Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change: Volume 30

This volume of the Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change series, our 30th, begins by casting a spotlight on the institution that the RSMCC series exists within and primarily serves: higher education. Thus Section I includes two papers focused on the academy itself.

In the United States, rights-based laws have opened major social institutions to previously marginalized groups, altering the terrain on which social movements act, creating opportunities for disruption, and expanding the forms protest takes. This research is an attempt to add to our understanding of contemporary protest. I use data from 50 open-ended, loosely structured interviews with women feminist PhD sociologists working at U.S. (and 1 Canadian) colleges and universities as a lens through which to examine contemporary protest. These in-depth interviews reveal that the demand-making and discursive protest of feminists in academia is rooted in the empowering intersections of their collective feminist identities and disrupts hegemonic practices in the academy and beyond. My findings indicate that social movement theory must move beyond restrictive notions of potential movement targets, activist locations, and strategies; and past narrow conceptualizations of collective action and movement goals.

Professional ethics require researchers to disclose all risks to participants in their studies. Changes in the legal climate in the United States and new modes of surveillance and communication call into question the effectiveness of measures used by researchers to protect participants from the risks they now face. This paper explores existing and newly enhanced risks to participants in social movement studies and examines problems with confidentiality agreements and informed consent procedures, two avenues that scholars traditionally use to protect research participants. The utility of Certificates of Confidentiality and researcher privilege also are examined as means to safeguard the privacy and security of research participants. The conclusion raises larger issues about the accountability of scholars to their research participants and the nature of risk in today's changing political climate. These include how to weigh potential risks and benefits to social movements and activists who are studied, the consequences for scholarship if scholars avoid studying movements and activists that pose risks, and the need for scholars to collaborate with research participants to tailor ethical research practices and to use institutional resources to challenge threats to the privacy and integrity of the people and groups they study.

Scholarship on the effects of various kinds of state repression (e.g., counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, protest policing) on subsequent dissent has produced a body of contradictory findings. In an attempt to better understand the effects of one form of state repression – protest policing – on one form of dissent – public protest – this paper examines the effects of various policing strategies used at protest events on subsequent protest levels in the United States between 1960 and 1990. Theoretically, we argue the effects of repression cannot be broadly theorized but instead need to be hypothesized at the level of particular police strategies and actions. We theorize and empirically examine the impacts of five police strategies, while also improving on prior analyses by producing a comprehensive model that examines lagged and nonlinear effects and examines the effects across the entire social movement sector, as well as across two specific movement industries. Results (1) confirm that not all police strategies have the same effects; (2) show that policing strategies tend to have predominately linear effects; (3) show that police actions have their strongest effects in the very short term, with few effects detectable after a few weeks; and (4) point to interesting differences in the effects of policing strategies on subsequent protest across different social movements.

How do large-scale protest events differ across nation-states? Do social networks play different roles in different places and, if so, how do they matter? This paper compares the role that social networks play in mobilizing participants in large-scale domestic protest. Employing a paired comparison of large-scale domestic protests in the United States and France, I find that social ties play a differing role in each country. Although personal and organizational ties played almost equal roles in mobilizing participants at the protest-event in the United States, organizational ties played a much more significant role in mobilizing participants to protest in France. In addition, participants in these two events reported having very different levels of civic engagement at these two protests. I conclude by discussing how these differences are related to the characteristics of the mobilizations themselves.

The Revolution is 50, Raúl has succeeded Fidel, and many dissidents who participated in the 2002 Varela Project initiative are in jail. What hope for “cambio” (change) in Cuba? Legal dissent – constitutional proposals, a legislative agenda, and grassroots civil rights organizing – may be the key. The Movimiento Cristiano Liberación (MCL), led by the Nobel Peace Prize-nominated Oswaldo Payá, presents the strongest challenge to the power of Cuba's 50-year-old Revolutionary government. This dissident group is at the heart of the development of the 2002 Varela Project and forms the core of the leaders arrested in the 2003 Cuban Spring crackdown. This paper traces the history of MCL's “legal dissent” strategy, from the evolution of the Varela Project to their development of an entire legislative agenda, crafted with nation-wide grassroots participation over the last six years since the crackdown. Using data from international NGO surveys conducted within Cuba, we analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the MCL's proposal vis-à-vis the political and economic concerns and interests of the broader population. Cuba's government seeks to consolidate its rule through its institutions, specifically, through the Cuban Communist Party. It remains to be seen whether the MCL's legal dissent strategy can successfully mobilize a broad segment of the Cuban population, and channel the political aspirations of reformers whose interests are not served under one-party rule.

Netroots organizations are re-defining political struggle by providing the resources and environment necessary for political mobilizing, and are affecting the ways that parties and traditional groups now campaign, recruit, and fundraise. While there is no clear consensus in the social movement literature regarding information communication technology's (ICT's) influence on participation on political participation, campaigns, and parties, or on social movement participation more broadly, there is substantial agreement that the Net has increased information available for citizens and has changed the capacity for mobilization. The key question is if (and if so how) the increasing availability of information and more efficient mobilizing tactics enabled by the Internet translates into motivation, interest, and participation. As an electronic social movement organization (SMO), MoveOn has become one of the most successful advocacy operations in the digital era. This paper examines ways in which MoveOn has used the Internet and alternative forms of grassroots mobilization to fuse contentious politics with institutional means of reform via the electoral process. A case study of MoveOn is relevant to broader arguments regarding how the Internet is re-defining our understanding of mobilization and participatory politics, and demonstrates a shift in contentious politics and protest. The findings support the arguments in the literature that information sharing electronically can lead to a more informed citizenry, yet goes beyond previous research by suggesting that this refers not only to those that are initially politically aware, but also to otherwise uninformed or disengaged citizens (who have access to the Internet). This analysis also challenges previous research that asserts that there is little or no relationship between Internet use to obtain political information and political participation.

This study investigates core framing techniques utilized by two anti-illegal immigration social movement organizations, the Minuteman Project, Inc. and the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, both volunteer civil border patrol groups operating along the U.S.–Mexican border. Theoretically, this paper is informed by Robert Benford and David Snow's work on collective action framing. Using a case study approach, document analysis is employed to explore how four types of framing techniques (diagnostic framing, prognostic framing, motivational action framing, and credibility framing) are implemented by each group via information presented on their websites. The findings of this investigation suggest that these groups implement each of the four framing techniques in question, with the bulk of their focus resting in the diagnostic frame. Through the examination of these groups via the framing perspective, it is also found that the groups emphasize the importance of place, that is, the U.S.–Mexican border itself. The case analyses thus further framing theory by highlighting the roles that “geographic and place framing” also play. The Minuteman Project, Inc. and the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps are relatively new groups that have mobilized within the past few years. Sociologically, relatively few scholars have studied these particular groups within the larger anti-illegal immigration movement. This paper provides an in-depth analysis of how the groups utilize framing to construct their messages, missions, and goals to the public. Doing so contributes to an interesting and emerging type of civil border patrol movement and also adds to the body of work devoted to the importance of social movement framing.

This paper assesses how a social movement organization strategically framed its actions to simultaneously gain the support of multiple, diverse constituencies. The challenges associated with creating meaning and mobilizing potential partisans during the Indians of All Tribes (IAT) occupation of Alcatraz Island from November 1969 to June 1971 are examined through a qualitative analysis of movement-created texts. The IAT used a trio of distinct approaches to communicate with and gain the support of Native Americans and whites. Through inflection the IAT explained why they seized the island, emphasizing themes such as decolonization, democracy, and the importance of taking action. Through direction the IAT encouraged whites to write letters, sign petitions, and make donations while calling for a deeper engagement by Native Americans in the land seizure. Through deflection the IAT recounted normative stories to discourage whites and “wannabes” who failed to heed the organization's other directions about how best to participate in the takeover. These three framing processes build upon and extend social movement framing theory by complicating conceptualizations of allies and underscoring how movements seek distinct types of support from different adherents.

While media records have become an increasingly popular source of data on social movement activities, some researchers have also relied upon materials produced by movements themselves. Unlike information culled from the press, which have been subject to considerable methodological scrutiny, there has been no effort to assess what movement actors consider “newsworthy.” The current research addresses movement selection bias through an analysis of the United Steelworkers' coverage of strikes and organizing drives in Steelabor, a periodical produced by the union four times annually. In some respects the results mirror previous research on media selection bias; larger, more contentious events tend to receive disproportionate attention. Yet movement reporting practices diverge from typical media coverage: movements use their publications strategically to construct a positive self-image. The findings have considerable implications for scholars interested in exploring new data sources on social movements.

Kathleen M. Blee is distinguished professor of Sociology and chair of the Department of Sociology at the University of Pittsburgh. She is completing a book manuscript on emerging social movement groups in Pittsburgh. She has also written extensively on women in U.S. racist movements, including Women of the Klan: Racism and Gender in the 1920s, published in 1991 by the University of California Press and Inside Organized Racism: Women in the Hate Movement, published in 2002 by the University of California Press. Earlier, she studied the historical origins of regional poverty and co-authored The Road to Poverty: The Making of Wealth and Hardship in Appalachia with Dwight Billings, published in 2000 by Cambridge University Press.