English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 88295/117812 (75%)
Visitors : 23406987      Online Users : 81
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 傳播學院 > 新聞學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/77891
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/77891


    Title: 探討網絡化社運中社會網絡之形構- 以苗栗大埔事件為例
    The formation of social network in the networked social movement: A case study of Miao-li Da-pu
    Authors: 鄭雅云
    Cheng, Ya Yun
    Contributors: 陳百齡
    鄭宇君

    Chen, Pai Lin
    Cheng, Yu Chung

    鄭雅云
    Cheng, Ya Yun
    Keywords: 社交媒體
    社會網絡
    網絡化社會運動
    連結性行動
    Social media
    Social network
    Networked social movement
    Connective action
    Date: 2015
    Issue Date: 2015-08-24 10:17:36 (UTC+8)
    Abstract:   近幾年的大規模社會抗爭運動,不像過往傳統社運組織由上而下的動員,強調一致的意識形態和認同作為號召,而是透過網際網路與社交媒體的訊息擴散與中介動員,形成水平式的串連。面對這種新型態的網絡化社會運動,Bennett & Segerberg(2013)提出連結性行動(connective action)概念,強調個人化行動框架的重要性,以及組織在這些新型態社會運動中扮演的不同角色。本研究以2013年苗栗大埔農地徵收一案作為本地的連結性行動個案,觀察社交媒體上的浮現社群和既有的社運組織之連結,探討線上與線下參與者之串連如何使此案成為眾所關注的社會抗爭事件。

      本研究採取複合式研究方法進行資料蒐集與分析,研究場域包括線上社交媒體與線下田野觀察,並訪談實際參與者。研究發現,在2013年苗栗大埔事件中,透過社交媒體的訊息擴散與動員參與,一波又一波的訊息擴散累積為下次的動員能量,號召更多的個別行動者參與;再者,社運組織作為一個連結平台,讓線上社交媒體的議題社群,有機會與在地抗爭者共同參與活動,並捲動不同社運組織之間的連結,形成社運組織「網絡的網絡」的協作圈。
    In the 2013, residents of Miao-li Da-pu fought for their living right against the government. They organized a series of protest by mobilizing people through social media. This was one of the several high-profile networked social movements in recent years.

    Adopting “the logic of connective action” from Bennett & Segerberg (2013) as the conceptual framework, this study examines the online and offline social networks of activist organizations during the protest events of Miao-li Da-pu.

    This analysis indicates that the protest’s information flows on the social media may recruit more individuals to participate the protest. Moreover, the organizations enabled “the network of networks”, which is linked to the networks belonging to different organizations. The role of organization in the protest is not only to mobilize the resources but also an enrolling platform to connect various individuals and local residents to work together.
    Reference: Allan, S. (2013). Citizen Witnessing. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
    Atton, C. & Hamiliton, J. F. (2008). Alternative Journalism. Sage: London.
    Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and beyond: From production to produsage. Peter Lang.
    Bruns, A. (2005). Gatewatching: Collaborative online news production. Peter Lang.
    Bruns, A. (2012). How long is a tweet? Mapping dynamic conversation networks on Twitter using Gawk and Gephi. Information, Communication & Society, 15: 1323-1351.
    Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739-768.
    Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge University Press.
    Bennett, W. L., Segerberg, A., & Walker, S. (2014). Organization in the crowd: peer production in large-scale networked protests. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 232-260.
    Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J.G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 249-258). New York: Greenwood.
    Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. John Wiley & Sons.
    Castells, M. (2009). Communication Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Chadwick, A. (2007). Digital network repertoires and organizational hybridity. Political Communication, 24(3), 283-301.
    Diani, M. (1992). The concept of social movement. Sociological Review, 40: 1-25.
    Diani, M. & McAdam, D. (Eds.). (2003). Social movements and networks: Relational approaches to collective action: Relational approaches to collective action. Oxford University Press.
    Lievrouw, L. (2011). Alternative and activist new media. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
    Foot, K. A., & Schneider, S. M. (2002). Online action in campaign 2000: An exploratory analysis of the US political Web sphere. Journal of broadcasting & electronic media, 46(2), 222-244.
    Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    García Albacete, Gema M. and Theocharis, Yannis and Lowe, Will and van Deth, Jan W., (2013). Social media mobilisation as a prompt for offline participation? Analyzing Occupy Wall Street Twitterers’ offline engagement with the movement. Working papers, Social Science Research Network, Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2228231 orhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2228231
    Gladwell, M. (2010). Small change. The New Yorker, 4: 42-49.
    Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American journal of sociology, 78, 1360-1380.
    Krzywinski M, Birol I, Jones S, Marra M (2011). Hive Plots — Rational Approach to Visualizing Networks. Briefings in Bioinformatics.取自:http://www.hiveplot.com (上網日期:2015/3/16)
    Papacharissi, Z., & de Fatima Oliveira, M. (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on# Egypt. Journal of Communication, 62(2): 266-282.
    Poell, T., & Borra, E. (2012). Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr as platforms of alternative journalism: The social media account of the 2010 Toronto G20 protests. Journalism, 13(6): 695-713.
    Park, H. W. (2003). Hyperlink network analysis: A new method for the study of social structure on the web. Connections, 25(1), 49-61.
    Putnam, Robert D. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy: 65-78.
    Rheingold, Howard. (2008). Using participatory media and public voice to encourage civic engagement, In Civic Life Online: Learning How Digital Media Can Engage Youth. Edited by W. Lance Bennett. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 97–118.
    Rheingold, Howard. (2012). Net smart: How to thrive online. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
    Shirky, C. (2010). Cognitive surplus: How technology makes consumers into collaborators. Penguin.
    Tarleton, J. (2000). Protesters Develop Their Own Global Internet Service. Nieman Reports, 53-55.
    Thorson, K., Driscoll, K., Ekdale, B., Edgerly, S., Thompson, L. G., Schrock, A., & Wells, C. (2013). YouTube, Twitter and the Occupy movement: Connecting content and circulation practices. Information, Communication & Society, 16(3), 421-451.
    Tilly, C. (1995). Popular contention in Great Britain, 1758-1834. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press.
    Van Aelst, P. & Walgrave, S. (2004). New media, new movements? The role of the Internet in shaping the ‘anti-globalization’ movement. In Wim Van de Donk et. al. (Eds.) Cyberprotest: New media, citizens and social movements. London: Routledge.
    Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. (1997). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
    McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American journal of sociology, 1212-1241.
    Maireder, A., & Ausserhofer, J. (2013). Political discourses on Twitter: networking topics, objects and people. Twitter and Society, New York, Peter Lang, 291-341.
    Meraz, S., & Papacharissi, Z. (2013). Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #Egypt. The international journal of press/politics, 1940161212474472.
    Morozov, E. (2011). The Net Delusion: How not to liberate the world. Penguin UK.
    Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide. Cambridge University Press.
    Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Mapping twitter topic networks: From polarized crowds to community clusters(2014, Feb 2nd), Pew Research Centre, from:http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/02/20/mapping-twitter-topic-networks-from-polarized-crowds-to-community-clusters/)
    Rioters of the world unite: They have nothing to lose but their web cameras(2008, Dec 18th), The Economist, from: http://www.economist.com/node/12815678

    林鶴玲、鄭陸霖(2001)。台灣社會運動網路經驗:一個探索性的分析。《臺灣社會學刊》。25:111-156。
    何明修(2005)。《社會運動概論》。台北:三民。
    李亦園 (1989)。〈自然觀察研究〉。《社會及行為科學研究法》。台北:東華書局。
    陳順孝(2012 )。〈網路社會動員的繼往開來: 反國光石化運動的社會科技基礎和行動策略演化〉。《傳播研究與實踐》, 2(1): 21-36。
    劉嘉偉、張玉佩(2012)。〈原住民與傳播科技:網路對於蘭嶼反核廢之社會資本的動員與凝聚〉。《傳播管理學刊》。13(2):1-25。
    黃惠英(2014)。〈差異性連結策略與流動性網絡之建構:以大埔農地徵收事件為例〉。《資訊社會研究》。27:30-57。
    翁秀琪、許傳陽、蘇湘琦、楊韶彧、葉瓊瑜(1997)。《新聞與社會真實建構-大眾媒體、官方消息來源與社會運動的三角關係》。台北:三民書局 。
    楊國斌(2009)。〈悲情與戲謔:網路事件中的情感動員〉。《傳播與社會學刊》。9:39-66。
    蔡培慧(2010)。〈真實是一場社會行動:反思台灣農村陣線行動與組織〉。《台灣社會研究季刊》。79:319-339。
    蔡培慧(2014年7月18日)。〈大埔事件大事記〉,《公民行動影音記錄資料庫》。取自:http://www.civilmedia.tw/archives/20140 。
    傅士哲、謝良瑜譯(2004)。《六個人的小世界》,台北,大塊文化。(原書Watts, D. J. [2004]. Six degrees: The science of a connected age. WW Norton & Company.)
    蕭遠(2011)。〈 網際網路如何影響社會運動中的動員結構與組織型態?-以台北野草莓學運個案研究〉。《臺灣民主季刊》 。 8(3) : 45-85。
    盧沛樺(2012)。〈鄉民全都「讚」出來:初探反國光石化運動的青年網路實踐〉。國立政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
    吳傑沐、王志弘、徐珮君(2010年8月4日)。〈「田沒了」大埔婦仰藥亡〉,《台灣蘋果日報》。
    〈「一戶都不能少」 大埔徵地案「最後戰役」〉(2012年8月5日)。《台灣蘋果日報》。
    〈大埔人護家園〉(2012年8月8日)。《台灣蘋果日報》。
    內政部營建署(2012年7月24日)。〈內政部都市計畫委員會第 784會議紀錄〉。臺北。
    內政部營建署(2012年8月 7日)。〈內政部都市計畫委員會第 785會議紀錄〉。臺北。
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    新聞研究所
    101451005
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101451005
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[新聞學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML115View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback