When a movement becomes a party: Computational assessment of new forms of political organization in social media

Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web and Social Media, ICWSM 2016

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 12-21

  Aragón, Pablo ^a,b   Volkovich, Yana ^b   Laniado, David ^b   Kaltenbrunner, Andreas ^b  

^a UNIVERSITAT POMPEU FABRA   (Spain)

^b Eureca ^*  (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CITY COUNCIL; COMPUTATIONAL FRAMEWORK; DECENTRALIZED STRUCTURES; HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURES; POLITICAL CHANGES; POLITICAL SCIENCE; SMALL WORLD PHENOMENON; SOCIAL MEDIA;

SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

EID: 84979583849     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (44)

1. Adamic, L. A., and Glance, N. 2005. The political blogosphere and the 2004 us election: Divided they blog. In Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Link discovery, 36-43. ACM.
2. Aragón, P.; Kappler, K. E.; Kaltenbrunner, A.; Laniado, D.; and Volkovich, Y. 2013. Communication dynamics in twitter during political campaigns: The case of the 2011 spanish national election. Policy & Internet 5(2):183-206.
3. Barberá, P.; Wang, N.; Bonneau, R.; Jost, J. T.; Nagler, J.; Tucker, J.; and González-Bailón, S. 2015. The critical periphery in the growth of social protests. PLOS ONE 10(11).
4. Bennett, W. L., and Segerberg, A. 2012. The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society 15(5):739-768.
5. Blondel, V. D.; Guillaume, J.-L.; Lambiotte, R.; and Lefebvre, E. 2008. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2008(10):P10008.
6. Borondo, J.; Morales, A.; Losada, J.; and Benito, R. 2012. Characterizing and modeling an electoral campaign in the context of twitter: 2011 spanish presidential election as a case study. Chaos 22(2):3138.
7. boyd, d.; Golder, S.; and Lotan, G. 2010. Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter. In System Sciences (HICSS), 1-10. IEEE.
8. Castells, M. 2013. Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. J. Wiley & Sons.
9. Congosto, M. L.; Fernández, M.; and Moro, E. 2011. Twitter y política: Información, opinión y¿ predicción? Cuadernos de Comunicación Evoca 4:11-15.
10. Conover, M.; Ratkiewicz, J.; Francisco, M.; Gonçalves, B.; Menczer, F.; and Flammini, A. 2011. Political polarization on twitter. In ICWSM.
11. Edelstein, J. D., and Warner, M. 1979. Comparative union democracy: Organisation and opposition in British and American unions. Transaction Publishers.
12. Feller, A.; Kuhnert, M.; Sprenger, T. O.; and Welpe, I. M. 2011. Divided they tweet: The network structure of political microbloggers and discussion topics. In ICWSM.
13. Freeman, L. C. 1979. Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social networks 1(3):215-239.
14. Garcia, D.; Abisheva, A.; Schweighofer, S.; Serdult, U.; and Schweitzer, F. 2015. Ideological and temporal components of network polarization in online political participatory media. Policy & Internet 7(1):46-79.
15. Garcia, D.; Mavrodiev, P.; and Schweitzer, F. 2013. Social resilience in online communities: The autopsy of friendster. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Online social networks, 39-50. ACM.
16. Garimella K., Morales G. D. F., Gionis A., and Mathioudakis M. 2015. Quantifying controversy in social media. arXiv preprint arXiv: 1507.05224.
17. Gerbaudo, P. 2012. Tweets and the streets: Social media and contemporary activism. Pluto Press.
18. Gini, C. 1912. Variabilità e mutabilità. Reprinted in Memorie di metodologica statistica (Ed. Pizetti E, Salvemini, T). Rome 1.
19. Golder, S. A., and Macy, M. W. 2014. Digital footprints: opportunities and challenges for online social research. Sociology 40(1):129.
20. González-Bailón, S.; Borge-Holthoefer, J.; Rivero, A.; and Moreno, Y. 2011. The dynamics of protest recruitment through an online network. Scientific reports 1.
21. Granovetter, M. S. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American journal of sociology 1360-1380.
22. Gruzd, A., and Roy, J. 2014. Investigating political polarization on twitter: A canadian perspective. Policy & Internet 6(1):28-45.
23. Jacomy, M. 2011. Force atlas 2 layout.
24. Katz, R. S., and Mair, P. 1995. Changing models of party organization and party democracy the emergence of the cartel party. Party politics 1(1):5-28.
25. Kwak, H.; Lee, C.; Park, H.; and Moon, S. 2010. What is twitter, a social network or a news media? In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web, 591-600. ACM.
26. Lazer, D.; Pentland, A. S.; Adamic, L.; Aral, S.; Barabasi, A. L.; Brewer, D.; Christakis, N.; Contractor, N.; Fowler, J.; Gutmann, M.; et al. 2009. Life in the network: the coming age of computational social science. Science (New York, NY) 323(5915):721.
27. Lietz, H.; Wagner, C.; Bleier, A.; and Strohmaier, M. 2014. When politicians talk: Assessing online conversational practices of political parties on twitter. arXiv preprint arXiv:1405.6824.
28. Lipset, S. M.; Trow, M. A.; Coleman, J. S.; and Kerr, C. 1956. Union democracy: The internal politics of the International Typographical Union. Free Press Glencoe.
29. Margetts, H. 2001. The cyber party. ECPR Joint Sessions. London.
30. Michels, R. 1915. Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy. Hearst's International Library Company.
31. Mills, C. W. 1999. The power elite. Oxford U. Press.
32. Morozov, E. 2012. The net delusion: The dark side of Internet freedom. PublicAffairs.
33. Mosca, G. 1939. The ruling class: elementi di scienza politica.
34. Neff, J. J.; Laniado, D.; Kappler, K. E.; Volkovich, Y.; Aragón, P.; and Kaltenbrunner, A. 2013. Jointly they edit: Examining the impact of community identification on political interaction in wikipedia. PLOS ONE 8(4):e60584.
35. Newman, M. E. 2004. Analysis of weighted networks. Physical Review E 70(5):056131.
36. Pareto, V.; Livingston, A.; Bongiorno, A.; Rogers, J. H.; et al. 1935. Mind and society.
37. Peña-López, I.; Congosto, M.; and Aragón, P. 2014. Spanish indignados and the evolution of the 15m movement on twitter: towards networked para-institutions. Journal of Spanish Cultural Studies 15(1-2):189-216.
38. Rothschild-Whitt, J. 1976. Conditions facilitating participatory-democratic organizations. Sociological Inquiry 46(2):75-86.
39. Sandiumenge, L. 2015. La guerrilla digital de Colau. http://districte15.info/la-guerrilla-digital-de-colau/. [Online; accessed 1-March-2015].
40. Sunstein, C. R. 1999. The law of group polarization. University of Chicago Law School, John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper (91).
41. Sunstein, C. R. 2009. Republic. com 2.0. Princeton University Press.
42. Toret, J.; Calleja-López, A.; Marín, O.; Aragón, P.; Aguilera, M.; Barandiaran, X.; and Monterde, A. 2015. Tecnopolítica y 15m: La potencia de las multitudes conectadas.
43. Toret, J. 2015. Una mirada tecnopolítica al primer año de podemos. seis hipótesis. Teknokultura 12(1):121-135.
44. Watts, D. J., and Strogatz, S. H. 1998. Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. nature 393(6684):440-442.