Suchergebnisse

On January 21st, 2017, the day after Trump's inauguration, feminist activists and allies across many progressive movements assembled across the United States to express their displeasure with the new President and his agenda. These marches were unprecedented in size, bringing together as many as 5.3 million Americans, with at least 408 protests in cities and towns across the country. These protests were large and dramatic, and had an outsized impact. But, they do not tell the whole story of this wave of contention. 'Keeping the March Alive' follows thirty-five progressive groups founded after the Women's March across ten cities from Amarillo and Atlanta to Pasadena and Pittsburgh to tell the whole story of how some social movement organizations survive and thrive while others falter.

"Imagining Society: An Introduction to Sociology is an innovative, versatile, and economical resource for an introductory course. With this single text, instructors can teach the discipline's history, key concepts, and subfields; expose students to short excerpts from the original works of classical and contemporary sociologists; explain sociology's key theoretical insights by connecting them to specific issues; describe and illustrate the methods used by sociologists; and engage students in thoughtful, self-directed projects and activities"--

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Illustrations -- Acknowledgments -- 1. A model of participation -- 2. Getting in: Initial and shifting engagement -- 3. Trajectories of participation -- 4. Social, political, and organizational context of participation -- 5. The ties that bind? the effect of social ties and interaction -- 6. We are not all activists: the development and consequences of identity -- 7. Beyond the "activist" -- Appendix: methodology -- Notes -- References -- Index

Coalitions can be critical to social movement success. This article compares thirty-five Indivisible groups founded after the 2017 Women's March in ten U.S. cities. Through analysis of Facebook pages and interviews with activists, I find that groups that work more often in coalition mobilize more events and are more likely to survive. In cities with long histories of activism, groups tend to engage in more coalitions and a particular type of deep coalition work I call "supercoalitions" that strategically coordinate across a city and work to accumulate and channel resources to pre-existing organizations. In cities without long histories of activism, groups are less likely to engage in coalitions. However, when they do, they tend to organize into broad civil society coalitions that bring together a diversity of political and nonpolitical actors which can be very successful over time. This analysis highlights how coalitions are shaped by local political context.

AbstractFunding is critical for social movements. Our understanding of the relationship between social movements and funders has been shaped by broader theories used to understand movement dynamics. This review examines our changing understanding of the role of funding for movements, paying particular attention to the relative costs and benefits of funding from different groups of actors, such as constituents, foundations, governments, and corporations. While these groups provide critical resources to movements, they can also potentially alter movements by channeling them into less contentious actions and more bureaucratized forms. I explore three current debates in the area of social movement funding. First, current work assesses the relationships of funding, particularly how the interactions between funders and funded groups shape the types of actions in which social movements can engage. Second, social movement funding is embedded within a larger context, and current work is attempting to better understand the role of this context by engaging in comparative research. Finally, debates surrounding the rising importance of corporate funding for movements focus on how these new streams of revenue could help (or hinder) social movement activities.

Cet article analyse les communiqués de presse de World Wildlife Fund (WWF) et Greenpeace afin d'évaluer comment les tactiques et les cadrages déployées par ces deux organisations environnementales affectent l'attention médiatique qu'elles ont reçu dans The Globe and Mail et National Post entre 2000 et 2010. Bien qu'il soit clair que certaines tactiques soient plus susceptibles de capter l'attention médiatique, les résultats indiquent, cependant, que la totalité du répertoire de tactiques et cadrages ne sont pas tous efficace pour les deux groupes étudiés. Par exemple, un appel à la mobilisation citoyenne concernant un problème amène à une augmentation de l'attention médiatique dans le cas de Greenpeace, mais non pour WWF. Aussi, l'utilisation de recherche n'affecte pas la couverture médiatique pour WWF, alors qu'elle affecte négativement l'attention médiatique pour Greenpeace. Cette étude démontre que l'effet des choix tactiques sur la couverture médiatique est contingent sur l'identité du groupe mobilisant.