Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017;26(3):345-385.
doi: 10.1007/s10606-017-9275-z. Epub 2017 May 16.

Counter-Discourse Activism on Social Media: The Case of Challenging "Poverty Porn" Television

Tom Feltwell  1 , John Vines  1 , Karen Salt  2 , Mark Blythe  1 , Ben Kirman  3 , Julie Barnett  4 , Phillip Brooker  4 , Shaun Lawson  1
Affiliations

Counter-Discourse Activism on Social Media: The Case of Challenging "Poverty Porn" Television

Tom Feltwell et al. Comput Support Coop Work. 2017.

Abstract

In this paper we investigate how online counter-discourse is designed, deployed and orchestrated by activists to challenge dominant narratives around socio-political issues. We focus on activism related to the UK broadcast media's negative portrayal of welfare benefit claimants; portrayals characterised as "poverty porn" by critics. Using critical discourse analysis, we explore two activist campaigns countering the TV programme Benefits Street. Through content analysis of social media, associated traditional media texts, and interviews with activists, our analysis highlights the way activists leverage the specific technological affordances of different social media and other online platforms in order to manage and configure counter-discourse activities. We reveal how activists use different platforms to carefully control and contest discursive spaces, and the ways in which they utilise both online and offline activities in combination with new and broadcast media to build an audience for their work. We discuss the challenges associated with measuring the success of counter-discourse, and how activists rely on combinations of social media analytics and anecdotal feedback in order to ascertain that their campaigns are successful. We also discuss the often hidden power-relationships in such campaigns, especially where there is ambiguity regarding the grassroots legitimacy of activism, and where effort is placed into controlling and owning the propagation of counter-discourse. We conclude by highlighting a number of areas for further work around the blurred distinctions between corporate advocacy, digilantism and grassroots activism.

Keywords: Counter-discourse; Critical discourse analysis; socio-political issues; Grassroots activism; Social media activism.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
From left to right: a Landing page of Parasite Street website; b Visualisation of cost used on website; and c Prefabricated tweets and sharing functionality. © Stephen Reid 2014
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The London Economic’s infographic based on Parasite Street discourse. © The London Economic 2014
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Screen capture from The Great British Take-Off. © Positively Stockton-on-Tees,
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
PSOT branded refuse vehicle. © Positively Stockton-on-Tees,
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Accornero G, Pinto PR. ‘Mild mannered’? Protest and mobilisation in Portugal under austerity, 2010-2013. West European Politics. 2015;38(3):491–515. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2014.937587. - DOI
    1. Alonso, Omar; Catherine C. Marshall; and Marc Najork (2013). Are Some Tweets More Interesting Than Others? #HardQuestion. Proceedings of the Symposium on Human-Computer Interaction and Information Retrieval, Vancouver BC, Canada, 03–04 October 2013. New York: ACM Press, pp. 2.
    1. Al-Tahmazi, Thulfiquar H. (2015). The pursuit of power in Iraqi political discourse: Unpacking the construction of sociopolitical communities on Facebook. Journal of Multicultural Discourses Special Issue – Social Media, Discourse and Culture, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 163–179.
    1. Ammari, Tawfiq; and Sarita Schoenebeck (2016). “Thanks for your interest in our Facebook group, but it's only for dads”: Social Roles of Stay-at-Home Dads. Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '16), San Francisco, USA, 27 February – 02 March 2016. New York: ACM Press, pp 1363–1375.
    1. André, Paul; Michael Bernstein; and Kurt Luther (2012). Who gives a tweet?: evaluating microblog content value. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Seattle, Washington, USA, February 11–15, 2012. New York: ACM Press, pp. 471–474.

LinkOut - more resources