Wer ist #MeToo? Eine netzwerkanalytische Untersuchung (anti-)feministischen Protests auf Twitter

Table of contents

Bibliographic information

Cover of Volume: M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft Volume 68 (2020), Edition 3
Open Access Full access

M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft

Volume 68 (2020), Edition 3

Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright year
2020
ISSN-Online
2942-3317
ISSN-Print
1615-634X

Chapter information

Open Access Full access

Volume 68 (2020), Edition 3

Wer ist #MeToo? Eine netzwerkanalytische Untersuchung (anti-)feministischen Protests auf Twitter

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

Bibliography

  1. Baer, H. (2016). Redoing Feminism: Digital Activism, Body Politics, and Neoliberalism. Feminist Media Studies, 16(1), 17–34. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2015.1093070. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  2. Banet-Weiser, S. (2018). Empowered: Popular Feminism and Popular Misogyny. Duke University Press. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  3. Barabási, A. L. (2016). Network Science. http://networksciencebook.com [04.07.2020]. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  4. Barberá, P., Wang, N., Bonneau, R., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J. & González-Bailón, S. (2015). The Critical Periphery in the Growth of Social Protests. PLOS ONE, 10(11). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143611. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  5. Bastian, M., Heymann, S. & Jacomy, M. (2009). Gephi: An Open Source Software for Exploring and Manipulating Networks. International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. https://gephi.org/publications/gephi-bastian-feb09.pdf [04.07.2020]. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  6. Batagelj, V. & Zaversnik, M. (2003). An O(m) Algorithm for Cores Decomposition of Networks. arXiv: cs/0310049. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  7. Bennett, W. L. & Segerberg, A. (2012). The Logic of Connective Action. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  8. boyd, d. (2011). Social Network Sites as Networked Publics: Affordances, Dynamics, and Implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites (S. 39–58). Routledge. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  9. boyd, d., Golder, S. & Lotan, G. (2010). Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter. Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1–10. doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2010.412. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  10. Boyle, K. & Rathnayake, C. (2019). #HimToo and the Networking of Misogyny in the Age of #MeToo. Feminist Media Studies, 19(3), 1–19. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2019.1661868. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  11. Bruns, A. (2019). After the ‘APIcalypse’: Social Media Platforms and their Fight against Critical Scholarly Research. Information, Communication & Society, 22(11), 1544–1566. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2019.1637447. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  12. Bruns, A. & Burgess, J. (2012). Researching News Discussion on Twitter: New Methodologies. Journalism Studies, 13(5-6), 801–814. doi: 10.1080/1461670X.2012.664428. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  13. Bruns, A. & Stieglitz, S. (2014). Metrics for Understanding Communication on Twitter. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt & C. Puschmann (Hg.), Digital Formations: Bd. 89. Twitter and Society (S. 69–82). Lang. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  14. Bucher, T. & Helmond, A. (2018). The Affordances of Social Media Platforms. In J. Burgess, A. E. Marwick & T. Poell (Hg.), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media (S. 233–253). Sage Publications. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  15. Chadwick, A. (2017). The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power (2. Aufl.). Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  16. Codrea-Rado, A. (16.10.2017). #MeToo Floods Social Media with Stories of Harassment and Assault. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/16/technology/metoo-twitter-facebook.html [04.07.2020]. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  17. Dahlberg, L. (2011). Re-Constructing Digital Democracy: An Outline of Four ‘Positions’. New Media & Society, 13(6), 855–872. doi: 10.1177/1461444810389569. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  18. Drüeke, R. & Klaus, E. (2014). Öffentlichkeiten im Internet: Zwischen Feminismus und Antifeminismus. Femina Politica – Zeitschrift für feministische Politikwissenschaft, 23(2), 59–71. doi: 10.3224/feminapolitica.v23i2.17614. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  19. Drüeke, R. & Klaus, E. (2019). Die Instrumentalisierung von Frauen*rechten in rechten Diskursen am Beispiel der Kampagne #120db. Gender (3), 84–99. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  20. Drüeke, R. & Zobl, E. (2016). Online Feminist Protest against Sexism: the German-Language Hashtag #aufschrei. Feminist Media Studies, 16(1), 35–54. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2015.1093071. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  21. Fotopoulou, A. (2017). Feminist Activism and Digital Networks: Between Empowerment and Vulnerability. Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change. Palgrave Macmillan UK. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  22. Freudenschuss, M. (2014). Digitalisierung: eine feministische Baustelle – Einleitung. Femina Politica – Zeitschrift für feministische Politikwissenschaft, 23(2), 9–21. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  23. Gallagher, R. J., Stowell, E., Parker, A. G. & Foucault Welles, B. (2019). Reclaiming Stigmatized Narratives. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3, 1–30. doi: 10.1145/3359198. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  24. Ganz, K. & Meßmer, A.-K. (2017). Anti-Genderismus im Internet: Digitale Öffentlichkeiten als Labor eines neuen Kulturkampfes. In S. Hark & P.-I. Villa (Hg.), Anti-Genderismus: Sexualität und Geschlecht als Schauplätze aktueller politischer Auseinandersetzungen (2. Aufl., S. 59–78). Transcript Verlag. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  25. Garcia, S. E. (20.10.2017). The Woman Who Created #MeToo Long Before Hashtags. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/20/us/me-too-movement-tarana-burke.html [04.07.2020]. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  26. González-Bailón, S. & Wang, N. (2016). Networked Discontent: The Anatomy of Protest Campaigns in Social Media. Social Networks, 44, 95–104. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2015.07.003. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  27. Gsenger, M. & Thiele, M. (2014). Wird der #aufschrei erhört? Eine kritische Diskursanalyse der Sexismus-Debatte in Deutschland. kommunikation.medien (3). doi: 10.25598/JKM/2014-3.2. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  28. Hagberg, A. A., Schult, D. A. & Swart, P. J. (2008). Exploring Network Structure, Dynamics, and Function Using NetworkX. Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conference, 11–15. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  29. Heft, A., Mayerhöffer, E., Reinhardt, S. & Knüpfer, C. (2020). Beyond Breitbart: Comparing Right‐Wing Digital News Infrastructures in Six Western Democracies. Policy & Internet, 12(1), 20–45. doi: 10.1002/poi3.219. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  30. Hölig, S. (2018). Eine meinungsstarke Minderheit als Stimmungsbarometer?! Über die Persönlichkeitseigenschaften aktiver Twitterer. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 66(2), 140–169. doi: 10.5771/1615-634X-2018-2-140. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  31. Hölig, S. & Hasebrink, U. (2019). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2019: Ergebnisse für Deutschland. Arbeitspapiere des Hans-Bredow-Instituts: Bd. 47. Hans-Bredow-Institut. https://leibniz-hbi.de/uploads/media/default/cms/media/os943xm_AP47_RDNR19_Deutschland.pdf [04.07.2020]. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  32. Illgner, J. L. (2018). Hass-Kampagnen und Silencing im Netz. In J. Lang & U. Peters (Hg.), Antifeminismus in Bewegung: Aktuelle Debatten um Geschlecht und sexuelle Vielfalt (S. 253–272). Marta Press. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  33. Jacomy, M., Venturini, T., Heymann, S. & Bastian, M. (2014). ForceAtlas2, a Continuous Graph Layout Algorithm for handy Network Visualization Designed for the Gephi Software. PLOS ONE, 9(6), 1–12. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  34. Kapidzic, S., Neuberger, C., Stieglitz, S. & Mirbabaie, M. (2019). Interaction and Influence on Twitter. Digital Journalism, 7(2), 251–272. doi: 10.1080/21670811.2018.1522962. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  35. Klaus, E. & Lünenborg, M. (2013). Zwischen (Post-)Feminismus und Antifeminismus: Reflexionen zu gegenwärtigen Geschlechterdiskursen in den Medien. GENDER – Zeitschrift für Geschlecht, Kultur und Gesellschaft, 5(2), 78–93. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  36. Klinger, U. & Svensson, J. (2015). The Emergence of Network Media Logic in Political Communication: A Theoretical Approach. New Media & Society, 17(8), 1241–1257. doi: 10.1177/1461444814522952. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  37. Lang, J. & Peters, U. (Hg.). (2018). Antifeminismus in Bewegung: Aktuelle Debatten um Geschlecht und sexuelle Vielfalt. Marta Press. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  38. Liu, Y., Tang, M., Zhou, T. & Do, Y. (27.05.2015). Improving the Accuracy of the k-shell Method by Removing Redundant Links – from a Perspective of Spreading Dynamics. arXiv: 1505.07354v1. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  39. Loney-Howes, R. (2019). The Politics of the Personal: The Evolution of Anti-rape Activism: From Second-Wave Feminism to #MeToo. In B. Fileborn & R. Loney-Howes (Eds.), #MeToo and the Politics of Social Change (S. 21–35). Palgrave Macmillan. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  40. Maireder, A. & Schlögl, S. (2014). 24 hours of an #outcry: The Networked Publics of a Socio-political Debate. European Journal of Communication, 29(6), 687–702. doi: 10.1177/0267323114545710. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  41. Mendes, K., Ringrose, J. & Keller, J. (2019). Digital Feminist Activism: Girls and Women Fight Back against Rape Culture. Oxford Studies in Digital Politics. Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  42. Myles, D. (2019). ’Anne goes rogue for abortion rights!’: Hashtag Feminism and the Polyphonic Nature of Activist Discourse. New Media & Society, 21(2), 507–527. doi: 10.1177/1461444818800242. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  43. Neuberger, C. (2014). Konflikt, Konkurrenz und Kooperation: Interaktionsmodi in einer Theorie der dynamischen Netzwerköffentlichkeit. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 62(4), 567–587. doi: 10.5771/1615-634x-2014-4-567. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  44. Papakyriakopoulos, O., Serrano, J. C. M. & Hegelich, S. (2020). Political Communication on Social Media: A Tale of Hyperactive Users and Bias in Recommender Systems. Online Social Networks and Media, 15, 100058. doi: 10.1016/j.osnem.2019.100058. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  45. Pfetsch, B., Löblich, M. & Eilders, C. (2018). Dissonante Öffentlichkeiten als Perspektive kommunikationswissenschaftlicher Theoriebildung. Publizistik, 63(4), 477–495. doi: 10.1007/s11616-018-0441-1. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  46. Portwood-Stacer, L. & Berridge, S. (2014). Introduction: The Year in Feminist Hashtags. Feminist Media Studies, 14(6), 1090. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2014.975415. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  47. Scharff, C., Smith-Prei, C. & Stehle, M. (2016). Digital Feminisms: Transnational Activism in German Protest Cultures. Feminist Media Studies, 16(1), 1–16. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2015.1093069. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  48. Schradie, J. (2018). The Digital Activism Gap: How Class and Costs Shape Online Collective Action. Social Problems, 65(1), 51–74. doi: 10.1093/socpro/spx042. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  49. Sills, S., Pickens, C., Beach, K., Jones, L., Calder-Dawe, O., Benton-Greig, P. & Gavey, N. (2016). Rape Culture and Social Media: Young Critics and a Feminist Counterpublic. Feminist Media Studies, 16(6), 935–951. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2015.1137962. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  50. Sorce, G. (2018). Sounding the Alarm for Right-Wing #MeToo: “120 Dezibel” in Germany. Feminist Media Studies, 18(6), 1123–1126. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2018.1532146. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  51. Theocharis, Y. (2018). Every Crisis Is a Digital Opportunity: The Aganaktismenoi Movement's Use of Social Media and The Emergence of Networked Solidarity in Greece. In A. Bruns, G. Enli, E. Skogerbø, A. O. Larsson & C. Christensen (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics (S. 184–197). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  52. Villa, P.-I. (2018). Die #MeToo-Debatte. POP, 7(1), 79–85. doi: 10.14361/pop-2018-0109. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  53. Wößmann, L., Lergetporer, P., Grewenig, E., Kersten, S. & Werner, K. (2018). Was denken die Deutschen zu Geschlechterthemen und Gleichstellung in der Bildung? Ifo Schnelldienst, 71(17), 15–30. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255
  54. Zweig, K. (2016). Network Analysis Literacy: A Practical Approach to the Analysis of Networks. Lecture Notes in Social Networks. Springer. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255

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