The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantifying the power and consequences of social media protest
Open accessAbstract
The exercise of power has been an implicit theme in research on the use of social media for political protest, but few studies have attempted to measure social media power and its consequences directly. This study develops and measures three theoretically grounded metrics of social media power—unity, numbers, and commitment—as wielded on Twitter by a social movement (Black Lives Matter [BLM]), a counter-movement (political conservatives), and an unaligned party (mainstream news outlets) over nearly 10 months. We find evidence of a model of social media efficacy in which BLM predicts mainstream news coverage of police brutality, which in turn is the strongest driver of attention to the issue from political elites. Critically, the metric that best predicts elite response across all parties is commitment.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Fast unfolding of communities in large networks
Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008) · Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment · doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/p10008 · Cited by 21,424
The Practice of Social Research
Neustadtl, A., & Babbie, E. (1989) · Teaching Sociology · doi:10.2307/1318433 · Cited by 14,398
Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory
McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/226464 · Cited by 7,381
The Practice of Social Research.
Williams, D. G., & Babbie, E. R. (1976) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2062956 · Cited by 7,194
Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation
Snow, D. A., Rochford, E. B., Worden, S. K., & Benford, R. D. (1986) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2095581 · Cited by 6,548
THE LOGIC OF CONNECTIVE ACTION: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics
Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2012.670661 · Cited by 3,116
The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: divided they blog
Adamic, L. A., & Glance, N. (2005) · Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Link discovery · doi:10.1145/1134271.1134277 · Cited by 2,619
75. Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age
Castells, M. (2016) · Democracy · doi:10.7312/blau17412-091 · Cited by 2,330
Networks of outrage and hope: social movements in the internet age
Hands, J. (2014) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2013.829514 · Cited by 1,904
The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics
Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139198752 · Cited by 1,862
Cited by
Krupnikov, Y., & Ryan, J. B. (2022) · doi:10.1017/9781108923323 · Cited by 175
Zhang, Y., Wells, C., Wang, S., & Rohe, K. (2018) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444817744390 · Cited by 155
A review and provocation: On polarization and platforms
Kreiss, D., & McGregor, S. C. (2024) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448231161880 · Cited by 151
Contemporary Social Movements in a Hybrid Media Environment
Caren, N., Andrews, K. T., & Lu, T. (2020) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054627 · Cited by 108
Credible Threat: Attacks Against Women Online and the Future of Democracy
Sobieraj, S. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190089283.001.0001 · Cited by 100
Metadata
- Authors
- Freelon, D., McIlwain, C., & Clark, M.
- Venue
- New Media & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-11-15
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 990-1011
- ISSN
- 1461-4448 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7315
- OpenAlex
- W2549661938
- Cited by
- 391
- References
- 59
- FWCI
- 41.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantifying the power and consequences of social media protest. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1461444816676646
- The paper
- Freelon, D., McIlwain, C., & Clark, M. (2018). Quantifying the power and consequences of social media protest. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816676646
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
