Abstract
This chapter focuses on the political use of the internet considering both individual and organisational use. Firstly, looking at how individuals which took part in the Athens European Social Forum (ESF) use the internet politically. Secondly, shedding light on how social movements, families and organisations mobilized in the Italian Global Justice Movement (GJM) use the web, highlighting limits and opportunities of using the web politically. Data were gathered using different research instruments: a survey of participants in the European Social Forum in Athens and a series of interviews with spokespersons of different social movement families of the Italian GJM. While quantitative data allows for controlling relations among variables concerning the political use of the internet by individuals, qualitative data provides more detailed information on internet use in the everyday life of activists and organisations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Social movements are defined as “informal networks, based on shared beliefs and solidarity, which mobilise about conflictual issues, through the frequent use of various forms of protest” (della Porta and Diani 1999, p. 16).
- 2.
More information on the European social forum process can be found in della Porta 2009.
- 3.
The concept of social movement family has been proposed by della Porta and Rucht (1995) to indicate sets of movements of similar type (i.e. new social movements, left libertarian movements, etc.) sharing a number of values and a similar political culture.
- 4.
Both researches took place within the Demos project between 2006 and 2008. The project was coordinated by Donatella della Porta and focused on conceptions and practices of democracy in the European Global Justice Movements (http://demos.eui.eu).
- 5.
A probabilistic sample could not be built since for civil society events it is impossible to know exactly the characteristics of the population participating (indeed, lists of participants do not even exist).
- 6.
Most members of the Demos project plus some additional collaborators (for a total of 19 researchers) participated in the distribution and collection of the questionnaires.
- 7.
All results of non-parametric correlations presented in this article have been previously checked with results obtained through cross-tabulations and other descriptive techniques. The significance levels of coefficients presented throughout the paper are reported as follows: ** means significance at the 0.01 level; * means significance at 0.05 level.
- 8.
The survey was coordinated by Donatella della Porta.
- 9.
Among those who declared they did not access the internet, 51.7 % were men, 59.4 % were undergraduates, 49.6 % were more than 29 years old.
- 10.
Net-striking consists of a large number of people connecting simultaneously to the same domain at a prearranged time, in order to “jam” a site considered a symbolic target, in order to make it impossible for other users to reach it (Jordan 2002).
- 11.
The indicators aggregated in the index of offline participatory experiences were dummy variables concerning the following forms of action: trying to persuade someone to vote for a party, working in a political party, signing a petition/referendum, attending a demonstration, handing out leaflets, participating in a strike, practicing civil disobedience, participating in non-violent direct actions, boycotting products, occupying public buildings (i.e. schools, universities, etc.), occupying abandoned homes and/or land, participating in cultural performances as a form of protest, participating in a blockade, using violent forms of action against property. The indicators aggregated in the index of offline organisational experiences were dummy variables concerning the following organisations: political party, trade union, socialist organisation, communist organisation, Trotskyist organisation, anarchist group, group against neo-liberal agenda, local social forum, women’s group, environmental/anti-nuclear organisation, peace group, religious group/community, charity organisation/social voluntary, human rights organisation, consumerism/fair trade group, gay/lesbian/transgender rights organisation, development aid organisation, international solidarity organisation, autonomist/social centre, anti-racist, immigrant rights or pro-immigrants group, unemployed organisation, student group and alternative media. The index of the political use of the internet included the above mentioned indicators: express political opinions in forums/mailing lists/chats/blogs etc.; exchange information online within your political group; sign online petitions or participate in campaigns through e-mail and/or mailing-lists/chat; participate in a net-strike and/or other forms of radical online protest.
- 12.
Even if I do not want to disregard the impact of the internet in shaping ways in which politics is perceived and experienced – especially by younger generations – it is clear that political socialisation, political culture and the values of the interviewees are mainly the product of offline processes.
- 13.
Partial correlations controlled for the following variables: gender, education.
- 14.
The demonstration took place in Rome in October 15, 2005. More information on the Bolkestein directive and the mobilization against it can be found in Parks (2006).
- 15.
Clusters of organisational experiences were built on the basis of the score of correlation coefficients concerning similar organisational experiences. The additive index “old left” includes the following organisational experiences: political party, trade union, socialist, communist, anarchist and Trotskyist organisation. The additive index “new social movements” includes the following organisational experiences: women’s group, environmental/anti-nuclear organisation, peace group, and consumerist/fair trade group. The additive index “solidarity movements” includes the following organisational experiences: charity organisation/social voluntary, religious group/religious community, human rights organisation, gay/lesbian/transgender rights organisation, development aid organisation and international solidarity organisation. The additive index “new left” includes the following organisational experiences: autonomist/social centre, anti-racist, immigrant rights or pro-immigrants group, unemployed organisation, student group, local social forum, against neo-liberal economic agenda and alternative media.
- 16.
Clusters of participatory experiences were built on the basis of the score of correlation coefficients concerning similar participatory experiences. The additive index “traditional experiences” includes the following participation experiences: handing out leaflets, trying to persuade someone to vote for a party, working in a political party and participating in a strike. The additive index “moderate experiences” includes the following participation experiences: signing a petition/public letter and attending a demonstration. The additive index “unconventional experiences” includes the following participation experiences: boycotting products, participating in cultural performances as a form of protest and participating in non-violent direct actions. The additive index “radical experiences” includes the following participation experiences: occupying a public building, occupying abandoned homes and/or land, participating in a blockade, practicing civil disobedience and using violent forms of action against property.
- 17.
The selection of interviewees mirrored the variety and heterogeneity of the global justice movement in Italy. I interviewed 19 SMOs including the most relevant ones belonging to three social movement families which – although sharing a common master frame based on democracy and social justice – differ for ideological orientations, organisational structures and repertoires of action (della Porta et al. 2006): the “solidarity-ecopacifism” sector (Lilliput network, Pax Christi, Tavola della Pace, Legambiente, the campaign against “armed” banks, Sdebitarsi – Italian branch of Jubilee campaign–, the fair trade association Botteghe del Mondo, NGOs such as Unimondo, Un Ponte per and Emergency), the sector of institutional left (Attac-Italy, Arci, left-wing trade unions and red-green political parties), and the anticapitalist sector (Rete Noglobal, rank-and-file unions, anti-racist and inter-ethnic associations). Furthermore, I selected local social forums, media (i.e. Indymedia-Italy, Il Manifesto, Carta, Global Project, Peacelink, Radio Popolare) close to the movements but also groups at the “margins” of the European social forum process (i.e. Euromayday campaign and the Italian anarchist federation), whose democratic deficit they criticize.
- 18.
Being mostly text-based, the internet (at least in its 1.0 version) fits better with people with a background in written culture. Those more skilled in writing and used to dealing with the written word would then be more capable of profiting from such technology especially in interactive and dialogical spaces on-line.
- 19.
Most social movements consider the interactive features of Web 2.0 applications extremely important for implementing their democratic ideals. However, when the interviews were carried out many organisations declared they had not yet employed this kind of application.
References
Andretta, M., della Porta, D., Mosca, L., & Reiter, H. (2002). Global, noglobal, newglobal. La protesta di Genova contro il G8. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
Anduiza, E., Gallego, A., & Cantijoch, M. (2010). Online political participation in Spain. Journal of Information Technologies and Politics, 7(4), 356–368.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.
Atton, C. (2003). Reshaping social movement media for a new millennium. Social Movement Studies, 2(1), 3–15.
Bennett, W. L. (2003). Communicating global activism: Strengths and vulnerabilities of networked politics. Information, Communication & Society, 6(2), 143–168.
Bentivegna, S. (2009). Disuguaglianze digitali. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
Bentivegna, S. (Ed.). (2012). Parlamento 2.0. Strategie di comunicazione politica in internet. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Best, S. J., & Krueger, B. S. (2004). Internet data collection. Quantitative applications in the social sciences. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Blanchard, P., & Fillieule, O. (2006). Individual surveys in rallies (INSURA). A new Eldorado for Comparative Social Movement Research? Paper presented at the Conference: Crossing Borders. On the Road Towards Transnational Social Movement Analysis. Berlin, Germany: WZB.
Calenda, D., & Meijer, A. (2008). Digital encounters and ‘easy’ politics – results of a web survey among young people in three European countries. In T. Hayhtio & J. Rinne (Eds.), Net working/networking: Citizen initiated internet politics (pp. 205–223). Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Calenda, D., & Mosca, L. (2007). The political use of the Internet: Some insights from two surveys of Italian students. Information, Communication & Society, 10(1), 29–47.
Coleman, S., Taylor, J., & Van de Donk, W. (Eds.). (1999). Parliament in the age of the Internet. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Corbetta, P. (2003). Social research theory, methods and techniques. London: Sage.
della Porta, D. (Ed.). (2009). Another Europe: Conceptions and practices of democracy in the European social forums. London: Routledge.
della Porta, D., & Mosca, L. (2005a). Global-net for global movements? A network of networks for a movement of movements. Journal of Public Policy, 25(1), 165–190.
della Porta, D., & Mosca, L. (Eds.). (2005b). Searching the Net (Report prepared for the WP2 of the Demos project), San Domenico di Fiesole (Florence): European University Institute. http://demos.eui.eu.
della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (1999). Social movements: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
della Porta, D., & Rucht, D. (1995). Social movement sectors in context: A comparison of Italy and West Germany, 1965–1990. In J. C. Jenkins & B. Klandermans (Eds.), The politics of social protest (pp. 272–299). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
della Porta, D., Andretta, M., Mosca, L., & Reiter, H. (2006). Globalization from below. Transnational activists and protest networks. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Di Gennaro, C., & Dutton, W. (2006). The internet and the public: Online and offline political participation in the United Kingdom. Parliamentary Affairs, 59(2), 299–313.
Diani, M. (2001). Social movement networks: Virtual and real. In F. Webster (Ed.), Culture and politics in the information age (pp. 117–128). London: Routledge.
Doerr, N., & Mattoni, A. (2007). The Euromayday parade against precarity: Cross national diffusion and transformation of the European space ‘from below’. Paper presented at 8th Annual Conference of the European Sociological Association, Caledonian University, Glasgow.
Downing, J. (2001). Radical media: Rebellious communication and social movements. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Earl, J., & Kimport, K. (2011). Digitally enabled social change. Activism in the internet age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Freschi, A. C. (2003). Dalla rete delle reti al movimeto dei movimenti. Gli hacker e l’altra comunicazione. In D. della Porta & L. Mosca (Eds.), Globalizzazione e Movimenti Sociali (pp. 49–75). Roma: Manifestolibri.
Garrett, R. K. (2006). Protest in an information society. A review of literature on social movements and new ICTs. Information Communication & Society, 9(2), 202–224.
Gibson, R., Nixon, P., & Ward, S. (Eds.). (2003). Political parties and the internet. Net gain? London: Routledge.
Gillan, K., Pickerill, J., & Webster, F. (2011). Anti-war activism. New media and protest in the information age. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Guay, L. (2002). The world march of women: A political action to transform the world. Paper presented at the symposium on Citizenship and Globalization: Exploring Participation and Democracy in a Global Context, Langara College, Vancouver, British Columbia.
Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hargittai, E. (2004). Internet access and use in context. New Media & Society, 6(1), 137–143.
Hindman, M., Kostas, T., & Johnson, J. A. (2003). Googlearchy: How a few heavily linked sites dominate politics on the Web. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
Hirzalla, F., & van Zoonen, L. (2011). Beyond the online/offline divide: How youth’s online and offline civic activities converge. Social Science Computer Review, 29(4), 481–498.
Jordan, T. (2002). Activism!: Direct Action Hacktivism and the Future of Society. London: Reaktion Books.
Kavada, A. (2006). The ‘alter-globalization movement’ and the Internet: A case study of communication networks and collective action. Paper presented at the colloquium on Cultural Conflicts, Social Movements and New Rights: A European Challenge, Cortona.
Koopmans, R., & Zimmermann, A. (2005). Visibility and communication networks on the Internet: The role of search engines and hyperlinks. Paper presented at the CONNEX workshop on A European Public Sphere: How much of it do we have and how much do we need? Amsterdam.
Koopmans, R., & Zimmermann, A. (2010). Transnational political communication on the internet: Search engine results and hyperlink networks. In R. Koopmans & P. Statham (Eds.), The making of a European public sphere (pp. 171–194). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leonardi, L. (2000). La dimensione sociale della globalizzazione. Roma: Carocci.
Loader, B. D. (2008). Social movements and new media. Sociology Compass, 2(6), 1920–1933.
Lusoli, W., Gibson, R., & Ward, S. (2008). Italian elections online: Ten years on. In J. L. Newell (Ed.), The Italian general election of 2006. Romano Prodi’s victory (pp. 177–199). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Margolis, M., Resnick, D., & Wolfe, J. (1999). Party competition on the Internet in the United States and Britain. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 4(4), 24–47.
Meyers, D. J. (2001). Social activism through computer networks. In O. V. Burton (Ed.), Computing in the social science and humanities (pp. 124–139). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Micheletti, M. (2003). Political virtue and shopping. Individuals, consumerism, and collective action. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Micheletti, M., & Stolle, D. (2008). Fashioning social justice through political consumerism, capitalism, and the Internet. Cultural Studies, 22(5), 749–769.
Mosca, L. (2005). Italian report. In D. della Porta & L. Mosca (Eds.), Searching the net (pp. 75–95). Domenico di Fiesole (Florence): European University Institute.
Mosca, L. (2010). From the streets to the net? The political use of the internet by social movements. International Journal of E-Politics, I(1), 1–21.
Mosca, L., & della Porta, D. (2009). Unconventional politics online: Internet and the global justice movement. In D. Della Porta (Ed.), Democracy in social movements (pp. 194–216). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mosca, L., & Santucci, D. (2009). Petitioning online. The role of e-petitions in web campaigning. In S. Baringhorst, J. Niesyto, & V. Kneip (Eds.), Political campaigning on the web (pp. 121–146). Bielefeld: Transcript.
Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide. Civic engagement, information poverty and the Internet worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Parks, L. (2006, September). No Valentine for Bolkestein: A study of the campaign against the draft directive on services in the internal market. Paper presented at the ESPANET conference, Bremen. Retrieved April 30, 2009, from http://www.zes.uni-bremen.de/ccm/cms-service/stream/asset/?asset_id=1667369
Pickerill, J. (2003). Cyberprotest. Environmental activism online. Manchester: Manchester University press.
Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267.
Quintelier, E., & Vissers, S. (2008). The effect of internet use on political participation: An analysis of survey results for 16-Year-olds in Belgium. Social Science Computer Review, 26(4), 411–427.
Ryan, C. (1991). Prime time activism: Media strategies for grassroots organizing. Boston: South End Press.
Sunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Trechsel, A., Kies, R., Mendez, F., & Schmitter, P. (2003). Evaluation of the use of new technologies in order to facilitate democracy in Europe, Edemocratizing the parliament and parties of Europe. Luxembourg: Scientific Technology Assessment Office, European Parliament.
Van Aelst, P., & Walgrave, S. (2001). Who is that (wo)man in the street? From the normalization of protest to the normalization of the protester. European Journal of Political Research, 39, 461–486.
Van de Donk, W., Loader, B. D., Nixon, P. G., & Rucht, D. (Eds.). (2004). Cyberprotest. New media, citizens and social movements. London: Routledge.
Van Dijk, J. (2005). The deepening divide: inequality in the information society. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Van Laer, J. (2007). Internet use and protest participation: How do ICTs affect mobilization? (PSW-paper 2007/1). http://webhost.ua.ac.be/psw/pswpapers/PSWpaper%202007–01%20jeroen%20van%20laer.pdf. Accessed 30 Apr 2009.
Vedres, B., Bruszt, L., & Stark, D. (2005). Shaping the web of civic participation: Civil society websites in Eastern Europe. The Journal of Public Policy, 25(1), 149–163.
Vissers, S. (2009). From preaching to the converted to preaching through the converted. Paper presented at the ECPR conference (Joint Sessions of Workshops), Lisbon.
Walgrave, S., & Rucht, D. (Eds.). (2010). The world says no to war. Demonstrations against the war on Iraq. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Walgrave, S., & Verhulst, J. (2008). Protest surveying. Testing the feasibility and reliability of an innovative methodological approach to political protest (PARTIREP working paper). http://www.partirep.eu/upload/1236065530.pdf. Accessed 30 Apr 2009.
Wall, M. A. (2007). Social movements and email: Expressions of online identity in the globalization protests. New Media & Society, 9(2), 258–277.
Ward, S., & Lusoli, W. (2003). Dinosaurs in cyberspace? British trade unions and the Internet. European Journal of Communication, 8(2), 147–179.
Zimmermann, A., & Koopmans, R. (2003). Political communication on the Internet. Part 1: Representative sample of websites (Europub. Com WP4 Integrated report – Analysis of Internet sites). http://europub.wzb.eu/Data/reports/WP4/D4-5%20WP4%20Integrated%20Report.pdf. Accessed 30 Apr 2009.
Zittel, T. (2009). Constituency communication on the WWW in comparative perspective. Changing media or changing democracy? Paper presented at the ECPR conference (Joint Sessions of Workshops), Lisbon.
Interviews
1 – Spokesperson of the Abruzzo Social Forum.
2 – President of the weekly magazine, Carta (paper).
3 – Activist of the Venice Social Forum.
4 – Activist of the Rete Lilliput working group on the internet.
5 – Spokesperson of the Young Communists.
6 – Activist of Indymedia-Italy.
7 – Creator of the online magazine, Social Press.
8 – President of the Italian World Shops Association.
9 – Activist of the social centre, Bulk.
– Webmaster of the metalworkers trade union, Fiom (Federazione Impiegati e Operai Metallurgici).
– Journalist of the communist newspaper, Il Manifesto.
– Spokesperson of the Italian branch of the World March of Women.
– Activist of the non-violent group, Casa Pace (House of Peace).
– President of the ecopacifist online portal, PeaceLink.
– Spokesperson of the Rete Lilliput.
– Delegate of the rank-and-file union Sin COBAS.
– Collaborator of the online magazine, Social Press.
– Activist of the Italian branch of the World March of Women.
– Spokesperson of the COBAS Confederation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mosca, L. (2013). The Internet as a New Channel for Political Participation?. In: Demetriou, K. (eds) Democracy in Transition. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30068-4_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30068-4_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-30067-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-30068-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)