Advertisement

Information? Conversation? Action?

Gabriel Tarde’s Model and Online Protest in the Eyes of Jewish: Israeli Teenage Girls
  • David LevinEmail author
  • Sigal Barak-Brandes
Chapter
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 13)

Abstract

The issue of the Facebook social network and its contribution to political and civil action has been discussed in many academic works over the last few years. We seek to contribute our share to this discussion in two ways: (a) by employing the public opinion formation model suggested by Gabriel as a tool to examine the role of the Facebook social network in widening the participation circle of social protests and (b) by giving evidence as to how Facebook functioned in the public atmosphere of protest (the summer protests in Israel 2011–2012)—among Israeli Jewish teenage girls of no political-civil action background. During those years and over long weeks, the streets of Israel were teeming with demonstrators, while mass media raised the protest issue to the top of public agenda, branding the social networks, and specially Facebook, as the ultimate platform for social change. Gabriel Tarde observed that “information”, “conversation” and “opinion” were milestones, partaking in the shaping and burgeoning process of public opinion. This model allows posing three questions pertaining to the internet function: (a) is the information streamed through it conducive to political and civil activism?; (b) What is the political role of the online conversation?; (c) Does online activism prompt to action on the streets? The conversations with the teenage girls (aged 12–18) about this topic are part of a wider project that looked into the Facebook social network from different perspectives of identity politics: gender, nationality and age. Indeed, the Zionist mythology ties the inception of the Jewish state with political and civil action by young people, yet surveys performed in Israel reveal that Israeli youth is not inclined to take civil action. The prolific use of the social network by this youth, in general, and by the teenage girls interviewed, in particular, as well as the public atmosphere at the time of the study, inspired a revisit of this virtual platform; we wanted to look into its abilities to empower and change participation patterns among this sector of population, prompting it into political and civil activism.

Keywords

Public Opinion Housing Price Teenage Girl Civil Action Social Protest 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their gratitude to the Research Authority of the College of Management Academic Studies, Rishon LeZion, Israel, for their financial support of this research.

References

  1. Akdeniz, Y. (2002). Anonymity, democracy, and cyberspace. Social Research, 69(1), 223–237.Google Scholar
  2. Baek, Y. M., Wojcieszak, M., & Carpini, M. X. D. (2012). Online versus face-to-face deliberation. Who? Why? What? With what effects? New Media & Society, 14(3), 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom (1st ed.). New Haven, CO: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bimber, B. (2000). The study of information technology and civic engagement. Political Communication, 17(4), 329–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyd, D. (2008). Can social network sites enable political action? International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 4(2), 241–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carey, J. (1967). Harold Adams Innis and Marshall McLuhan. The Antioch Review, 27(1), 5–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dahlberg, L. (2007). The Internet, deliberative democracy, and power: Radicalizing the public sphere. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 3(1), 47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dahlgren, P., & Sparks, C. (Eds.). (1997). Communication and citizenship: Journalism and the public sphere in the new media age. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Dreyfus, H. L. (2009). On the internet. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  10. Ellis, J. (1982). Visible fictions: Cinema, television, video. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  11. Fraser, N. (2007). Transnationalizing the public sphere. Theory, Culture & Society, 24, 7–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frosh, P. (2011). Phatic morality: Television and proper distance. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 14(4), 383–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gluzman, M. (2007). The Zionist body: Nationality gender and sexuality in modern Hebrew literature. Hakibbutz Hameuchad (Hebrew): Tel Aviv.Google Scholar
  14. Graber, D. (2004). Mediated politics and citizenship in the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 547–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Harlow, S. (2012). Social media and social movements: Facebook and an online Guatemalan justice movement that moved offline. New Media & Society, 14(2), 225–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hass, H. (1999). Leisure culture in Israel- 1998. Phanim, 10, 107–139. Hebrew.Google Scholar
  18. Katz, E. (2006). Rediscovering Gabriel Tarde. Political Communication, 23(3), 263–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kearney, M. C. (2007). Productive spaces: Girls’ bedrooms as sites of cultural production. Journal of Children and Media, 1(2), 126–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kraidy, M. M. (2007). Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and the changing Arab information order. International Journal of Communication, 1(1), 139–156.Google Scholar
  21. Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Merton, R. K. (1971). Mass communication, popular taste and organized social action. Media studies: A reader, 2nd edn. (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1999), pp. 18–30.Google Scholar
  22. Lessig, L. (2009). Against transparency. The New Republic. October, http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and
  23. Levin, D. (2012). The cottage ban: The conjunction between news construction and facebook’s social protest. JOMEC, 1, 2–15.Google Scholar
  24. Loudon, M., & Mazumdar, B. T. (2013). Media representations of technology in Egypt’s 2011 pro-democracy protests. Ecquid Novi: African Journalism Studies, 34(1), 50–67.Google Scholar
  25. Lynch, M. (2011). After Egypt: The limits and promise of online challenges to the authoritarian Arab state. Perspectives on Politics, 9(02), 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McRobbie, A., & Garber, J. (1976). Girls and subculture. In S. Hall & T. Jefferson (Eds.), Resistance through rituals (pp. 209–221). London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  27. Meyrowitz, J. (1985). No sense of place. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Miller, V. (2008). New media, networking and phatic culture. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14(4), 387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Morozov, E. (2011). The net delusion: The dark side of internet freedom. Philadelphia: Perseus.Google Scholar
  30. Peters, J. D. (1999). Public journalism and democratic theory: Four challenges. In T. L. Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 99–117). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  31. Schudson, M. (1999). What public journalism knows about journalism but doesn’t know about “public”. In T. L. Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 118–133). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  32. Shirky, C. (2010). “The political power of social media.” Foreign Affairs. N.p., 20 Dec. 2010. Web. 31 May 2013. http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/67038/clay-shirky/the-political-power-of-social-media
  33. Shoham, S. G., & Pinchevski, A. (2001). The medium is the barrier. Anthropological Linguistics, 27, 149–167.Google Scholar
  34. Sivitanides, M., & Shah, V. (2011). The era of digital activism. http://proc.conisar.org/2011/pdf/1842.pdf
  35. Tarde, G. (1969). Opinion and conversation. In T. N. Clark (Ed.), On communication and social influence: Selected papers (pp. 297–319). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tichenor, P. A., Donohue, G. A., & Olien, C. N. (1970). Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(2), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Uslaner, E. M. (2004). Trust, civic engagement, and the Internet. Political Communication, 21(2), 223–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Zoonen, L. (2004). Imagining the fan democracy. European Journal of Communication, 19(1), 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wheeler, D. (2003). The internet and youth subculture in Kuwait. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 8(2). (http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/)

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Academic Studies DivisionMedia School, The College of ManagementRishon LezionIsrael

Personalised recommendations