The Interpretative Dimension of Transformative Events: Outrage Management and Collective Action Framing After the 2001 Anti-G8 Summit in Genoa

Abstract

Abstract. By focusing on the aftermath of the 2001 anti-G8 summit in Genoa, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive insight into the interpretative dimension of transformative events leading to backfire. First, in line with the existing literature on transformative events, the study shows that after the violent events Italian authorities employed all possible strategies to inhibit public outrage (i.e., cover-ups of the situation, stigmatizations of targets to legitimate repressive action, reinterpretations of police violence as different from direct attacks, presence of authoritative assessments and intimidation of participants and witnesses).Second, a multidimensional scaling of symbolic devices from 70 social forum websites shows that after 2001 Italian social movement actors used the narrative of the Genoa events in deliberative (i.e., bridging, extension) or negotiating (i.e., punctuation, articulation) framing processes to build new collective action frames.Key words: collective action frames, repression, mobilization, transformative events, Genoa Social Forum, Global Justice Movement.According to the social movement literature, events can turn transformative when they lead to sudden increases or decreases in the levels of mobilization (see, among the others, Della Porta, 2008: 30; Hess and Martin, 2006: 249; McAdam and Sewell, 2001: 101; Sewell, 1996: 2 272). Repressive events, for instance, are potentially transformative as they can ignite or trigger protest waves. When repression does increase mobilization levels, two specific processes characterize transformative events: authorities develop strategies of outrage management and social movement actors engage in new protest in response, so-called "backfire" mobilization 1 (Francisco, 2004;Hess and Martin, 2006; Jansen and Martin, 2004;Martin, 2004 Martin, , 2005 Martin, , 2007. Public memory of transformative events is then marked exactly by "the conflict between different narratives of the past, each one struggling for a group's position inside the public sphere" (Zamponi, 2013: 2). While scholarly attention has been drawn to the interpretative dimension of authorities' strategies of outrage management (Hess and Martin, 2006; Jansen and Martin, 2004;Martin, 2004 Martin, , 2005 Martin, , 2007 Martin, , 2009), little cognitive investigation has been devoted to social movements' countering action.By applying a frame analysis approach to the aftermath of the 2001 anti-G8 summit in Genoa, this study aims exactly to fill this lacuna and flesh out the interpretative dimension of both processes associated with repressive events that lead to further mobilization. The counter-summit makes a relevant case study because it was characterized by both an extremely high degree of police violence and extensive national and international media coverage. Moreover, it was followed by increased mobilization levels, although only in the short-term, among Italian movement actors (Reiter et al., 2007). In sum, by drawing upon framing theory, this work will provid...

Repression, Cooptation, and Movement Fragmentation in Authoritarian Regimes: Evidence from the Youth Movement in Egypt

“…However, repression is a double-edged sword. It could lead to more contention, as protest movements might perceive a regime's tactic to be threatening and costly, and accordingly believe that they would suffer if they do not take action (Goldstone and Tilly, 2001;Ming-Sho Ho, 2015;Vicari, 2015). Yet it can also deter protest movements from further mobilization against an authoritarian regime (Lichbach, 1987).…”

‘The Outrage Was Really Quite Visceral’1: Overt and Covert Deterrence Effects on Social Movement Activism

“…Direct action is particularly challenging for the state in this regard, as it requires the authorities to physically engage activists, removing them from industrial sites and high-profile locations. When coupled with the proliferation of media technologies the reputational costs can be high, with activists highlighting heavy-handed forms of social control to reinforce collective action (see Vicari, 2015). Activist groups also risk their position if their actions are deemed to be too far from what is deemed acceptable, as the message may be obscured (see Evans, 2016).…”

Framing, friction, and the continuity of social movements : the case of the ambonese peace movement in Indonesia

“…Gatherings are activities in which they, for example, help lift each other's burden over dinners and casual meetings (Futrell & Simi, 2004), exchange political and economic grievances at coffeehouses and on streets (Lim, 2012), and mutually give and obtain information on a secret Facebook group (Hensby, 2016). In comparison, campaigns comprise the actors' participation in recruiting new members (Wimberley, 2009), using social media to gain wider supports (Gaby & Caren, 2012), and going off to the street to protest the establishment (Poell, 2013;Vicari, 2015). A campaign is a planned and time-bounded activity (Tilly, 2004), differentiating it from gatherings that can be spontaneous and fluid.…”