Факторы успеха сетевых протестных движений (анализ конфликта вокруг Исаакиевского собора в 2017–2018 гг.)

Nikolay A. Golovin; Vladimir A. Sibirev

doi:10.21638/spbu17.2020.213

Authors

Nikolay A. Golovin St. Petersburg State University
Vladimir A. Sibirev St. Petersburg State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2020.213

Abstract

In the article, the peculiarities of the communication activity of Russian social movements in organizing online and offline actions are explored on the example of the conflict between the authorities and the public concerning the official decision on the transfer of St. Isaac’s Cathedral in St. Petersburg (in the building of which the museum works) to the Russian Orthodox Church. As a theoretical and methodological basis of the study, a modernized theory of social movements is used, taking into account their features associated with their use of new communicative capabilities of social networks. Methods of dynamic network analysis were used for analyzing the collected empirical data on the content of the political communication of the network groups. The structural characteristics of the online communication of the two protest network groups “Let’s protect…” and “Let’s save…” the cathedral museum as well as communication links between them are revealed. The differences in their chosen strategies of fighting against the government’s decision are illustrated. The stages of their development are emphasized: mobilization of the movement’s participants by cultural figures and politicians dissatisfied with the decision (January 2017); organizational institutionalization during meetings and rallies (February — May 2017); attainment of the goal (June 2017) with the subsequent termination of the decision (success of the movement). The dynamics of the volume and structure of communication during the entire period of the conflict are analyzed at each stage. A conclusion is made about the real political power of the e-movement during the conflict. It is proved that the use of social networks does not automatically result in the success of the network protest movement, much depends on the chosen strategy. Network protest mobilization alone does not ensure the success of the movement in Russia.

Keywords:

social movements, protest mobilization, online communities, political communication, civil society, big data

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Литература

1. Сморгунов, Л. В. (2014), Сетевые политические партии, Полис. Политические исследования, № 4, с. 21–37.

2. Михайленок, О. М. и Малышева, Г. А. (2019), Политические эффекты социальных сетей в России, Социологические исследования, № 2, с. 78–87.

3. Earl, J. and Kimport, K. (2011), Digitally Enabled Social Change: Activism in the Internet Age, Cambridge: MIT Press.

4. Gamson, W. (1975), The Strategy of Social Protest, Homewood: Dorsey.5. Kriesi, H. (1995), The political opportunity structure of new social movements: Its impaction their mobilization, in Jenkins, J. C. and Klandermans, B. (eds.), The Politics of Social Protest, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 167–198.

6. Tarrow, S. (2010), Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics, Cambridge: University Press.

7. Носиков, А. А., Турыгин, Ф. В., Мыскин, Е. Б. и Пелин, А. А. (2017), Протест против передачи Исаакиевского собора Русской Православной Церкви: сетевой анализ и динамика конфликта на этапе его становления, Бюллетень Центра этнорелигиозных исследований, т. 1, № 1, с. 65–81.

8. Сибирев, В. А., Головин, Н. А. и Клебанов, А. А. (2018), Сетевые сообщества в борьбе вокруг решения передать Исаакиевский собор Русской православной церкви (январь — июнь 2017 года), Мониторинг общественного мнения: Экономические и социальные перемены, № 1, с. 296–317.

9. ВЦИОМ: Рейтинги и индексы. URL: https://wciom.ru/news/ratings/odobrenie_deyatelnosti_obshhestvennyx_institutov/ (дата обращения: 17.03.2019).

10. Ушкин, С. Г. (2016), На пути к лучшему обществу, или почему люди становятся активистами? Мониторинг общественного мнения: Экономические и социальные перемены, № 4, с. 33–47.

11. Ушкин, С. Г. (2015), Теоретико-методологические подходы к изучению сетевой протестной активности: от «умной толпы» к «слактивизму», Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены, № 3, с. 3–11.

References

1. Smorgunov, L. V. (2014), Network Political Parties, Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniia, no. 4, pp. 21‒37. (In Russian)

2. Mikhaylenok, O. M. and Malysheva, G. A. (2019), Political effects of social networks in Russia, Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, no 2, pp. 78‒87. (In Russian)

3. Earl, J. and Kimport, K. (2011), Digitally Enabled Social Change: Activism in the Internet Age, Cambridge: MIT Press.

4. Gamson, W. (1975), The Strategy of Social Protest, Homewood: Dorsey.

5. Kriesi, H. (1995), The political opportunity structure of new social movements: Its impaction their mobilization, in Jenkins, J. C. and Klandermans, B. (eds), The Politics of Social Protest, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 167–198.

6. Tarrow, S. (2010), Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics, Cambridge: University Press.

7. Nosikov, A. A., Turygin, F. V., Myskin, E. B. and Pelin, A. A. (2017), The Protest against the Transfer of St. Isaac’s Cathedral of the Russian Orthodox Church: Network Analysis and the Dynamics of the Conflict at the Stage of its Formation, Biulleten’ Tsentra etnoreligioznykh issledovanii, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 65‒81. (In Russian)

8. Sibirev, V. A., Golovin, N. A. and Klebanov, A. A. (2018), Social media communities on the controversial de-cision to hand over St. Isaac’s Cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church (January through June 2017 analysis), Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniia: Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny, no. 1, pp. 296–317. DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2018.1.15.

9. Public Opinion Research Center — VCIOM. Available at: https://wciom.com/news/ratings/ratings-of-social-institutions/ (accessed: 17.03.2019).

10. Ushkin, S. G. (2016), Towards better society, or why people become activists, Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniia: Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny, no. 4, pp. 33‒47.

11. Ushkin, S. G. (2015), Methodoloigical approaches toward studying network protest activity: from smart mobs towards slacktivism, Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniia: Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny, no. 3, pp. 3‒11.