Mapping a Dark Space: Challenges in Sampling and Classifying Non- Institutionalized Actors on Telegram

Table of contents

Bibliographic information

Cover of Volume: M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft Volume 71 (2023), Issue 3-4
Open Access Full access

M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft

Volume 71 (2023), Issue 3-4

Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright Year
2023
ISSN-Online
2942-3317
ISSN-Print
1615-634X

Chapter information

Open Access Full access

Volume 71 (2023), Issue 3-4

Mapping a Dark Space: Challenges in Sampling and Classifying Non- Institutionalized Actors on Telegram

Authors:
ISSN-Print
1615-634X
ISSN-Online
2942-3317
Preview:

Crafted as an open communication platform characterized by high anonymity and minimal moderation, Telegram has garnered increasing popularity among activists operating within repressive political contexts, as well as among political extremists and conspiracy theorists. While Telegram offers valuable data access to research non-institutionalized activism, scholars studying the latter on Telegram face unique theoretical and methodological challenges in systematically defining, selecting, sampling, and classifying relevant actors and content. This literature review addresses these issues by considering a wide range of recent research. In particular, it discusses the methodological challenges of sampling and classifying heterogeneous groups of (often non-institutionalized) actors. Drawing on social movement research, we first identify challenges specific to the characteristics of non-institutionalized actors and how they become interlaced with Telegram’s platform infrastructure and requirements. We then discuss strategies from previous Telegram research for the identification and sampling of a study population through multistage sampling procedures and the classification of actors. Finally, we derive challenges and potential strategies for future research and discuss ethical challenges.

Bibliography

  1. Balser, Markus (2022). Telegram sperrt 64 Kanäle. Süddeutsche Zeitung vom 11.02.2022. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/telegram-kanaele-sperrung-1.5527255 [07.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  2. CeMAS (2023). Chronologie einer Radikalisierung. Wie Telegram zur wichtigsten Plattform für Verschwörungsideologien und Rechtsextremismus wurde. https://cemas.io/publikationen/telegram-chronologie-einer-radikalisierung/ [07.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  3. Jäschke, Marvin (2021). BfJ: Anwendung des NetzDG gegen Telegram. Computer und Recht, 37(7), r79–r80. https://doi.org/10.9785/cr-2021-370720. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  4. Kiess, Johannes, & Wetzel, Gideon (Hrsg.) (2022). EFBI Digital Report 2: Ausstieg aus der Demokratie: Einblicke in Sächsische Telegram-Gruppen & Kanäle. https://efbi.de/files/efbi/pdfs/Digital%20Reports/2022_EFBI_Digital%20Report_2_FGZ.pdf. [07.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  5. Koch, Wolfgang (2022). Reichweiten von Social-Media-Plattformen und Messengern. Ergebnisse der ARD/ZDF-Onlinestudie 2022. Media-Perspektiven, 10/2022, S. 471–478. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  6. Lüdecke, Robert (2020). Eine Strafverfolgung findet de facto nicht statt – Telegram ist Superspreader von Hass und Verschwörungserzählungen. https://www.amadeu-antonio-stiftung.de/eine-strafverfolgung-findet-de-facto-nicht-statt-telegram-ist-superspreader-von-hass-und-verschwoerungserzaehlungen-64371/ [07.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  7. Müller, Pia (2022). Extrem rechte Influencer*innen auf Telegram: Normalisierungsstrategien in der Corona-Pandemie. ZRex – Zeitschrift für Rechtsextremismusforschung, 2(1–2022), 91–109. https://doi.org/10.3224/zrex.v2i1.06. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  8. Puyosa, Iria, & Ponce de Léon, Esteban (2022). Understanding Telegram’s Ecosystem of Far-Right Channels in the US. Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab). https://medium.com/dfrlab/understanding-telegrams-ecosystem-of-far-right-channels-in-the-us-22e963c09234 [07.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  9. Simon, Mónika, Welbers, Kasper, Kroon, Anne C., & Trilling, Damian (2022). Linked in the Dark: A Network Approach to Understanding Information Flows within the Dutch Telegramsphere. Information, Communication & Society, Online First. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2022.2133549. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  10. Smirnova, Julia, Matlach, Paula, & Arcostanzo, Francseca (2022). Support from the Conspiracy Corner: German-Language Disinformation about the Russian Invasion of Ukraine on Telegram. https://www.isdglobal.org/digital_dispatches/support-from-the-conspiracy-corner-german-language-disinformation-about-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-on-telegram/ [07.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  11. Statista (2023). Anzahl der monatlich aktiven Nutzer von Telegram weltweit in ausgewählten Monaten von Dezember 2014 bis August 2023. https://www.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/515623 [07.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  12. Taddicken, Monika, & Schmidt, Jan-Hinrik (2022). Soziale Medien und Öffentlichkeit(en). In: Jan-Hinrik Schmidt & Monika Taddicken (Hrsg.), Handbuch Soziale Medien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-03895-3_22-1. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  13. Urman, Aleksandra, & Katz, Stefan (2022). What They Do in the Shadows: Examining the Far-Right Networks on Telegram. Information, Communication & Society, 25(7), 904–923. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1803946. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  14. Walther, Samantha, & McCoy, Andrew (2021). US Extremism on Telegram: Fueling Disinformation, Conspiracy Theories, and Accelerationism. Perspectives on Terrorism, 15(2), 100–124. https://pt.icct.nl/article/us-extremism-telegram-fueling-disinformation-conspiracy-theories-and-accelerationism [07.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-207
  15. Al-Rawi, A. (2021). Telegramming hate: Far-right themes on dark social media. Canadian Journal of Communication, 46(4), 821–851. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2021v46n4a4055 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  16. Al-Rawi, A. (2022). News loopholing: Telegram news as portable alternative media. Journal of Computational Social Science, 5(1), 949–968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42001-021-00155-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  17. Alonso-Muñoz, L., Tirado-García, A., & Casero-Ripollés, A. (2022). Telegram in campaign: The use of mobile instant messaging services in electoral political communication. Communication & Society, 35(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.35.4.71-88 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  18. Bailey, M., Dittrich, D., Kenneally, E., & Maughan, D. (2012). The Menlo Report. IEEE Security & Privacy, 10(2), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2012.52 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  19. Barberá, P. (2015). Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data. Political Analysis, 23(1), 76–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpu011 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  20. Barbosa, S. & Milan, S., (2019). Do not harm in private chat apps: Ethical issues for research on and with WhatsApp. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture 14(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.16997/wpcc.313 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  21. Baumgartner, J., Zannettou, S., Squire, M., & Blackburn, J. (2020, May). The pushshift Telegram dataset. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (Vol. 14, pp. 840–847). https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v14i1.7348 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  22. Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(10). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  23. Bloom, M., Tiflati, H., & Horgan, J. (2019). Navigating ISIS’s preferred platform: Telegram. Terrorism and Political Violence, 31(6), 1242–1254. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2017.1339695 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  24. Bovet, A., & Grindrod, P. (2022). Organization and evolution of the UK far-right network on Telegram. Applied Network Science, 7(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41109-022-00513-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  25. Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. (2011). The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics. In A. Bruns & P. De Wilde (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) General Conference 2011 (pp. 1–9). The European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR). https://eprints.qut.edu.au/46515/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  26. Buehling, K. (2023). Message deletion on Telegram: Affected data types and implications for computational analysis. Communication Methods and Measures. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2023.2183188 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  27. Buehling, K., & Heft, A. (2023). Pandemic protesters on Telegram: How platform affordances and information ecosystems shape digital counterpublics. Social Media + Society, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305123119943 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  28. Cahn, M. A. (2012). Institutional and noninstitutional actors in the policy process. In S. Theodoulou & M. A. Cahn (Eds.), Public Policy: The Essential Readings (2nd ed., pp. 199–206). Pearson. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  29. Curley, C., Siapera, E., & Carthy, J. (2022). Covid-19 protesters and the far right on Telegram: Co-Conspirators or accidental bedfellows? Social Media + Society, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221129187 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  30. Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2020). Social movements: An introduction (3rd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  31. Diani, M. (1992). The concept of social movement. The Sociological Review, 40(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1992.tb02943.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  32. Diani, M., & Bison, I. (2004). Organizations, coalitions, and movements. Theory and Society, 33(3/4), 281–309. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  33. Earl, J., & Kimport, K. (2011). Digitally enabled social change: Activism in the internet age. The MIT Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hhcb9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  34. Earl, J., Maher, T. V., & Pan, J. (2022). The digital repression of social movements, protest, and activism: A synthetic review. Science Advances, 8(10), eabl8198. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abl8198 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  35. Erickson, B. H. (1979). Some problems of inference from chain data. Sociological Methodology, 10, 276–302. https://doi.org/10.2307/270774 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  36. Gärtner, C. (2022). Zentrale Akteure in Online-Netzwerken von sozialen Bewegungen [Central actors in online social movement networks]. In J. Jünger, U. Gochermann, C. Peter, & M. Bachl (Eds.), Grenzen, Probleme und Lösungen bei der Stichprobenziehung (pp. 114–155). Herbert von Halem Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  37. Goodman, L. A. (1961). Snowball sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 32(1), 148–170. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177705148 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  38. Gursky, J., Riedl, M. J., Joseff, K., & Woolley, S. (2022). Chat apps and cascade logic: A multi-platform perspective on India, Mexico, and the United States. Social Media + Society, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221094773 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  39. Herasimenka, A. (2022). Movement leadership and messaging platforms in preemptive repressive settings: Telegram and the Navalny Movement in Russia. Social Media + Society, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221123038 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  40. Holzer, B. (2021). Zwischen Protest und Parodie: Strukturen der „Querdenken“-Kommunikation auf Telegram (und anderswo) [Between protest and parody: Structures of „lateral thinking“ communication on Telegram (and elsewhere).] In S. Reichardt (Ed.), Die Misstrauensgemeinschaft der „Querdenker“. Die Corona-Proteste aus kultur- und sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive (pp. 125–157). Campus Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  41. Hoseini, M., Melo, P., Benevenuto, F., Feldmann, A., & Zannettou, S. (2021). On the globalization of the QAnon conspiracy theory through Telegram (arXiv:2105.13020). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.13020 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  42. Jahanbakhsh-Nagadeh, Z., Feizi-Derakhshi, M.-R., & Sharifi, A. (2022). A deep content-based model for Persian rumor verification. ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing 21(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3487289 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  43. Jost, P., & Dogruel, L. (2023). Radical mobilization in times of crisis: Use and effects of appeals and populist communication features in Telegram channels. Social Media + Society, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231186372 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  44. König, T., Schünemann, W. J., Brand, A., Freyberg, J., & Gertz, M. (2022). The EPINetz Twitter politicians dataset 2021. A new resource for the study of the German Twittersphere and its application for the 2021 federal elections. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 63(3), 529–547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-022-00405-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  45. Kriesi, H. (1996). The organizational structure of new social movements in a political context. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements (pp. 152–184). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803987.009 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  46. Kurant, M., Markopoulou, A., & Thiran, P. (2010). On the bias of BFS (Breadth First Search). 2010 22nd International Teletraffic Congress (LTC 22), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITC.2010.5608727 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  47. La Morgia, M., Mei, A., Mongardini, A. M., & Wu, J. (2021). Uncovering the dark side of Telegram: Fakes, clones, scams, and conspiracy movements (arXiv:2111.13530). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2111.13530 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  48. Loadenthal, M. (2022). Feral fascists and deep green guerrillas: Infrastructural attack and accelerationist terror. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 15(1), 169–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2031129 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  49. Müller, P., Harrendorf, S, & Mischler, A. (2022) Linguistic radicalisation of right-wing and salafi jihadist groups in social media: a corpus-driven lexicometric analysis. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 28, 203–244, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-022-09509-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  50. Münch, F. V., Thies, B., Puschmann, C., & Bruns, A. (2021). Walking through Twitter: Sampling a language-based follow network of influential Twitter accounts. Social Media + Society, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120984475 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  51. Narayanan, A., & Shmatikov, V. (2007). How to break anonymity of the Netflix Prize dataset (arXiv:cs/0610105). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cs/0610105 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  52. Pearson, E., Whittaker, J., Baaken, T., Zeiger, S., Atamuradova, F., & Conway, M. (2023). Online extremism and terrorism researchers’ security, safety, and resilience: Findings from the field. VOX-Pol. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  53. Peeters, S., & Willaert, T. (2022). Telegram and migital Methods: Mapping networked conspiracy theories through platform affordances. M/C Journal, 25(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.2878 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  54. Peter, V., Kühn, R., Mitrović, J., Granitzer, M., & Schmid-Petri, H. (2022). Network analysis of German COVID-19 related discussions on Telegram. In P. Rosso, V. Basile, R. Martínez, E. Métais, & F. Meziane (Eds.), Natural Language Processing and Information Systems (pp. 25–32). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08473-7_3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  55. Puschmann, C., Karakurt, H., Amlinger, C., Gess, N., & Nachtwey, O. (2022). RPC-Lex: A dictionary to measure German right-wing populist conspiracy discourse online. Convergence, 28(4), 1144–1171. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221109440 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  56. Robertson, D. G., & Amarasingam, A. (2022). How conspiracy theorists argue: Epistemic capital in the QAnon social media sphere. Popular Communication, 20(3), 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2022.2050238 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  57. Rogers, R. (2020). Deplatforming: Following extreme internet celebrities to Telegram and alternative social media. European Journal of Communication, 35(3), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323120922066 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  58. Rössler, P. (2017). Inhaltsanalyse [content analysis] (3rd ed.). utb GmbH. https://doi.org/10.36198/9783838547060 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  59. Rosvall M., Bergstrom C. T. (2008). Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(4), 1118–1123. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0706851105 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  60. Rothut, S., Schulze, H., Hohner, J., Greipl, S. & Rieger, D. (2022). Radikalisierung im Internet – ein systematischer Überblick über Forschungsstand, Wirkungsebenen sowie Implikationen für Wissenschaft und Praxis [Radicalization on the Internet – A systematic overview of the state of research, levels of impact, and implications for science and practice]. CoRE-NRW. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  61. Salganik, M. J. (2018). Bit by Bit: Social Research in the Digital Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  62. Schulze, H. (2021). Zur Bedeutung von Dark Social & Deplatforming. Eine quantitative Exploration der deutschsprachigen Rechtsaußenszene auf Telegram [On the meaning of dark social & deplatforming. A quantitative exploration of the German-speaking far-right scene on Telegram]. Zeitschrift für Semiotik, 42(3–4), 61–86. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  63. Schulze, H., Hohner, J., Greipl, S., Girgnhuber, M., Desta, I., & Rieger, D. (2022). Far-right conspiracy groups on fringe platforms: A longitudinal analysis of radicalization dynamics on Telegram. Convergence, 28(4), 1103–1126. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221104977 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  64. Semenzin, S., & Bainotti, L. (2020). The use of Telegram for non-consensual dissemination of intimate images: Gendered affordances and the construction of masculinities. Social Media + Society, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120984453 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  65. Simon, M., Welbers, K., C. Kroon, A., & Trilling, D. (2022). Linked in the dark: A network approach to understanding information flows within the Dutch Telegramsphere. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2022.2133549 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  66. Su, C. C., Chan, M., & Paik, S. (2022). Telegram and the anti-ELAB movement in Hong Kong: Reshaping networked social movements through symbolic participation and spontaneous interaction. Chinese Journal of Communication, 15(3), 431–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2022.2092167 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  67. Telegram (2022). 700 million users and Telegram Premium. https://telegram.org/blog/700-million-and-premium?ln=r [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  68. Teo, E., & Fu, K. (2021). A novel systematic approach of constructing protests repertoires from social media: Comparing the roles of organizational and non-organizational actors in social movement. Journal of Computational Social Science, 4(2), 787–812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42001-021-00101-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  69. Törnberg, A., & Nissen, A. (2022). Mobilizing against Islam on social media: Hyperlink networking among European far-right extra-parliamentary Facebook groups. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2022.2118546 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  70. Urman, A., & Katz, S. (2022a). Online publicity and outcomes of individual politically salient criminal cases in an authoritarian regime: Evidence from Russia. Political Research Exchange, 4(1), Article 2095920. https://doi.org/10.1080/2474736X.2022.2095920 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  71. Urman, A., & Katz, S. (2022b). What they do in the shadows: Examining the far-right networks on Telegram. Information, Communication & Society, 25(7), 904–923. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1803946 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  72. Urman, A., Ho, J. C., & Katz, S. (2021). Analyzing protest mobilization on Telegram: The case of 2019 anti-extradition bill movement in Hong Kong. Plos one, 16(10), e0256675. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256675 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  73. Wahlström, M., & Törnberg, A. (2021). Social media mechanisms for right-wing political violence in the 21st century: discursive opportunities, group dynamics, and co-ordination. Terrorism and Political Violence, 33(4), 766–787. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2019.1586676 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  74. Wich, M., Gorniak, A., Eder, T., Bartmann, D., Çakici, B. E., & Groh, G. (2022). Introducing an abusive language classification framework for Telegram to investigate the German hater community. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 16, 1133–1144. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  75. Willems, J., & Jegers, M. (2012). Social movement structures in relation to goals and forms of action: An exploratory model. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.22230/cjnser.2012v3n2a128 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  76. Zehring, M., & Domahidi, E. (2023). German corona protest mobilizers on Telegram and their relations to the far right: A network and topic analysis. Social Media + Society, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231155106 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  77. Zook, M., Barocas, S., Boyd, D., Crawford, K., Keller, E., Gangadharan, S. P., Goodman, A., Hollander, R., Koenig, B. A., Metcalf, J., Narayanan, A., Nelson, A., & Pasquale, F. (2017). Ten simple rules for responsible big data research. PLOS Computational Biology, 13(3), e1005399. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005399 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212
  78. Behre, J., Hölig, S., & Möller, J. (2023): Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2023 – Ergebnisse für Deutschland. Hamburg: Verlag Hans-Bredow-Institut, Juni 2023 (Arbeitspapiere des Hans-Bredow-Instituts | Projektergebnisse Nr. 67), https://doi.org/10.21241/ssoar.86851. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  79. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The Logic of Connective Action. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  80. Bergmann, E., & Butter, M. (2020). Conspiracy Theory and Populism. In M. Butter & P. Knight (Eds.), Routledge Handbooks. Routledge Handbook of Conspiracy Theories (pp. 330–343). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  81. Bertuzzi, N. (2021). Conspiracy Theories and Social Movements Studies: A Research Agenda. Sociology Compass, 15(12). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12945. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  82. Bessi, A., Coletto, M., Davidescu, G. A., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2015). Science vs Conspiracy: Collective Narratives in the Age of Misinformation. PLoS ONE 10(2), e0118093. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  83. Bitzmann, H., Sick, H., Fielitz, M., & Marcks, H. (2023). Methodisches Vorgehen beim Monitoring (MATR Nr.1). Machine Against the Rage. https://doi.org/10.58668/matr/01.5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  84. Boyle, M. P., & Schmierbach, M. (2009). Media Use and Protest: The Role of Mainstream and Alternative Media Use in Predicting Traditional and Protest Participation. Communication Quarterly, 57(1), 1–17. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  85. Brotherton, R., French, C. C., & Pickering, A. D. (2013). Measuring Belief in Conspiracy Theories: The Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 279. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00279. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  86. Buehling, K. (2023). Message Deletion on Telegram: Affected Data Types and Implications for Computational Analysis. Communication Methods and Measures, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2023.2183188. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  87. Bühlmann, P. (1997). Sieve Bootstrap for Time Series. Bernoulli, 3(2), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.2307/3318584. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  88. Cinelli, M., Quattrociocchi, W., Galeazzi, A., Valensise, C. M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L., Zola, P., Zollo, F., & Scala, A. (2020). The COVID-19 Social Media Infodemic. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 16598. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-73510-5. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  89. Curley, C., Siapera, E., & Carthy, J. (2022). Covid-19 Protesters and the Far Right on Telegram: Co-Conspirators or Accidental Bedfellows? Social Media + Society, 8(4), 20563051221129187. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221129187. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  90. Dargahi Nobari, A., Sarraf, M. H. K. M., Neshati, M., & Erfanian Daneshvar, F. (2021). Characteristics of Viral Messages on Telegram: The World’s Largest Hybrid Public and Private Messenger. Expert Systems with Applications, 168, 114303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.114303. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  91. Darius, P., & Urquhart, M. (2021). Disinformed Social Movements: A Large-Scale Mapping of Conspiracy Narratives as Online Harms During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Online Social Networks and Media, 26, 100174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.osnem.2021.100174. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  92. Douglas, K. M., Uscinski, J. E., Sutton, R. M., Cichocka, A., Nefes, T., Ang, C. S., & Deravi, F. (2019). Understanding Conspiracy Theories. Political Psychology, 40(S1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12568. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  93. Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2023). What Are Conspiracy Theories? A Definitional Approach to Their Correlates, Consequences, and Communication. Annual Review of Psychology, 74(1), 271–298. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-032420-031329. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  94. Dzeyk, W. (2001). Ethische Dimensionen der Online-Forschung. [Ethical Dimensions of Online Research.] Kölner Psychologische Studien, 6(1), 1-32. http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/2424/. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  95. Fielitz, M., & Schwarz, K. (2020). Hate not Found?! Das Deplatforming der extremen Rechten und seine Folgen. Institut für Demokratie und Zivilgesellschaft (IDZ). https://www.idz-jena.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Hate_not_found/WEB_IDZ_FB_Hate_not_Found.pdf. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  96. Hameleers, M. (2021). They Are Selling Themselves Out to the Enemy! The Content and Effects of Populist Conspiracy Theories. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 33(1), 38–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edaa004. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  97. Hetzel, N., Klawier, T., Prochazka, F., & Schweiger, W. (2022). How Do COVID-19 Conspiracy Beliefs, Exposure to Alternative Sources and Social Media Correlate in Germany? Studies in Communication and Media, 11(4), 508–535. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2022-4-508. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  98. Holt, K. (2018). Alternative Media and the Notion of Anti-Systemness: Towards an Analytical Framework. Media and Communication 6(4), 49–57. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1467. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  99. Imhoff, R., Dieterle, L., & Lamberty, P. (2021). Resolving the Puzzle of Conspiracy Worldview and Political Activism: Belief in Secret Plots Decreases Normative but Increases Nonnormative Political Engagement. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619896491. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  100. Imhoff, R., & Bruder, M. (2014). Speaking (Un–)Truth to Power: Conspiracy Mentality as a Generalised Political Attitude. European Journal of Personality, 28(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1930. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  101. Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M. (2014). The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions. PloS one, 9(2), e89177. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  102. Jost, P. & Dogruel, L. (2023). Radical Mobilization in Times of Crisis: Use and Effects of Appeals and Populist Communication Features in Telegram Channels. Social Media + Society, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231186372. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  103. Júnior, M., Melo, P., Da Silva, A. P. C., Benevenuto, F. & Almeida, J. (2021). Towards Understanding the Use of Telegram by Political Groups in Brazil. In A. C. M. Pereira (Ed.), ACM Digital Library. Proceedings of the Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the Web (pp. 237–244). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3470482.3479640. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  104. Kenski, K., & Stroud, N. J. (2006). Connections between Internet Use and Political Efficacy, Knowledge, and Participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem5002_1. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  105. Lamberty, P., & Leiser, D. (2019, April 23). “Sometimes You Just Have to Go In” – The Link between Conspiracy Beliefs and Political Action. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/bdrxc. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  106. Lyubchich, V., Gel, Y. R., & Vishwakarma, S. (2022). funtimes: Functions for Time Series Analysis (9.0). https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=funtimes. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  107. Mahl, D., Schäfer, M. S., & Zeng, J. (2022). Conspiracy Theories in Online Environments: An Interdisciplinary Literature Review and Agenda for Future Research. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221075759. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  108. Maurer, M., Reinemann, C., & Kruschinski, S. (2021). Eine empirische Studie zur Qualität der journalistischen Berichterstattung über die Corona-Pandemie. Rudolf Augstein Stiftung. https://rudolf-augstein-stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Studie-einseitig-unkritisch-regierungsnah-reinemann-rudolf-augstein-stiftung.pdf [06.09.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  109. Perloff, R. M. (2020). The Dynamics of Persuasion: Communication and Attitudes in the 21st Century. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  110. Pinkleton, B. E., Austin, E. W., Zhou, Y., Willoughby, J. F., & Reiser, M. (2012). Perceptions of News Media, External Efficacy, and Public Affairs Apathy in Political Decision Making and Disaffection. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 89(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699011428586. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  111. Quarfoot, D., & Levine, R. A. (2016). How Robust are Multirater Interrater Reliability Indices to Changes in Frequency Distribution? The American Statistician, 70(4), 373–384. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  112. Reiter, F., & Matthes, J. (2021). Correctives of the Mainstream Media? A Panel Study on Mainstream Media Use, Alternative Digital Media Use, and the Erosion of Political Interest as well as Political Knowledge. Digital Journalism, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.1974916. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  113. Schlütz, D. & Möhring, W. (2018). Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: Negotiating Ethics and Method in Communication Research Practice. Studies in Communication and Media, 7(1), 31–58. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  114. Schulze, H., Hohner, J., Greipl, S., Girgnhuber, M., Desta, I., & Rieger, D. (2022). Far-Right Conspiracy Groups on Fringe Platforms: A Longitudinal Analysis of Radicalization Dynamics on Telegram. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 28(4), 1103–1126. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221104977. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  115. Schwaiger, L., Schneider, J., Rauchfleisch, A., & Eisenegger, M. (2022). Mindsets of Conspiracy: A Typology of Affinities towards Conspiracy Myths in Digital Environments. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 28(4), 1007–1029. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221106427. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  116. Sternisko, A., Cichocka, A., & van Bavel, J. J. (2020). The Dark Side of Social Movements: Social Identity, Non-Conformity, and the Lure of Conspiracy Theories. Current Opinion in Psychology, 35, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.02.007. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  117. Strömbäck, J., & Shehata, A. (2019). The Reciprocal Effects between Political Interest and TV News Revisited: Evidence from Four Panel Surveys. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 96(2), 473–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018793998. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  118. Theocharis, Y. (2015). The Conceptualization of Digitally Networked Participation. Social Media & Society, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115610140. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  119. Theocharis, Y., Cardenal, A., Jin, S., Aalberg, T., Hopmann, D. N., Strömbäck, J., Castro, L., Esser, F., van Aelst, P., Vreese, C. de, Corbu, N., Koc-Michalska, K., Matthes, J., Schemer, C., Sheafer, T., Splendore, S., Stanyer, J., Stępińska, A., & Štětka, V. (2021). Does the Platform Matter? Social Media and COVID-19 Conspiracy Theory Beliefs in 17 Countries. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211045666. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  120. Urman, A., & Katz, S. (2022). What They Do in the Shadows: Examining the Far-Right Networks on Telegram. Information, Communication & Society, 25(7), 904–923. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1803946. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  121. Uscinski, J., Enders, A., Klofstad, C., Seelig, M., Drochon, H., Premaratne, K., & Murthi, M. (2022). Have Beliefs in Conspiracy Theories Increased over Time? PLoS One, 17(7), e0270429. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270429. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  122. van Mulukom, V., Pummerer, L. J., Alper, S., Bai, H., Čavojová, V., Farias, J., Kay, C. S., Lazarevic, L. B., Lobato, E. J. C., Marinthe, G., Pavela Banai, I., Šrol, J., & Žeželj, I. (2022). Antecedents and Consequences of COVID-19 Conspiracy Beliefs: A Systematic Review. Social Science & Medicine, 301, 114912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114912. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  123. van Prooijen, J.‑W., & Douglas, K. M. (2017). Conspiracy Theories as Part of History: The Role of Societal Crisis Situations. Memory Studies, 10(3), 323–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698017701615. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  124. Wood, M. J. (2017). Conspiracy Suspicions as a Proxy for Beliefs in Conspiracy Theories: Implications for Theory and Measurement. British Journal of Psychology, 108(3), 507–527. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12231. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  125. Zehring, M., & Domahidi, E. (2023). German Corona Protest Mobilizers on Telegram and Their Relations to the Far Right: A Network and Topic Analysis. Social Media & Society, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231155106. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  126. Zeng, J., & Schäfer, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing „Dark Platforms”. Covid-19-Related Conspiracy Theories on 8kun and Gab. Digital Journalism, 9(9), 1321–1343. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.1938165. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  127. Zhang, X., & Davis, M. (2022). E-extremism: A conceptual framework for studying the online far right. New Media & Society, online first. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221098360. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-230
  128. Al-Rawi, Ahmed (2021). Telegramming Hate: Far Right Themes on the Dark Social Media. Canadian Journal of Communication, 46(4), 821–851. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2021v46n4a4055. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  129. Akbari, Azadeh & Gabdulhakov, Rashid (2019). Platform Surveillance and Resistance in Iran and Russia: The Case of Telegram. Surveillance & Society, 17(1/2), 223–231. https://ojs.library.queensu.ca/index.php/surveillance-and-society/issue/view/798. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  130. Bachmeier, Martin & Morf, Michael (2015). Kuratieren 2.0 Warum Journalistinnen und Journalisten kuratieren sollten. kommunikation.medien 5, 1–12. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  131. Bause, Halina (2021). Politische Social-Media-Influencer als Meinungsführer? Publizistik 66(2), 295–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-021-00666-z. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  132. Blöbaum, Bernd, Nölleke, Daniel & Scheu, Andreas M. (2016). Das Experteninterview in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. In Stefanie Averbeck-Lietz & Michael Meyen (Hrsg.), Handbuch nicht standardisierte Methoden in der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 175–190). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01656-2_11. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  133. Cui, Xi & Liu, Yu (2017). How Does Online News Curate Linked Sources? A Content Analysis of Three Online News Media. Journalism 18(7), 852–870. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916663621. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  134. Franke, Kim Lucienne, Buschow, Christopher & Kohlschreiber, Marie (2022). Die Creator Economy im Journalismus. Ein Vergleich plattformbasierter Medienproduktion mit der Arbeit in redaktionellen Strukturen. MedienWirtschaft 19(4), 16–25. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  135. Guerrini, Federico (2013). Newsroom Curators & Storytellers: Content Curation as a New Form of Journalism. Working Paper. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/research/files/Newsroom%2520Curators%2520%2526%2520Independent%2520Storytellers%2520-Content%2520Curation%2520as%2520a%2520New%2520Form%2520Of%2520Journalism.pdf [02.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  136. Guhl, Jakob & Davey, Jacob. (26. Juni 2020). A Safe Space to Hate: White Supremacist Mobilisation on Telegram. Institute for Strategic Dialogue. https://www.isdglobal.org/isd-publications/a-safe-space-to-hate-white-supremacist-mobilisation-on-telegram/ [02.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  137. Glaser, Barney G. & Strauss, Anselm L. (1998). Grounded Theory. Strategien qualitativer Forschung. Hans Huber Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  138. Hepp, Andreas, Breiter, Andreas & Hasebrink, Uwe (2018). Rethinking Transforming Communications: An Introduction. In Andreas Hepp, Andreas Breiter & Uwe Hasebrink (Hrsg.), Communicative Figurations. Transforming Communications in Times of Deep Mediatization (S. 3–13). Palgrave McMillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65584-0_1. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  139. Hepp, Andreas & Coudry, Nick (2023). Necessary Entanglements: Reflections on the Role of a “Materialist Phenomenology” in Researching Deep Mediatization and Datafication. Sociologica, 17(1), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/15793. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  140. Hepp, Andreas & Hasebrink, Uwe (2018). Researching Transforming Communications in Times of Deep Mediatization: A Figurational Approach. In Andreas Hepp, Andreas Breiter & Uwe Hasebrink (Hrsg.), Communicative Figurations. Transforming Communications in Times of Deep Mediatization (S. 14–48). Palgrave McMillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65584-0_1. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  141. Herrero-Solana, Victor & Castro-Castro, Carlos (2022). Telegram Channels and Bots: A Ranking of Media Outlets Based in Spain. Societies, 12(6), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc12060164. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  142. Herasimenka, Aliaksandr, Bright, Jonathan, Knuutila, Aleksi & Howard, Philip N. (2023). Misinformation and Professional News on Largely Unmoderated Platforms: The Case of Telegram, Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 20(2), 198–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2022.2076272. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  143. Hohlfeld, Ralf, Bauerfeind, Franziska, Braglia, Ilenia & Butt, Aqib (2021). Communicating COVID-19 against the Backdrop of Conspiracy Ideologies: How Public Figures Discuss the Matter on Facebook and Telegram. Disinformation Research Lab Passau. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36822.78406. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  144. Holzer, Boris (2021). Zwischen Protest und Parodie: Strukturen der „Querdenken“-Kommunikation auf Telegram (und anderswo). In Sven Reichardt (Hrsg.), Die Misstrauensgemeinschaft der „Querdenker“. Die Corona-Proteste aus kultur- und sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive (S. 125–157). Campus Verlag. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/9rgtk. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  145. Jarynowski, Andrzej, Semenov, Alexander & Belik, Vitaly (2020). Protest Perspective Against COVID-19 Risk Mitigation Strategies on the German Internet. In Sriram Chellappan, Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo & NhatHai Phan (Hrsg.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Computational Data and Social Networks (S. 524–535). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66046-8_43. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  146. Jünger, Jakob & Gärtner, Chantal (2020). Datenanalyse von rechtsverstoßenden Inhalten in Gruppen und Kanälen von Messengerdiensten am Beispiel Telegram. Landesanstalt für Medien NRW. https://www.medienanstalt-nrw.de/fileadmin/user_upload/NeueWebsite_0120/Zum_Nachlesen/Telegram-Analyse_LFMNRW_Nov20.pdf [02.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  147. Khaund, Tuja, Hussain, Muhammad Nihal, Shaik, Mainuddin & Agarwal, Nitin (2021). Telegram: Data Collection, Opportunities and Challenges. In Juan Antonio Lossio-Ventura, Jorge Valverde-Rebaza, Eduardo Díaz & Hugo Alatrista-Salas (Hrsg.), Information Management and Big Data. 7th Annual International Conference, SIMBig 2020, Lima, Peru, October 1–3, 2020, Proceedings (S. 513–526). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76228-5. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  148. Kelle, Udo & Kluge, Susanne (2010). Vom Einzelfall zum Typus. Fallvergleich und Fallkontrastierung in der qualitativen Sozialforschung. VS Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  149. Krämer, Benjamin (2021). Stop Studying “Fake News” (We Can Still Fight against Disinformation in the Media). Studies in Communication and Media, 10(1), 6–30. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2021-1-6. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  150. Lou, Chen, Tandoc Jr., Edson C., Hong, Li Xuan, Pong, Xiang Yuan, Lye, Wan Xi & Sng, Ngiag Gya (2021). When Motivations Meet Affordances: News Consumption on Telegram. Journalism Studies, 22(7), 934–952. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1906299. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  151. Mayring, Philipp (2022). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken (13. Aufl.). Beltz. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  152. Müller, Pia (2022). Extrem rechte Influencer*innen auf Telegram: Normalisierungsstrategien in der Corona-Pandemie. Zeitschrift für Rechtsextremismusforschung, 2(1), 91–109. https://doi.org/10.3224/zrex.v2i1.06. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  153. Riedl, Magdalena, Schwemmer, Carsten, Ziewiecki, Sandra & Ross, Lisa M. (2021). The Rise of Political Influencers—Perspectives on a Trend Towards Meaningful Content. Frontiers in Communication, 6, 752–656. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.752656. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  154. Rogers, Richard (2020). Deplatforming: Following Extreme Internet Celebrities to Telegram and Alternative Social Media. European Journal of Communication, 35(3), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323120922066. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  155. Rothut, Sophia, Schulze, Heidi, Hohner, Julian & Rieger, Diana (2023). Ambassadors of Ideology: A Conceptualization and Computational Investigation of Far-Right Influencers, Their Networking Structures, and Communication Practices. New Media & Society, 0(0), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231164409. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  156. Salmons, Janet (2016). Doing Qualitative Research Online. Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  157. Simon, Mónika, Welbers, Kasper, C., Kroon, Anne & Trilling, Damian (2022). Linked in the Dark: A Network Approach to Understanding Information Flows within the Dutch Telegramsphere. Information, Communication & Society, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2022.2133549. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  158. Schlesinger, Philip (2020). After the Post-Public Sphere. Media, Culture & Society, 42(7–8), 1545–1563. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720948003. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  159. Schulze, Heidi, Hohner, Julian, Greipl, Simon, Girgnhuber, Maximilian, Desta, Isabell & Rieger, Diana (2022). Far-Right Conspiracy Groups on Fringe Platforms: A Longitudinal Analysis of Radicalization Dynamics on Telegram. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 28(4), 1103–1126. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221104977. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  160. Schwaiger, Lisa, Schneider, Jörg, Rauchfleisch, Adrian & Eisenegger, Mark (2022). Mindsets of Conspiracy: A Typology of Affinities towards Conspiracy Myths in Digital Environments. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 28(4) 1007–1029. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221106427. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  161. Urman, Aleksandra & Katz, Stefan (2020). What They Do in the Shadows: Examining the Far-Right Networks on Telegram. Information, Communication & Society, 25(7) 904–923. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1803946. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  162. Walther, Samantha & McCoy, Andrew (2021). US Extremism on Telegram: Fueling Disinformation, Conspiracy Theories, and Accelerationism. Perspectives on Terrorism, 15(2), 100–124. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27007298. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  163. Werner, Petra (2013). Qualitative Befragungen. In Konrad Umlauf, Simone Fühles-Ubach & Michale Seadle (Hrsg.), Handbuch Methoden der Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft (S. 128–151). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110255546. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  164. Wehden, Lars-Ole (2023). Nachrichtenangebote und -nutzung in den Sozialen Medien. In ders., Journalistische Gatekeeper in den Sozialen Medien (S.43–83). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40257-0_3. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  165. Wimmer, Jeffrey (2014). Öffentlichkeit, Gegenöffentlichkeiten und Medienpartizipation im Zeitalter des Internets. In Caroline Schmitt & Asta Vonderau (Hrsg.), Transnationalität und Öffentlichkeit. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven (S. 285–308). transcript. https://doi.org/10.14361/transcript.9783839421543.285. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  166. ZAF (2023). Abschlussbericht – Mainstreaming und Radikalisierung in sozialen Medien. https://www.verfassungsschutz.de/SharedDocs/publikationen/DE/zaf/2023-02-16-zaf-abschlussbericht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=7 [02.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  167. Zehring, Maximilian & Domahidi, Emese (2023). German Corona Protest Mobilizers on Telegram and Their Relations to the Far Right: A Network and Topic Analysis. Social Media & Society, 9(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231155106. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  168. Zihiri, Saifeldee, Lima, Gabriel, Han, Jiyoung, Cha, Meeyoung & Lee, Wonjae (2022). QAnon shifts into the mainstream, remains a far-right ally. Heliyon, 8(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08764. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  169. Zimmermann, Fabian & Kohring, Matthias (2020). Aktuelle Desinformation – Definition und Einordnung einer gesellschaftlichen Herausforderung. In Ralf Hohlfeld (Hrsg.), Fake News und Desinformation (S. 32–43). Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748901334. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-248
  170. Amadeu Antonio Stiftung (2020). Alternative Wirklichkeiten: Monitoring rechts-alternativer Medienstrategien. https://www.amadeu-antonio-stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Monitoring_2020_web.pdf [02.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  171. Bromell, David (2022). Deplatforming and Democratic Legitimacy. In: ders. Regulating Free Speech in a Digital Age: Hate, Harm and the Limits of Censorship (S. 81–109). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  172. Busch, Christoph (2021). Regulierung digitaler Plattformen als Infrastrukturen der Daseinsvorsorge. Bonn: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  173. Caiani, Manuela und Donatella Della Porta (2018). The Radical Right as Social Movement Organizations. In: J. Rydgren (Hrsg.), The Oxford Handbook of the Radical Right (S. 327–347). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  174. Fielitz, Maik; Karolin Schwarz und Jana Hitziger (2020). Hate not found?! Das Deplatforming der extremen Rechten und seine Folgen. https://www.idz-jena.de/forschung/hate-not-found-das-deplatforming-der-extremen-rechten [02.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  175. Freelon, Deen (2010). ReCal: Intercoder Reliability Calculation as a Web Service. International Journal of Internet Science, 5, 20–33. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  176. Freelon, Deen (2013). ReCal OIR: Ordinal, Interval, and Ratio Intercoder Reliability as a Web Service. International Journal of Internet Science, 8, 10–16. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  177. Gorwa, Robert (2019). What is Platform Governance? Information, Communication & Society, 22(6), 854–871. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  178. Guhl, Jakob; Julia Ebner und Jan Rau (2020). Das Online-Ökosystem rechtsextremer Akteure. Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD). https://www.bosch-stiftung.de/sites/default/files/publications/pdf/2020-02/ISD_Studie_Online-%C3%96kosystem%20Rechtsextremer%20Akteure.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  179. Koopmans, Ruud (1995). A Burning Question: Explaining the Rise of Racist and Extreme Right Violence in Western Europa (Veröffentlichungsreihe der Abteilung Öffentlichkeit und Soziale Bewegung des Forschungsschwerpunkts Sozialer Wandel, Institutionen und Vermittlungsprozesse des Wissenschaftszentrums Berlin für Sozialforschung). WZB. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  180. Koopmans, Ruud (2005). Repression and the Public Sphere. Discursive Opportunities for Repression against the Extreme Right in Germany in the 1990s. In C. Davenport, H. Johnston & C. Mueller (Hrsg.), Repression and Mobilization (NED – New edition, Bd. 21, S. 159–188). University of Minnesota Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctttv82w.10 [02.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  181. Kriesi, Hanspeter; Ruud Koopmans; Jan Willem Duyvendak und Marco Giugni (1995). New Social Movements in Western Europe. A Comparative Analysis (Bd. 5, NED – New edition). University of Minnesota Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.cttttkw0 [02.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  182. Krippendorff, Klaus (2011). Computing Krippendorff's Alpha-Reliability. https://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/43 [02.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  183. Marcks, Holger und Janina Pawelz (2020). From Myths of Victimhood to Fantasies of Violence: How Far-Right Narratives of Imperilment Work. Terrorism and Political Violence, 1–18. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  184. Minkenberg, Michael (2006). Repression and Reaction: Militant Democracy and the Radical Right in Germany and France. Patterns of Prejudice, 40(1), 25–44. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  185. Nicas, Jack (2018, 4. September). Alex Jones said bans would strengthen him. He was wrong. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/technology/alex-jones-infowars-bans-traffic.html [02.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  186. Rau, Jan; Sandra Kero; Vincent Hofmann; Christina Dinar und Amelie P. Heldt (2022). Rechtsextreme Online-Kommunikation in Krisenzeiten: Herausforderungen und Interventionsmöglichkeiten aus Sicht der Rechtsextremismus- und Platform-Governance-Forschung. Hamburg: Verlag Hans-Bredow-Institut (Arbeitspapiere des Hans-Bredow-Instituts, 62). https://doi.org/10.21241/ssoar.78072. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  187. Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (2020a, 11. Juli). Twitter sperrt Konten der rechtsextremen Identitären wegen Gewaltverherrlichung. Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland. https://www.rnd.de/digital/twitter-sperrt-konten-der-rechtsextremen-identitaren-wegen-gewaltverherrlichung-IMVTRAO3CETD5C6YDH4BPPGIO4.html [10.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  188. Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (2020b, 14. Juli). Identitäre raus: Auch Youtube sperrt Konten von Rechtsextremen. Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland. https://www.rnd.de/politik/identitare-bewegung-gesperrt-auch-youtube-sperrt-konten-von-rechtsextremen-OVU7C4VEX2X5YRJXXFOPJNRKF4.html [10.10.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  189. Rogers, Richard (2020). Deplatforming – Following Extreme Internet Celebrities to Telegram and Alternative Social Media. European Journal of Communication, 35(3), S. 213–229. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  190. Rucht, Dieter (2004). The quadruple ‘A’. In: W. de van Donk (Hrsg.), Cyberprotest. New Media, Citizens and Social Movements (o. S.). London: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  191. Schieb, Jörg (2021). Wenn Attila Hildmann auf Telegram zum „Blitzkrieg“ aufruft. WDR.de, https://blog.wdr.de/digitalistan/wenn-attila-hildmann-auf-telegram-zum-blitzkrieg-aufruft/ [02.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  192. Schink, Alan (2020). Verschwörungstheorie und Konspiration. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  193. Scholl, Armin (2009). Vom Dissens zur Dissidenz. Die Bedeutung alternativer Gegenöffentlichkeit für die Gesellschaft. In K. Merten (Hrsg.), Konstruktion von Kommunikation in der Mediengesellschaft (S. 83–95). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  194. Schweiger, Wolfgang (2017). Der (des)informierte Bürger im Netz. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  195. Stamm, Karl-Heinz (1988). Alternative Öffentlichkeit. Die Erfahrungsproduktion neuer sozialer Bewegungen. Frankfurt am Main: Campus. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  196. Telegram (2023). Channels FAQ. What Does the Eye Icon Mean? https://telegram.org/faq_channels#q-what-does-the-eye-icon-mean. [02.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  197. Tilly, Charles (2005). Repression, Mobilization, and Explanation. In C. Davenport, H. Johnston & C. Mueller (Hrsg.), Repression and Mobilization (NED – New edition, Bd. 21, S. 211–226). University of Minnesota Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctttv82w.10 [05.10.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  198. Weiss, Thomas G. (2000). Governance, Good Governance and Global Governance: Conceptual and Actual Challenges. Third World Quarterly, 21(5), 795–814. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  199. Wimmer, Jeffrey (2007). (Gegen-)Öffentlichkeit in der Mediengesellschaft. Analyse eines medialen Spannungsverhältnisses (1. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften / GWV Fachverlage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  200. Ziegele, Marc; Maike Resing; Katharina Frehmann; Nikolaus Jackob; Ilka Jakobs; Oliver Quiring; Christian Schemer; Tanjev Schultz und Christina Viehmann (2022). Deprived, Radical, Alternatively Informed. Factors Associated with People’s Belief in Covid-19 Related Conspiracy Theories and their Vaccination Intentions in Germany. European Journal of Health Communication, 3(2), 97–130. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-266
  201. Anduiza, E., Cristancho, C., & Sabucedo, J. M. (2014). Mobilization through online social networks: the political protest of the Indignados in Spain. Information, Communication & Society, 17(6), 750–764. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.808360 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  202. Arafa, M., & Armstrong, C. (2016). “Facebook to mobilize, Twitter to coordinate protests, and YouTube to tell the world”: new media, cyberactivism, and the Arab Spring. Journal of Global Initiatives – Policy, Pedagogy, Perspective, 10(1), 73–102. https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/jgi/vol10/iss1/6/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  203. BAG „Gegen Hass im Netz“, & Jost, P. (2023). Die Kanalisation des Protests. Demokratiefeindliche Mobilisierung via Telegram. Machine Against the Rage, 1. https://doi.org/10.58668/matr/01.2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  204. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009). Gephi: An open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 3(1), 361–362. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v3i1.13937 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  205. Bastos, M. (2021). Spatializing social media. Social networks online and offline. Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  206. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action. Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  207. Bennett, W. L., Segerberg, A., & Walker, S. (2014). Organization in the crowd: peer production in large-scale networked protests. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 232–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.870379 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  208. Boulianne, S., Koc-Michalska, K., & Bimber, B. (2020). Mobilizing media: comparing TV and social media effects on protest mobilization. Information, Communication & Society, 23(5), 642–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1713847 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  209. Brantly, A. F. (2019). From cyberspace to independence square: understanding the impact of social media on physical protest mobilization during Ukraine’s Euromaidan Revolution. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 16(4), 360–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2019.1657047 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  210. Breuer, A. (2012). The role of social media in mobilizing political protest: evidence from the Tunisian Revolution (German Development Institute Discussion Paper No. 10/2012). Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE). https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2179030 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  211. Buehling, K. (2023). Message deletion on Telegram: affected data types and implications for computational analysis. Communication Methods and Measures. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2023.2183188 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  212. Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (2021). Verfassungsschutzbericht 2021. https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/DE/publikationen/themen/sicherheit/vsb-2021-gesamt.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=6 [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  213. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2. Aufl.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  214. Csardi, G., & Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal Complex Systems, 1695. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  215. Exo, L. (2022). Telethon: full-featured Telegram client library for Python 3 (1.26.0) [Python Library]. https://github.com/LonamiWebs/Telethon [28.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  216. Frei, N., & Nachtwey, O. (2021). Quellen des „Querdenkertums“. Eine politische Soziologie der Corona-Proteste in Baden-Württemberg. Forschungsauftrag der Heinrich Böll Stiftung Baden-Württemberg. https://www.boell-bw.de/sites/default/files/2021-11/Studie_Quellen%20des%20Querdenkertums.pdf [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  217. Goertz, S. (2022). „Querdenker”. In U. Backes, A. Gallus, E. Jesse & T. Thieme (Hrsg.), Jahrbuch Extremismus & Demokratie (E & D) (S. 175–190). Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  218. Hippert, J., & Saul, P. (28. April, 2021). Von Stuttgart bis auf die Treppen des Reichstagsgebäudes. Süddeutsche Zeitung. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/querdenken-chronologie-bundestag-1.5279496 [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  219. Holzer, B. (2021). Zwischen Protest und Parodie: Strukturen der „Querdenken“-Kommunikation auf Telegram (und anderswo). In S. Reichardt (Hrsg.), Die Misstrauensgemeinschaft der „Querdenker“. Die Corona-Proteste aus kultur- und sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive (S. 125–159). Campus Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  220. Jarynowski, A., Semenov, A., & Belik, V. (2020). Protest perspective against COVID-19 risk mitigation strategies on the German internet. In S. Chellappan, K.-K. R. Choo & N. Phan (Hrsg.), Computational Data and Social Networks, 9th International Conference, CSoNet 2020 (S. 524–535). Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  221. Jost, J. T., Barberá, P., Bonneau, R., Langer, M., Metzger, M., Nagler, J., Sterling, J., & Tucker, J. A. (2018). How social media facilitates political protest: information, motivation, and social networks. Advances in Political Psychology, 39(S1), 85–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12478 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  222. Kirchgässner, G., Wolter, J., & Hassler, U. (2013). Introduction to modern time series analysis. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33436-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  223. Koch, W. (2022). Ergebnisse der ARD/ZDF-Onlinestudie 2022. Reichweiten von Social-Media-Plattformen und Messengern. Media Perspektiven, 10, 471–478. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  224. Koos, S. (2021). Konturen einer heterogenen „Misstrauensgemeinschaft“: Die soziale Zusammensetzung der Corona-Proteste und die Motive ihrer Teilnehmer:innen. In S. Reichardt (Hrsg.), Die Misstrauensgemeinschaft der „Querdenker“. Die Corona-Proteste aus kultur- und sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive (S. 67–90). Campus Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  225. Lyubchich, V., Gel, Y. R., Brenning, A., Chu, C., Huang, X., Islambekov, U., Niamkova, P., Ofori-Boateng, D., Schaeffer, E. D., Vishwakarma, S., Wang, X. (2023). funtimes: functions for times series analysis (9.1) [R Package]. https://cran.r-project.org/package=funtimes [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  226. McLeod, A. I. (2022). Kendall: Kendall rank correlation and Mann-Kendall trend test (2.2.1) [R Package]. https://cran.r-project.org/package=Kendall [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  227. Metzger, M. M., & Tucker, J. A. (2017). Social media and EuroMaidan: a review essay. Slavic Review, 76(1), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.1017/slr.2017.16 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  228. Neuberger, C. (2022). How to capture the relations and dynamics within the networked public sphere? Modes of interaction as a new concept. In B. Krämer, & P. Müller (Hrsg.), Questions of communicative change and continuity (S. 67–96). Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  229. Nienhuysen, F. (25. April, 2014). Der Mann, der Putin die Stirn bietet. Süddeutsche Zeitung. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/digital/vkontakte-gruender-auf-der-flucht-der-mann-der-putin-die-stirn-bietet-1.1943843 [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  230. Nissen, S. (2023). Das Demonstrationsgeschehen in Sachsen in der Selbst-Rezeption und -Reflexion auf Telegram. EFBI Digital Report 2023-1, 8–10. https://efbi.de/files/efbi/pdfs/Digital%20Reports/2023_EFBI_DigitalReport_1.pdf [28.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  231. Ohme, J., Araujo, T., Boeschoten, L., Freelon, D., Ram, N., Reeves, B. B., & Robinson, T. N. (2023). Digital trace data collection for social media effects research: APIs, data donation, and (screen) tracking. Communication Methods and Measures. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2023.2181319 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  232. Querdenken-711. (o. D.). Manifest. https://querdenken-711.de/manifest/ [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  233. R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (4.1.3). R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/ [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  234. Reimers, N., & Gurevych, I. (2019). Sentence-BERT: sentence embeddings using siamese BERT-networks. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1908.10084 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  235. Rogers, R. (2020). Deplatforming: following extreme internet celebrities to Telegram and alternative social media. European Journal of Communication, 35(3), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323120922066 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  236. Sanchez, J. (2023). Time series for data scientists. Data management, description, modeling, forecasting. Cambridge University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  237. Schulze, H., Hohner, J., Greipl, S., Girgnhuber, M., Desta, I., & Rieger, D. (2022). Far-right conspiracy groups on fringe platforms: a longitudinal analysis of radicalization dynamics on Telegram. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 28(4), 1103–1126. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221104977 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  238. Simon, M., Welbers, K., Kroon, A. C., & Trilling, D. (2022). Linked in the dark: a network approach to understanding information flows within the Dutch Telegramsphere. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2022.2133549 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  239. Slobozhan, I., Brik, T. & Sharma, R. (2023). Differentiable characteristics of Telegram mediums during protests in Belarus 2020. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 13(19), https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-022-01002-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  240. Su, C. C., Chan, M., & Paik, S. (2022). Telegram and the anti-ELAB movement in Hong Kong: reshaping networked social movements through symbolic participation and spontaneous interaction. Chinese Journal of Communication, 15(3), 431–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2022.2092167 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  241. Telegram (o. D.). Fragen und Antworten. https://telegram.org/faq [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  242. Teune, S. (2021). Querdenken und die Bewegungsforschung – Neue Herausforderung oder déjà-vu? Forschungsjournal Soziale Bewegungen, 34(2), 326–334. https://doi.org/10.1515/fjsb-2021-0029 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  243. Theocharis, Y. (2013). The wealth of (occupation) networks? Communication patterns and information distribution in a Twitter protest network. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(1), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2012.701106 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  244. Titz, U. (2022). „Alt-Tech“ – Das Archipel digitaler Hassrede. EFBI Digital Report 2022-1, 15–17. https://efbi.de/files/efbi/pdfs/Digital%20Reports/2022_EFBI_Digital%20Report%20%231_FGZ.pdf [28.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  245. Trapletti, A., Hornik, K., & LeBaron, B. (2023). tseries: time series analysis and computational finance (0.10.53) [R Package]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tseries [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  246. Townsend, L., & Wallace, C. (2017). The ethics of using social media data in research: a new framework. In K. Woodfield (Hrsg.), The ethics of online research (S. 189–207). Emerald Publishing Limited. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  247. Urman, A., & Katz, S. (2022). What they do in the shadows: examining the far-right networks on Telegram. Information, Communication & Society, 25(7), 904–923. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1803946 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  248. Urman, A., Ho, J. C.-t., & Katz, S. (2021). Analyzing protest mobilization on Telegram: the case of 2019 Anti-Extradition Bill movement in Hong Kong. PLOS ONE, 16(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256675 [26.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  249. Wetzel, G., Nissen, S., & Kiess, J. (2022). Ergebnisse des Qualitativen Telegram-Monitorings. EFBI Digital Report 2022-1, 3–6. https://efbi.de/files/efbi/pdfs/Digital%20Reports/2022_EFBI_Digital%20Report%20%231_FGZ.pdf [28.09.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  250. Zehring, M., & Domahidi, E. (2023). German Corona protest mobilizers on Telegram and their relations to the far right: a network and topic analysis. Social Media + Society, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231155106 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-285
  251. Amlinger, Carolin, und Oliver Nachtwey. 2022. Gekränkte Freiheit: Aspekte des libertären Autoritarismus. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  252. Bennet, W. Lance, und Alexandra Segerberg. 2012. „The Logic of Connective Action“. Information, Communication & Society 15(5): 739–768. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  253. Bimber, Bruce. 2014. „Digital Media in the Obama Campaigns of 2008 and 2012: Adaptation to the Personalized Political Communication Environment“. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 11(2): 130–50. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  254. Blee, Kathleen, und Mehr Latif. 2020. „Sociological Survey of the Far Right“. In: Stephen Ashe, Joel Busher, Graham Macklin, und Aaron Winter (Hrsg.), Researching the Far Right: Theory, Method and Practice, 45–59. New York: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  255. Blum, Rebekka. 2022. Das Verhältnis von Antifeminismus und Verschwörungsdenken. In: Florian Hessel, Pradeep Chakkarath, und Mischa Luy (Hrsg.), Verschwörungsdenken, 193–214. Gießen: Psychosozial-Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  256. Bonikowski, Bart. 2017. „Ethno-Nationalist Populism and the Mobilization of Collective Resentment: Ethno-Nationalist Populism“. The British Journal of Sociology 68 (November): 181–213. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  257. Brady, William J., Julian A. Wills, John T. Jost, Joshua A. Tucker, und Jay J. van Bavel. 2017. „Emotion Shapes the Diffusion of Moralized Content in Social Networks“. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114 (28): 7313–7318. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  258. CeMAS 2023. Telegram: Chronologie einer Radikalisierung. Wie Telegram zur wichtigsten Plattform für Verschwörungsideologien und Rechtsextremismus wurde. https://report.cemas.io/telegram [26.09.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  259. Castelli Gattinara, Pietro, Caterina Froio, und Andrea L.P. Pirro. 2022. Far‐right Protest Mobilisation in Europe: Grievances, Opportunities and Resources. European Journal of Political Research 61 (4): 1019–1041. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  260. Davies, Garth, Edith Wu, und Richard Frank. 2021. „A Witch’s Brew of Grievances: The Potential Effects of COVID-19 on Radicalization to Violent Extremism“. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Mai, 1–24. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  261. Decker, Oliver, Ayline Heller, Johannes Kiess, und Elmar Brähler, Hrsg. 2022. Autoritäre Dynamiken in unsicheren Zeiten: Neue Herausforderungen – alte Reaktionen? Leipziger Autoritarismus Studie 2022. Forschung psychosozial. Gießen: Psychosozial-Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  262. Devlin, Jacob, Ming-Wie Chang, Kenton Lee, und Kristina Toutanova. 2019. BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding. arXiv:1810.04805. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  263. Grootendorst, Maarten. 2022. BERTopic: Neural Topic Modeling with a Class-based TF-IDF Procedure. arXiv:2203.05794. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  264. Duncombe, Constance. 2019. „The Politics of Twitter: Emotions and the Power of Social Media“. International Political Sociology 13(4): 409–429. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  265. Earl, Jennifer. 2010. „The Dynamics of Protest-Related Diffusion on the Web“. Information, Communication & Society 13(2): 209–225. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  266. Earl, Jennifer, und Alan Schussman. 2003. „The New Site of Activism: On-Line Organizations, Movement Entrepreneurs, and the Changing Location of Social Movement Decision Making“. In Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, 24: 155–187. Bingley: Emerald (MCB UP). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  267. Ebner, Julia. 2019. Radikalisierungsmaschinen: Wie Extremisten die neuen Technologien nutzen und uns manipulieren. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  268. Engesser, Sven, Nicole Ernst, Frank Esser, und Florin Büchel. 2017. Populism and Social Media: How Politicians Spread a Fragmented Ideology. Information, Communication & Society 20(8): 1109-1126. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  269. Fernholz, Tobias. 2022. Die rechtsradikale Bewegung und ihr digitaler Kampf um Identität: Inhalte, Dynamiken und Resonanzräume rechtsradikaler Alternativ-Öffentlichkeiten. Edition Rechtsextremismus. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  270. Fielitz, Maik, und Holger Marcks. 2020. Digitaler Faschismus: Die sozialen Medien als Motor des Rechtsextremismus. Berlin: Dudenverlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  271. Fielitz, Maik, Holger Marcks, Harald Sick, und Hendrik Bitzmann. 2022. „Vom Volkstod zum Blackout? Rechtsextreme Bedrohungsnarrative im Wandel“. Machine Against the Rage 0(Herbst), https://www.doi.org/10.58668/matr/00.2. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  272. Franck, Georg. 1998. Ökonomie der Aufmerksamkeit: Ein Entwurf. Edition Akzente. München: Hanser. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  273. Fuchs, Christian, und Paul Middelhoff. 2019. Das Netzwerk der neuen Rechten: Wer sie lenkt, wer sie finanziert und wie sie die Gesellschaft verändern. Reinbek: Rowohlt. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  274. Funke, Manuel, Moritz Schularick, und Christoph Trebesch. 2016. „Going to Extremes: Politics after Financial Crises, 1870–2014“. European Economic Review 88 (September): 227–260. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  275. Gaudette, Tiana, Ryan Scrivens, und Vivek Venkatesh. 2022. „The Role of the Internet in Facilitating Violent Extremism: Insights from Former Right-Wing Extremists“. Terrorism and Political Violence 34(7): 1339–1356. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  276. Groß, Eva, Sighard Neckel, Markus Pullen, Julia Gundlach, und Melanie Verhovnik-Heinze. 2022. „‚Merkel-Goldstücke‘, ‚Rapefugees‘, ‚System-Medien‘ und die ‚Volksverräter-Regierung‘. Eine Analyse rechtsgerichteter Online-Diskurse und emotionaler Mobilisierungsprozesse in Social Media“. In Sybille Reinke de Buitrago (Hrsg.), Radikalisierungsnarrative online, 75–108. Wiesbaden: Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  277. Groß, Eva, und Sighart Neckel. 2020. „Social Media und die Bedeutung von Emotionen in autoritär-nationalistischen Radikalisierungsnarrativen“. In Annika Hamachers, Kristin Weber, und Stefan Jarolimek (Hrsg.), Extremistische Dynamiken im Social Web: Befunde zu den digitalen Katalysatoren politisch und religiös motivierter Gewalt, 271–283. Frankfurt: Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  278. Habermas, Jürgen. 2006. „Political Communication in Media Society: Does Democracy Still Enjoy an Epistemic Dimension? The Impact of Normative Theory on Empirical Research“. Communication Theory 16(4): 411–426. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  279. Habermas, Jürgen. 2022. Ein neuer Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit und die deliberative Politik. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  280. Horner, Christy Galletta, Dennis Galletta, Jennifer Crawford, und Abhijeet Shirsat. 2021. „Emotions: The Unexplored Fuel of Fake News on Social Media“. Journal of Management Information Systems 38(4): 1039–1066. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  281. Howard, Philip N., und Muzammil M. Hussain. 2013. Democracy’s Fourth Wave? Digital Media and the Arab Spring. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  282. Hyvärinen, Hissu, und Roman Beck. 2018. Emotions Trump Facts: The Role of Emotions in on Social Media: A Literature Review. Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. HICCS. http://dx.doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2018.226. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  283. Kiess, Johannes, und Gideon Wetzel. 2023. Rückgang der Mobilisierung – Fortsetzung der Agitation. EFBI Digital Report 2023-1. Leipzig: Else-Frenkel-Brunswik-Institut. https://efbi.de/files/efbi/pdfs/Digital%20Reports/2023_EFBI_DigitalReport_1.pdf [26.09.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  284. Kiess, Johannes. 2023. Extrem rechte Parteien in Sachsen. In Oliver Decker, Fiona Kalkstein, und Johannes Kiess (Hrsg.), Demokratie in Sachsen. Jahrbuch des Else-Frenkel-Brunswik-Instituts für 2022, 79–95. Leipzig: überland. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  285. Kitschelt, Herbert. 1999. „Politische Gelegenheitsstrukturen in Theorien sozialer Bewegungen heute“. In Ansgar Klein, Hans-Josef Legrand, und Thomas Leif (Hrsg.), Neue soziale Bewegungen, 144–163. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  286. Klandermans, Bert. 2016. „Mobilization, Political“. In Gianpietro Mazzoleni (Hrsg.), The International Encyclopedia of Political Communication (online). Hoboken: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118541555.wbiepc059. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  287. Klandermans, Bert, und Jacquelien Stekelenburg. 2013. Social Movements and the Dynamics of Collective Action. In Leonie Huddy, David O. Sears, und Jack S. Levy (Hrsg.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, 850–900. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  288. Klein, Ofra, und Jasper Muis. 2019. „Online Discontent: Comparing Western European Far-right Groups on Facebook“. European Societies 21(4): 540–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2018.1494293. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  289. Koos, Sebastian. 2021. „Konturen einer heterogenen »Misstrauensgemeinschaft«: Die soziale Zusammensetzung der Corona-Proteste und die Motive ihrer Teilnehmer:innen“. In Sven Reichardt (Hrsg.), Die Misstrauensgemeinschaft der „Querdenker“: die Corona-Proteste aus kultur- und sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive, 67–89. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  290. Kruschinski, Simon, und Jörg Haßler. 2017. Die Instrumentalisierung partizipativer Öffentlichkeit durch die AfD bei der rheinland-pfälzischen Landtagswahl 2016. MedienJournal 41(2): 97–112. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  291. Lahusen, Christian. 1996. The Rhetoric of Moral Protest: Public Campaigns, Celebrity Endorsement, and Political Mobilization. Berlin: de Gruyter. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  292. McInnes, Leland, John Healy, und James Melville. 2018. “UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reduction.” arXiv:1802.03426. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  293. McInnes, Leland, John Healy, und Steve Astels. 2017. “hdbscan: Hierarchical Density Based Clustering”. The Open Journal 2(11). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  294. Moffitt, Benjamin. 2015. „How to Perform Crisis: A Model for Understanding the Key Role of Crisis in Contemporary Populism“. Government and Opposition 50(2): 189–217. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  295. Mølmen, Guri Nordtorp, und Jacob Aasland Ravndal. 2021. „Mechanisms of Online Radicalisation: How the Internet Affects the Radicalisation of Extreme-Right Lone Actor Terrorists“. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression, Oktober, 1–25. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  296. Muis, Jasper, Ofra Klein, und Guido Dijkstra. 2020. Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media Research. Using Twitter and Facebook to investigate far-right discourses. In Stephen D. Ashe, Joel Busher, Graham Macklin, Aaron Winter (Hrsg.), Researching the Far Right: Theory, Method and Practice. London: Routledge, 147–163. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  297. Nagle, Angela. 2017. Kill all Normies: The Online Culture Wars from Tumblr and 4chan to the Alt-Right and Trump. Washington: Zero Books. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  298. Pirro, Andrea L. P. 2022. „Far Right: The Significance of an Umbrella Concept“. Nations and Nationalism (online first). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  299. Quent, Matthias, Christoph Richter, und Axel Salheiser. 2022. Klimarassismus: der Kampf der Rechten gegen die ökologische Wende. München: Piper. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  300. Reichardt, Sven. 2021. Die Misstrauensgemeinschaft der „Querdenker“: Die Corona-Proteste aus kultur- und sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  301. Rogers, Everett M. 1962. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  302. Rogers, Richard. 2020. „Deplatforming: Following Extreme Internet Celebrities to Telegram and Alternative Social Media“. European Journal of Communication 35(3): 213–29. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  303. Schulze, Heidi, Julian Hohner, Simon Greipl, Maximilian Girgnhuber, Isabell Desta, und Diana Rieger (2022). Far-Right Conspiracy Groups on Fringe Platforms: A Longitudinal Analysis of Radicalization Dynamics on Telegram. Convergence 28(4): 1103–1126. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  304. Seeliger, Martin, und Sebastian Sevignani, Hrsg. 2021. Ein neuer Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit? Leviathan Sonderband 37. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  305. Stegemann, Patrick, und Sören Musyal. 2020. Die rechte Mobilmachung: wie radikale Netzaktivisten die Demokratie angreifen. Berlin: Econ. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  306. Stekelenburg, Jacquelien, Bert Klandermans, und Stefaan Walgrave. 2018. „Individual Participation in Street Demonstrations“. In David A. Snow, Sarah A. Soule, Hanspeter Kriesi, und Holly J. McCammon (Hrsg.), The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, 369–291. Hoboken: Wiley. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  307. Stier, Sebastian, Lisa Posch, Arnim Bleier, und Markus Strohmaier. 2017. When Populists Become Popular: Comparing Facebook Use by the Right-Wing Movement Pegida and German Political Parties. Information, Communication & Society 20(9): 1365–1388. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  308. Volk, Sabine. 2021. „Die Rechtspopulistische PEGIDA in der COVID-19-Pandemie: Virtueller Protest ‚für unsere Bürgerrechte‘“. Forschungsjournal Soziale Bewegungen 34(2): 235–248. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  309. Wahl-Jorgensen, Karin. 2018. „The Emotional Architecture of Social Media“. In Zizi Papacharissi (Hrsg.), A Networked Self and Platforms, Stories, Connections, 77–93. New York: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-309
  310. Albrecht, Stephen/Fielitz, Maik/Thurston, Nick (2019). Introduction. In: Fielitz, Maik/Thurston, Nick (Hrsg.), Post-Digital Cultures of the Far Right. Online Actions and Offline Consequences in Europe and the US. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, S. 7–22. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  311. Berg, Lynn/Üblacker, Jan (2020). Rechtes Denken, rechte Räume? Eine Einführung zum Band. In: Berg, Lynn/Üblacker, Jan (Hrsg.), Rechtes Denken, rechte Räume? Demokratiefeindliche Einstellungen und ihre ländlichen Kontexte. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. S. 9–17. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  312. Breuer, Franz/Muckel, Petra/Dieris, Barbara (2019). Reflexive Grounded Theory. Eine Einführung für die Forschungspraxis. 4. Auflage. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  313. Brinckmeier, Kai (2012). Bewegung im Weltnetz. Rechtsextreme Kommunikation im Internet. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  314. Buchstein, Hubertus/Heinrich, Gudrun (2010). Rechtsextremismus in Ostdeutschland. Demokratie und Rechtsextremismus im ländlichen Raum. Schwalbach: Wochenschau-Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  315. Bundschuh, Stephan (2004). Aneignung von Räumen als rechtsextreme Strategie. Über das Konzept der so genannten „national befreiten Zonen“. In: Deutsches Jugendinstitut Arbeitsstelle Rechtsextremismus und Fremdenfeindlichkeit (Hrsg.), Sozialraumorientierung und die Auseinandersetzung mit Rechtsextremismus in der Jugendarbeit. Halle. S. 10–21. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  316. Burawoy, Michael (2006). Introduction: A Public Sociology for Human Rights. In: Blau,Judith/Iyall, Keri E. (Hrsg.), Public Sociologies Reader. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, S. 1–19. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  317. Castelli, Pietro/Pirro, Andrea L. P. (2018). The Far Right as Social Movement. In: European Societies, 21(4), S. 447–462. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  318. CeMAS, Center für Monitoring, Analyse und Strategie gGmbH (2023). Telegram: Chronologie einer Radikalisierung. https://report.cemas.io/telegram/ [01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  319. Dietze, Nikolas (2022). Der digitale Raum als Teil rechter Raumergreifung am Beispiel Leisnig. In: Kiess, Johannes/Wetzel, Gideon (Hrsg.), Ausstieg aus der Demokratie. Extrem rechte Parallelstrukturen in Sachsen, EFBI Digital Report 2-2022, Leipzig: Else-Frenkel-Brunswik-Institut. S. 11–13. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  320. Dietze, Nikolas (2023). „Ein Vakuum wird immer durch etwas besetzt.“ Sphären rechter Raumnahme in Sachsen. In: Decker, Oliver/Kalkstein, Fiona/Kiess, Johannes (Hrsg.), Demokratie in Sachsen. Jahrbuch des Else-Frenkel-Brunswik-Institut für 2022. Leipzig: edition überland. S. 151–168. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  321. Döring, Uta (2008). Angstzonen. Rechtsdominierte Orte aus medialer und lokaler Perspektive. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  322. Evola, Julius (1997 [1961]). Cavalcare la tigre. Den Tiger reiten. Engerda: Arun. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  323. Fernholz, Tobias (2022). Die rechtsradikale Bewegung und ihr digitaler Kampf um Identität. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  324. Fielitz Maik/Marcks, Holger (2020). Digitaler Faschismus: Die Sozialen Medien als Motor des Rechtsextremismus. Berlin: Duden Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  325. Fielitz, Maik (2019). Post-digitale Kulturen der extremen Rechten. In: Burschel, Friedrich (Hrsg.), Autoritäre Formierung. Der Durchmarsch von rechts geht weiter. Manuskripte, Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung, Neue Folge 25, S. 105–115, https://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/Manuskripte/Manuskripte_25_Autor_Formierung.pdf [01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  326. Fielitz, Maik/Schwarz, Karolin/Hitziger, Jana (2020). Hate not found?! Das Deplatforming der extremen Rechten und seine Folgen. Hrsg. vom Institut für Demokratie und Zivilgesellschaft. https://www.idz-jena.de/fileadmin//user_upload/Hate_not_found/WEB_IDZ_FB_Hate_not_Found.pdf. [01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  327. Fielitz, Maik/Wallmeier, Philip (2019). Exit als Radikalisierung. Zur Radikalität rechtsextremer Rückzugsbewegungen. In: Behemoth – A Journal on Civilisation, 12, S. 49–62. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  328. Forschungsstelle BAG „Gegen Hass im Netz“/Jost, Pablo (2023). Die Kanalisation des Protests. Demokratiefeindliche Mobilisierung via Telegram. In: Machine Against the Rage, 1, 2023. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  329. Freiheit, Manuela/Sitzer, Peter/ Heitmeyer, Wilhelm (2022). Rechte Bedrohungsallianzen in städtischen Zentren und ländlichen Peripherien – eine vergleichende Analyse. In: Mullis, Daniel/Miggelbrink, Judith (Hrsg.), Lokal extrem Rechts. Analysen alltäglicher Vergesellschaftungen. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, S. 61–84. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  330. Habermas, Jürgen (2018 [1962]). Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit: Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft. 15. Auflage. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  331. Haller, André/Holt, Kristoffer (2019). Paradoxical Populism: How PEGIDA Relates to Mainstream and Alternative Media. In: Information, Communication & Society, 22(12), S. 1665–1680. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  332. Hammer, Franz (2022). Protest im angestammten Land. Ideologische Landnahme der Völkischen Bewegung in Sachsen. In: Decker, Oliver/Kalkstein, Fiona/Kiess, Johannes (Hrsg.), Demokratie in Sachsen. Jahrbuch des Else-Frenkel-Brunswik-Institut für 2021. Leipzig: edition überland. S. 223–235. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  333. Hasebrink, Uwe/Hölig, Sascha (2014). Topographie der Öffentlichkeit. In: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte (APuZ): Politik, Medien, Öffentlichkeit, 64, 22-23/2014, S. 16–22. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  334. Hellwig, Marius (2020). Land unter? Handlungsempfehlungen zum Umgang mit völkischen Siedler*innen. Hrsg. von der Amadeu Antonio Stiftung, https://www.amadeu-antonio-stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Land-unter-Internet.pdf [01.11.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  335. Hübl, Philipp (2019). Die aufgeregte Gesellschaft. Wie Emotionen unsere Moral prägen und die Polarisierung verschärfen. München: C. Bertelsmann Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  336. Kiess, Johannes/Nissen, Sophia/Wetzel, Gideon/Winkler, Benjamin (2022). Report #0 Pilotausgabe. EFBI Digital Report. Leipzig: Else-Frenkel-Brunswik-Institut. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  337. Kneuer, Marianne (2017). Politische Kommunikation und digitale Medien in der Demokratie. In: Gapski, Harald/Oberle, Monika/Staufer, Walter (Hrsg.), Medienkompetenz. Herausforderung für Politik, politische Bildung und Medienbildung. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. S. 43–53. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  338. Leggewie, Claus (2017). Immer noch: Rechte soziale Bewegungen – revisited. In: Soziale Passagen, 8(2), S. 389–394. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  339. Marcks, Holger/Fielitz, Maik (2020). Die offene Gesellschaft und ihre virtuellen Feinde. Über digitalen Faschismus. In: Berliner Debatte Initial, 31(1), S. 124–135. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  340. Möller, Kurt (2010). Regionale Bedingungsfaktoren des Rechtsextremismus aus sozialwissenschaftlicher und (sozial-)pädagogischer Perspektive. In: Zeitschrift für Jugendkriminalrecht und Jugendhilfe, 2, S. 159–164. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  341. Müller, Pia (2022). Extrem rechte Influencer*innen auf Telegram: Normalisierungsstrategien in der Corona-Pandemie. In: Z-Rex – Zeitschrift für Rechtsextremismusforschung, Jg. 2, Heft 1/2022, S. 91–109. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  342. Pates, Rebecca (2011). Die Hölle sind immer die anderen. Moralische Ordnungen in Trainings gegen „Rechtsextremisten“. In: Forum für kritische Rechtsextremismusforschung (Hrsg.), Ordnung. Macht. Extremismus: Effekte und Alternativen des Extremismus-Modells. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. S. 212–239. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  343. Quent, Matthias (2017). Eine Fallstudie aus dem Saale-Holzland-Kreis: Zivilgesellschaftliches Engagement in der Krise? In: Wissen schafft Demokratie, Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Demokratie und Zivilgesellschaft, 2017/1, S. 268–286. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  344. Quent, Matthias/Schulz, Peter (2015). Rechtsextremismus in lokalen Kontexten. Vier vergleichende Fallstudien. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  345. Rogers, Anna/Kovaleva, Olga/Rumshisky, Anna (2020). A Primer in BERTology: What We Know About How BERT Works, arXiv:2002.12327. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.12327.pdf [01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  346. Röpke, Andrea/Speit, Andreas (2019). Völkische Landnahme. Alte Sippen, junge Siedler, rechte Ökos. Berlin: Ch. Links Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  347. Rucht, Dieter/Neidhardt (2001). Soziale Bewegungen und kollektive Aktionen. In: Lehrbuch der Soziologie, Band 1. Campus Verlag, S. 533–556. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  348. Runter von der Karte (2022). Leisnig, völkische Siedler. https://www.runtervonderkarte.jetzt/leisnig-voelkische-siedler/ [01.11.2023] Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  349. Sächsische Zeitung (2021, 18.09.). Schlägerei beschäftigt Leisniger Stadträte. https://www.saechsische.de/doebeln/lokales/spendenlauf-schlaegerei-auseinandersetzung-lebenszeit-5528303-plus.html [01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  350. Salheiser, Axel (2021). Rechtsextremismus in Eisenach. Kritische Bestandsaufnahme. Jena: Institut für Demokratie und Zivilgesellschaft/Amadeu Antonio Stiftung. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  351. Schmidt, Anna (2014). Völkische Siedler/innen im ländlichen Raum. Basiswissen und Handlungsstrategien. Hrsg. von der Amadeu Antonio Stiftung (Hrsg.). https://www.amadeu-antonio-stiftung.de/w/files/pdfs/voelkische_siedler_web.pdf [01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  352. Schwarz, Eva-Lotte (2022). Überblick: Medienstrategien. In: Meiering, David (Hrsg.), Schlüsseltexte der „neuen Rechten“. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  353. Seeliger, Martin/Sevignani, Sebastian (Hrsg.) (2021). Ein neuer Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit? Leviathan Sonderband 37. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  354. Statista (2023). Anzahl der monatlich aktiven Nutzer von Telegram weltweit in ausgewählten Monaten von Dezember 2014 bis August 2023. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/515623/umfrage/monatlich-aktive-nutzer-von-telegram-weltweit/ [zuletzt geprüft am 01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  355. Telegram (2023). Fragen und Antworten. https://telegram.org/faq#f-was-ist-telegram-was-kann-man-hier-machen. [01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  356. Törnberg, Anton/Wahlström, Mattias (2017). Unveiling the Radical Right Online. Exploring Framing and Identity in an Online Anti-Immigrant Discussion Group. In: Sociologisk Forskning 55, Heft 2–3, S. 267–292. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  357. Urman, Aleksandra/Katz, Stefan (2022). What They Do in the Shadows: Examining the Far-Right Networks on Telegram. In: Information, Communication & Society, 25,7, S. 904–923. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  358. Virchow, Fabian (2021). „Medienkrieg“. Die populistische und extreme Rechte als mediale Akteurin. In: Schütz, Johannes/Schäller, Steven/Kollmorgen, Raj (Hrsg.), Die neue Mitte? Ideologie und Praxis der populistischen und extremen Rechten. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. S. 321–334. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  359. Volk, Sabine (2021). Die rechtspopulistische PEGIDA in der COVID-19-Pandemie. Virtueller Protest für unsere Bürgerrechte. In: Forschungsjournal Soziale Bewegungen, Nr. 2, Jg. 34, S. 235–248. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  360. von Nordheim, Gerret/Rieger, Jonas (2020). Im Zerrspiegel des Populismus: Eine computergestützte Analyse der Verlinkungspraxis von Bundestagsabgeordneten auf Twitter. In: Publizistik 65(3), S.403–424. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  361. Wetzel, Gideon (2023). Gut zu wissen. Topic Modeling. In: Kiess, Johannes/Wetzel, Gideon (Hrsg.), Rückgang der Mobilisierung – Fortsetzung der Agitation, EFBI Digital Report, 1-2023, Leipzig: Else-Frenkel-Brunswik-Institut. S. 11–12. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  362. Wetzel, Gideon/Kiess, Johannes (Hrsg.) (2022). Aktuelle Entwicklungen. In: Digitale Mobilisierung für den „Wutwinter“, EFBI Digital Report, 3-2022, Leipzig: Else-Frenkel-Brunswik-Institut. S. 3–8. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  363. Witzel, Andreas (2000). The Problem-Centered Interview. In: Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, Vol. 1, No. 1, Art. 22. https://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1132/2522 [01.11.2023]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  364. Wodak, Ruth (2015). The Politics of Fear. What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. Los Angeles: Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339
  365. Wodak, Ruth (2018). Vom Rand in die Mitte – „Schamlose Normalisierung“. In: Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 59(2), S. 323–335. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-339

Citation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download chapter (PDF)

Notice

This work is protected by copyright and may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Terms of Use and License Agreement. Any use of the work beyond this is expressly prohibited and will be prosecuted.

Share via email

Media