Canada is #IdleNoMore: exploring dynamics of Indigenous political and civic protest in the Twitterverse

ABSTRACT

Social media have been playing a growingly important role in grassroots protest over the last five years. While many scholars have explored dynamics of political cyberprotest (e.g., the ongoing transnational Occupy movement, the 2012 Quebec student strike, the student-led protest movement in Chile between 2011 and 2013), few have studied sub-dynamics relating to ethno-cultural minorities’ uses of social media to gain visibility, mobilize support, and engage in political and civil action. We fill part of this gap in the academic literature by investigating uses of Twitter for political engagement in the context of the Canada-based Idle No More movement (INM). This ongoing protest initiative, which emerged in December 2012, seeks to mobilize Indigenous Peoples in Canada and internationally as well as their non-Indigenous allies. It does so by bringing attention to their culture, struggles, and identities as well as advocating for changes in policy areas relating to the environment, governance, and socio-economic matters. Our study explores to what extent references to aspects of Indigenous identities and culture shaped INM-related tweeting and, by extension, activism during the summer of 2013. We conducted a quantitative and qualitative content analysis of 1650 #IdleNoMore tweets shared by supporters of this movement between 3 July 2013 and 2 August 2013. Our study demonstrates that unlike other social media-intensive movements where economic and political concerns were the primary drivers of political and civil engagement, aspects of Indigenous culture influenced information flows and mobilization among #IdleNoMore tweeters.

KEYWORDS:

• Social media
• identity politics
• cultural activism
• grassroots mobilization
• Idle No More
• Indigenous peoples

Overview

In late 2012, Canada-based Indigenous grassroots and their allies spearheaded what would become the national ‒ and later transnational ‒ protest movement known as Idle No More (INM). Rooted in deeper Indigenous¹ resistance spanning over 500 years (Diabo, 2012), this social media-intensive protest movement was initiated in early November 2012 when four women² based in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan traded emails on a variety of policy matters of importance to Indigenous Peoples of Canada, including federal omnibus budget Bill C-45 (Tupper, 2014; Woo, 2013). This legislation introduced by Stephen Harper’s Conservative government in mid-October 2012 made significant changes to the Indian Act and environmental legislation ‒ among others ‒ with few to no consultations with members of Indigenous communities (Inman, Smis, & Cambou, 2013; Wotherspoon & Hansen, 2013). Over the following weeks, teach-ins and other events of varying sizes were organized throughout Canada – some involving the four women – to shed light on long-standing issues manifesting themselves through Bill C-45 as well as to build support (Donald, 2013; Palmater, 2014; Welty, 2015). As these initiatives gained traction among the public, they became more broad-based and mobilized individuals and organizations with wide-ranging interests and objectives (e.g., socio-economic conditions, missing and murdered Indigenous women, reconciliation, reassertion of Indigenous nations, cultural revival) (Kino-nda-niimi Collective, 2014; Woolford, 2015).

Social media have played a key role in the growth of INM (e.g., Callison & Hermida, 2015; Dahlberg-Grundberg & Lindgren, 2015; Gray & Gordo, 2014; Tupper, 2014; Wood, 2015; Wotherspoon & Hansen, 2013). They have facilitated multidirectional INM-related information flows and social interactions, thus contributing to the rapid expansion, diversification, and transnationalization of this protest movement. From a broader perspective, ‘for social-movement cultures, such as secular Egyptian revolutionaries, 15M (Los Indignados), and Idle No More, social media [are] an integral part of life; it is context’ (Gray & Gordo, 2014, p. 551). Journalist Karissa Donkin (2013) goes further by stating that INM ‘[was] driven by social media, a place where anyone can participate in discussion and follow news.’ In fact, the #IdleNoMore hashtag has become a global ‘rallying cry’ (Barker, 2015, p. 48) contributing to the mobilization and organization of Indigenous Peoples in Canada and their supporters on – and in some cases off ‒ Twitter (Tupper, 2014; Wood, 2015).

While distinct due to its nature, INM is part of a broader pattern of social media-fueled grassroots protest movements that have recently impacted many national contexts. Their supporters have leveraged these user-generated media services’ structural and functional properties to be active politically. Notable are the 2011 Indignados movement in Spain (Loader, Vromen, & Xenos, 2014), the student-led protest initiatives in Chile between 2011 and 2013 (Scherman, Arriagada, & Valenzuela, 2015) or in the province of Quebec, Canada, in mid-2012 (Raynauld, Lalancette, & Tourigny-Kone, 2016), the transnational Occupy movement between 2011 and 2012 (Agarwal et al., 2014), or the US-based Tea Party movement (Rohlinger & Bunnage, 2015). While the INM movement shares similarities with many of these social media-intensive protest initiatives – limited formal or centralized leadership,³ loose membership, diversity of interests (Gray & Gordo, 2014; Raynauld et al., 2016; Welty, 2015) ‒ it distinguishes itself in key ways. Chief among them is the fact that the INM movement has a larger goal than solely opposing Bill C-45. Its supporters seek to unite Indigenous Peoples in Canada and mobilize their supporters, both nationally and internationally, in the face of future political, economic, and cultural challenges (Caven, 2013). Comparatively, several other movements have been driven by mostly short-term considerations and objectives relating to political ideology and values or socio-economic policy matters (e.g., Agarwal et al., 2014; Scherman et al., 2015).

Coulthard (2014) reinforces that point by linking INM to resistance in the form of identity reassertion against many actions of the Canadian federal government, including the continued dispossession of Indigenous Peoples from their lands. In other words, it laid the foundation of and promoted a shared consciousness⁴ rooted in Indigenous cultures, identities, histories, and struggles among different Indigenous communities. Several scholars have echoed this argument. Wotherspoon (2016) notes that by ‘adopting an educational and advocacy role,’ this movement ‘is simultaneously connecting indigenous youth with elders and other community members and fostering recognition of indigenous orientations to social and natural relationships’ (p. 11). Welty (2015) also points out that INM relies heavily on Indigenous identity and culture for mobilization and organization. Few researchers have unpacked the role of culture and identity in shaping dynamics of protest in the social mediascape over the last decade. Further work is required as cultural, ethnic, religious, political, and other minorities are increasingly turning to social media for political and civic action around the globe.

This paper addresses and fills part of this gap in the academic literature. It does so by exploring the manifestation of the INM movement in the Twitterverse through an inductive approach rooted in two complementary questions: (1) How did INM participants – whether they supported or opposed the Indigenous movement – use Twitter to engage in protest action during the summer months of 2013? (2) To what degree did references to culture shape the presence of the INM movement on Twitter? The first section of this paper offers a discussion of social media and grassroots political engagement. The second section describes the methodological approach developed specifically to answer the previously outlined research questions. The third section reports the findings as well as their implications. Specifically, while recent social media-intensive protest movements comparable to the INM movement on Twitter were driven by economic and political concerns, civic and political engagement in the context of the INM movement was fueled by other variables, including aspects of Indigenous culture. Building on these findings, this article offers insights into future research on social media, civic engagement, and political protest.

Literature review

Over the last 10 years, social media have contributed to the expansion, diversification, deepening, and informalization of the digital protest repertoire. This digital ‘protest repertoire’ can be defined as a diverse collection of digital political and civic engagement practices outside more institutionalized – or traditional – paths of political action seeking to question, contest or, conversely, support established media, governmental, and political entities’ decisions or actions (see also Raynauld et al., 2016; Van Laer & Van Aelst, 2010). Often shaping the actions of social movements and other members of civil society at the peripheries of the formal political arena, this set of protest tactics comprises an eclectic mixture of offline-inspired modes of protest (e.g., non-violent direct actions, social disobedience) and newer forms of political action shaped by digital media’s affordances, including interactive features like hashtags which can be used to tag content or articulate conversations around issues and events at the root of protest initiatives and can lead to the emergence of crowdsourced narratives (della Porta & Tarrow, 2012; Van Laer & Van Aelst, 2010; Yang, 2016).

Social media can play a pivotal role in political and civic engagement. Their distinct structural and functional properties can create a more inclusive and accessible political process by engaging both established political players and less influential individuals to create, maintain, or expand networks (Valenzuela, Arriagada, & Scherman, 2014). Lester and Cottle (2015) point out that with the help of Web 2.0 media, grassroots protest and other forms of decentralized mobilization initiatives can be launched, promoted, and coordinated mostly independently of contextual variables, such as time, access to financial and technical resources, or geographical location.

More importantly for this paper, political participation tactics appealing to individual-based culture and identity can play a key role in shaping protest in the social mediascape. As noted by Valenzuela et al. (2014), social media can heighten ‘processes of social identity construction in political spaces where opinions and ideas are shared’ (p. 2048) and contribute to the creation, promotion, or reinforcement of a shared consciousness that can fuel protest behavior. Furthermore, Ginsburg (1997; 2008) argues that the proliferation of digital media, like social media, has created opportunities for media creators to engage in what she terms ‘cultural activism’ (1997, p. 122), where producers use media as a means of cultural reassertion involving struggles of representation and identity. The idea that media represents a space where cultural communities – especially Indigenous Peoples ‒ can engage in identity contestation and, as a result, identity and culture-based mobilization and political action is not new. Sreberny-Mohammadi and Mohammadi (1994) link culture, identity, and communication to protest and resistance. They argue that small media – grassroots media that can easily reproduce messages and information such as Xeroxing, fax machines, and cassette tapes – provide spaces to articulate and circulate alternative identities from those presented in state or private broadcast media.

While these investigations have been the source of valuable theoretical and methodological insights, significant work remains to explore other facets of these dynamics, especially as they relate to social media and protest politics within the Indigenous context. Little to no research has been done on uses of social media by Indigenous Peoples in Canada or other nation-state contexts for political and civic action (Dahlberg-Grundberg & Lindgren, 2015). Callison and Hermida (2015) have shown how Twitter was used effectively by Indigenous grassroots for ‘dissemination and representation of news and information’ (p. 696) in the context of the INM movement. They also theorize that through the #IdleNoMore hashtag, tweeters were able to create a collective identity. While their work offers a detailed quantitative assessment of this dynamic, it provides limited qualitative details. Our paper builds on this stream of academic literature as it explores how INM participants ‒ whether they supported or opposed the movement ‒ turned to Twitter and engaged in culture-intensive political and civic activism by circulating information, sharing opinions, mobilizing and cultivating support, or criticizing or attacking other formal or information political and civic players.

Methods

We document, examine, and analyze the manifestation of INM in the Twitterverse through an inductive approach anchored by two research questions: (1) How did INM participants and their critics use Twitter to engage in protest action? (2) In which ways and to what extent did identity and culture shape the manifestation of the INM movement in the Twitterverse? We explore these questions by conducting a hybrid of quantitative and qualitative content analysis on a sample of 1650 tweets with at least one #IdleNoMore hashtag ‒ as well as the content of Web links embedded by their authors when available – shared on Twitter’s public timeline between 3 July 2013 and 2 August 2013.⁵ As noted previously, the #IdleNoMore hashtag was used heavily by Indigenous and non-Indigenous individuals and organizations supporting or opposing the movement to express themselves and be active politically.⁶ More generally, hashtags have also been used as a sampling mechanism by several scholars who have taken interest in social media-based political and civic engagement phenomena over the last five years (e.g., Dubois & Ford, 2015; Gruzd & Roy, 2014; Raynauld et al., 2016).

In order to conduct this analysis, we utilize a two-step sampling approach to assemble the corpus of #IdleNoMore tweets for this study. First, we acquire and archive all tweets with at least one #IdleNoMore hashtag that were shared on Twitter’s public timeline between 3 July 2013 and 2 August 2013 using the data mining tool service Tweet Archivist.⁷ A total of 17,482 #IdleNoMore tweets were collected in this first round of sampling. Second, we narrow the corpus by randomly selecting 50 #IdleNoMore tweets posted on each day during the time period considered for this study (1650 tweets). We recorded specific elements of #IdleNoMore tweets in the archiving process, including information about their author, their textual content (e.g., hyperlinks, hashtags), as well as their time of publication. While preventing us from observing potential social interactions between #IdleNoMore tweeters, selecting tweets randomly allows for the constitution of a corpus that would not be affected by events or context-specific patterns of tweeting that may have altered dynamics of #IdleNoMore tweeting over a short period of time.

To explore the specificities of #IdleNoMore tweeting, we use a three-pronged quantitative and qualitative content analysis approach modeled after recent academic work on social media-based political action (e.g., Raynauld et al., 2016; Scherman et al., 2015; Theocharis, Lowe, van Deth, & García-Albacete, 2015). First, we identify the basic content of #IdleNoMore tweets considered for this study, such as the handle of their author, the date and time of their publication, their language, or the presence of hyperlinks or other social and content interactive mechanisms (e.g., hashtags, social interactions through the @mention⁸ or @retweet⁹ mechanisms). Second, we investigate the purpose of those #IdleNoMore tweets, following a methodological approach developed in previous work by Raynauld et al. (2016). Specifically, we determine if they serve an information dispersion function, an opinion sharing function, a mobilization function, and/or a criticism function. In cases where tweets served more than one function, we qualitatively assessed which function was the primary one.

Third, we assess if #IdleNoMore tweets considered in this study referenced elements related to Indigenous culture. Little consensus exists among academics across disciplines on how to define culture as it is shaped by constantly evolving factors. Specifically, culture is a multifaceted concept as it encompasses a large number of endogenous and exogenous indicators that vary greatly due to social, demographic, political, economic, and ideological variables (see Baldwin, Faulkner, Hecht, & Lindsley, 2006; Rosaldo, 2006). In recent years,¹⁰ some authors have identified close to 300 unique definitions of the concept of culture (Rosaldo, 2006), up from 200 based on a compilation by Baldwin and Lindsey (1994) in 1993, and 164 in 1952 according to Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952). Much like the broader concept of culture, Indigenous culture also varies greatly between and within communities in Canada (see Alfred & Corntassel, 2005). The intention of the following discussion is not to provide a single, fixed, or complete definition of Indigenous culture. As noted by Simpson (2007), doing so would perpetuate colonial hierarchies of settler knowledge about Indigenous Peoples.

This paper builds on Holm, Pearson, and Chavis’ model (2003), which shows that culture ‘is predicated on a view of identity that is both dynamic and interconnected’ (Alfred & Corntassel, 2005, p. 609). It suggests that Indigenous culture is rooted in four core elements: ‘sacred history, ceremonial cycles, language and ancestral homelands’ (Alfred & Corntassel, 2005, p. 609). Alfred and Corntassel (2005) add ‘relationships (or kinship networks)’ (p. 609) as a basis for both the four core elements and for restoring loss or damage to them. Of the six categories for coding culture introduced by Holm et al.’s model (2003) and later revisited by Alfred and Corntassel (2005), five were used in the context of this research project; namely, ‘Language,’ ‘Cultural Production,’ ‘Group Membership,’ ‘Land,’ and ‘Epistemologies.’ The study additionally coded for ‘Resistance’ for reasons outlined below.

Indigenous culture can be viewed as a ‘site of contestation’ (Baldwin et al., 2006, p. 19) of power relationships that are both affected by and often produced as a response to societal frameworks, including capitalism and colonialism (Coulthard, 2014). Wotherspoon and Hansen (2013) write that ‘Indigenous people have experienced hundreds of years of imperialism and social exclusion, resulting in a legacy with respect to outcomes and social practices that have been perpetuated to the present day’ (p. 29) and by extension, deeply impact several facets of Indigenous culture. Alfred and Corntassel (2005) pull together social and historical elements ‒ along with the element of ongoing struggle as a prerequisite for continued existence of Indigenous cultures and identities subject to colonialism ‒ in their discussion of Indigeneity. Though complex to define, Dirks (1992) discusses the inextricable role of colonial-capitalism in culture. In his nuanced view of relationships between the two, he argues that colonial culture, besides serving as a means to conquest, was essential to the production of gender, race, and class society, through discourse. He demonstrates that colonialism and culture cannot be discussed in isolation from one another (Dirks, 1992).

We develop a detailed codebook accounting for manifestations of Indigenous culture in #IdleNoMore tweets based on the literature reviewed in the previous paragraphs and other relevant sources (Alfred, 2010; Altamirano-Jimenez, 2013; Ellis, 2013; Hecht, Jackson, & Pitts, 2005; Henderson, 2000; Hermes, 2012; Lawrence, 2003; Lugones, 2010; Nelson, 2006).¹¹ The content of hyperlinks embedded in tweets was also taken into account when analyzing the presence of references to core elements of Indigenous identity. The hashtag #IdleNoMore and Twitter usernames were excluded from the analysis. In cases of tweets containing more than one type of reference to Indigenous culture, we assess qualitatively which reference to culture was the most significant. The relevance and reliability of the codebook was determined by first coding a small random sample of #IdleNoMore tweets before the analysis of the entire corpus was initiated. The third author of this paper, who has research expertise in sociology and Indigenous culture, manually coded all references of Indigenous culture in #IdleNoMore tweets to ensure the reliability of the coding.

Findings

The analysis of the sample of 1650 #IdleNoMore tweets revealed clear political engagement dynamics. First, it indicated that 816 tweeters contributed at least one #IdleNoMore tweet during the time period considered for this study. A minority of them ‒ known as ‘vocal’ tweeters (Mascaro & Goggins, 2012, p. 7) ‒ were the source of a large volume of #IdleNoMore posts. For example, three #IdleNoMore tweeters each posted 35 tweets or more for a total of 277 tweets (16.8% of the dataset). User @TeamRevoltNow, who defines himself as an ‘open Twitter stream highlighting the ongoing worldwide revolution against Fascism/Oppression’ in the bio section of his Twitter account, tweeted 189 times. California-based user @joanie399, who describes herself as interested in ‘human rights’ and ‘native american history,’ shared 53 posts. Finally, Toronto-based user @IndigoRave, who presents himself as an Indigenous writer and Indian Residential School program survivor, contributed 35 posts. An overwhelming majority of #IdleNoMore tweeters (94% of #IdleNoMore tweeters) shared three tweets or less. This data reflect the structure of #IdleNoMore tweeting where most tweeters were the source of only one or two entries. More importantly, these findings are in line with those of studies that have examined the manifestation of other political protest phenomena in the Twitterverse (e.g., Bastos & Mercea, 2016; Turcotte & Raynauld, 2014).

Our review of data suggests that #IdleNoMore tweeters included different digital material in their posts. While close to 35.5% of tweets did not contain a hyperlink, 63.2% featured at least one, 1.2% had at least two, and 0.2% had at least three. These hyperlinks pointed to a variety of media platforms, including legacy media websites, social media, or web pages of local, regional, and national government agencies, private companies, and advocacy groups. A large number of hashtags other than #IdleNoMore were also embedded in tweets. Indeed, 21.1% of tweets included only one hashtag (#IdleNoMore) compared to 20.8% of tweets that featured two hashtags, 17.9% of tweets that comprised three hashtags, 16.2% that had four hashtags, and 21% that comprised five hashtags or more.¹² Hashtags embedded in #IdleNoMore tweets referred to wide-ranging INM-related matters, such as geo-political contexts (e.g., #cndpoli, #onpoli, #nspoli, #abpoli), policy issues (e.g., #fishing, #tarsands, #foodSecurity), mobilization initiatives (e.g., #MarchAgainstCorrupt, #sovsummer, #OWS), activist networks (e.g., #anonymous), geographical locations (e.g., #vancouver, #toronto, #yyc), as well as emotions, states of mind, or commentary (e.g., #shame, #never).

Most #IdleNoMore tweets in our dataset were @retweets (@RT). Our analysis showed that 59.2% of all #IdleNoMore tweets were @retweets, while 35.5% were regular tweets, and 0.4% were modified tweets (MT@), which can be defined as a Twitter-specific mechanism enabling tweeters to circulate tweets originally shared by other users that have been altered slightly, such as by the inclusion or removal of words. Only 4.9% of #IdleNoMore tweets were social interactions between one or multiple users. These findings suggest that #IdleNoMore tweeters utilized Twitter more for the mass circulation of content and self-expression than to interact with other users.

Unpacking #IdleNoMore political engagement patterns

As part of the analysis of the INM movement’s manifestation in the Twitterverse, we examined whether #IdleNoMore tweets served an information dispersion function, an opinion sharing function, a mobilization function, or an attack or condemnation function. Table 1 summarizes the findings of our analysis of tweets.

Table 1. Functions of #IdleNoMore tweets.

Category	Frequency	Percentage	Sub-category	Frequency	Percentage
Information dissemination	851	51.6	Current events	451	27.3
			Mobilization initiative	236	14.3
			Policy matters	127	7.7
			Other	37	2.2
Mobilization	343	20.8	Invitation to participate in a mobilization event	154	9.3
			Other	189	11.5
Opinion sharing	261	15.8	Mobilization initiative	147	8.9
			Policy matters	68	4.1
			Current event	29	1.8
			Other	17	1.0
Criticism	156	9.5	Critique of a policy matter	64	3.9
			Critique of mobilization initiative	41	2.5
			Critique of news	38	2.3
			Personal attack	9	0.6
			Other	4	0.2
Other	39	2.4		39	2.4
Total	1650	100		1650	100

First, we note that no tweets in the #IdleNoMore dataset featured content opposing the INM movement. Rather, their authors either supported openly the movement or were neutral about it. A majority of #IdleNoMore tweets (51.6%) were used for the mass dispersion of INM-related information. Specifically, our analysis reveals that 27.3% of them featured information on INM-related current events. On 1 July 2013 at 11:28:24PM + 0000, for example, user @WaywardReporter tweeted the following:

Round dancers and drummers at #IdleNoMore Canada Day flash mob in Dief Park #yxe http://t.co/WmoDMyzO2C.

Furthermore, 14.3% of tweets circulated details about INM mobilization initiatives, such as online petitions, demonstrations, or other types of protest action. User @Zizania_meghan invited her followers to join an INM webinar in the following tweet posted on 13 July 2013 at 4:55:52 PM + 0000:

Did u miss the #IdleNoMore webinar w/@LawladyINM, @bearclannation & @BuffySteMarie Tues 2nd July? Watch it here: http://t.co/IMIs0wOHnK#INM.

We determined that 7.7% of tweets informed about one or multiple policy matters, including the environment, natural resources, or education. For example, user @AngToldeo posted the following tweet on 15 July 2013 at 1:43:21 AM + 0000:

#IdleNoMore The CAN mining Project next to Belo Monte is about to receive an environmental legal permit licence! (?) http://t.co/zAA8vjKkqW.

Additionally, 2.2% of informational tweets provided details on miscellaneous INM-related matters or were not specific in nature.

Second, we determined that 20.8% of #IdleNoMore tweets served a mobilization function. These tweets consisted of invitations to participate in mobilization events (9.3% of the corpus) or more general calls to personal and collective political action in online and offline settings (11.5% of the corpus). For example, @user AngToldedo called for a ‘tweetstorm’ ‒ also known as ‘Twitter storm’ (Segerberg & Bennett, 2011, p. 207) ‒ in this post on 16 July 2013 at 1:40:02 PM + 0000:

TweetStorm against: #GolpePLP227Não NEW Brazilian legislation of “legalized theft of indigenous land” http://t.co/e0BEK3divn #idlenomore.

On 3 July 2013 at 4:09:41 PM + 0000, Ontario-based user @DavidSpencerEdu asked his followers to learn about Indigenous culture:

Head out to a #Pow-wow in North America celebrate culture http://t.co/nXXTlHbhB3 #Aboriginal #Indigenous #IdleNoMore.

Third, our analysis found that 15.8% of #IdleNoMore tweets served an opinion sharing function. A closer look at the data revealed that #IdleNoMore tweeters shared their views on a wide range of INM-related matters, including INM-related mobilization initiatives (8.9%), policy matters (4.1%), current events (1.8%), and miscellaneous matters (1.0%). On 9 July 2013 at 2:16:08 PM + 0000, user @TeamRevoltNow retweeted the following post by user @MegFerguson1 where she argued for more education to end racism in Canada:

Canada may be in denial about our racism. Education is key. Sheelah McLean, co-founder #idlenomore #CTFForum #NSTU http:/ … 

User @EndingViolence opined that the Canadian government should investigate cases of missing and murdered Indigenous women in this tweet posted on 30 July 2013 at 1:04:11 AM + 0000:

Gov't should hold inquiry into missing & murdered #Indigenous women and girls http://t.co/jL0laG4Fzg #cdnpoli #idlenomore #MMIW -EG.

Finally, we found 9.5% of #IdleNoMore tweets featuring criticism of matters relating to INM, including policy issues (3.9%), mobilization initiatives (2.5%), and legacy media news stories (2.3%). Only 0.6% of tweets featured personal attacks aimed at individuals and organizations, and even less (0.2%) criticism of miscellaneous INM-related matters. For example, user @RobertJensen2 retweeted on 15 July 2013 at 8:25:04 PM + 0000 a post by user @etenebrislux in which he directly attacked federal minister Pierre Poilievre:

Douchebag of the Week: Pierre Poilievre - Conservative http://t.co/nb0czvWCLW #idlenomore

References to core elements of Indigenous culture in #IdleNoMore tweets

Our analysis takes a look at the presence of references to core element Indigenous culture in #IdleNoMore tweets. The review of the #IdleNoMore dataset reveals that 85% of tweets included references to Indigenous cultural markers. Cultural markers relating to land, group membership, and epistemologies were the most common, followed by cultural production, resistance, and language (see Table 2).

Table 2. References to Indigenous culture in #IdleNoMore tweets.

Category	Frequency	Percentage	Sub-category	Frequency	Percentage
Language	9	0.5	Use of Indigenous languages	5	0.3
	Language resurgence	4	0.2
	Other	0	0
Cultural production	145	8.8	Activities	127	7.7
	Sartorial choices	5	0.3
	Objects	5	0.3
	Food	7	0.4
	Other	1	0.1
Group membership	420	25.5	Self-identification with	17	1.0
	Band/nation solidarities	44	2.7
	Transnational solidarities (within Canada)	126	7.6
	Transnational solidarities (international)	148	9.0
	Regulation of	62	3.8
	Other	23	1.4
Land	429	26.0	Land claim processes	32	1.9
	Environmentalism	338	20.5
	Traditional territories	54	3.3
	Other	5	0.3
Epistemologies	267	16.2	Pedagogy	138	8.4
	Spirituality	123	7.5
	Storytelling	3	0.2
	Other	3	0.2
Resistance	139	8.4	Anti-colonialism	107	6.5
	Anti-capitalism	30	1.8
	Other	2	0.1
Other	0	0		0	0
No mention of Indigenous culture	241	14.6		241	14.6
Total	1650	100		1650	100

Mentions of land were frequent in #IdleNoMore tweets, with most of them focusing on environmentalism (20.5% of tweets). This is the case of user @0ccupyNewMexico who linked the hashtag #IdleNoMore to criticism of uranium mining in a post on 5 July 2013 at 10:28:22 PM + 0000:

PHOTOS: Defending #Havasupai sacred land from #uranium mining in Grand Canyon http://t.co/xanSY3d3 mm via @brendanorrell #idlenomore #arizona

Indigenous group membership was expressed mostly in tweets with references to solidarities, both within Canada (7.6% of tweets) and internationally (9.0% of tweets). On 3 July 2013 at 6:27:41 PM + 0000, user @plrsTweet emphasized solidarities among First Nations, as well as solidarities between First Nations and other groups in Canadian society:

First Nations,Angophones,Franophones,are all speaking the same language. #nbpoli #idlenomore http://t.co/RTAaGCTS5o #solidarity #nspoli

On 3 July 2013 at 2:01:33 AM + 0000, user @TeamRevoltNow retweeted user @joanie399 who likened INM to Indigenous identity through use of ‘NDNZ’ (meaning ‘Indians’) as a hashtag, which is not country-specific:

RT @joanie399: #NDNZ #IDLENOMORE #INDIGENOUS #clemency4peltier Immigration Reform Heads to the House http://t.co/k3I48jz7Jl

References to epistemologies were also a core feature of #IdleNoMore tweeting, with many of them discussing pedagogy (8.4% of tweets). For example, on 17 July 2013 at 5:08:58 PM + 0000, user @VeroMato brought attention to Indigenous history:

Des enfants autochtones auraient servi de cobayes pour des régimes expérimentaux http://t.co/qGzRUDUcMU #polcan #IdleNoMore” (translation: “Indigenous youth would have been used as gunea pigs for experiments http://t.co/qGzRUDUcMU #polcan #IdleNoMore”).

A large volume of tweets (7.5%) discussed elements of Indigenous spirituality, such as Nishiyuu walkers, pilgrims who walked from Northern Quebec to Ottawa during the winter 2013 in support of the INM movement. A retweet posted by @chuddles11 on 16 July 2013 at 6:59:38 PM + 0000 is a good illustration of this phenomenon:

RT @AFN_Updates: Inspired & energized by actions of #IdleNoMore #INM, women and young ppl, incl the Nishiyuu walkers - #AFN NC @shawnatleo … 

Finally, a large number of tweets containing multiple references to core elements of Indigenous culture were analyzed, especially those with Web links. A good example would be a tweet by user @ykotanaka shared on 1 July 2013 at 9:21:42 PM + 0000, which was coded as referring to international transnational solidarities, but also contained references to anti-colonialism, solidarities within Canada, and traditional territories:

Now lets work in solidarity toward migrant justice and decolonization. We are all treaty people. #homeonnativeland #IdleNoMore.

We further unpack patterns of references to Indigenous cultures in #IdleNoMore tweets by looking at their presence in tweets based on the function they serve (see Figure 1). The data clearly indicates that references to culture were far more likely to be embedded in tweets serving an information dispersion function, which are often provide context about the INM movement, its manifestation online and offline, as well as it causes. In comparison, they were significantly less likely to be present in tweets offering opinion and criticism as these tweets tend to be much more pointed and specific.

Discussion

This article provides an in-depth look at dynamics of INM-related political communication and engagement in the Twitterverse. It shows quantitatively and qualitatively how #IdleNoMore participants turned to Twitter to engage in four main activities. Tweets related to #IdleNoMore served primarily a mass information dispersion function, and to a lesser extent, a mobilization function, an opinion sharing function, and a criticism function. The findings of this project are somewhat similar to a recent study focusing on the 2012 student strike in the province of Quebec (Raynauld et al., 2016). However, it should be noted that some tweets could serve multiple functions. For instance, #IdleNoMore tweets providing updates on matters of interest to INM activists could have potential mobilizing effects on them as it could inform them and subsequently tap into their ‘participatory surplus’ and incite them to be involved in different facets of formal and informal political processes. The concept of participatory surplus can be defined as unexploited political resources (e.g., money, time, energy) that individuals and organizations are ready and willing to commit to a political cause ‒ whether it is through traditional or more informal paths of political engagement – especially if it appeals to their preferences, interests, and objectives (see Blaser, Weinberger, & Trippi, 2009). More research on this aspect could of interest.

Figure 1. References to Indigenous culture in #IdleNoMore tweets.

These findings indicate that #IdleNoMore activists were far more likely to engage in broadcast politics-oriented forms of political or civic engagement in the Twitterverse and far less likely to take part in more dialogic or interactive forms of political action exploiting social media’s distinct structural and functional properties. This echoes works by scholars who have explored patterns of political communication, mobilization, and organizing in the social mediascape, whether they are initiated by political elites in and out of elections or by civil society members. Of interest are studies by scholars (e.g., Graham, Broersma, Hazelhoff, & van't Haar, 2013; Raynauld & Greenberg, 2014) who have concluded that Twitter has been used, for the most part, in ways essentially replicating offline-inspired modes of unidirectional mass political communication, mobilization, and organizing, whether it is by initiatives of political engagement on the left or on the right of the political spectrum.

However, findings presented in this paper also suggest that #IdleNoMore-related political engagement on Twitter distinguished itself in other ways. Specifically, this research project demonstrates quantitatively and qualitatively that references to core elements of Indigenous culture played a pivotal role in shaping dynamics of INM-related tweeting during the time period covered in this investigation. This aspect of the analysis is especially important as it fills an important gap in the academic literature. We argue that social media provided opportunities for #IdleNoMore tweeters to engage in wide-ranging forms of political and civic action or, from a broader perspective, political protest that was deeply informed and, to a certain extent, influenced by references to Indigenous culture. Indeed, the analysis indicates that 85% of #IdleNoMore tweets featured at least one reference to core elements of Indigenous culture, especially those related to land, group membership, and epistemologies. Building on these findings, it is possible to argue that culture played a key role in shaping the ways in which the INM movement manifested in the Twitterverse. These findings are in line with the work of other scholars who have examined the INM movement and found that culture and identity were integral part of its DNA (see Caven, 2013; Coulthard, 2014; Welty, 2015; Wotherspoon, 2016). More importantly, these dynamics distinguished the #IdleNoMore movement from other movements, which were driven for the most part by political or economic concerns.

Following these initial findings, it would be of interest to conduct further research into uses of culture as a strategy for mobilization and persuasion in the social mediascape, especially in the context of political and civic engagement by social, political, cultural, and ethnic minorities. Precisely, it would be pertinent to examine what factors are driving culture to become an important component of political engagement in the social mediascape. Future research also needs to focus on the impact culture-based mobilization can have on policy development as well as identity formation.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the invaluable financial support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) through an Insight Development Grant for the production of this article. The authors would also like to thank Emerson College, particularly the Department of Communication Studies, as well as the University of Windsor for providing logistical and financial support. A special mention goes to Patricia Ochman, lawyer specializing in Indigenous law, and Derek Antoine for their insights at different stages of the research project. Finally, the authors would like to recognize the outstanding work of research assistants Natalia Locatelli, Arief Kartolo, and Abunya Medina.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Dr Vincent Raynauld is Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication Studies at Emerson College. He is also serving as Research Associate in the Groupe de Recherche en Communication Politique at Université Laval, as Academic Adviser to Samara Canada, and as a member of the research network Réseau Démocratie Électronique. His areas of research interest include political communication, political contention, social media, research methods, online political campaigning, and journalism [email: [email protected]].

Dr Emmanuelle Richez is Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Windsor. Her research examines law and politics in Canada and other advanced liberal democracies, with a particular focus on ethno-cultural minority rights. She is currently conducting a comparative analysis of the effects of bills of rights on Indigenous Peoples in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States [email: [email protected]].

Katie Boudreau Morris is currently a Ph.D. Student in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Carleton University. Her research work focuses on Indigenous transnational anti-colonial solidarity between activists from Turtle Island–Canada and Palestine–Israel. She is a recipient of a SSHRC Doctoral Fellowship. Katie holds an MA in Women and Gender Studies from Saint Mary’s University. She holds an HonBA from the University of Toronto [email: [email protected]].

Notes

1 The Canadian constitution recognizes and affirms existing Aboriginal and treaty rights of the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada, which includes ‘Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada’ (Constitution Act, 1982, p. s35). Throughout the paper, the term ‘Indigenous Peoples’ is used as opposed to ‘Aboriginal Peoples,’ as it is more commonly used in an international context to describe ‘people[s] with long traditional occupation of a territory, but who are now under pressure as minorities or disenfranchised populations within an industrialized or industrializing nation-state’ (Kesler, n.d.).

2 Their names were Sheelah McLean, Nina Wilson, Sylvia McAdam, and Jessica Gordon (Tupper, 2014).

3 The initial leadership structure of the INM movement was centered around the four women in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. However, it experienced a rapid expansion and decentralization as social media became an important political engagement tools for its supporters who organize and managed political mobilization initiatives on their own (Gray & Gordo, 2014; Wotherspoon & Hansen, 2013).

4 While it can be argued that the movement promoted some degree of shared identity, it is important to emphasize the diverse identities, histories, cultures, and traditions of Indigenous Peoples across Canada’s territory. Throughout INM, these diversities continued to exist, often creating disagreements among and between various supporters of the movement.

5 While INM has been active since November 2012, we consider this time period as we sought to analyze the #IdleNoMore tweeting dynamic outside intense moments marked by high levels of mobilization and intense policy debates.

6 Other scholars studying the manifestation of the INM movement on Twitter have used the #IdleNoMore hashtag as a sampling mechanism (e.g. Dahlberg-Grundberg & Lindgren, 2015).

7 Many researchers have turned to Tweet Archivist for Twitter data collection and archiving over the last five years (e.g. Boynton et al., 2014; Croeser & Highfield, 2014).

8 A @mention can be defined as Twitter-specific mechanisms giving the ability to users to tag one or multiple other Twitter users in a post, which triggers a notification and can lead to social interaction.

9 A @retweet can be defined as Twitter-specific mechanisms enabling users to redistribute tweets originally published by other users without any modifications.

10 Precise years are unavailable.

11 Categories and subcategories of references to core elements of Indigenous identity can be found in Table 2.

12 It should be noted that 0.3% of hashtags were categorized as comprising no hashtags as there was a typo in the hashtag (extra space between the pound sign and the textual expression of the hashtag), but they were still archived by Tweet Archivist.