CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 376Social Media and PoliticsMedia and Digital CommunicationGender, Feminism, and Media

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 2 are not checked yet.

Social Media and the Activist Toolkit: User Agreements, Corporate Interests, and the Information Infrastructure of Modern Social Movements

Open access
Youmans, William Lafi, York, Jillian C.·2012·Journal of Communication
DOI 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01636.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, and elsewhere have been credited in part to the creative use of social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.Yet the information policies of the firms behind social media can inhibit activists and empower authoritarian regimes.Analysis of Facebook's response to Egypt's ''We Are All Khaled Said'' group, YouTube's policy exemption for videos coming from Syria, Moroccan loyalist response to the online presence of atheists, and the activities of the Syrian Electronic Army illustrate how prohibitions on anonymity, community policing practices, campaigns from regime loyalists, and counterinsurgency tactics work against democracy advocates.These problems arise from the design and governance challenges facing large-scale, revenue-seeking social media enterprises.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01636.x

Cites

40 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 45 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Anderson, 2011, Demystifying the Arab spring: Parsing the differences between Tunisia, Egypt and Libya., Foreign Affairs, 90, 2
  2. Kopytoff, 2011, March 7). Sites like Twitter absent from free speech pact., The New York Times, B4
  3. Lessig, 2006, Code: And other laws of cyberspace. Version 2.0.
  4. Noman , H. 2010 OpenNet Initiative Bulletin http://opennet.net/sex-social-mores-and-keyword-filtering-microsoft-bing-arabian-countries
  5. Wilson, 2011, Digital media in the Egyptian revolution: Descriptive analysis from the Tahrir data sets., International Journal of Communication, 5, 1248
  6. Wood , J. 2011 Boston Review. http://www.bostonreview.net/BR36.4/josh_wood_syrian_activist_arab_spring_lebanon_beirut.php
  7. York , J. 2010 OpenNet Initiative Bulletin http://opennet.net/policing-content-quasi-public-sphere
  8. Zhuo, 2010, November, 30). Where anonymity breeds contempt., The New York Times, A31

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 376

Related

Metadata

Authors
Youmans, W. L., & York, J. C.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
ORCID
Youmans, William Lafi
Venue
Journal of Communication
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2012-03-16
Volume
62
Issue
2
Pages
315-329
ISSN
0021-9916 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01636.x
OpenAlex
W1974840411
Cited by
376
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 4
FWCI
78.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 1264 d)
Locations
  • Journal of Communication (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Michigan
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media and Digital Communication
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
Keywords
social media, activism, user agreements, corporate interests, information infrastructure, social movements, platform governance, digital activism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review