. J. Commun. 20, 435–459 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sériot, P.: Structure Et Totalité: Les Origines Intellectuelles Du Structuralisme En Europe Centrale Et Orientale. Presses universitaires de France, Paris (1999)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Smith, A.D.: National identity and vernacular mobilization in Europe. Nat. Nationalism 17(2), 233–248 (2011)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Takeshita, T.: Exploring the media’s roles in defining reality: from issue-agenda setting to attribute agenda setting. In: McCombs, M.E., Shaw, D.L., Weaver, D.H. (eds). Communication and Democracy. Mahwah (1997)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tilly, C., Giugni, M.: How Social Movements Matter. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis (1999)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    The Significance of Simmel’s Work ex: In: Koser, L. (ed.) Masters of Sociological Thought: Ideas in Historical and Social Context, 2nd edn. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York (1977)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Toffler, A.: Previews and Premises: An Interview with the Author of Future Shock and The Third Wave. Black Rose Books, Montreal (1987)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weber, L., Loumakis, A., Bergman, J.: Who Participates and Why? An Analysis of Citizens on the Internet and the Mass Public. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 21, 26–42 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wu, H.D., Coleman, R.: Advancing agenda setting theory: the comparative strength and new contingent conditions on the two levels of agenda-setting effects. J. Mass Commun. Quarter. 86(4), 775–789 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elena Brodovskaya
    • 1
  • Anna Dombrovskaya
    • 2
    Email author
  • Irina Batanina
    • 3
  1. 1.Financial University Under the Government of RFMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Moscow State Pedagogical UniversityMoscowRussia
  3. 3.Tula State UniversityTulaRussia

Personalised recommendations