The extreme right and the online public sphere
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • Nice to see this online, forgot this was put on slideshare.
    - Lieke
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 15 11 3 1

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. The extreme right and theonline public sphereLieke Ongering, MA
  • 2. Inclusion Exclusion
  • 3. • Features of the extreme right (Mudde, 1995) • Nationalist • Racist • Xenophobic • Anti-democratic • Believe in strong stateThe extreme rightMUDDE, C. 1995. Right-wing extremism analyzed. A comparatics analysis of the ideologies of three allegedright wingextremist parties (NPD, NDP, CP‟86). European Journal of Political Research, 27, 203-24.
  • 4. Active constitution of the „Other‟ Active exclusion of their constitutive „Other‟ Creation of „communities with closure‟ (Couldry, 2002), „anti-public spheres‟ (Cammaerts, 2007)The extreme rightCAMMAERTS, B. 2007. Jamming the political: boyong counter-hegemonic practices. Continuum: jourmal of media andcultural studies, 21(1), 71-90.COULDRY, N. 2002. Alternative media and mediated community. Paper presented at The International Association forMedia and Communication Research. Barcelona.
  • 5. • BNP can be seen as a British extreme right party • Research on the BNP online: • Copsey (2003), Atton (2004) • Atton (2004): “The „community‟ established by the BNP in cyberspace is replete with closure: organisationally, dialogically, discursively.” The British National PartyATTON, C. 2004. An alternative Internet, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.COPSEY, N. 2003. Extremism on the net. The extreme right and the value of the Internet. In: GIBSON, R., NIXON, P. & WARD, S.(eds.) Political Parties and the Internet. Net gain? London: Routledge.
  • 6. • Open, democratic and bottom up structure • Web 2.0 encourages Interactivity, networking and selfpublishing • O‟Reilly: • “Architechture of Participation” Web 2.0O‟REILLY, T. 2005. What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. [Online].Available: [Accessed 26 October 2011].
  • 7. BNP + Web 2.0 = more open?
  • 8. Analysis of the discussions on the page, for example:What do they Who is talking How do they talk about? with who? talk? Analysis of the deliberativeness of the discussionsBNP Facebook Page
  • 9. • Process of achieving mutual understanding • Rational-critical debate • Coherence and continuity • Reciprocity, reflexivity and empathy• Structural and dispositional fairness: • Discursive equality • Discursive freedom • SincerityThe normative conditionsof the public sphereGRAHAM, T. 2009. What‟s Wife Swap got to do with it? Talking politics in the net-based public sphere. Amsterdam:Amsterdam School of Communications Research, University of Amsterdam.
  • 10. Coding schemeAdapted from:GRAHAM, T. 2009. What‟s Wife Swap got to do with it? Talking politics in the net-based public sphere. Amsterdam:Amsterdam School of Communications Research, University of Amsterdam.STROMER-GALLEY, J. 2007. Measuring deliberation‟s content: A coding scheme. Journal of Public Deliberation, 3, 12.
  • 11. Coding example
  • 12. • The normative conditions of the public sphere were unsatisfied • No „mutual understanding‟ • No structural and dispositional fairnessBNP + Web 2.0 = more open?
  • 13. “Solution. Get them all out.PROBLEM SOLVED EASY.”• Unreasoned comments• Insulting comments towards constitutive other• Attraction towards the BNP ideology• Only 2 % clear aversionBNP + Web 2.0 = more open?
  • 14. Confirms earlier research Community with closure Anti-public sphereBNP + Web 2.0 = more open?
  • 15. • Compared to earlier research: • More openness • Multi-voiced discourse within the BNP community • Less hierarchical communication • User-generated content more important• Changes in line with general development of the Internet• These changes should not be exaggerated  BNP community is still very closedSome minor changes
  • 16. Inclusion Exclusion
  • 17. Internet a democratic Internet a polarised Internet • e-participation • Polarisation and • networked public fragmentation Inclusion and exclusion (Sunstein, 2009) onlinesphere(s) • Information cocoons • inclusion • exclusion Inclusion and exclusion onlineSUNSTEIN, C.R. 2009. Going to extremes. How like minds unite and devide, Oxford, Oxford University Press
  • 18. Extreme right = extreme example Exclusion can also take place in democratic e-participation projects Detect exclusion and prevent from happeningConcluding remarks
  • 19. • Research done at University of Leeds• Supervised by Dr Giles Moss• E-mail:• LinkedIn:• Twitter: @nietweinigThanks!