4.1 Article

Turning the inside out: Social media and the broadcasting of indigenous discourse

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION
卷 32, 期 2, 页码 131-150

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0267323116674112

关键词

Indigenous media; inreach vs outreach communication; protest movements; Sami culture; social media

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council FORMAS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article analyses what happens on social media (Twitter) when a local issue specific to a certain Indigenous group spreads out to a wider network of actors. We look closer at the process where emic (inside) discourses are enabled, through social media, to reach a broader audience and become part of translocal debates. In a case study of information sharing, network building and support on Twitter in relation to a series of Sami anti-mining protests in 2013, we address questions about the dynamics, flows and process of Indigenous communication on Twitter. First, we analyse in what ways and to what extent the posts are used for inreach communication or outreach communication. Second, we analyse the role of tweets that contain links to web resources for broadcasting Indigenous concerns to a wider, more diverse audience. Finally, we assess how different types of actors interact in order to shape the circulation of content. Our analysis shows even though communication went beyond the core community, Sami actors still appeared to own and control the discourse and agenda on the issue in social media. Obviously, online communities are not secluded communities. For geographically localized groups and for marginalized communities, the use of global social media does not only enable communication with actors in more distant groups and places; social media also makes visible common interests and goals on a global scale. The possibility of addressing multiple audiences at the same time increases the potential of reaching an audience outside one's set of followers' or one's tight-knit communities of like-minded people.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据