Are social work advocacy groups using Web 2.0 Effectively?

Journal of Policy Practice

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 220-239

  Edwards, Heather R ^a   Hoefer, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Advocacy; Internet advocacy; Policy practice; Social work advocacy; Web 2.0

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954158360     PISSN: 15588742     EISSN: 15588750     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15588742.2010.489037     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Cronk, H. (2007). Pushing towards Web 3.0 organizing tools. Social Policy, 38(1), 27-34.
2. Dunlop, J. M. & Fawcett, G. (2008). Technology-based approaches to social work and social justice. Journal of Policy Practice, 7(2), 140-154.
3. Fine, A. H. (2007). Web 2.0 assessment of the Overbrook Foundation's human rights grantees. New York, NY: The Overbrook Foundation. Retrieved from http:// www.overbrook.org/resources/opn/pdf/Overbrook_Foundation_Web2point0_ Report.pdf
4. Goldschmidt, K. & Ochreiter, L. (2008). Communicating with Congress: How the Internet has changed citizen engagement. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Foundation. Retrieved from http://nposoapbox.s3.amazonaws.com/ cmfweb/CWC_CitizenEngagement.pdf
5. Hoefer, R. (2001). Highly effective human services interest groups: Seven key practices. Journal of Community Practice, 9(3), 1-13.
6. Hoefer, R. (2005). Altering state policy: Interest group effectiveness among statelevel advocacy groups. Social Work, 50(3), 219-227.
7. Hoefer, R. (2006). Advocacy practice for social justice. Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.
8. Imperatore, C. (2009). What you need to know about Web 2.0. Techniques: Connecting Education & Careers, 83(9), 20-23.
9. Jackson-Elmoore, C. (2005). Informing state policymakers: Opportunities for social workers. Social Work, 50(3), 251-261.
10. Kenix, L. J. (2007). In search of Utopia: An analysis of non-profit Web pages. Information, Communication & Society, 10(1), 69-94.
11. MacManus, R. (2009, October 20). Web 2.0 summit opens: Today's revolution akin to Web 2.0 in 2004. Retrieved from http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/ web_20_summit_opens_todays_revolution_akin_to_web20.php
12. McNutt, J. G. (2006). Building evidence-based advocacy in cyberspace: A social work imperative for the new millennium. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 3(3/4), 91. doi: 10.1300/J394v03n03•07.
13. McNutt, J. G. (2008). Web 2.0 tools for policy research and advocacy. Journal of Policy Practice, 7(1), 81-85.
14. McNutt, J. G., & Menon, G. M. (2008). The rise of cyberactivism: Implications for the future of advocacy in the human services. Families in Society, 89(1), 33-38.
15. Miller, L. (2009). e-Petitions at Westminster: The way forward for democracy?. Parliamentary Affairs, 62(1), 162-177. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
16. Moon, S. S. & deWeaver, K. L. (2005). Electronic advocacy and social welfare policy education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 25(1/2), 57-68.
17. National Association of Social Workers (NASW) (2008). Code of ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. Washington, DC: Author.
18. Rich, A. (2001). The politics of expertise in Congress and the news media. Social Science Quarterly (Blackwell Publishing Limited), 82(3), 583.
19. Ritter, J. A. (2008). A national study predicting licensed social workers' levels of political participation: The role of resources, psychological engagement, and recruitment networks. Social Work, 53(4), 347-357.
20. Salcido, R. M. & Seek, E. T. (1992). Political participation among social work chapters. Social Work, 37(6), 563-564.
21. Scanlon, E., Hartnett, H., & Harding, S. (2006). An analysis of the political activities of NASW state chapters. Journal of Policy Practice, 5(4), 41-54.
22. Schembri, A. M. (2008). www.why-social-workers-need-to-embrace-Web2.0.com.au. Australian Social Work, 61(2), 119-123.
23. Schutt, R. K. (2006). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
24. Suarez, D. F. (2009). Nonprofit advocacy and civic engagement on the Internet. Administration Society, 41(3), 267-289.
25. Teinowitz, I. (2008). Note to politicians: It's not the spending, stupid. Advertising Age, 79(11), 17.
26. Thackeray, R., Neiger, B. L., Hanson, C. L., & McKenzie, J. F. (2008). Enhancing promotional strategies within social marketing programs: Use of Web 2.0 social media. Health Promot Pract, 9(4), 338-343.
27. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (1996). Content analysis: A methodology for structuring and analyzing written material (No. PEMD-10.3.1). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office. Retrieved from http://archive.gao.gov/ f0102/157490.pdf
28. Walker, R. B. (1993). Inside/outside: International relations as political theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Williams, C. B., Foxman, E. R., & Saraswat, S. P. (2007). A comparative study of nonprofit and for-profit Web-based issue advocacy. Journal of Political Marketing, 6(1), 69-97.
30. Zhou, X., Chan, Y., & Peng, Z. (2008). Deliberativeness of online political discussion: A content analysis of the Guangzhou DailyWeb site. Journalism Studies, 9(5),759-770.