Digital organizing of a global social movement: From connective to collective action

Leong, Carmen; Faik, Isam; Tan, Felix Ter Chian; Tan, Barney; Khoo, Ying Hooi

doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2020.100324

Cited by 28 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on digital platforms as political spaces has explored different actors' roles and behaviors and the affordances each platform has to offer [2,22]. For example, in a recent study on the Bersih movement in Malaysia, Leong et al [23] showed the importance of Facebook in formalizing different roles of movement participants over time. They revealed the emergence of political Facebook groups that shared a similar cause.…”

Section: Digital Platforms As Political Spacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Political Turn of Twitch – Understanding Live Chat as an Emergent Political Space

Ruiz-Bravo¹,

Selander²,

Rabiei³

2022

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research and media have all emphasized the importance of digital platforms such as Twitter and Facebook in contemporary political activism. Yet, little is known of the politicization of other digital platforms, such as Reddit, Twitch, and Discord, and how such politicization is manifested. By politicization, we refer to the emergence of political messages in a "decidedly a-political" space. In this paper, we explore a case of politicization on Twitch, a live streaming platform associated with the gaming community. We focus on the live chat, a central feature of Twitch. Our analysis illustrates rapidly emergent actor roles and their respective use of different features in posting (and objecting to) political messaging. We develop a model that illustrates the dynamic between actors and conclude with implications for research and practice.

show abstract

Section: Digital Platforms As Political Spacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Political Turn of Twitch – Understanding Live Chat as an Emergent Political Space

Ruiz-Bravo¹,

Selander²,

Rabiei³

2022

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Collective action (Ghobadi & Clegg, 2015;Leong, Faik, et al, 2020;Saebø et al, 2020;Thapa et al, 2012;Young, 2018;Young et al, 2019;Zheng & Yu, 2016) What role DSI plays in social movements, and how social movements catalyse DSI?…”

Section: Social Embeddedness Of Dsirsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social movements (Ghobadi & Clegg, 2015;Leong, Faik, et al, 2020;McKenna, 2020;Miranda et al, 2016;Young et al, 2019) What role do social structures play in facilitating or limiting digital social innovation?…”

Section: Social Embeddedness Of Dsirsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Collective action (Ghobadi & Clegg, 2015;Leong, Faik, et al, 2020;Saebø et al, 2020;Thapa et al, 2012;Young, 2018;Young et al, 2019;Zheng & Yu, 2016); social movements (Ghobadi & Clegg, 2015;Leong, Faik, et al, 2020;McKenna, 2020;Miranda et al, 2016;Young et al, 2019) to scaling the organisation rather than the idea are full of pitfalls (Grimes et al, 2019;Onyx et al, 2018). Scaling impact by scaling organisations may not always be a practical or sustainable strategy considering the various costs and agency-related issues (Cannatelli, 2017;Grimes et al, 2020).…”

Section: Scaling Social Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social intermediation (Kistruck et al, 2013;Shalini et al, 2021); market linkages (Hota et al, 2019;Kistruck et al, 2013); knowledge creation and transfer (Chliova & Ringov, 2017;Inkpen & Tsang, 2005); mission drift (Bhatt, 2021;Bhatt et al, 2019;Grimes et al, 2019Grimes et al, , 2020Klein et al, 2020;Ometto et al, 2019) Scaling Open innovation (Feller et al, 2011;Madon & Schoemaker, 2021;Parthiban et al, 2021;Yun et al, 2017) Crowdsourcing (Liu et al, 2020;Schlagwein et al, 2019;Taylor & Joshi, 2019) Paradox/tension (Kibere, 2016;Mahrer & Krimmer, 2005;McLennan, 2016;Poole & Van de Ven, 1989;Rajão & Marcolino, 2016;Smith & Lewis, 2011) Collective action (Ghobadi & Clegg, 2015;Leong, Faik, et al, 2020;Saebø et al, 2020;Thapa et al, 2012;Young, 2018;Young et al, 2019;Zheng & Yu, 2016); social movements (Ghobadi & Clegg, 2015;Leong, Faik, et al, 2020;McKenna, 2020;Miranda et al, 2016;Young et al, 2019) Scaling deep Does long-term engagement of DSIrs develop capabilities in local communities? If so, how?…”

Section: Scaling By Diversificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Digital social innovation: An overview and research framework

Qureshi

Pan

Zheng

2021

Information Systems Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital social innovation (DSI) involves the use of digital technologies in the development and implementation of innovative products, services, processes and business models that seek to improve the well-being and agency of socially disadvantaged groups or address social problems related to marginality, inequality and social exclusion (Qureshi, Pan, & Zheng, 2017;Shalini et al., 2021). Often, DSI is less about technological innovation and more about social innovation-a process of finding innovative, effective and sustainable solutions to pressing societal challenges, such as those listed in sustainable development goals (SDGs). Thus, technology can be anywhere in the range of simple WhatsApp enabled groups (Parthiban et al., 2021; and advanced blockchain-enabled supply chain , but its deployment is innovative in tackling wicked social problems, such as poverty, inequality, social exclusion, marginalisation and poor healthcare

show abstract

Unraveling the influence of human capital and stakeholder engagement on corporate digital responsibility: Implications for firm performance in Southeast Asia enterprises

Vo Thai,

Hue,

Chen

et al. 2023

Corp Soc Responsibility Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Southeast Asian enterprises (SAEs) face the challenge of ensuring responsible and ethical utilization of data and digital technologies in the rapidly evolving digital landscape. Corporate digital responsibility (CDR) has emerged as a framework to guide organizations in adopting socially, economically, technologically, and ecologically responsible practices. However, empirical research on CDR is limited, highlighting the need for further investigation to bridge the gap between theory and practice. This study addresses this gap by examining the influence of human capital and stakeholder engagement on the formulation and execution of CDR strategies and their impact on firm performance. Drawing upon the theoretical framework of a Resource‐Based View and analyzing data from 2106 enterprises in Vietnam, Philippines, and Indonesia were collected through the Future of Business Survey. This research contributes insights into the drivers and determinants of CDR adoption and implementation, evaluates the effectiveness of different CDR approaches in achieving favorable post‐CDR performance outcomes, emphasizes the moderating role of stakeholder engagement, and offers a unique empirical perspective within the context of SAEs. This study enriches our understanding of CDR and provides practical implications for organizations seeking to navigate the complexities of responsible digital practices.

show abstract

Digital organizing of a global social movement: From connective to collective action

Cited by 28 publications

References 48 publications

The Political Turn of Twitch – Understanding Live Chat as an Emergent Political Space

The Political Turn of Twitch – Understanding Live Chat as an Emergent Political Space

Digital social innovation: An overview and research framework

Unraveling the influence of human capital and stakeholder engagement on corporate digital responsibility: Implications for firm performance in Southeast Asia enterprises

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About