The influence of new and traditional media coverage on public attention to social movements: the case of the Dakota Access Pipeline protests

References

• Amenta, E. (2006). When movements matter: The townsend plan and the rise of social security. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, K. T., & Caren, N. (2010). Making the news: Movement organizations, media attention, and the public agenda. American Sociological Review, 75, 841–866. doi: 10.1177/0003122410386689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barakso, M., & Schaffner, B. F. (2006). Winning coverage: News media portrayals of the women’s movement, 1969–2004. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 11, 22–44. doi: 10.1177/1081180X06293069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbera, P. (2017). Rfacebook (Version 0.6.15) [R]. Retrieved from https://github.com/pablobarbera/Rfacebook
   Google Scholar
• Baylor, T. (1996). Media framing of movement protest: The case of American Indian protest. The Social Science Journal, 33, 241–255. doi: 10.1016/S0362-3319(96)90021-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bode, L. (2016). Political news in the news feed: Learning politics from social media. Mass Communication and Society, 19, 24–48. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2015.1045149
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boydstun, A. E. (2013). Making the news: Politics, the media, and agenda setting. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carlisle, J. E., & Patton, R. C. (2013). Is social media changing how we understand political engagement? An analysis of Facebook and the 2008 presidential election. Political Research Quarterly, 66, 883–895. doi: 10.1177/1065912913482758
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celebrity Involvement | #NoDAPL. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://hashtagnodapl.web.unc.edu/celebrity-involvement/
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means? First Monday, 16. doi:10.5210/fm.v16i2.3336
   Google Scholar
• Conroy, M., Feezell, J. T., & Guerrero, M. (2012). Facebook and political engagement: A study of online political group membership and offline political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1535–1546. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conway, B. A., Kenski, K., & Wang, D. (2015). The rise of Twitter in the political campaign: Searching for intermedia agenda-setting effects in the presidential primary. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20, 363–380. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coursaris, C. K., Osch, W. v., & Balogh, B. A. (2016). Do Facebook likes lead to shares or sales? Exploring the empirical links between social media content, brand equity, purchase intention, and engagement. 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 3546–3555).
   Google Scholar
• DeLuca, K. M., Lawson, S., & Sun, Y. (2012). Occupy wall street on the public screens of social media: The many framings of the birth of a protest movement. Communication, Culture and Critique, 5, 483–509. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-9137.2012.01141.x
   Google Scholar
• DeVito, M. A. (2017). From editors to algorithms. Digital Journalism, 5, 753–773. doi: 10.1080/21670811.2016.1178592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duggan, M., & Smith, A. (2016, October 25). Americans, Politics and Social Media | Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewinternet.org/2016/10/25/the-political-environment-on-social-media/
   Google Scholar
• Edelman, M. (1988). Constructing the political spectacle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, B. (2018). The only constant is change: Technology, political communication, and innovation over time. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Feezell, J. T. (2018). Agenda setting through social media: The importance of incidental news exposure and social filtering in the digital era. Political Research Quarterly, 71, 482–494. doi: 10.1177/1065912917744895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferree, M. M., Gamson, W. A., Gerhards, J., & Rucht, D. (2002). Shaping abortion discourse: Democracy and the public sphere in Germany and the United States. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fontana, K. (2016, December 5). Musicians, actors, and celebrities celebrate the Dakota Access Pipeline decision. Retrieved from Vulture website https://www.vulture.com/2016/12/celebs-react-to-dakota-access-pipeline-decision.html
   Google Scholar
• Francisco, S. L. N. W. in S. (2016, November 1). A million people “check in” at standing rock on Facebook to support Dakota Pipeline protesters. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/31/north-dakota-access-pipeline-protest-mass-facebook-check-in
   Google Scholar
• Gamson, W. A., & Meyer, D. S. (1996). Framing political opportunity. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 275–290). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 1–37. doi: 10.1086/229213
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gamson, W. A., & Wolfsfeld, G. (1993). Movements and media as interacting systems. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528, 114–125. doi: 10.1177/0002716293528001009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GDELT Project. (2017, October 9). Retrieved from GDELT Blog website https://blog.gdeltproject.org/gdelt-2-0-television-api-debuts/
   Google Scholar
• Gerbaudo, P. (2012). Tweets and streets. London: Pluto Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gruszczynski, M., & Wagner, M. W. (2017). Information flow in the 21st century: The dynamics of agenda-uptake. Mass Communication and Society, 20, 378–402. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2016.1255757
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadler, F., & Yoran, G. (2012). Default metaphysics – Social networks and the self. In C. Reiman (Ed.), Public interest and private rights in social media (pp. 67–78). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science & Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Harlow, S. (2012). Social media and social movements: Facebook and an online Guatemalan justice movement that moved offline. New Media & Society, 14, 225–243. doi: 10.1177/1461444811410408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healy, J. (2016a, September 9). U.S. Suspends Construction on part of North Dakota Pipeline. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/10/us/judge-approves-construction-of-oil-pipeline-in-north-dakota.html
   Google Scholar
• Healy, J. (2016b, December 5). Protesters gain victory in fight over Dakota Access Oil Pipeline. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/04/us/federal-officials-to-explore-different-route-for-dakota-pipeline.html
   Google Scholar
• Heffington, C., Park, B. B., & Williams, L. K. (2019). The “Most Important Problem” Dataset (MIPD): A new dataset on American issue importance. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 36(3), 312–335. doi: 10.1177/0738894217691463
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hersher, R. (2017, February 27). Key moments in The Dakota Access Pipeline fight. Retrieved from NPR.org website https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/22/514988040/key-moments-in-the-dakota-access-pipeline-fight
   Google Scholar
• Joseph, S. (2012). Thinking intentionality: Arab women’s subjectivity and its discontents. Journal of Middle East Women’s Studies, 8, 1–25. doi: 10.2979/jmiddeastwomstud.8.2.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kearney, M. W. (2017). rtweet: Collecting Twitter data (Version 0.6.0) [R]. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=rtweet
   Google Scholar
• Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Transnational advocacy networks in the movement society. In D. S. Meyer & S. G. Tarrow (Eds.), The social movement society: Contentious politics for a new century (pp. 217–237). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Keele, L., & Kelly, N. J. (2006). Dynamic models for dynamic theories: The ins and outs of lagged dependent variables. Political Analysis, 14, 186–205. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpj006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy, M. (2016, November 1). More than 1 million “check in” on Facebook to support the standing rock sioux. Retrieved from NPR.org website https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/01/500268879/more-than-a-million-check-in-on-facebook-to-support-the-standing-rock-sioux
   Google Scholar
• Kobayashi, T., & Ichifuji, Y. (2015). Tweets that matter: Evidence from a randomized field experiment in Japan. Political Communication, 32, 574–593. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2014.986696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koopmans, R. (2004). Movements and media: Selection processes and evolutionary dynamics in the public sphere. Theory and Society, 33, 367–391. doi: 10.1023/B:RYSO.0000038603.34963.de
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kriesi, H. (1995). The political opportunity structure of new social movements: Its impact on their mobilization. In C. Jenkins & B. Klandermans (Eds.), The politics of social protest: Comparative perspectives on states and social movements (pp. 167–198). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lampinen, A. (2016). Why we need to examine multiple social network sites. Communication and the Public, 1, 489–493. doi: 10.1177/2057047316681171
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, E. (2016, September 23). Meet the native Americans on the front lines of a historic protest. Retrieved from National Geographic News website https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/09/portraits-from-dakota-access-pipeline-protest/
   Google Scholar
• Lee, K., Lee, B., & Oh, W. (2015). Thumbs up, sales up? The contingent effect of Facebook likes on sales performance in social commerce. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32, 109–143. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2015.1138372
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim, M. (2012). Clicks, cabs, and coffee houses: Social media and oppositional movements in Egypt, 2004–2011. Journal of Communication, 62, 231–248. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01628.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAdam, D. (1996). Conceptual origins, current problems, future directions. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings (pp. 23–40). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCammon, H. J. (2012). The U.S. women’s jury movements and strategic adaptation: A more just verdict. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCombs, M. E. (2004). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Malden, MA: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Mellon, J. (2013). Where and when can we use google trends to measure issue salience? PS: Political Science & Politics, 46, 280–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, R. (2017, June 9). Oil is flowing through the Dakota Access Pipeline. Retrieved from The Atlantic website https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/06/oil-is-flowing-through-the-dakota-access-pipeline/529707/
   Google Scholar
• Morozov, E. (2011a). The net delusion: The dark side of internet freedom. New York, NY: PublicAffairs.
   Google Scholar
• Morozov, E. (2011b). Whither internet control? Journal of Democracy, 22, 62–74. doi: 10.1353/jod.2011.0022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ott, B. L. (2017). The age of Twitter: Donald J. Trump and the politics of debasement. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34, 59–68. doi: 10.1080/15295036.2016.1266686
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papacharissi, Z., & Blasiola, S. (2015). Structures of feeling, storytelling, and social media: The case of #Egypt. In A. Bruns, G. Enli, E. Skogerbo, A. O. Larsson, & C. Christensen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to social media and politics (pp. 211–222). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Park, C. S. (2013). Does Twitter motivate involvement in politics? Tweeting, opinion leadership, and political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1641–1648. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripberger, J. T. (2011). Capturing curiosity: Using internet search trends to measure public attentiveness. Policy Studies Journal, 39, 239–259. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00406.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders, C., & Jennings, W. (2019). Street demonstrations and the media agenda: An analysis of the dynamics of protest agenda setting. Comparative Political Studies, 52(13-14), 2283–2313. doi: 10.1177/0010414019830736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saurette, P., & Gordon, K. (2013). Arguing abortion: The new anti-abortion discourse in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de Science Politique, 46, 157–185. doi: 10.1017/S0008423913000176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayre, B., Bode, L., Shah, D. V., Wilcox, D., & Shah, C. (2010). Agenda setting in a digital age: Tracking attention to California proposition 8 in social media, online news and conventional news. Policy & Internet, 2, 7–32. doi: 10.2202/1944-2866.1040
   Google Scholar
• Seguin, C. (2016). Cascades of coverage: Dynamics of media attention to social movement organizations. Social Forces, 94, 997–1020. doi: 10.1093/sf/sov085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shirky, C. (2011). The political power of social media: Technology, the public sphere, and political change. Foreign Affairs, 90, 28–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skalicky, S. (2016, October 28). Tension between police and standing rock protesters reaches boiling point. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/29/us/dakota-access-pipeline-protest.html
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2018, March 1). Social media use in 2018. Retrieved from Pew Research Center Internet, Science & Tech website http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/
   Google Scholar
• Sood, G., Lyons, K., & Muschelli, J. (2018). tuber: Client for the YouTube API (Version 0.9.7). Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tuber
   Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Going to extremes: How like minds unite and divide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tarrow, S. (1998). Power in movement: Social movements and contentious politics (3rd). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tilly, C., & Tarrow, S. G. (2015). Contentious politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tufekci, Z. (2013). “Not this one”: Social movements, the attention economy, and microcelebrity networked activism. American Behavioral Scientist, 57, 848–870. doi: 10.1177/0002764213479369
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vraga, E. K., Bode, L., Wells, C., Driscoll, K., & Thorson, K. (2014). The rules of engagement: Comparing two social protest movements on YouTube. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17, 133–140. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2013.0117
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weeks, B., & Southwell, B. (2010). The symbiosis of news coverage and aggregate online search behavior: Obama, Rumors, and presidential politics. Mass Communication and Society, 13, 341–360. doi: 10.1080/15205430903470532
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, C. (2011, January 28). How Egypt shut down the internet. Retrieved from https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8288163/How-Egypt-shut-down-the-internet.html
   Google Scholar
• Wu, T. (2016). The attention merchants: The epic scramble to get inside our heads (1st ed.). New York: Knopf.
   Google Scholar