Interest group activism on the web: The case of environmental organizations

Journal of Information Technology and Politics

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 110-128

  Merry, Melissa K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE   (United States)

Author keywords

Environment; Interest groups; Internet; Political participation; World Wide Web

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952514518     PISSN: 19331681     EISSN: 1933169X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19331681.2010.508003     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Alexa Internet, Inc. (2009). Frequently asked questions. Retrieved March 15, 2009, from http://www.alexa.com/site/help/
2. Arnold, R. D. (1990). The logic of congressional action. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
3. Barko, J., & Wells, K. (2004). The political consultants' online fundraising primer. Washington, DC: Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet. Retrieved September 27, 2007, from http://www.ipdi.org/UploadedFiles/online_fundraising_primer.pdf
4. Barabasi, A. (2003). Linked: How everything is connected to everything else and what it means. New York, NY: Plume Books.
5. Baumgartner, F. R., & Leech, B. L. (1998). Basic interests: The importance of groups in politics and in political science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6. Baumgartner, F. R., & Leech, B. L. (2001). Interest niches and policy bandwagons: Patterns of interest group involvement in national politics. The Journal of Politics, 63(4), 1191-1213.
7. Bimber, B. (1998). The Internet and political transformation: Populism, community, and accelerated pluralism. Polity, 31(1), 133-160.
8. Bimber, B. (2003). Information and American democracy: Technology in the evolution of political power. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
9. Bosso, C. J., & Collins, M. T. (2002). Just another tool? How environmental groups use the Internet. In A. J. Cigler & B. A. Loomis (Eds.), Interest group politics, 6th ed. (pp. 95-114). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
10. Brulle, R. J. (2000). Agency, democracy, and nature: The U.S. environmental movement from a critical theory perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Chadwick, A. (2007). Digital network repertoires and organizational hybridity. Political Communication, 24, 283-301.
12. Conover, W. J. (1999). Practical nonparametric statistics. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
13. Corrado, A., & Firestone, C. M. (Eds.). (1996). Elections in cyberspace: Toward a new era in American politics. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
14. D'Aprile, S. (2009). Operation new media. Politics (Campaigns & Elections), 30(4), 26-37.
15. Davis, R. (1999). The web of politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
16. Dowie, M. (1995). Losing ground: American environmentalism as the close of the 20th century. Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
17. Ennew, C., Lockett, A., Blackman, I., & Holland, C. P. (2005). Competition in Internet retail markets: The impact of links on Web site traffic. Long Range Planning, 38, 359-372.
18. Garrett, R. K. (2006). Protest in an information society: A review of literature on social movements and new ICTs. Information, Communication, and Society, 9(2), 202-224.
19. Gerlach, L. P. (2001). The structure of social movements: Environmental activism and its opponents. In J. Arquilla, & D. Ronfeldt (Eds.), Networks and netwars: The future of terror, crime, and militancy (pp. 289-310). Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
20. Hacker, K. L. (1996).Missing links in the evolution of electronic democratization. Media, Culture & Society, 18, 213-232.
21. Hernández, B., Jiménez, M., & Martín, M. J. (2009). Key website factors in e-business strategy. International Journal of Information Management, 29, 362-371.
22. Hindman, M. (2008). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
23. Holtz, S. (2006). Using RSS to cut through the clutter. Strategic Communication Management, 10(5), 3.
24. Jamison, A. (1996). The shaping of the global environmental agenda: The role of non- governmental organizations. In S. Lash, B. Szerszynski, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Risk, environment and modernity: Towards a new ecology (pp. 224-245). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
25. Kang, S., & Norton, H. E. (2004). Nonprofit organizations' use of the World Wide Web: Are they sufficiently fulfilling organizational goals? Public Relations Review, 30, 279-284.
26. Kollman, K. (1998). Outside lobbying: Public opinion and interest group strategies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
27. Lowery, D., & Gray, V. (2004). Bias in the heavenly chorus. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 16(1), 5-29.
28. Lupia, A., & Sin, G. (2003). Which public goods are endangered? How evolving communication technologies affect the logic of collective action. Public Choice, 117, 315-331.
29. Margolis, M., & Resnick, D. (2000). Politics as usual: The "cyberspace revolution." Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
30. McKenna, L. (2007). "Getting the word out": Policy bloggers use their soap box to make change. Review of Policy Research, 24(3), 209-299.
31. Miles, J, & Shevlin, M. (2001). Applying regression and correlation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
32. Morris, D. (2001). Direct democracy and the Internet. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 34, 1033-1052.
33. Pickard, V. W. (2008). Cooptation and cooperation: Institutional exemplars of democratic Internet technology. New Media & Society, 10(4), 625-645.
34. Reader, B. (2005). Who's really writing those 'canned' letters to the editor? Newspaper Research Journal, 26(2/3), 43-56.
35. Sanson, A. (2008). Facebook and youth mobilization in the 2008 presidential election. Gnovis Journal, 8(3), 162-174.
36. Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semisovereign people. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
37. Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York, NY: Penguin Press.
38. Shlozman, K. L., & Tierney, J. T. (1986). Organized interests and American democracy. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
39. Shulman, S. W. (2007, August). Perverse incentives: The case against mass email campaigns. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
40. Smith, J., Kearns, M., & Fine, A. (2005). Power to the edges: Trends and opportunities in online civic engagement. Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement. Retrieved November 5, 2005, from http://www.pacefunders.org/power_edges.html
41. Stein, L. (2009). Social movement Web use in theory and practice: A content analysis of US movement Websites. New Media & Society, 11(5), 749-771.
42. Swords, P. (2006). How to read the IRS form 990 and find out what it means. Retrieved March 2, 2007, from http://www.npccny.org/Form_990/990.htm
43. Taylor, M., Kent, M. L., & White, W. J. (2001). How activist organizations are using the Internet to build relationships. Public Relations Review, 27(3), 263-284.
44. Weare, C., & Lin, W. (2000). Content analysis of the World Wide Web: Opportunities and challenges. Social Science Computer Review, 18, 272-292.
45. Williams, C. B., & Gulati, G. J. (2007, August-September). Social networks in political campaigns: Facebook and the 2006 midterm elections. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.