Since I do not have much time, I will concentrate on meme theory instead of emphasizing Internet as a factor or as a media or communication channel or whatever
I provide this squeeze to show you how much SMOs are contradicting and therefore fascinating.
The problem is that frames, created by different groups, can seriously contradict. Roughly speaking, ppl do not understand each other. Considering this, distributing “ working info ” activists must simultaneously try to create some commonly shared frame. They must explain ppl why ideas in their propagandistic texts is organized in one way and not in any other.
On 1 st April ppl wanted to gather on Red Square, but access there was locked and ppl was said that it ’ s coz of some repair. Let me remind you that surface there is made of really old stones. I put the text only as an evidence, you do not need to read it, if you trust me. I extracted something looking like frame – a set of ideas with replicated logic.
Administrators of FB group are trying to say that the most important evil is that, first, the authorities lie to the nation and, second, that the mayority of population is indifferent to this situation. From administrators ’ point of view, these two facts must make intellectual elite (main core of protesters) feel angry. And anger is a kind of legitimate reason to go to streets.
Why I choose frame as a unit of analysis. Often this logic is deeply masked and hidden, administrators tell the same things in very different ways, often indirectly, using methophors, historical examples etc.
T o be applied to a number of cases
I will focus on coalition formation, since I see this as a current problem of Russian protest movement.
• Aberle, D. F. 1966. The Peyote Religion among the Navaho. Chicago: Aldine.
• Castells, M. (1996). The Information Age: Economy, Soceity and Culture Volume I:
The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
• Chakrabarti, S., Dom, B.E., Gibson, D., Kleinberg, J., Kumar, R., Raghavan, P., Rajagopalan,
S.& Tomkins, A. 1999. “Mining the Link Structure of the World Wide Web”. Journal Computer
• Conte, R. (2001). Memes through (social) minds. In: Darwinizing Culture: The Status of
Memetics as a Science. Ed. by R. Aunger. Oxford University Press. Pp. 83-120.
• Gerhards, J. (1995). Framing dimensions and framing strategies: contrasting ideal- and real-
time frame. Social Science Information, 34: 225-243.
• Friedland, J, Rogerson, K. (2009). How Political and Social Movements Form on the Internet
and How They Change Over Time. Literature Reviews prepared for the Internet Radicalization
Workshop. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: Institute for Homeland Security Solutions.
• Laland, K., Odling-Smee, J. (2001). The Evolution of the Meme. In: Darwinizing Culture: The
Status of Memetics as a Science. Ed. by R. Aunger. Oxford University Press. Pp. 121-142.
• MacDonald, K. (2002). ‘From Solidarity to Fluidarity: Social Movements beyond “Collective
Identity” – The Case of Globalization Conflicts’. Social Movement Studies, 1(2): 109–28.
• Tarrow, S. G. 2011. Power in Movement. Social Movements and Contentious Politics.
Third Edition, Revised and Updated. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.