ows in alternative and mainstream media thesis

8/10/2019 OWS in Alternative and Mainstream Media Thesis

1/231

Department of Informatics and Media

Social Sciencemajor in Media and Communication Studies

Fall 2012 Master Two Years Thesis

Occupy Wall Street in alternative and mainstream media

A comparative analysis of the social movements framing in the media

Andra Stefania Negus

Fall 2012

Supervisor: Christian Christensen


2/231


3/231

Abstract

The Occupy Wall Street movement is one of the strongest and most visible reactions to the

economic crisis that began in 2007. As a result, it has consistently generated media attention

since its birth on September 17, 2011, despite the fact that it was repeatedly criticized for lacking

a clear agenda.

This thesis provides an analysis of the different ways the Occupy Wall Street was presented by

OccupyWallSt.org ( the movements own media source), and The New York Times, The Wall

Street Journal and USA Today from July 2011 up to the end of June 2012. This was done by

using Entman theory of media framing together with Castells network theory of power. The

former provided a way of addressing the different types of frames that mainstream media utilize,

while the latter offered an understanding of how power is built through the media processes.

Additionally, Castells theory described another type of media frame which is mostly used by

alternative media, the counter frame, which could successfully be applied to study the content

that the social movement decided to provide about itself.

The study first employs a quantitative approach by using Crawdad, a centering resonance

analysis (CRA) software. This provides a reliable pool of data that was then analyzed by using

the above theories. Additionally, in order to check the reliability of the qualitative conclusions, a

statistical test was done for the overall top centers resulting from the CRA.


4/231

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1

2. What is Occupy Wall Street? ................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Timeline of the OWS Movement ..................................................................................... 4

2.2 The sources: OccupyWallSt.org ....................................................................................... 5

2.3 The sources: The New York Times.................................................................................. 5

2.4 The sources: The Wall Street Journal .............................................................................. 6

2.5 The sources: USA Today ................................................................................................. 6

3. Literature review ...................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Connective vs. collective action ....................................................................................... 83.2 Social media: can it generate long term support? ............................................................ 9

3.3 A cross-media analysis .......................................................................................................... 9

3.3 A social movements changing media exposure............................................................ 11

3.5 Social movement websites: what are they used for? ........................................................... 12

3.6 Alternative media: definition, structure and content sourcing ............................................ 12

4. Theoretical background ......................................................................................................... 16

4.1 Network Society ............................................................................................................. 17

4.1.1 Power and Counter-Power in the Network Society ...................................................... 18

4.1.2 Counter-power and Social Movements ........................................................................ 22

4.2 Media Frames ................................................................................................................. 27

4.2.1 The media and the public: how the connection is built ................................................ 27

4.2.2 How to create and recognize a frame ........................................................................... 29

4.2.3 Types of media frames ................................................................................................. 32

4.2.4 Counter-frames ............................................................................................................. 33

5. Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 34

5.1. Source Material .................................................................................................................. 35

5.2 Extracting and Processing the Source Data......................................................................... 37

5.2.1 Extracting and processing the primary corpus ............................................................. 37

5.2.2. Extracting and processing the secondary corpus ......................................................... 38


5/231

5.2.3 Creating datasets for analysis ....................................................................................... 39

5.3 Centering Theory and Centering Resonance Analysis ................................................... 39

5.3.1 Centering Theory .......................................................................................................... 40

5.3.2 Centering Resonance Analysis ..................................................................................... 46

6. Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 53

6.1 Brief description of the overall newspaper content on Occupy Wall Street ....................... 53

6.2 Monthly evolution ............................................................................................................... 54

6.3 Overall top centers: how do they compare? ................................................................... 83

7. Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 89

Bibliography ................................................................................................................................. 93

Appendix 1 .................................................................................................................................. 100

Appendix 2 .................................................................................................................................. 104


6/231

1

1. Introduction

The topic that I will be looking into is the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) social movement and the

messages that it used in order to achieve a broad social appeal and support. The movement that

began on September 17, 2011 and is ongoing at the time I am writing this paper, came as a

response to the economic and political factors behind the economic crisis that started in the late

2000s.

The choice of topic came as a result of a combination of reasons. On one hand, the idea of the

many but socially, politically and economically weak joining forces to fight for what they

believe in and actually looking like they might make a dent is certainly appealing. On the other

hand, the academic interest came from the desire to understand the way that the OWS movement

managed to be long lived and to spread across nations, and from the interest in seeing the way in

which social movements function and how they can be better explained and understood.

The attitude towards new media platforms is ambivalent. Some believe they generate no real life

/ offline reactions, while others are sure that they will and they are currently changing in a

profound manner the way people interact and assemble. First of all, online interactions may or

may not lead to action, but what is certain is that the new media platforms are unique means of

communication. Some of their users may not be satisfied with simply posting or commenting and

do feel the need to further their actions, but not all of them act in such a way. Second, the

message of OWS seems to be reappearing in different geographical settings and despite changing

location it still manages to gain support. Therefore, I would like to see exactly how that message

is built and why it is so popular.

After considering and reconsidering the topic of this paper, I returned to my initial choice:

looking at the Occupy Wall Street social movement and comparing the way they portray

themselves with the way they are portrayed by mainstream media. At first, having seen a few

random OWS articles from The New York Times it seemed that the picture they were drawing

was simplistic and stereotypical. Those involved in the movement were often described as

disorganized, not knowing exactly what they were fighting for and even completely unaware of


7/231

2

the situation. At other times, participants were simply presented as strange: protesters chant, a

flag was burned as a tantrum, someone discovered an apparently abandoned infant (Emery

2012). However, upon further review the story looked much more diverse and nuanced and

definitely worth the effort of looking into.

A comment that often comes up when talking about this non-violent social movement is that it

functions without a clear agenda, and that the various voices from within produce messages that

are quite distinct from one another. Therefore, an attribute that is generally accepted when it

comes to political campaigns (where very few would question the politicians need to have a

message that gathers as much support as possible, thus one that is generally broader and less

clearly defined) is considered a flaw when it comes to social movements. A possible reason

might be that while political campaigns are a part of a normal and regulated reality, social

movements are considered disruptive forces and as such they need to work harder and are

measured up against tougher standards in order to gain legitimacy.

The main research question I will look at is How does Occupy Wall Street portray itself versus

the way that mainstream newspapers portray it and what is the impact of the difference between

these images? More particularly, I am interested in answering the following:

1. What are Occupy Wall Streets main messages as they appeared on OccupyWallSt.org? How

did the messages evolve across time (if they did)?

2. How does OccupyWallSt.org use these messages (what is the outcome of the way they use

"new" media). A more general question would be "what did they do to attract attention and

gain support?"

3. What are the main messages generated by The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and

USA Today regarding Occupy Wall Street? How did their messages evolve across time (if

they did)?

4.

Is there a difference between the two main types of sources (the movement vs. mainstream

media)? If this is the case, what are the main discrepancies and similarities, can they be

linked to the type they appeared in, and if so, how?

I will focus on the content generated by and about the movement by the above newspapers and

OccupyWallSt.org from July 2011 to June 30, 2012.


8/231

3

2. What is Occupy Wall Street?

The Occupy Wall Street movement states on its unofficial de facto online resource

(Occupywallst.org 2012) that its purpose is fighting back against the corrosive power of major

banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in

creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations (ibid).

Occupy Wall Street began with an Adbusters e-mail sent in June 2011 stating that America

needs its own Tahrir (Schwartz 2011). Adbusters is a Canadian media foundation aimed at

toppling existing power structures and forging a major shift in the way we live in the 21st

century (Adbusters Website, 2012). The e-mail quickly spread and, as enthusiasm grew,

Adbusters created the #OccupyWallStreet Twitter hash tag and specifically urged its subscribers

to flood into lower Manhattan, set up tents, kitchens, peaceful barricades and occupy Wall

Street (Adbusters blog 2011) on September 17, 2011.

Some even point to an even earlier moment, as on February 2, 2011 the magazine published a

blog article titled A Million Man March on Wall Street (Matsu 2011). This made references to

Egypts Tahrir Square protests that contributed to ending Hosni Mubaraks 30 year reign. It also

asked whether a similar popular reaction could happen in the United States of America and made

an argument as to why such a thing might happen:

Over 25 million folks are now unemployed, 2.8 million homes are in

foreclosure while the investment bankers who brought this economic

misery cynically reap obscene bonuses and rewards. Blatant corruption

rules at the heart of American democracy.(Matsu 2011)

The article ends on an activist note: If we want to spark a popular uprising in the West like a

million man march on Wall Street then let's get organized, let's strategize, let's think things

through (Matsu 2011).


9/231

4

2.1

Timeline of the OWS Movement

After the Adbusters articles and the e-mails that circulated among its subscribers, on August 30,

2011 the hacktivist group Anonymous posted a YouTube video stating their support of the OWS

cause (Mother Jones news team 2011). On September 17, 2011 approximately one thousand

people started the protest by the Wall Street Charging Bull statue in New York while others

camped in Zuccotti Park (Weigel and Hepler 2011). On September 20 the first arrests were made

as five protesters are taken into custody for violating a 150 year old law banning masks at

public gatherings; four days later eighty more were arrested during a peaceful protest (Mother

Jones news team 2011). By the end of the month, the movement had supported the postal

workers strike against the five day work week as well as gained the support of the Transport

Union works (ibid). On top of that, the New York State United Teachers union, the AmericanFederation for State, County, and Municipal Workers, the Service Employees International

Union's 1199 Chapter along with the Transport Workers Union Local 100 had all declared their

support of the Occupy Wall Street cause (ibid).

On October 1, the OWS protesters marched across the Brooklyn Bridge in New York blocking

traffic and leading to over seven hundred arrests (Mother Jones news team 2011). The next major

event for the movement happened on November 15 when occupiers were evicted from Zuccotti

Park, an action that led to seventy arrests (Weigel and Hepler 2011). A few days later, on

November 18, a student protest was held at the University of California, Davis, and a campus

police lieutenant pepper sprayed the students who were sitting on the campus grounds. The

filmed incident quickly spread over the Internet and led to the temporary suspension of some

members of the campus police.

The following months consist of nonviolent demonstrations that spread across the country and

are occasionally interrupted by the police. On March 17, 2012, in an attempt to mark the six

month anniversary of OWS, protesters returned to Zuccotti Park. Over seventy arrests were

made, as some tried to once again camp in the park (Francescani 2012). A month and a half later,

on May 1, 2012, International Labor Day not celebrated in the US, OWS organized marches

across the country most of which were peaceful (Abrahamian and Berg 2012). The majority of


10/231

5

the events after this date and up to June 30, 2012, were of a much smaller scale than the May 1

marches.

2.2 The sources: OccupyWallSt.org

As stated above, the OccupyWallSt.org website is the unofficial de facto online resource or the

growing occupation movement happening on Wall Street and around the world (OccupyWallSt

Website About 2012). It is equally used to spread OWS messages, to organize occupationsand

to gain physical and financial support. This is the top ranked website regarding the OWS

movement (Alexa.com 2012). Also, OccupyWallSt.org has over 131 thousand likes on

Facebook, has been tweeted almost 36 thousand times (OccupyWallSt.org 2012) and Adbustersrefers to it as the news website for OWS (Adbusters.org 2012). Relatively to the general users of

the Internet, in its audience the 18-24 age group is over-represented, as well as those without

children and the website is browsed mostly from at home or at school (Alexa.com 2012). The

25-44 and 55-64 age groups are similar to the general population of the Internet, while the 35-55

age group is under represented (ibid). Those with some college education or who have graduated

from college are over represented while those with no college education as well as those who

went to graduate school are underrepresented (ibid).

2.3 The sources: The New York Times

According to its media kit, The New York Times promises to offer an insightful view of the

world throughthorough and uncompromising coverage in the world(2012). The newspaper

has a total average paid circulation of 1.586.757 for the Monday through Friday editions, making

it the third largest in the country (Audit Bureau of Circulation 2012), and is owned by the New

York Times Company. Its audience is of 4.601.000, made up of men and women in equal

proportions (ibid). The median age of its readers is 51 and the median household income is

99.669 $ (ibid). Most of them are college educated (60%), while 42% are professionals or

managers and 13% are top management.


11/231

6

2.4

The sources: The Wall Street Journal

In its public relations material, The Wall Street Journal states that it offers readers, described as

the world's most powerful business leaders, active investors and affluent luxury consumers, the

most crucial news of the day, insightful opinion and fair-minded analysis (Wall Street Journal

Media Kit 2012). The WSJ is published by Dow Jones& Company (Wall Street Journal Media

Kit Fact Sheet 2012). It has an audience of 2.881.000 (ibid) and a total average paid circulation

of 2.118.315 for the Monday through Friday editions, meaning that it is the countrys largest

newspaper (Audit Bureau of Circulation 2012). Of its subscribers, 82% are men and 18%

women, with an overall average age of 57 and an average household income of 257.100$ (Wall

Street Journal Media Kit Audience Profile 2012). They are more likely to be top management

(57%) as well as have a college degree or above (88%) (ibid).

2.5

The sources: USA Today

In the content provided by its media kit, USA Today is described as supplying a range of

information in a concise, easy-to-read format to its 3.100.000 readers (2012) who consider it

approachable and friendly but also smart and informed (ibid). Of these, 65% are men and

35% women with a median age of 50 and a median household income of 89.731$ (ibid). Only

44% of them are college educated, while 33% are in managerial positions (ibid). The newspaper

is owned by the Gannett Company (ibid) andhas a total average paid circulation is of 1.817.446

for the Monday through Friday editions, making it the countrys second largest newspaper (Audit

Bureau of Circulation 2012).


12/231

7

3. Literature review

As the Occupy Wall Street movement is a relatively new topic, it has generally been discussed

either from an essayistic perspective or, occasionally, from a descriptive new media perspective.

Some papers simply present possible ways of approaching the subject, while others seem to be

personal accounts of participants who also have an academic career. Media scholars beginning as

early as the 1970s have produced a body of research which shows that US mainstream media are

more likely to marginalize movements for social change and to reinforce the status quo rather

than question it (Rauch et al. 2007, 132). Mainstream media is clearly an important resource for

broadcasting the social movements messages. However, because of their reluctance to do so in away that casts a positive or at least objective light upon them, social movements need to use

alternative media in order to promote their cause and the Internet can become their main ally

(Stein 2009, 750).

The fact that news are constantly framed in the same way is partly because journalists use

existing templates to guide the assembly of facts, quotations and other elements in a story

(Rauch et al. 2007, 133) and partly because they must use sources that are established within

their respective fields, thus always reaching for the primarily official and elite ones (ibid).

When it comes to the media representation of social movements, the partiality of the news

towards the status quo is somewhat caused by the fact that journalists need to maintain the

contact with officials, including the police, thus also needing to support them (ibid). Whereas

journalists occasionally use a debate or balanced frame for reporting social movements, and thus

allow the movement to gain legitimacy, they most often use riot, confrontation or circus

frames (138) and achieve the exact opposite.

In the following pages, I will do a review of previous research on social movements focusing on

the way they are presented in mainstream and alternative media as well as on the manner in

which they use online tools in order to gain notoriety and support. This will be done so as to see

whether the two types of media, alternative and mainstream, use their resources differently when

it comes to presenting such movements.


13/231

8

3.1

Connective vs. collective action

Bennett and Segerberg (2012) analyze social movements, including the OWS, from the

perspective of connective action. This is defined as action based on personalized content

sharing across media networks (739) as opposed to collective actionwhich is based on high

levels of organizational resources and the formation of collective identities (ibid). Collective

action requires participants to invest vast amounts of resources in their support of a cause. They

need to socialize more, educate themselves better, and require more formal types of organization.

Even though new media can reduce some of the necessary costs they do not fundamentally

change the action dynamics (748).

In order for connective action to be efficient, it makes use of two approaches. First, social

movements based on such action formulate political statements in ways that are easy to adapt

and personalize (for OWS the role was played by the we are the 99% message and website).

Second, they use personal communication technologies that enable sharing these themes and

[] further personalization (Bennett and Segerberg 2012, 743).However, organizations with

strong elements of connective action may still have attributes that are similar to those of

conventional organizations, thus becoming communities based on a hybrid of connective and

collective action. Some forms of loose organizational coordination of action (756) appear

because they are necessary,as is the case of OWS General Assemblies or the various resource

centers such as the OWS library, medical assistance centers and others. Nevertheless, these

clearly defined structures are adjacent and not central to the groups existence or persistence:

Occupy was defined by its self-organizing roots (757). Another element that made it apparent

that the OWS was centered on connective action is that even after gaining publicity thanks to the

we are the 99% message it steered clear of choosing official leaders or spokespeople (754).

This hybrid type of community can gain support particularly because there are no stronger

demands for membership or subscribing to collective demands (757). Consequently, even

though the group may be larger thanks to its lack of strict rules and codes for participation, the

bonds within it may also be much weaker.


14/231

9

3.2

Social media: can it generate long term support?

While Bennett and Segerberg (2012) analyze the OWS movement from the perspective of

connective and collective action, Juris (2012) looks at Occupy Bostonsuse of social media and

how this influenced the manner in which it was organized. His main assumption is that new

media are an important organizational tool for movements but that places, bodies, face-to-face

networks, social histories, and the messiness of offline politics continue to matter(260).

The OWS movement built on the media tools used by previous social movements and

complemented, rather than replaced them, with social media (Juris 2012, 260). OWS has a

website (www.occupywallst.org), a blog (http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com), a printed

newspaper (The Occupied Wall Street Journal), but it is also a heavy user of Facebook and

Twitter. The last two elements are mainly used for spreading information and coordinating

action, but they are most effective at generating protests []which disaggregate as easily as

they aggregate (267). The range of online communication tools that are easily available and

come at a rather low financial cost is so wide that it can turn into a hindrance. The large amount

of OWS Twitter feeds, forums, websites, wikis and blogs become a drawback of organizing in a

social media age that mirrors the proliferation and fragmentation of #Occupy Bostons physical

gatherings(271). Additionally, OWSavoids putting forward a concrete set of demands despite

disparate in-group initiatives to create them (272). However, unofficial representatives of the

movement state on OccupyWallSt.org that they will not come up with a specific set of political

or economic demands. Doing so would mean that they believe in and trust the system that has led

to the negative situation their country is in, since they would be accepting its formal rules and

processes (Graeber 2012). Overall, the article offers an account of the Occupy Boston

movement, some interesting theoretical points but never goes beyond simply describing what

happened.

3.3 A cross-media analysis

After looking at the way the OWS was built on a combination of connective and collective action

(Bennett and Segerberg 2012), and at how their intensive and seemingly unfocused use of social

media can become a problem (Juris 2012), lets shift the focus to the way another social cause
http://www.occupywallst.org/http://www.occupywallst.org/http://www.occupywallst.org/http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://www.occupywallst.org/


15/231

10

was presented across different types of media. Thus, Edgerly, Toft and Veden (2011) analyze the

way that the May 1, 2006 day without an immigrant marches for the rights of USA immigrants

were presented in three media sources. These were selected so as to be representative of Parkins

(1971 in Edgerly, Toft and Veden 2011, 5) types of situated reading: dominant, which upholds

the status quo interpretation; oppositional, which superimposes on the message an interpretation

that works in direct opposition; and negotiated, which decodes the broadest possible meaning of

a message to find a middle ground (317). The researchers looked at 297 front pages of

newspapers which had a negotiated reading position, Lou Dobbs Tonight TV show on Fox

Business Network with an oppositional reading, and Democracy Now! with a dominant reading

position (322-25). Their discourse analysis was based upon a framework of three distinct topics:

economy, policy/rights, and law/order (314).

Activists must balance providing the media with content they are likely to broadcast and

transmitting what the movement is actually interested in showing, such as its agenda. Too much

accent on the first aspect and they risk being described as illegitimate and hostile fools (Edgerly,

Toft and Veden 2011, 315), too little and they risk not being seen at all. The paper evaluated the

media success of the day without an immigrantby using the description of media success for a

social movements representation in the media: 1. get on the media agenda; 2. manage the

coverage so as to avoid a negative portrayal; 3. increase internal movement identification []

and commitment (316).The movement managed its media coverage somewhat successfully as

it was quite visible in many sources and was not portrayed as violent or deviant. However, it

could not generate comprehensive coverage of [its] legislative goals in the mainstream press

(329) or escape the trope of illegality that has driven coverage of immigration for decades

(ibid). Additionally, as the movements organizers decided to communicate two distinct

legislative agendas (both immigration reform and opposing bill H.R. 4437 that would have

turned immigration into a felony) they made it easier for the newspapers to present disparate

accounts of their political goals. Lou Dobbs account of the movement built upon his audiencesbeliefs and selected information about the march so as to support a negative reading of the event

while Democracy Now! produced an interpretation of the march that coincided with the

intended purpose of the eventsorganizers.


16/231

11

3.3

A social movements changing media exposure

While the first three studies had a more limited time frame for their analyses, the Rauch et al.

(2007) research focuses on the media image of the movement for democratic globalization from

the 1999 protests during the WTO meeting in Seattle up to the 2004 protests at the Republican

National Convention in New York (133). Its main research questions were the following:1. Did

journalists use of official and nonofficial sources in protest coverage change in the five years

after the new social movements emergence?2. Did journalists use of terms that legitimize or

delegitimize the new social movement change in its first five years? 3: Did the new social

movements visibility in the mainstream press change between 1999 and 2004? (134). A total of

503 articles from The New York Times were used as their only media source (ibid). The

framework for their analysis was divided into two categories: legitimizing (external support,influence, and stating their goals) and de-legitimizing language (activists appearance, behavior

and attitude) (135-6).The main findings of the research are summarized within two categories:

improving activist access and legitimizing the goals of the movement (137-9). The research

observed an overall shift of 8% from official to non-official sources during the five years, with

articles focusing on official, established sources especially at the beginning of the social

movement (137). The non-official voices that gained the most media space came from

individual protesters, sympathetic celebrity figures and members of marginal activist groups

(137). On top of that, during the five years both the average number of legitimizing and de-

legitimizing terms increased, however, the first category had a more pronounced change for the

better ( 353% to 23.3 legitimating terms per story versus 141% to 14.5 per story for the de-

legitimating ones) (138).

Another positive conclusion is that the demonstrations put the democratic globalization

movement on journalists agendas (Rauch et al. 2007, 139) as only one article on the topic

existed in the newspaper in the entire year prior to the 1999 protests but 209 appeared afterwards

(1999-2004). Also, while the number of the stories clearly decreased six months after the WTO

protest with 72 % over the 5 year, the prominence of the articles only decreased by 5% during

the same period (139). Overall, the portrayal of the movement remained rather stable with some

of its initial elements staying the same despite the long timeframe (for example the reference to

the 1999 Seattle protest) (141).


17/231

12

3.5 Social movement websites: what are they used for?

The previous studies have described social movements from a rather empirical perspective. Stein

(2009), on the other hand, not only looked at how they use the Internet but also created a

typology of the functions that new media support (752). These were to: provide information;

assist action and mobilization; promote interaction and dialog; make lateral linkages; serve as an

outlet for creative expression; and promote fundraising and resource generation (752-3). The

sample of established national social movement organizations (SMO) was split into six

different types of causes: environmental; lesbian/gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT); anti-

corporate globalization; human rights; media reform; and womens movement (756), and a

survey was used in order to assess how and which of the functions their usage of the Internet

supported.

The social movements that were the subject of the study are only moderately or occasionally

highly active when it comes to using the web for providing information but have a low or even

no web activity for coordinating action and mobilization; engaging in fundraising and resource

generation; and making lateral linkages (Stein 2009, 763-4). It is likely that this limited activity

is caused by the fact that the members who have access to the web resources of the organization

have different interests and fail to coordinate properly (764). Another possibility is that they trust

traditional means of communication more (face-to-face communication, posting flyers, etc)

(ibid). On top of this, as the SMOs are already established, they may simply choose to add the

Internet as another resource within their communication tools instead of using it to its full

potential (ibid).

3.6 Alternative media: definition, structure and content sourcing

Moving on from the typology of functions supported by new media, the next studies analyze the

differences and similarities of the journalistic work ethic on both sides of the barricade

(mainstream and alternative) as well as show how the two influence each other. As such,

researchers have noted that alternative media need to adopt and adapt mainstream media

practices in order to survive and advance their political aims (Sandoval and Fuchs 2009, 146).


18/231

13

However, they can make use of capitalist structures and at the same time criticize these

structures (146). The similarities in processes and function of mainstream and alternative media

are necessary if alternative media are to gain support beyond their restricted, already persuaded

readership. Most of them come in the form of commercial financing or professional

organization (148). Whereas some resemblances need to exist, alternative media need to have

on the structural level, critical media content and/or complex form [and] on the actor level

media producers produce critical content (146). Critical content is the central defining element

of alternative media as it gives voice to suppressed possibilities of existence, antagonisms of

reality, potentials for change, questions domination, [and] expresses the standpoints of oppressed

and dominated groups and individuals and argues for the advancement of a co-operative society

(148).

Atton and Wickenden (2005) analyzed the types of actors presented as sources by the activist

newspaper SchNEWS, the frequency of their appearance and the amount of space dedicated to

them (352) over a one year period. The research questions they sought to answer were how the

newspaper sourced its content and how this process differed from that of mainstream media

(351). The studys theoretical background is based on a critique of the theory of primary

definition (Hall et al. 1978). This argues that the media rely on elite sources because the elites

have better access to information that is viewed as important, and the media are under constant

financial and time pressure (Atton and Wickenden 2005, 352). However, this does not account

for the different levels of media access that various members of the elite have or for the way that

voices that were once disregarded can become primary sources.

Alternative medias sourcing routines are described with the concept of native reporting (Atton

and Wickenden 2005, 349) which relies on participants, eyewitnesses and activists. These can

offer a comprehensive description and analysis of struggles within a community from a

perspective that is relevant to it because the reporters are a part of the community (ibid). Despite

the fact that these insider voices may be anyone, with or without formal training, they do tend to

be highly educated and are usually already involved in the life of their communities (ibid). Also,

through the content it makes available to its readers, it becomes apparent that the counter-

agenda of the radical community newspaper is often in direct opposition to local, commercial

newspapers (350) and that it seeks to balance these out. Also, the lack of professionalization


19/231

14

in alternative news media does not prevent them being subject to pressures similar to those in

mainstream media, as low pay, or none at all, deadlines and unexpected changes occur just as

well in alternative media contexts (351). Thus, it is better not to ignore these limitations and

idealize alternative media as some sort of , mysteriously liberated from the

everyday, structural considerations of the practice (ibid).

SchNEWS seeks to counterbalance and critique the established voices in mainstream media.

Thus, in an inversion of Hall et al.s theory of primary definition, [it] gives ordinary people

privileged media access (Atton and Wickenden 2005, 357). However, the ordinary voices they

favor are protesters and activists, a counter-elite that dominates an alternative hierarchy of

sources (ibid). Also, as they focus on this particular groups views and opinions, and thus, limit

the opportunities for the other voices to be heard (ibid), they are acting in a way that is very

similar to that of the mainstream media. SchNEWS is preserving the dominant model of

sourcing in its assumptions about power, legitimacy and authoritativeness (ibid). Additionally,

SchNEWS sourcing of news is extremely dependent upon shared interests, ideologies and

notions of expert knowledge (358) to an extent that may be even greater than that of mainstream

media. This means that the paper is far from the idealized theorization of

alternative media and is instead prompted primarilyby political ideology and the philosophy

of direct-actionprotest (ibid).

In one of Attons (2002)previousstudies, he compared the coverage ofthe July 2001 G8 summit

produced by SchNEWS and The Guardian, which he describes as part of the liberal press. He

noted that while the more mainstream newspaper occasionally offered activists the chance to

speak, the activist paper did not do the same (499). Atton attributes this inclusion of non-

mainstream voices to The Guardians personal history of having activists as its columnists. Also,

while other researchers have observed that social movements are often portrayed in mainstream

sources in a way that is less accurate but more entertaining for the readers (Stein 2009, Rauch et

al. 2007; Edgerly, Toft and Veden 2011), this analysis shows that the alternative source itself had

a subversive use of a tabloid writing style (Atton 2002, 503) with headlines that range d from

insensitive to crude and were dominated by accounts of violence (498). Not only this, but

SchNEWS journalists were the central voice within the newspaper, though they remained

anonymous (503). Furthermore, instead of a departure from the journalistic style that denies one


20/231

15

side, usually the protesters, thus lowering its credibility, SchNEWS used the same style against

the authorities. Thus, this was done both to describe the development of the protests and the way

that the authorities were handling them: protesters were presented as victims, while the police

used extreme force (498). Haas (2006) reached a similar conclusion regarding weblogs. As

such, weblogs are not a radical departure from more established media of communication as

they reproduce rather than challenge existing media formulae and larger blogs work as agenda

setters for the smaller ones (387). They also usually focus on the same topics as mainstream

media as well as use it as one of their primary source of information (394). As alternative media

is sometimes approached as being completely different from mainstream media, Harcup (2005)

tries to avoid presenting them using the David versus Goliath framework (371). His

comparative analysis of the two types of media showed that they influence and limit each other.

As one of the respondents of Harcups survey said, mainstream media tends to be , in alternative

media (ibid).

Overall, the literature review has provided a comprehensive description of the way in which

social movement are analyzed in the field of communication. While some studies tried to create a

typology of how new media either was employed or influenced the strength of the group

connections (Bennett and Segerberg 2012, Juris 2012, Stein 2009), others focused on comparing

the portrayal of social movements in alternative and mainstream media (Rauch et al. 2007,

Edgerly, Toft and Veden 2011; Atton 2002, 2005; Harcup 2005).


21/231

16

4. Theoretical background

After looking at the various studies of the media portrayal of social movements, it became

necessary to find a theory that could help explain the differences and similarities in the content

produced by established or alternative media. This needed to address them in the context of the

social changes and struggles for power in a globalized society. As such, Castells network theory

of power (2009, 2011) combined with a theory of media framing were considered relevant for

the study and will be presented in the following chapter.

The sustained effort to produce social change and the negation of institutions that once created

strong social ties are both related to globalization[and] have resulted in the growing separation

of individuals in late modern societies from traditional bases of social solidarity such as parties,

churches, and other mass organizations (Bennett and Segerberg 2011, 770). Fewer young adults

in the Western world state that they believe in God and an even smaller proportion of them goes

to church for events other than marriage ceremonies, baptisms or funerals. People switch

between religions, often remarry, choose not to have their children baptized. Army service

remains mandatory in fewer countries than before. While in difficult times people might go back

to doing things in the traditional way, this generally comes as a temporary decision in the searchfor momentary stability. On the other hand, while they are moving away from the causes that

used to be predefined for future generations by their parents and grandparents, they keep looking

for things to do and a cause to believe in and fight for. This search is complemented by a desire

to personalize everything around them so as to represent them perfectly. This includes both

objects and subjects and this growing individualization can be seen in the tendency to engage

with multiple causes by filtering the causes through individual lifestyles (771). Thus, one

person can be at the same time a feminist, an environmentalist, a liberal and a member of the

church choir.

The ability to define individual affiliations in a very precise and personal manner can help build

a stronger relationship with various causes. However, it can also mean that as people undergo the

normal changes that occur throughout life, as their values and attitudes change, the causes that


22/231

17

they fight for will also change accordingly. This tends to be particularly true for younger people

who seem to be constantly looking to define themselves and thus to try new things and

appropriate new identities. What the attitude some have towards the fashion of the day could

become the one they have towards the cause of the day, which can make a cause suddenly

popular and then help it lose its appeal just as quickly.

However, gaining support for a cause is an imperative for social movements and the easiest way

to do so is through mass media, and particularly through online media. The latter is often talked

about as if it were the solution for all social ills. Despite this overenthusiastic embrace of the new

communication platforms and while they definitely can help build up the support for various

events, causes and movements, they cannot organize a movement or supply momentum to a

protest that was not there (Iskander 2011, 1228). However eager the new media prosumers

might be for a new cause to fight for, the specifics of the ideas that will light up their spirits are

within them and not within the new medium for broadcasting the message. They are not mindless

followers; most have a strong sense of what moves them and what deserves their energy and

attention. Instead, while new media do not generate the content of the messages that cause their

users to react, they can just as the traditional media, tap into and amplify it and elicit an emotive

response (1231). With this general description of the media environment providing a

background, the following pages will address the actual theories that will be employed in this

paper. As such, they will explore the means used by the media in order to create and re-create

power, the processes by which decisions are made regarding media content as well as a theory of

media framing that will offer the means to understand the actual content that this study examines.

4.1 Network Society

In the context of social movements using new media as their ally (since established media may

or may not present them as intended) a theory that would shed light on the way they use

resources in order to gain or preserve legitimacy and power was essential. Thus, as stated above,

Manuel Castells network theory of power will be applied. First of all, a network society is one

where social structures are organized in accordance with digital technologies of information and

communication (Castells 2009, 24). Second, social structures are understood as organizational


23/231

18

arrangements of humans in relationships of production, consumption, reproduction, experience,

and power expressed in meaningful communication coded by culture (ibid).

4.1.1 Power and Counter-Power in the Network Society

Power is a basic aspect of any type of society. Whether it is democratic or authoritarian, its grasp

on everyday life cannot be denied. A basic reason for this is that organizing human activities and

generally making order out of chaos seems to depend on hierarchies and a certain limitation of

the social actors freedom. Power can have various sources. It can come from the threat of

violence (physical or psychological), the respect or attraction for a charismatic leader or it can be

based on the trust in someones superior knowledge of a particular topic. No matter what its

source is, power has to be communicated and built through communication, otherwise the costs

are steep. A political regime that wants to be regarded as democratic cannot blatantly force its

citizens into submission. It has to find more elegant ways of doing so. Therefore, power is

primarily exercised by the construction of meaning in the human mind through processes of

communication enacted in global/local multimedia networks of mass communication, including

mass self-communication (Castells 2009, 416).

By continuously defining and broadcasting what is normal, acceptable or expected of someone, itbecomes easier to generate that particular type of behavior. This functions for most aspects of

society. Thus, it is not only the individual normality that is defined through the mediated

message but the institutional one as well. As the attitudes and the expectations that people have

from certain institutions are shaped through this process, it, in turn, establishes whose power

can be exercised and how it can be exercised (Castells2009, 416-7). Additionally, if it should

become necessary to resort to violence or coercion, it is essential to build the particular mindset

within which they can be considered acceptable and even appropriate alternatives (416).

The external definition of what is acceptable is imposed upon the individuals lifeas well as the

individuals interaction with institutions. The narratives define everyday life but they also act as

a form of social control (Tichenor et al. 1980 in Edgerly, Toft and Veden 2011, 316). This

invisible form of social control is reproduced through the use of language which is itself a form


24/231

19

of power (Edgerly, Toft and Veden 2011, 316). Therefore, the mass mediated discourse is the

most widely spread and generally well funded expression of power. This does not mean that

people simply accept whichever message is bestowed upon them. On the contrary, people

transform and adapt it according to personal histories or state of mind and then accept or reject it

fully or partially. However, this is a vicious circle as the mental processing is conditioned by the

communication environment (Castells2009, 417).

But what exactly is power? Castells defines it as the structural capacity of a social actor to

impose its will over other social actor(s) (Castells 2007,239) within a particular social context,

and its opposite force is counter-power (ibid).Castells (2011) has three basic assumptions about

the network society and the way that power functions within it. First of all, power is dependent

upon multidimensional networks that organize all the aspects of human life. The multimedia

networks of mass communication are among the main, but not the only, means of influencing

the mind; as such, mass communication networks are an important source of power in society

(786). Second, because the various networks organize all aspects of human life and identity, they

need to be specialized and have distinct roles. Thus, they do not become one large network but

maintain their identity and function either as partners or as competitors, depending on the

projects, other partners and specific contexts (ibid). Last, though it may seem that global

companies have worldwide influence irrespective of local rules, the state with its political system

continues to possess a fundamental role in the overall networking of power (ibid). By and

large, the network society functions according to four different types of power: networking

power, network power, networked power and network-making power (Castells 2009, 2011).

Networking power is the capacity that in-network actors have to accept or reject the external

actors entrance into the established network (Castells 2009, 2011) and is based on network

gatekeeping (Castells 2009, 43). Network power, on the other hand, refers to the shape and the

protocols that an out-of-the-network message or medium needs to comply with in order to be

functional within the established network it wants to permeate: power is exercised not by

exclusion from the networks but by the imposition of the rules of inclusion (Castells 2011, 773).

Network power stems from the structure and management of the networks (Castells 2009,

418). Network power refers to the form that the messages need to have in order to function

properly within the network; it does not refer to gate keeping for the sake of the content but for


25/231

20

that of the configuration of the message. The ones capable of creating the aforementioned

structures and protocols are the programmers of the network. They are a network in themselves:

a decision-making network [that] sets up and manages the programs on the network (419).

Despite having an obvious amount of power, its scope is limited. Thus, programmers are only

interested in the fulfillment of the goals of the network, which is, primarily, to attract audience

(ibid), other scopes are beyond them. Furthermore, the actual programming of the networks is

less about content than about format (420).

These first two types of power illustrate the ability of the network nodes (the actors that have the

network power) to include or exclude elements coming from outside the network. In contrast, the

networked poweris the influence that actors within the network have over other actors that are

also inside the network (Castells 2011, 773). In the case of networks of communication this

translates into the agenda-setting, managerial, and editorial decision-making power in the

organizations that own and operate multimedia communication networks (Castells2009, 419).

The last of the four, the network making power, is exactly what its name would lead you to

believe. It is the ability to create and structure a network according to a certain actorsinterests;

therefore this is in the hand of media corporations (Castells 2009, 2011). They are the ones that

decide on the type of messages and the format they will have to comply with in order to access

the network and these two factors are set according to the goals assigned to the network: profit-making, power-making, culture-making, or all of the above (Castells 2009, 420). Network

making power is the one that all the others stem from. The network is the system that allows for

power relationships to be built. In its absence, there is no point in having rules for access that

refer to content and form or authority over peers and subordinates. The ability to influence

others depends on two basic mechanisms: (a) the ability to constitute network(s) and to

program/reprogram the network(s) in terms of the goals assigned to the network; and (b) the

ability to connect and ensure the cooperation of different networks by sharing common goals and

combining resources while fending off competition from other networks by setting up strategic

cooperation (Castells 2011,776). Those holding the first type of power are the programmers,

while those insuring the interaction and connection between networks are the switchers and

these are the two types of actors who have network making power (776-7).


26/231

21

However, though it may seem that true power, the one that leads to making a profit or

establishing a particular cultural reading of an event lays in the hands of the few people leading

the major media conglomerates, reality is not that clear cut as multimedia conglomerates are

intertwined with financial investors of various origins (Castells, 2009, 420). Also, despite the

fact that the end users of the network (the consumers or the prosumers) cannot choose the shape

and content that a certain network will have, they can choose to switch between networks. A

commercial television channel, a radio station or a website are only profitable if their format and

content reach a certain proportion of the audience. In the case of the Internet people would use

it less if it lost its fundamental features: interactivity and unfettered communication, regardless of

how surveilled it is (420-1).

The web 2.0 and web 3.0 and their attributes of interactivity and instant communication and

(almost) instant co-creation or co-production have the ability to commodify freedom (Castells

2009, 421). Its users build on content and formats that are already online as well as generate new

content both directly, through sharing their knowledge and know-how, and indirectly, by sharing

their online surfing habits. A good example of such a situation is the fact that users of web search

engines not only get their information through them but due to their search habits they are

helping to determine the accessibility and dominance of that information source for other users

in the Internet sphere (97). They thus become users, producers and products who surrender

their privacy and become advertising targets (421). However, this is not a one-way tragic story

of the used masses that are unaware they are pawns in the hands of the rich and few. The more

networks of communication are created, the greater the number of people who generate their

own networks of mass self-communication, thus empowering themselves(ibid).

While for the time being, there is an unequal competition between professionalized media

production and our low-quality home videos and blog gossip (Castells2009, 422) the balance

definitely shifts as more people having the skill set necessary to work in a professional media

environment choose to use it outside their professional lives. Thus, content that does not strictly

come from the corporate media environment can have a level of quality (aspect, formatting and

text) similar to that produced by the media industry. On top of that, while using a given network

layout as it was decided by those who have the various types of network power, a change of

power structure happens to a certain extent. Though the structure of the media that people are


27/231

22

using is not one that they create themselves, they do use it according to their own intentions and

purposes. Whether or not structure is a central aspect of communication, that is not the purpose

of this paper, but its content is definitely one that people can focus on. The medium is not the

message, although it conditions the format and distribution of the message (418).

The message may have to conform to a certain format which is predefined by online spaces as

digitization operates as a protocol of communication (Castells 2009, 418). However, most

messages face no serious difficulties in order to undergo this process, thus it is unlikely that the

standard inhibits the message (ibid). A basic rule of digitized media is that its format is rather

strict and universal. Therefore, as long as an author uses the proper protocol for entering the

network, once the message is in place, the network can help amplify the diffusion of the

message beyond anyones control (ibid).

New media have the ability to quickly transport a message across borders of all types. However,

gate keeping remains the major instrument of the networking power as most socialized

communication is still processed through the mass media, and the most popular information web

sites are those of the mainstream media because of the importance of branding in the source of

the message (Castells 2009, 419). So, though it may be tempting to say that new media are

starving old media of their audience, they still require the former in order to gain legitimacy and

for their message to be shared quickly by individuals through their online communities.

4.1.2 Counter-power and Social Movements

As long as power exists, so does counter-power. The latter is defined as thecapacity of a social

actor to resist and challenge power relations that are institutionalized (Castells 2007, 239).

Irrespective of how much effort and how many resources are invested into either keeping

everyone happy or everyone quiet, there always will be people who disagree with the generally

accepted rhetoric of their everyday lives. The very moment that the oppositional voices become a

majority, the values and norms, and ultimately the system in which they exist will have to

change, although not necessarily according to their wishes (238-9). Generally, such a change has

to be or at least appear to be according to their expectations; otherwise the discontent that led to


28/231

23

the initial shift will persist and will require a new shift in order for the system to regain some

balance. Also, the more unstable the economic, social, and political context, the more likely the

rise of social movements becomes. The postmodern shift from traditional values and expressions

of authority to a world where everything is questioned and nothing is taken for granted is also

partly responsible for this. More recently, alongside the growing crisis of political legitimacy,

we have witnessed in most of the world the growth of social movements, coming in very

different forms and with sharply contrasted systems of values and beliefs, yet opposed to what

they often define as global capitalism ( 249).

Through counter-power, social movements seek to modify the balance of power. As the easiest

way to communicate and influence people is through the mass mediated message, the media

have necessarily become the space where power is decided (Castells 2007, 242). Therefore,

social movements must first gain access to the mass media and then simultaneously adjust to

their formulas and change the type of message that is accepted and broadcast through them. The

content of communication has to be built upon what is already in the media and needs to create a

hybrid out of its own agenda and the context and contents that the media present. Therefore, not

only the ideas that stand as the core of the social movement, but also what they choose to say to

the world about themselves are adapted to and are the result of a negotiated meaning. These have

to take into account the societies within which they are born as they adopt values and take up

organizational forms that are specific to [them] (249).

Though counter-power is the reaction force aimed at the established power, those seeking to hold

it have to use the same or similar means of gaining influence as established power actors.

Consequently, counter power is also built through the two main sources for network making

power: the programmers and the switchers. This means that social movement must either

introduce new instructions and new codes into the networks programs (Castells 2011, 778)or

disrupt the dominant switches while switching networks of resistance and social change

(Castells 2009, 430). This disruption is done by interrupting and stopping the switches that

allow the networks to be controlled by the metaprogram of values that express structural

domination where the metaprogram is understood as the source code for the programs of the

networks that operate organizations and institutions (Castells 2011, 778).


29/231

24

Traditionally, the institutions that were the holders of power and counterpower were the parties,

unions and other types of organizations based on common interests. However, with the increased

usage of new media in order to communicate, collaborate and organize action, the new means

of digital communication constitute their most decisive organizational form [...] [and are]

evolving toward the new organizational model built around networked communication (Castells

2007, 249-50). Nevertheless, any kind of movement, old or new, irrespective of time of

existence, depends on a secure means of communication. Ideas, values and projects have always

had to be shared in order to keep a group alive. Consequently, new media essentially intensify

and expand the internal and external communication. Throughout history the modes of

communication were critical factors in determining the extent and consequences of revolts and in

explaining how isolated incidents could reach societal proportions (Castells 2009, 347)and this

remains a fact for contemporary movements.

The new mass media have become more accessible both as a source of information and as a

means of sharing content created by individuals outside the established network. They allow

more people to interact and find common interests or common sources of discontent. As

communication is the basic means of building communities, this new media environment has two

important effects. First, it helps legitimize individual feelings of discomfort and disagreement

with institutional decisions and events that may otherwise be considered normal and acceptable.

Second, it helps create a community of those who do not believe in them. The sharing and

legitimization increase the chances that the members of the community will try to do something

in order to change the state of affairs. If communication helps build larger groups of people who

do not agree with certain decisions, by controlling it the opposite can be done: the narrower the

circle of discontented, the easier the repression of their protest and the faster the restoration of

order (Castells2009, 347).

Online media allow people to broadcast their ideas and values as well as communicate with other

people who share them. As they are usually informal means of communication, this leads to the

creation of networks of horizontal communication (Castells 2009, 431). At a different level,

this happens to social movements using websites, forums or other online communities to spread

their messages. The sharing of values, aspirations and plans helps individuals overcome the

powerlessness of their solitary despair by networking their desire (ibid) and legitimizes their


30/231

25

discomfort by showing that others share their discontent. Therefore, by presenting the stories of

their members, their values as a group, as well as their plans, this type of online presence helps

build a stronger relationship with their supporters at least within this medium.

The global network society, that online media help build, is characterized by two important

traits: networked individualism and communalism (Castells, 2009, 362). This means that two

somewhat opposite attitudes coexist. First of all, individuals strive to define themselves as

independent, self sufficient and uniquely creative while at the same time they are using and

producing the resources of their online (and offline) communities. Social movements benefit

from both facets. For one thing, the more accurately individual tastes are defined, the more likely

a certain movement is to find its particular group of supporters. Then, as the movement has

defined, found and built its audience, it can start to use this community as an informational,

social and material resource. This becomes a self propelling circle. However, networked

individualism is a culture, not an organizational form (ibid), you build on it and around it but

you need to end up with some sort of community. So, while it may begin with the values, plans

and desires of the individual it needs to lead to a system of exchange with other individuals,

thus reconstructing society rather than reproducing society (ibid). Individual creativity needs to

translate into societal creativity. In addition, as in developed countries the cost of using the

Internet is rather low, people looking for information or support for a certain cause will have to

spend fewer resources by using it. This turns the Internet into an "essential platform for debate,

[a] means of acting on peoples mind, and ultimately serves as [the] most potent political

weapon (Castells2007, 250).

Removing or at least lowering the barrier for entering the conversation means that more people

can become involved. If more people are involved in the discussion, then more of them may be

looking for an outlet for their discontent and for solutions, and those people might eventually

become a majority. The power of the majority over the minority is part of the definition of

democracy: democracy [...] resides in the capacity to counter the power of heritage, wealth, and

personal influence with the power of the multitude, the power of numbers the numbers of

citizens, whoever they are (Castells 2009, 366). If enough people speak up, and if enough

people are listening, then they might actually realize that they, as a group, are capable of

changing their reality. This is arguably an optimistic view of new media and its impact because,


31/231

26

while they can provide an outlet for diverging opinions the technologies of freedom are not

free (414). The question is what actually happens when a message, which is against the main

voices within the media, appears. How does it grow, what are the attributes that help it grow

despite the fact that it goes against the stream and how can it become efficient?

Part of the reason why the Internet has become such an important ally of social movements is the

fact that the networking processes it sustains are central to the movement from a strategic,

organizational, and normative (Castells 2009, 343) perspective. Having a distinct and relatively

cheap and easy to use element, that can be utilized in quite a varied manner, means that more

resources can be directed elsewhere. As new media have become an important part of everyday

life, the skills and the community acquired through them can easily be put to a different use. To a

certain extent, it can be said that for the most consistent users of new media the tools are already

in place for them to become online activists.

Obviously, social movements need a real life presence in order to draw from and then shape

reality. Thus, they root themselves in their local lives and in face-to-face interaction (Castells

2007, 250). Social movements need to gain supporters. As the incentives for staying loyal to a

movement are mostly intrinsic and sometimes weak, some participants will choose to leave. In

order for the social movements to survive and grow, they need to gain supporters faster than they

lose them, therefore the networking form of the movement, a decisive organizational tool,becomes the networking norm of the movement (Castells2009, 342).

New social movements need to reach a certain balance between publicizing their cause, gaining

new support, attracting media attention and staying true to their intentions and plans. They need

to build upon the cultural conventions that are preexistent and coexistent. They do not live in a

void and do not build ideas in a void. Thus, some of its main members, the activist-hackers,

need to function as relayers and exchangers [of networked movements], receiving, interpreting,

and routing information to diverse network nodes (Juris 2008, 14). These activist-hackers have

similar functions to those of Castells switchers, as they assure the interactions within and

between networks, but they also create content. This is done through combining and

recombining cultural codesin this case political signifiers, sharing information about projects,

mobilizations, strategies and tactics within global communication networks (ibid). Their


32/231

27

actions are directed at partially changing what is taken for granted in society such as the values

and interests institutionalized in society, what is tantamount to modify the power relations

(Castells 2007, 249).

However, the message is effective only if the receiver is ready for it [] and if the messenger is

identifiable and reliable (Castells2009, 2). This draws the full circle, as similar states of mind

need to coexist in different areas of society in order to create a successful social movement. The

agenda and values of the audience that will later on become the online or offline activists, the

core ideas of the central nodes of the social movements that create the message and need to make

sure it is broadcasted and a certain permeability of the established media to the messages that

may eventually disrupt its core values, all need to meet at the starting point of a social movement

if it will have any chance to survive.

4.2 Media Frames

Power is a central notion in the network society. As power relationships start at a mental level,

they are based on the shaping of the human mind by the construction of meaning through

image-making (Castells 2009, 193). This shaping, in turn, happens partly through media

exposure. This is not to say that the media have the power but that, instead, they are the space of

power-making (194). Media is the main source of socialized communication, capable of

reaching a large portion of society, and thus the framing of the public mind is largely performed

through processes that take place in the media (157).

4.2.1 The media and the public: how the connection is built

According to Castells there are three major phenomena that define the relationship between the

media and the public: agenda setting, priming and framing (Castells 2009, 157). Each concept

will be presented briefly in the following paragraphs. The first is McCombs and Shaws (1972)

agenda setting theory which pointed out that even though mass media do not directly tell the

reader what to think about certain topics, they do instead decide what topics the readers will be


33/231

28

thinking about and what he/she will consider as important. As such, mass media influence the

importance that the readers put upon a certain issue according to the amount of information and

the positioning of the topic within the media source. Furthermore, they even noticed that there is

a coherence and repetition of content and quantity of information on many distinct topics

throughout different media sources (ibid).

Priming happens when the media tell their audience that they should use particular issues in

order to assess the actions of their leaders and government (Scheufele and Tewksbury 2007, 11).

This is considered a by-product of agenda setting, as by making some issues more visible than

others they also help build the appearance that those issues should be used as the benchmarks

for evaluating the performanceof political actors and their decisions (ibid).

The third process, framing, is defined as selecting and highlighting some facets of events or

issues, and making connections among them so as to promote a particular interpretation,

evaluation and/or solution (Entman 2004, 5). Its content can be used to analyze and asses the

power of a communicating text (Entman 1993, 51). Media frames are the persistent patterns

of cognition, interpretation, and presentation, of selection, emphasis, and exclusion, by which

symbol-handlers routinely organize discourse, whether verbal or visual (Gitlin 2003, 7). They

are consistently used by journalists because they allow them to handle large volumes of

information quickly and routinely: to recognize it as information, to assign it to cognitivecategories, and to package it for efficient relay to their audiences (ibid). Framing is an important

aspect of the media-audience relationship because it does not exist only in the media content but

it creates and strengthens associative neural networks (Castells 2009, 158).Frames exist in the

mind and those of them that manage to connect their message to pre-existing frames in the mind

become activators of conduct (ibid). Whereas this brief discussion is about the way that frames

affect the mind of the media consumer, which is not the purpose of this paper, it is important to

make this connection in order to argue for the significance of choosing media framing as a means

for interpreting the data. Entman uses the term schemas to relieve the ambiguity between media

frames and the audiences personal frames. As such, schemas are applied in the process of

interpretation by the human mind while frames are applied to texts (Entman 2004, 7).


34/231

29

Researchers (Sandoval and Fuchs 2009, Atton 2002, Atton and Wickenden 2005) have

repeatedly shown that alternative media do not represent a significant departure from mainstream

media in terms of processes and structures. For this reason, the concept of media frame can be

used to analyze them as well.In the case of discourse analysis, frames are particularly important.

They allow the researcher to choose which terms have the most strength in the text being

analyzed as well as not treat absolutely everything as if it were equally salient and influential

(Entman 1993, 56). Additionally, during the process, researchers informed by framing theory

will not only look at the text within its context ( the newspaper, TV program, etc) but they will

measure the salience of elements in the text, and [...] gauge the relationships of the most salient

clusters of messages-the frames-to the audiences schemata (ibid). Also, the researcher can

safely assume that if a message in the media is salient, it is more likely that the same topic is

salient in the mind of the audience (ibid).

4.2.2 How to create and recognize a frame

The content of frames, textual or visual, can be identified within the news due to its ability to

generate either opposition or support for a particular cause, an ability that can be evaluated

through its cultural resonance and magnitude (Entman 2004, 6). Such texts or images are

capable of making aspects of the story more salient by placement or repetition, or by associating

them with culturally familiar symbols (Entman 1993, 53).While the type of frame associated

with an issue is important, it turns out that the moment when the frame is presented to the public

is just as important. Thus, when covering major political or economic issues, the earlier a frame

is established within its news coverage, the more likely it is that it will become the generally

accepted frame for that issue, the so-called dominant frame (Entman 2004, 7). This happens

because such early framing can activate and spread congruent thoughts and feelings in

individuals knowledge networks, building a new event schema that guides responses to all

future reports (ibid). Additionally, using a frame that has already been accepted for an issue is

beneficial for the journalists producing the media texts, as conveying the congruent frame yields

career-enhancing attention (or avoids career-damaging inattention and criticism) from editors,

colleagues, and the public(15).


35/231

30

The framing of issues can have such power that as soon as a particular mode of referring to an

issue has become generally accepted, using another is to risk that the target audiences will

perceive the communicator as lacking credibility or will even fail to understand what the

communicator is talking about (Entman 1993, 55). Thus, once they have been built, broadcast,

accepted and internalized by the audience, trying to shift the frames can be a dangerous process.

In part, this happens because frames do not exist only with the communicator but also with the

text, the receiver and the culture (52). If any of the four creates a dissonant frame, the other

three will react to the loss of balance. The framing process itself consists of choosing certain

elements of reality and then turning them into the moresalient in a communicating text, in such

a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation,

and/or treatment recommendation for the item described (Entman 1993, 52). These choices are

the result of an interaction between different types of power-holding actors or groups and

Entman (2004) offers a model of this process that he refers to as cascading network activation

(10).

(Entman 2004, 10)

According to this model, frames are the result of a continuous interaction between the

administration, the elites, the media and the public. There is first a top-down relationship, as the


36/231

31

upper power structures define the issues-du-jour and pass them on to lower power structures,

followed by a feedback loop, a bottom-up relationship, where the public offers its response and

reaction to the notions it is provided with through the media.

Frames increase the salience of an element of communication, meaning that they make it more

noticeable, meaningful or memorable to audiences (Entman 1993, 53). However, though they

may provide information that reinforces clusters of facts or judgments (52), the frames may or

may not coincide with the frames (the schemas) the reader is using to interpret the text (ibid).

Thus, though they can make certain aspects more obvious to their audience, they might do so in

ways that were not intended by the broadcaster. As communicators make conscious or

unconsciousframing judgments in deciding what to say, guided by frames (often called

schemata) that organize their belief systems (ibid) so do those that are at the other end of the

communication situation. As such, the feedback loop helps the senders of the message better

understand how their content was received by their audience and thus influences the content of

their future messages. The upper structures need to take this into account if they want to build a

message that is easily digestible and quickly adopted by the general public.

Putting conscious or unconscious effort into presenting a reality within a certain framework

means that most frames are defined by what they omit as well as include (Entman 1993, 54).

The Atton and Wickenden (2005) study, for example, found that SchNEWS purposefullypresented the stories in such a way that the point of view of the conventional authority figures

was completely omitted. Instead, the activists were the only ones giving their version of the facts

in the newspaper.

The cascading network activation model complements Castellsnetwork society model well. In

the network society all its actors are connected: administration, elites, media and the public. The

flow of information, regulations and limitations is top-down but it needs to adapt according to

the feedback loop in order to remain relevant and accepted. The media conglomerates exist in an

environment that is regulated by the administration, as Entman defines it, as well as the other

elites. The network making power is in the hand of the elites. The networked power, the

influence the network actors have over other members of their network, is similar to Entmans

idea of an informal network of association(Entman 2004, 10) where one actor sets the tone for


37/231

32

ows in alternative and mainstream media thesis

Documents