The Logic of Connective Action by Bennett & Segerberg (2012) - Article

After the economical world crisis, the leaders of the 20 leading economy countries (G20) have been holding a couple of meetings. These meetings have always met with protest, whatever the location of the meeting. One of the meetings was held in London and environmental activists, anti-capitalists and non-governmental organizations (NGO) sponsored actions across multiple days. The NGOs that were included where among others Oxfam, Save the Children and Friends of the Earth. The launched the Put People First (PPF) campaign, which promoted public mobilization against the harms to environment and social elements caused by business. This campaign asked for an economy that is based on the fair distribution of wealth and a low carbon future. 35000 people marched through the streets of London. This protest was also WUNC: worthiness (embodied by different organizations), unity (orderliness of the event), numbers and commitment. However, governments didn’t really listen to the protestors and the protests continues. Citizens protested against their governments. Some of the protests operated without the involvement from conventional organizations. An example of this is the protest of 15M in Spain. This involved a mass mobilization in 60 cities. This organization kept unions, political parties and political organizations out. Some civil society organizations supported 15M, but they stayed in the background. It surprised many people that 15M could mobilize so many people and to become stronger over time and use online media. With the help of a survey, it was shown that the protest of 15M different in a couple of ways from normal protests: people in other protests recognized the organizations involved, while many people in 15M didn’t recognize them, not many organizations of the 15M protest offered membership possibilities, while other protests had many organizations one could enlist with and the organizations associated with 15M had a mean age of 3, while the organizations of the other protests had a mean age range from 10 to 40 years. M15 also received high levels of WUNC.

These successful protests have gotten a broader public engagement because of their use of digital media and because they are more personalized. Simple political messages can nowadays be easily shared on social media. The use of network action digitally, has been termed digitally networked action (DNA). The writers of this article want to know how these varieties of collective action work. How are they organized, how are they sustained and when are they effective? In order to answer this, two logics of action need to be distinguished: collective action and connective action.

Personal action frames

Group memberships in economically developed countries (post-industrial democracies) have changed because of the pressures of globalization from the 1970s. This has caused a shift in the political and social orientations in younger generations. The DNAs of these post-industrial democracies show similarities in action formation with undemocratic regimes. In both, many disaffected individuals organized collectively through access to technologies. This had an influence on the face-to-face interaction of the protest. There is also a shift from group-based to individualized societies and this goes together with an emergence of flexible ‘weak tie’ networks. These networks enable people to navigate through the changing social and political landscape. The writers think there are two elements of personalized communication that are important in large-scale connective action formation:

1. Political content should consist of easy, personalized ideas.

2. Different communication technologies are needed to enable the sharing of these themes.

Sharing these messages about action kind of organizes the actions itself. The PPF was easy to share with friends that lived near, but also friends that live far away. Things that are easy to imitate and personally adaptable will be easily shared with others. Another name for it is a meme. The PPF protest meme came in newspapers, blogs, Facebook, Twitter and sites on the internet, years after the event. However, not everyone who wants to send a personalized protest theme across national and cultural boundaries will be successful. Political opportunities and the conditions for social adoptions differ in countries and situations. More conventional collective action frames probably need more resources than just communication technologies. Collective action memes need more elaborate packaging to reintroduce them into new contexts, while personal action memes do not. For conventional collective action, it is required that people make more difficult choices and they also need to adopt more self-changing social identities than the DNA based on personal action frames around social technologies. The model of connective action applies to societies in which formal organizations have lost or are losing their grip on individuals and ties to groups are replaced by fluid social networks. The logic of these networks doesn’t need organizational control.

Collective and connective action

Research has shown that the digital media hasn’t completely taken over the role of creating action. There are still many old-fashioned meetings going on. The writers want to know what the differences are between collective and connective actions. The logic of collective action is the better known logic. This type of logic refers to the problem of getting people to contribute to an endeavour that involves the support of a public good and which can be easier attained through a common cause. However, some scientists state that people can’t just act together by sharing a common goal. The contributions of all the people in a group are less noticeable, and because of this, some will free-ride on others. Also, if not enough people join, the efforts of the few are wasted. Individually it is more rational to not contribute. Formal organizations can coordinate people in common action. Connective action networks are more technologically organized and more individualized than collective action networks. The connective action networks don’t require collective identity framing or organizational resources to act effectively. Successful collective action needs different levels of organizational resources. The logic of connective action puts an emphasis on digital media and the role it plays in organizing agents. Some researchers state that when expressive content is shared with others, participation will become self-motivating and the sharing activities will be repeated by others. People feel that taking public action is a form of personal expression. People in the exchange don’t need a shared ideological frame to make a connection. The sharing of personalized ideas is the starting point. The action networks can become bigger quickly, because the personal action frames are easy and digital technology enables the spreading of communication. Networks are not only the building blocks of collective action, they are also organizational structures. There seem to be three large-scale action networks: one collective action logic and tow connective action networks. One of those connective action networks doesn’t have a role for conventional organizations (15M), while the other is a hybrid form in which the conventional organization operates in the background of a protest (PPF). So a distinction can be made:

• Connective action, self-organizing network: there is no or little organizational coordination of action, there is much personal access to different social technologies, the communication centres on inclusive personal action frames, involvements of existing formal organizations is shunned and personal expressions are shared over social networks.

• Connective action, organizationally enabled networks: there is a lose organizational coordination of action, organizations give social technology outlays, there is some moderation of personal expression on social networks, the organization is in the background and the communication centres on organizationally generated person action frames.

• Collective action: there is much organizational coordination of action, communication centres on collective action frames, social networks are organizationally managed, organization uses social technologies to manage and coordinate goals and participation and organization is in the foreground.

A figure of these three networks with their characteristics can be found on page 756 of the article. Ways to analyse the formation of connective action need to be found. This can also aid into seeing whether these action are politically effective. Models that focus solely on collective action can’t account for many elements of protests that have occurred the last couple of years. Some elements can be better understood by connective action, because we are in a digital age. However, connective action models can’t replace the model of collective action.