ABSTRACT
This article explores the effectiveness of international social media (Twitter) campaigns, as a modern form of transnational advocacy networks, seeking domestic legal change in Iran for women’s rights. Using the spiral model of human rights change and second wave normative theories, the article critiques current thought on social media as an advocacy tool using evidence from two Iranian campaigns. Gathering empirical data from the #stopstoning and #letwomengotostadium campaigns, the research finds that Twitter campaigns may be linked to regression in some areas of women’s rights. Early evidence indicates that social media may lead to amplified government backlash, lack of campaign persistence and foreign overshadowing of domestic voices, which all contribute to the ongoing problematisation of the role of transnational advocacy networks in domestic human rights change.
KEYWORDS:
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 The original model used case studies from Kenya, Uganda, South Africa, Tunisia, Morocco, Indonesia, the Philippines, Chile, Guatemala and Eastern Europe.
2 Transnational advocacy networks are defined generally as groups working across state borders on a given issue, from a place of shared values and discourse, and made up of non-state actors. See, e.g., Keck and Sikkink (Citation1998) and Kiel (Citation2011).
3 As a party to these Conventions, Iran is required to submit periodic periods on the implementation of the rights contained in the Conventions. Those reports are reviewed by the Committee of experts and a dialogue follows between the Committee and the State. The process culminates in a series of recommendations which form the basis of discussions for the next round of periodic reporting. 93 of these UN reports were reviewed in this research to understand how Iran is or isn’t moving towards international rule-consistent behaviour relating to the stoning of women.