Advertisement

Connective Politics, Videos, and Algorithms: YouTube’s Mediation of Audiovisual Political Communication

  • Andrea MedradoEmail author
  • Simone do Vale
  • Adilson Cabral
Chapter

Abstract

Brazil held its presidential elections in 2018. In this context, the Socialism and Liberty Party (Partido Socialismo e Liberdade [PSOL]) chose two candidates who were members of social movements to run as candidates for president and vice-president: Guilherme Boulos from the Homeless Workers’ Movement (Movimento dos Trabalhadores Sem Teto [MTST]) and Sonia Guajajara from the Articulation of the Brazilian Indigenous Peoples’ Movement (Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Brasil [APIB]). This chapter argues that this represents a strategy of “connective politics” in which the party borrows some of the movements’ causes and turns them into relatable personalized messages. In order to illustrate this, the authors chose one video from each of the social actors (PSOL, MTST, and APIB) and used YouTube’s Data Tools to map out each video’s network of related videos. By doing so, they hope to shed light on how political strategies and algorithms interact, delving into the ways in which YouTube mediates political audiovisual content through its recommendation system.

Keywords

YouTube Algorithms Social movements Political parties Connective politics 

References

  1. Bennett, W. L., & Pfetsch, B. (2018). Rethinking Political Communication in a Time of Disrupted Public Spheres. Journal of Communication, 68, 243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The Logic of Connective Action. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Castells, M. (2012). Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  4. Comscore. (2018). O cenário das redes sociais no Brasil. Retrieved from https://www.comscore.com/por/Insights/Apresentacoes-e-documentos/2018/State-of-Social
  5. Costanza-Chock, S. (2012). Preliminary Findings: Occupy Research Demographic and Political Participation Survey 2012. Retrieved from http://www.occupyresearch.net/2012/03/23preliminary-findings-occupy-research-demographic-and-political-participation-survey
  6. Covington, P., Adams, J., & Sargin, E. (2016). Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  7. Cubitt, S. (1993). Videography: Video Media as Art and Culture. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Didi-Huberman, G. (2005). Confronting Images: Questioning the Ends of a Certain History of Art. Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ekman, M., & Widholm, A. (2017). Political Communication in an Age of Visual Connectivity: Exploring Instagram Practices Among Swedish Politicians. Northern Lights, 15, 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fleischman, L. (2006). Os Novos Meios de Ativismo na Internet: O Caso dos Centros de Mídia da Internet. Dissertação de Mestrado. Niterói, RJ: UFF.Google Scholar
  12. Gonçalves, C. P. (2012). Divino Tserewahú, Vídeo nas Aldeias et al: uma etnografia de encontros intersocietários (Doctoral dissertation). Programa de Pós- Graduação em. Antropologia Social da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil. Retrieved from Repositório UFSC https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/100518
  13. Johnston, H., & Klandermans, B. (Eds.). (2004). Culture and Social Movements. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  14. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. McAdam, D. (1982). Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency 1930–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. McCosker, A. (2015). Social Media Activism at the Margins: Managing Visibility, Voice and Vitality Affects. Social Media + Society, 1, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Meyer, D., & Lupo, L. (2007). Assessing the Politics of Protest: Political Science and the Study of Social Movements. In B. Klandermans & C. Roggeband (Eds.), Handbook of Social Movements Across Disciplines (pp. 111–156). New York: Springer Science.Google Scholar
  18. Miller, T. (2009). A televisão acabou, a televisão virou coisa do passado, a televisão já era. In J. Freire Filho (Ed.), A TV em Transição: Tendências de Programação no Brasil e no Mundo. Porto Alegre: Sulina-Globo Universidade.Google Scholar
  19. Pena-López, I., Congosto, M., & Aragón, P. (2014). Spanish Indignados and the Evolution of the 15M Movement on Twitter: Towards Networked Para-Institutions. Journal of Spanish Cultural Studies, 15(1–2), 189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Plantin, J. C., Lagoze, C., Edwards, P. N., & Sandvig, C. (2016). Infrastructure Studies Meet Platform Studies in the Age of Google and Facebook. New Media & Society, 20(1), 293–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Polletta, F. (2006). It Was Like a Fever: Storytelling in Protest and Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shifman, L. (2013). Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Spyer, J. (2017). Social Media in Emergent Brazil: How the Internet Affects Social Mobility. London: UCL Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tilly, C. (2005). Regimes and Repertoires. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Van Dijck, J. (2013). The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Medrado
    • 1
    Email author
  • Simone do Vale
    • 1
  • Adilson Cabral
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidade Federal FluminenseNiteróiBrazil

Personalised recommendations