CollectiveActionDilemmaswith

IndividualMobilizationthroughDigitalNetworks

W.LanceBennett

AlexandraSegerberg

UniversityofWashington

StockholmUniversity

alex.segerberg@statsvet.su.se
lbennett@u.washington.edu

EuropeanConsortiumforPoliticalResearchGeneralConference,
PotsdamSeptember10122009.
Panel:DigitalPathsofPoliticalIndividualization:DoesTechnologyMatter?

Pleasedonotquotewithoutpermissionoftheauthors.

Severalbroadtrendsareassociatedwiththeglobalizationofmanysocialand
economicissuessuchaslabormarketinequities,tradepractices,andclimate
change.First,governmentcontrolovermanyissueshasbecomebothcomplexand
dispersed,reflectingtheneedforsocialpressuretobeappliedtodiversenational
andtransnationalgoverninginstitutions,aswellastocorporationsthathaveused
globalbusinessmodelstogainautonomyfromgovernmentregulation.Second,
bothwithinnationsandtransnationally,politicalissuesareinterrelatedinways
thatmaycutacrossconventionalsocialmovementsectors:laborandhuman
rightsoftenoccupycommonagendas,andeconomicdevelopmentinitiativesmay
alignwithenvironmentalcauses.Theresultingorganizationalincentivesfor
greaterflexibilityindefiningissuesandproteststrategiesaremagnifiedbyathird
factorinvolvingthegrowingautonomyofindividualsinlatemodernsocietiesin
termsofseparationfromtraditionalbasesofsocialsolidaritysuchasparties,
churches,unions,andothermassorganizations.
Onesignofthisgrowingindividualautonomyisthetendencytoengagewith
multiplecauses(oftenindependentofpartiesorconventionalpolitical
organizations)byfilteringthosecausesthroughindividuallifestyles(Giddens
1991;Bennett1998;BeckandBeckGernsheim2002;Putnam2000;Inglehart
1997;Micheletti2003;dellaPorta2005).Theorganizationofindividualactionin
termsofmeaningsassignedtolifestyleelements(brands,leisurepursuits,friend
networks)resultsinpersonalizationofsuchthingsasclimatechange(inrelation
topersonalcarbonfootprints),laborstandards(inrelationtofashionchoices),or
consumptionoffood(associatedwithfairtradepracticesortheslowliving
movement).Thepersonalfilteringofissuesandrelatedpoliticalactivitiesmakes

individualsownnarrativesimportantelementsofthemobilizationprocess,often
requiringorganizationstobemoreflexibleintheirdefinitionsofissuesandopen
tointeractionswithindividualswhomayresistformalmembershipbutjoinin
selectedactions(Bimber,Flanagin&Stohl,2005;Flanagin,Stohl&Bimber,2006).
Thisgrowingdemandforpersonalizedrelationswithcausesand
organizationsmakesvariousdigitalmediatechnologiesincreasinglycentraltothe
organizationandconductofcollectiveaction.Digitaltechnologiesenableloosely
tiedrelationsbetweenindividuals,causes,andorganizations,whileoftengiving
individualsconsiderableautonomyinmakingchoicesabouthow,when,where,
andwithwhomtoaffiliateandact.Theindividualcontrolofsuchconnectionsto
thetermsofactioncreatesthepotentialformorediverseandpersonalized
identificationsthanmaybecharacteristicofthecollectiveframingof
identificationscommonlyassociatedwithsocialmovementsbasedonmore
organizationcenteredandleaderdrivencollectiveaction(dellaPorta,2005).
Thesepolitical,organizational,personal,andtechnologicalqualitiesof
contemporaryprotestpoliticsmakecollectiveactionspacesbothrichand
complex.Thespacesinwhichindividualizedcollectiveactionoccursmaybe
geographicallydispersed,rangingfromstoreswherepoliticallymotivated
shoppingoccurs,topublicprotestralliesaddressingthesamelabor,
environmentalortradeissues.Theconnectionsthatenableindividualstonavigate
thesespacesandfindmeaningfulwaysofbehavinginthemcanbedenseand
chaotic,asconsumersmakeindependentchoicesaboutwhichfoodsorfashionto
buybasedonlifestyleconsiderationsinvolvingimpactsonclimate,working
conditionsinfarofffactories,orsustainablelocalcommunitieswherecoffeeor

cacaoaregrown.Atthesametime,thoseindividualchoices,alongwithdecisions
aboutjoiningprotestactions,maybeaffectedbyhowmovementorganizations
communicateabouttheircauses,policyagendas,andcampaignstovarioustarget
audiences.Bothlevelsoforganizationalcoordinationandindividualparticipation
invariouscollectiveactionspacesmaydependonusesofsocialtechnologiesthat
linkorganizationalagendaswithindividuallyexpressivecommunicationand
actionopportunities.Theanalysisofwebsites,facebookpages,twitterfeeds,email
lists,andviralflowsofimagesandmessagesmayhelpexplainhowvarious
organizationssharepoliticalspaceswitheachotherandwithindividualswho
selectivelychoosewhichorganizationalsignalstotakeupand,inturn,sharewith
theirownsocialnetworks.
Thispaperexploresthesedigitalpathsofpoliticalindividualizationby
analyzingthewaysinwhichdigitalmediasitesthataimtomobilizeactionforthe
sameeventsorcausesmayinviteverydifferentformsofindividualorcollective
identification.Sinceitisrelativelyeasytocreateavarietyofsocialtechnologies,
fromindividualblogsandvideostosophisticatedorganizationandcoalitionsites,
thereistypicallyadensenetworkofdigitalmediasurroundingmosteventsand
causes.Tosimplifytheinitialtheorizingofhowthesemedianetworksmayhelp
organizecollectiveaction,wewilllookprimarilyatdifferentcommunication
strategiesemployedbybroadorganizingcoalitionsengagedinprotest
organization,withparticularfocusonwhetherthenarrativesofferedtomotivate
protestaremoreopentoindividualswritingtheirownpersonalscriptsfor
engagement,ormorelikelytoimposecollectiveactionframesintheformof
ideologicalnarrativesaboutthenatureofaproblemanditspreferredresolution.

Observationsofdifferentkindsofcollectiveaction,fromantiwarprotests
(Bennett,Breunig&Givens,2008),toglobalizationcampaigns(Bennett2003),to
fairvs.freetradepolicies(Bennett,Foot&Xenos,forthcoming)leadustothink
thathighlydiversestrategiesforindividualmobilizationareofteninplaywithin
thesameevents.Asaresult,finergrainedanalysisofcollectiveactionmayreveal
multiple,andoftenhighlypersonalizednarrativesbeingexpressedinthesame
physicalandvirtualspaces(Bennett,2005).Thisrecommendsdevelopingmodels
thatlookbeyondorganizationsorcoalitionsinisolationinordertobetterassess
thearrangementsamongorganizations,coalitionsoforganizations,and
individualswithintheactionspace.Towardthisend,weproposetheconceptofan
ecologicalcollectiveactionspace(ECAS)whichdrawsontheworkofMongeand
othersdiscussedbelow(e.g.,MongeandContractor,2003;Schumate,Fulk&
Monge,2005)inordertoemphasizetheinterrelationsofdifferentactorsina
particularpoliticalspace.Weareinterestedinpatternsofcooccupationorco
habitationwithinthesespaces,andtheecologicaleffectstobefoundintheways
actorsadapttosharingthecollectiveactionspace.Inparticular,thewaysinwhich
differentcollectiveactionconfigurationsentailgroupsandindividualsforming
coalitions,expressingconflict,ormerelybeingcopresentcanshapethe
coherence,impact,andprospectsforfutureactions.Indevelopingtheseideas,we
willdiscusstheecologicalspacesharedbytwodifferentumbrellacoalitionsatthe
2009G20Londonsummitprotests.Inparticular,welookatthevariousdigital
narrativetracesofferedbyorganizationstoindividualswhomightbeshoppingfor
pathwaystopersonallycomfortableengagement.

CollectiveActionandSharedActionSpaces

LargescalemobilizationssuchastheBattleofSeattlein1999,theglobalantiIraq
warprotestsin2003ortheprotestsabouttheglobalfinancialcrisisatthe2009
G20Londonsummitallsuggestsimilarpropertiesofacollectiveactionlandscape
markedbypoliticalindividualization.Thecharacteristicsoflatemodernsocieties
sketchedearlierappeardistinctlyinthebackgroundoftheseprotests,accounting
fortheirscale,flexibilityandrecurrence,andalsofortheirlackoforganizational
residue,sustainedthematicfocus,orclearrecruitmentofindividualsto
organizationledcauses.
Protestsinthiseraofmorerelaxedindividualaffiliationhaveoftenbeen
impressiveintermsofspeedofmobilization,scopeofmultipleissues,andshort
termfocusingofattentiononthoseissues.Thesecapacitieshavebeenlinkedwith
thepotentialofsocalledloosetienetworksfacilitatedbydigitaltechnologies.
Organizationscertainlycontinuetoplayacentralroleincoordinating
contemporaryprotests(Fisheretal.,2005).Yet,theincreasinginclination
towardsindividualizedparticipationneverthelesscreatesmobilizationissuesfor
conventionalsocialmovementorganizationsthatmayformerlyhavebeen
strongerintermsofmembership,memberdisciplineandcollectiveactionframing
ofmessages.Asnotedearlier,someorganizationsconsequentlystrivetomobilize
individualsthroughmorepersonalizedappealsthatenableautonomous
expressionandinvitepersonalnetworkactivationwithinthecontextof
coordinatedcollectiveaction.Bimber,Flanagin&Stohl(2005)havetermedthisan
organizationalmovetowardfosteringentrepreneurialrelationswithindividual

supporters.Therelaxationofparticipationrequirementsmaysimultaneously
inviteindividualstousetheirowntechnologyresourcestorecruittheirownsocial
networks.Forexampleresearchonthemassiveglobalantiwardemonstrations
ontheeveoftheIraqinvasionsuggeststhatdigitallymanagedinterpersonal
networksplayedanimportantroleincontributingtothespeedandscaleofthe
mobilizations(Bennett,BreunigandGivens,2008).
Atthesametime,theveryfeaturesofcontemporaryprotesteventswhich
havebeensoimpressiveraisekeyconcernsaboutthepoliticalqualitiesofthe
collectiveactiontypicalofapoliticallyindividualizedsociety(Bennett,2003).
Whiledigitaltechnologymayfacilitateorganizing,criticsdoubtwhetherloose
multiissuenetworksthatareeasytooptinandoutofcangeneratethe
commitment,coherenceandpersistenceofactionrequiredtoproducepolitical
change(Tilly,2004;cf.Bennett,2005).However,theveryqualitiesthatmakethe
communicationbasednetworksvulnerabletolackoffocusmayalsolendthem
certainkindsofdurability,ascanbeseenforexampleinthepermanent
campaignswhichpersistbeyondthecontrolofparticularorganizations(Bennett,
2003).Thequestionmostcommonlyputisnonethelesswhetherdigitally
networkedprotestactionultimatelycanbeidentifiedwithcollectiveactionand
politicsofthekindproducedbyanapparentlyunifiedandsustainedcollectivity,
especiallygiventhefirmlyestablishedhistoricalimportanceof(theappearance
of)unityincollectiveidentityandclaimmakingindemocraticcontexts(Tilly,
2004;McAdametal.,2001).
Ourperspectiveencouragesmovingbeyondtheseeitherorviewpointsin
ordertoseethatlooseorganizationalaffiliationswithindividualsmayormaynot

necessarilydiminishthepolicyorthematicfocusoftraditionalorganizations.
Enablingindividualstoengageonpersonaltermsmaystillresultinmobilizations
thatdemonstratestrengthofpubliccommitmenttotheircauses.Atthesametime,
organizationsandcoalitionssendingdifferentkindsofnarrativesignals(from
individuallyopentoideologicallyclosed)maybecarefulabouthowtheyco
occupytheecologicalcollectiveactionspace.
TheECASideaalsoenablesustoshiftfromanorganizationaltoanindividual
perspective.Choicesamongdifferentkindsofnarrativesofinvolvementmaycome
fromvariousnetworkpoleswithintheprotestspace.Thus,individualsmayhave
variouschoicesabouthow,where,andwhentoentertheECAS,whetherthrough
digitalinteractionswithselectsites,attendingparticulardemonstrations,avoiding
others,orsendingtwitterfeedsfromthemidstofabattlewithpolice.The
increasedcapacitytopersonaliseonesplacewithintheECASmayenhancethe
messagecoherenceandaudiencereachofcollectiveactioninsomecasesand
contributetonoiseandlackofattentioninothers.
Oneelementthatseemsimportantforunderstandingtherangeofoutcomes
fromdifferentcollectiveepisodesishowthevariousnetworksoperatingina
spacecoordinatethenarrativesignalsofferedtopotentialparticipants,and
whethertheycooperateintheplanningofactivitieswithinthespace.Inthecase
oftheG20protests,thetwodominantcoalitionssentverydifferentmessagesto
potentialparticipants,yetmanagedtofindpointsofthematiclinkage.TheG20
ECASwasfurtherorganizedbythechoiceofdifferentdaysonwhichtostagevery
differentsortsofdemonstrations.

Thisapproachtocollectiveactionavoidsanalysesthatpositopposing
organizationalpolessuchasconventionalorganizationswithcentralized
hierarchiesandmembershipstructuresasoneextreme,anddistributednetworks
withdynamicparticipantaffiliationsastheother.Flanagin,StohlandBimber
(2006)usefullymovebeyondpolarizedpositionsbyintroducingtheconceptofa
collectiveactionspaceasananalyticaltoolforcategorizingorganizations
accordingtotheindividualsexperienceoftheorganizing.Theyenvisagethe
collectiveactionspaceasdefinedbytwodimensionsofrelationshiptoan
organization:themodeofinteraction(runningfrompersonaltoimpersonal)and
themodeofengagement(runningfromlowtohighexpectationsofindividual
responsibilityencouragedintheparticipant).Thisallowsthemtocompare
centralizedorganizationswithorganizationswhichinvitesomedegreeof
entrepreneurialresponsibilityintheirparticipants.Atthesametime,particular
organizationsmaymovethroughthisspaceacrosstimeorstrategicepisodes,
sometimesofferingimpersonalmodesofinteractionandsometimesenabling
morepersonalizedrelationsamongindividuals,aswhenahybridorganization
suchasMoveonsolicitsemailstopoliticiansinonemomentofaprotestsequence,
andtheninvitespeopletomeeteachotherinlocalitiestocoordinateadifferent
formofaction.Inprinciple,particularindividualsmayalsomovethroughdifferent
sectorsofthespace,behavingmoreorlessentrepreneuriallyandmoreorless
personallyinrelationtodifferentorganizations.Thiswayofconceivingcollective
actionspacecapturesimportantvariationswithinandbetweenorganizational
effortstomobilizeandcoordinateaction.

OurnotionofanECASmovesinasomewhatdifferentdirectionbysetting
multipleorganizationsandindividualsinmotionastheyengageinparticular
activitiestogether.ThisbuildsontheperspectiveofBimber,FlanaginandStohlby
introducingtwootheraspectsofthinkingaboutcollectiveaction.First,insteadof
arrayingdifferentorganizationsabstractedfromtheirissueorevents,wepropose
lookingathowmultipleorganizationalmodesofcommunicatingwithindividuals
playoutinthesameeventspace.OuranalysisoftheG20showshowdifferent
organizationscommunicatedaboutthesameprotesteventsbyofferingvarious
opportunitiesforpersonalandimpersonalinteractions(sometimesemanating
fromthesameorganization),andvaryingdegreesofindividualentrepreneurism
orautonomyinrelationswithorganizations.Second,wewouldliketothinkabout
howthesepatternsofcommunicationaffectthewaysinwhichorganizations,
coalitions,andindividualsnegotiate,willfullyornot,thequalitiesoftheaction
spacewhichtheymutuallyconstitute(e.g.,messageconsistencyornoise;
participationincommonactions;schedulingandspacingofseparateactions,
establishingstrongorweaknetworkties,etc.).Thisapproachbridgesthe
perspectiveonorganizationalrelationswithindividualssetoutbyBimber,
FlanaginandStohlandthebodyofworkdiscussedinthenextsectionbyMonge
andothersontherelationsamongorganizationsincomplexecologies.

AnEcologicalPerspectiveonCollectiveActionSpaces

Thispaperdevelopstheideaofanecologicalcollectiveactionspaceasastep
towardsconceivingthecomplexdynamicsofcollectiveactionintheindividualized
participationlandscape.Asdiscussedabove,wetakeourstartingpointinthe

10

conceptofthecollectiveactionspacedevelopedbyFlanagin,StohlandBimber
(2006),butpushitinthedirectionofanecologicalnetworkperspective.Inthis
movewedrawbroadlyonrecentworkbyPeterMongeandcolleagueswhich
tracesanevolutionaryapproachtocommunicationnetworksinorganizational
communities.Theydotwothings:theyintegrateanevolutionaryperspectiveinto
networkanalysesandanetworkperspectiveintostudiesoftheevolutionof
organizationalcommunities(MongeandContractor,2003;Monge,Heissand
Margolin,2008;BryantandMonge,2008;MongeandPoole,2008;Shumate,Fulk
andMonge,2005;cf.Powelletal.,2005).Bothpointsareimportantforthe
presentnotionoftheecologicalcollectiveactionspace.
Thecommunityecologicalperspectiveattheheartoftheirargumentfocuses
ontheprocessescreatingchangeinhumansocialsystems.Ittakesa
comprehensiveviewofsuchprocesses,positingthecoevolutionoftheactors,
theirrelationstoeachotherandtheenvironmentofresourceswithinwhichthey
act(Hawley,1950;Astley,1985;Aldrich,1999;BaumandSingh,1994).Monge
andcolleaguesfurtheremphasizethattheseprocessestakeplaceonmultiple
levels,andthatinfluencerunsbothupwardsanddownwardsinaheterarchical
dynamic(Kontopolous,1993).Theapproachthusshiftsfocusawayfrom
snapshotsofsingleentitiesandsingledimension,singlelevelrelationships
towardsthedevelopingdynamicsinvolvedinthecomplexmixtureofdiverse
actorsinadefinedareaovertime.
Mongeandcolleaguesinfusetheirevolutionaryapproachwithanetwork
perspective.Theyarguethatafullunderstandingoftheevolutionof
organizationalcommunitiesrequiresinsightintonotonlyorganizationsbutalso

11

theirnetworks,sincenetworkscanthemselvesbelocalesofevolutionary
processes(cf.DiMaggio,1994;Powelletal.,2005).Links,notjustnodes,are
subjecttotheevolutionaryprocessesofvariation,selectionandretention
(Campbell,1965).Accordingly,therearelinkandnetworkspecificdimensionsof
fitness,thepropensityofarelationshiptosustainitself.Moreover,anevolutionary
perspectiveonnetworksrevealsarelationalcarryingcapacity,thenumberof
linkagesacommunitycansupport,whichisdistinctfromthemorefamiliar
carryingcapacityrelatedtotheresourcenichessupportingacommunity.Findings
suggestthattherelationalandresource(ormember)carryingcapacitiesarenot
linearlyrelated.Networksbringanevolutionarydynamicoftheirownintothe
comprehensiveecologicalpicture.Theapproachinthisaspectmovesawayfrom
concentratingsolelyonactorsinisolation.
Drawingonthiswork,theecologicalcollectiveactionspaceishereconceived
asanecosystemofactors,theiractionsandtheirenvironmentinwhichthereare
multipleprocessesofadaptationandcoadaptation.Thecollectiveactionspaceof
theG20protests,forexample,isconstitutedbytheinteractionofdiverseentities
atmultiplelevels.Theseentitiesincludebothoppositionalprotestactorsand
actorsthatarethetargetsofprotest:umbrellacoalitions,organizationsand
individualparticipants,butalsoforexamplemediaorganizations,corporations,
governmentandintergovernmentalorganizations.Importantly,thesespacesare
constitutedasmuchbyrelationsbetweenactorsastheactorsthemselves.Monge
andcolleaguesstresstheevolutionarydynamicsrelatedtocommunication
networks.

12

Whilespecificepisodesofcollectiveactionsuchasprotestsoftenreflect
longdevelopingecologicalrelationsamongvariousactorsandnetworksofactors,
theyalsohaveimmediacy,focus,andsituatedrationales.Weproposethatwhat
typicallyconnectstheevolvingrelationsamongparticipantstotheiraction
choicesinparticularepisodesarethenarrativestheyfashiontoprovideboth
consistencyofidentitiesovertimeandspecificscriptinginthemomentsinwhich
collectiveactionsoccurandplayout.Inthecaseofcontemporaryprotestswe
suggestitmayberevealingtoexaminespecificallythenarrativenetworksthatare
digitallyfusedintothecollectiveactionspace.Sheddinglightonthesenetworks
promisesinsightintothecohabitationoftheprotestspace,includingthe
ecologicaleffectsofsharingthespace.

NarrativesandNetworkConnectivityintheECAS
Narrativeelementsembeddedinthedigitalandphysicalartefactsofprotest
spacesaresignalstoandfromindividualparticipantsandorganizationsabout
whoislikelytotakewhatkindsofactionandwhoitmaybemoreorless
comfortabletoassociatewith.Inthenextsectionwediscussthepresenceofa
loosethematicconsensussomethingofamasterframeintheG20protests
aroundthebroadideathatgovernmentsandfinancialinstitutionsshouldPut
PeopleFirstinaddressingthefinancialcrisis.Yetthereweretwoverydifferent
clustersofnarrativedrivenactionpositionedunderthatratherbroadand
relativelyunobjectionableslogan.TheG20Meltdowncoalitiongatheredmore
radicalorganizationsalignedwithastoryofrapaciouscapitalismthanhad
characteristicallyruinedthelivesofworkingpeopleingreedypursuitofprofit.

13

Manyslogansemanatingfromthismasternarrativecalledfortheeradicationof
capitalismitself.Protestersassociatedwiththisnetworkclustergatheredaround
familiarsloganssuchasEattheRich.Bycontrast,thePutPeopleFirstcoalition
memberorganizationsweretypicallymoremainstreameconomicdevelopment
andsocialreliefNGOsthatgatheredaroundthestorythatthepoliticaland
bankingsystemshadfailedtobehaveresponsibly,andneededtobereformed.The
maincoalitionwebsitewassolooseinitsnarrativerequirementsthatindividuals
wereencouragedtotelltheirownstoriesinpersonalcommunicationemailedto
theauthorities.
Eachbroadcoalitionorganizedsubstantiallydifferentkindsofprotestevents
ondifferentdaysandindifferentplacesinLondonduringtheweekbeforethe
2009G20meeting.Thecorestoryelementsdistinguishingthetwonetworks
enabledorganizationsandindividualstosortthemselvesoutfairlycleanly,and,
perhapsmoreimportantly,toplanprotestactivitiesseparatedintime,spaceand
dramaticscripting.Perhapsnotsurprisingly,thedifferentnarrativesignalssent
bythetwonetworksintheG20ECASalsocuedthemainstreampresstoreport
dramaticallydifferentstoriesaboutthetwodifferentdaysofprotest:coverageof
thePutPeopleFirstdemonstrationcenteredonresponsiblecitizensengagingin
peacefulexpressionofdemandstoauthorities,whiletheG20Meltdowncoverage
portrayedviolentdemonstratorsdisruptingpubliclifeandclashingwithpolice.
Asnarrativesmayhelporganizeverydifferentkindsofactivitiesinthe
collectiveactionspace,fromprotestactionstomediacoverageofthem,theyalso
providemeansoftrackingandassessingthestrengthsofnetworktiesintheECAS.
Forexample,wewillseethatalthoughthesurfaceimpressionsofthetwo

14

dominantG20protestcoalitionsindicatedstarkandopposingdifferences,other
elementsofthestoriesparticularlysecondaryprotestthemesaboutthe
relationshipbetweeneconomicpoliciesandtheenvironmentcreatedpointsof
coordinationacrossthelargeactivistnetworks.Indeed,finergrainedanalysisof
networktiesbasedonwebcrawlsreportedbelowindicatefargreateroverlapin
networkmembershipsthanonewouldhaveguessedeitherbyinspectingthetwo
coalitionsites,orbyreadingthedisparatenewsaccountsoftheprotests
organizedbythedifferentcoalitions.Wesuspectthattheselooselytiednetworks
enabledcoordinationofdifferenteventsandactionswithintheECAS.
Thisanalysissuggeststhatcommunicationlinksestablishedbydigitalmedia,
andnarrativecuesinparticular,areintegraltotheformationandmaintenanceof
networksthathelpchannelactioninanECAS.Narrativesordereventsinto
evolvingwholes,andpresentabasisforselfidentityandactionbymakingsense
ofpast,presentandprojectedevents.Theylocateactorsinrelationtoaction
(Polletta,1998;Boje,1991,1995;Czarniawska,1998).Intheindividualized
collectiveactionlandscapeanimportantcontingentofthesearedigitally
inscribed.Organizationsundertakenarrativeworkforexamplewhenusingtheir
websitestosignaltootherorganizations,thegeneralpublicandpotential
participantsaboutwhothey,theiraffiliatesandtheirparticipantsare.IntheG20
ECAS,thePutPeopleFirstcoalitionhelpedindividualsdeveloptheirown
narratives,whetherbysharingtheirconcernsinanopenforumordistributing
theirownObamaizedlikenessandsloganbywayofawidgetofferedonthePut
PeopleFirstwebsite.TheG20Mcoalitioninitiallyseemedtoembracesharing
participantsbylistingschedulesandcontactdetailsforactivitieshostedbyother

15

organizations.Buttheyneverthelessofferedfewopportunitiesforindividualsto
engagedirectlywithanyoftheissues:whiletheindividualisencouragedtoroam
betweenmemberorganizationsandsponsoredactivities,sheisnotinvitedto
producemessagesonherown.Tothecontrary,theG20Msitecontains
comparativelyradicalanticapitalismmessagesthatarenotofferedupfor
individualnegotiation.
Intheseways,clustersoforganizationsformaroundbroadumbrella
organizations,andnarrativesignalingbecomesanimportantmeansof
demarcatingkeynetworkproperties.Organizationsmayforexamplealter
networkboundariesbyadjustingstoriesoroutlinkstoincludeordeflectallies
(Shumate,FulkandMonge,2005;Bennett,Foot&Xenos,forthcoming).Inmost
complexspaces,noonenarrativepermeatesthespaceasawhole.Instead,
patternsemergethatstructure(impede,enhance,raisethevolumeof)flowsof
information,identificationandactionacrossnetworks.
Narrativenetworksaremadeupofdiverselinkssuchasindividual
testimonialsaboutwhytheyparticipateinacause,slogansthatmaybeshared
acrossdifferentnarrativecommunities,andicons,logos,ordramaticprops
aroundwhichstoriesmaybeconstructed.Asnotedabove,oneofthebroad
framingslogansusedintheLondonG20demonstrationswasPutPeopleFirst,
whichwasalsothenameofoneofthetwoprominentcoalitionwebsites.This
slogantraveledfarinabroadprotestnetworkwithdifferentgroupsand
individualscraftingdiversestoriesaroundit.Inthismanner,storiesconstitute
dynamicpointsofconnectionorcontentionbetweenactors.Thesenarrative
relationshipscanmakeorbreaknetworkconnections,revealingstructural

16

networkpropertiessuchascloseness,betweeness,andcentrality(Bennett,Foot&
Xenos,forthcoming).
Elementsfromwhichnarrativescanbeconstructed,bridged,andsharedcan
befoundinpublicdigitalformssuchasorganizationalwebsites.Fragmentsor
sloganizedversionsofnarrativesmayalsobedisplayedinpublicasmottoes,logos
ortrademarksonphysicalobjects(e.g.,fairtradetrademarksongoods).Actual
protesteventsalsobecomephysicalspaceswheredigitaltracesarefilledin.
Placards,chantedslogansandtheatricalperformancesbringtheseelementsout
intothestreets,whiletheeventsthemselvesmayyieldprominentdigitalmotifs
suchasphotos,videosortwitterfeedspostedfromdemonstrations.Publicly
inscribednarrativeelementsofthesekindsmayfunctionasnonhumanactors,or
actants(Latour2005),intheformationofnetworks.Allofthissuggeststhat
digitallinksandothertracesareanalyticallyusefulinthattheycanbeobserved,
measuredandtrackedovertime.
Thedigitaltracesofnarrativesshouldnotberegardedmerelyaspassive
residueofdeepercommunicationflowingthroughnetworks.Theactiveongoing
constructionofnarrativesbecomesimportantintheconstitutionofnetworks
themselves(BennetandToft,2009;Bennett,Foot&Xenos,forthcoming;Pentland
andFeldman,2007).Actorsnegotiatethechallengeofsharingspacebothby
makingadjustmentstoconvergeonsharednarrativesandbyseekingdistance
(evenseekingothercollectiveactionspaces)whenthoseadjustmentsprove
impossible.Organizationscanbeseennegotiatingnarrativesforexamplewhen
signalingontheirwebsitestopublicizecauses,affirmaffiliationandtorecruit
participants.Guidelinesforidentificationandactioncanbefoundinstatements

17

aboutwhoweareandwhatwedoundertabssuchasAboutUsandMission
Statement.Statementsabouttheenvisagedparticipantandherroleinthespace
maybeequallysignificantgiventhatorganizationssharespacenotonlywith
otherorganizationsbutwithindividualparticipantsaswell.Recruitingindividuals
withopportunitiestoexpresstheirpersonalnarrativesthroughinvitationstoDIY
participationmaybeastrategicmoveonthepartofanorganization.Atthesame
time,thisstrategyofinvitingDIYparticipantstoinscribetheirownpersonalized
narrativesonthewebsitemayblurthestrategicedgeoftheorganizationalmeta
narrative(cf.Polletta1998).
Whileitishardtoimagineexhaustivedocumentationandanalysisofspaces
thataresobroadlydefined(DiMaggio,1994),weaimtousethefollowingkindsof
digitaltracesaswindowsonthosespaces:websitecontent,protestimagesand
icons,downloadsofslogansandparaphernalia,messagestoindividuals,
interactivefeaturesthatmayengagethoseindividuals,andpatternsoflinksand
notableabsencesoflinksamongorganizationsontheirwebsites,twitterfeedsor
indymediareportsfromparticipantsindemonstrations,andotherdigital
materials.
Intherestofthispaperweseektoexploreandillustratesomeofour
theoreticalpropositionsinacasestudyoftheprotestsatthe2009G20London
summit.Wefocusontwoumbrellacoalitions.Thesecanbeanalyzedasnarrative
hubstoexaminesimilaritiesanddifferencesinthesignalstheysendtopotential
participantsinproposedG20actions.Althoughtheysharedthegeneralframeof
PutPeopleFirst,thetwocoalitionsorganizedaroundverydifferentnetworking
narrativesproducingconsiderabledifferencesintermsofwhotheylinkedto,

18

whatprotestrolesandmessagestheyofferedtoindividuals,andultimately,how
theydividedthephysicalprotestspacesintheCityofLondonintodifferentkinds
ofeventsoccurringatdifferenttimesandlocations.

ProtestingtheGlobalFinancialCrisis:TheG20MeetinginLondon
Theworldstwentyleadingeconomicnations,theG20,metinLondononApril2,
2009amidstaglobalfinancialcrisis(http://www.g20.org/)i.Theirannounced
intentionwastoaddressthegreatestchallengetotheworldeconomyinmodern
timesthroughcommonactionstorestoreconfidence,growth,andjobs,repair
thefinancialsystemandbuildaninclusive,greenandsustainable,recovery.
(http://www.g20.org/Documents/finalcommunique.pdf).ii
TwolargeprotestcoalitionschallengedtheG20overpastpoliciesthatcreated
thecrisisandfuturepoliciesthatmightresolveitinmorejustandequitableterms
forhumansontheplanet.Thecoalitionsdifferedconsiderablybothin
compositionofgroupsandprotesttactics.ThePutPeopleFirst(PPF)coalition
wasdescribedasacivilsocietycoalitionofmorethan160developmentNGOs,
tradeunions,andenvironmentalgroups(BBC,2009;Wikipedia,2009)thatstaged
amarchforJobs,JusticeandClimateonMarch28,drawinganestimated35,000
protesters.TheG20Meltdown(G20M)coalitiongatheredmoreradicalanarchist
andanticapitalistgroupsforaseriesofFinancialFoolsDayactivitiesonApril1,
theeveoftheG20meeting.Thoseactivitiesincluded:aFourHorsemenofthe
Apocalypsestreettheatremarchofanestimated5,000peoplefromtheoldgates
ofLondontotheBankofEngland;aClimateCampencampmentof2,0003,000in
theheartofLondon;asmallerStoptheWarcoalitionantiwarmarch;andan

19

alternativepublicG20summitfeaturingvariousacademics,activistsand
politicians(Wikipedia,2009).
Cooccupyingtheprotestspace
Althoughthetwocoalitionssharedthesamegeneralprotestspace,theydiffered
fairlyclearlyintermsofmessages,tactics,relationships,andusesoftimeand
space(includingcyberspace).Oneresultwastopartitionthespaceintodifferently
definedactionsondifferentdays,attractingdifferentlysized,clad,andscripted
collectivitiesofparticipants.Differencesinthetoneandscriptingofactions
organizedbytherespectivecoalitionsappearedinnewsframingsoftheevents.
ThemainBBCstoryontheprotestsclearlyassignedgreaterlegitimacytothePut
PeopleFirstdemonstration(includingreportingthecoreprotestmessageframe)
initsleadstoryontheMarch28activities:
ThePutPeopleFirstallianceof150charitiesandunionswalkedfrom
EmbankmenttoHydeParkforarally.
SpeakerscalledonG20leaderstopursueanewkindofglobaljustice.

Policeestimate35,000marcherstookpartintheevent.Itsorganiserssay
peoplewantedthechancetoairtheirviewspeacefully.
Protestersdescribeda"carnivallikeatmosphere"withbrassbands,piercing
whistlesandstereosblastingmusicastheslowpacedprocessionweaved
throughthestreets.(BBC2009a)

TheG20MFinancialFoolsDayactiononApril1receivedaverydifferenttone
ofcoverageastheBBCreportedontheviolenceagainstbanks,notthemessageof
theprotesters:
Demonstratorslaunchedmissilesandforcedtheirwayintothebankafter
clasheswithpoliceinthecapital.AbranchofHSBCalsohadwindowsbroken.
Climatechangeactivistspitchedtentsandantiwarcampaignersheldarally.

20

Therehavebeen63arrests,withsomepoliceandprotestersinjured.Later,a
mandiedaftercollapsing,policesaid.(BBC2009b)

Activistsowneventcoverageinindymedialondonincludedthemoreradical
messageframesfavoredbytheMeltdowncoalitionandreportedtheviolenceas
policeinstigated:
ThedaystartedwithabigbannerreadingSmashCapitalismhungnearTower
BridgeandaCriticalMassbikeprotest.Despitehystericalmediacoverage
thousandsofpeopletooktothestreetsoccupyingthesquareoutsidetheBank
OfEngland.TheG20MeltdownPartysawpeoplefloodthearea,someavoiding
attemptsbypolicetopreventthemreachingtheBank.Amidstanescalating
policeoperationbannerswerehung,graffitisprayed,effigiesburntandRBS
invadedtochantsof"WhoseBank,OurBank!".
Withriotpoliceencirclingthousandstherewererepeatedattemptstopush
throughpolicelinesandindiscriminatepolicebatonchargesleadingtomany
injuries,severalserious.Laterintheeveningitemergedthatamanhaddied
aftercollapsinginsidethepolicecordonsneartheBankofEngland.Later
identifiedasIanTomlinson,itwasunclearwhathadhappenedtohim
[Eyewitnessstatement]
Onemajorbreakoutfromthepolicelinessawscufflesspreadingacrossthe
cityasthestreetswerefilledwithprotestorsandpolicerushingtoblockthem.
Horses,dogs,andcsspraywereallused.DespitethestreetsoftheCityof
Londonbeingoccupiedbyprotestorsverylittlepropertydamageoccurred
withthesurroundingshopsleftuntouchedandHSBCgettingonewindow
smashed.(indymedialondon2009a).

Whatisclearisthatthetwocoalitionsmanagedtooccupythesamecollective
spaceatdifferenttimesandindifferentways,withoutmuchsharingofissue
framing,proteststrategiesordemonstrationtactics.Onlyatthemostgenerallevel
didtheyconvergeonbroadmessagethemesofJobs,JusticeandClimate,echoing
thethemesoftheG20itself.However,thedifferencesinprotestframesweremore
pronouncedthanthesimilarities.Forexample,theMeltdowncoalitionsite(G20
Meltdown2009)emphasizedananticapitalismthemeandechoedthediggers

21

movementof1649inexhortingpeopletotakeoverthecityofLondon.By
contrast,thePutPeopleFirstsitedisplayedafarmoremoderatemessageurging
reformofbanking,financeandtradesystems:Ourfuturedependsoncreatingan
economybasedonfairdistributionofwealth,decentjobsforallandalowcarbon
future.(PutPeopleFirst,2009)
Thetwocoalitionsalsosignaledtheirdifferencesintheimagesthatanimated
theirwebsites.ThePPFsitefeaturedabanneroffeetwearingrathermiddleclass
footwearwalkingtogether,asshowninFigure1.Bycontrast,theG20Msite
featureddarkcloudswithablackhorseandridercomingfromtheBankof
England,showninFigure2.

Figure1:PutPeopleFirstcoalitionhomepage

22


Figure2:G20Meltdownhomepage.

Beyondstarkdifferencesintheimageryandpoliticaltoneofthetwosites,the
twocoalitionsclearlydividedtheECASbyclaimingsponsorshipandtakingcharge
ofpublicityforthedifferentdaysofaction.ThePPFcoalitionsponsoredtheMarch
28march,andtheG20MsitefocusedontheFinancialFoolsDayactivitieswith
stormthebanksimagessuchasthoseinFigure3.

23

Figure3.ImagesofApril1eventsavailablefordownloadfromtheG20M
site.

24

Theprotestspacewasfurtherdelineatedbythedifferencesinmutual
recognitionofeachothersevents.ThePPFmadenomentionoftheApril1
actions,whiletheG20MlistedtheMarch28marchplannedbyPPFandprovided
linkstothevariousorganizers.ThispatternoftheG20MlinkingtothePPF
activitiesbutnotreceivingreciprocallinksinreturnisaninterestingdynamicthat
suggeststhecarewithwhichthemoremainstreamcoalitionprotectedthe
legitimacyofitsprotestspace.Atthesametime,thelinkagefromtheG20coalition
tothemoremainstreamcoalitionsuggestsarespectfortheboundariesand
definitionsthatthePPFputontheECAS.Thisasymmetricalnegotiationofthe
spacewasfurtherreflectedinthedifferingbehaviorsofG20Mgroupswhocrossed
overtojointhepeacefulmarchonMarch28,whilelaterstormingtheBankof
EnglandonApril1.
InitsownreportingontheMarch28action,thePPFsiteemphasizedthe
broadjobs,justiceandclimatethemesandthepeacefulnatureoftheirmarch:

OurthankstoeveryonewhoturnedoutfromallovertheUKandevenfurther
afieldfortodaysPutPeopleFirstMarchforJobs,Justice,Climate.
Thepoliceestimatedthirtyfivethousandofusmarchedpeacefullythrough
Londontoday.Thatsastrong,clearsignal,callingforaradicalbreakwiththe
failuresoftheunfetteredfreemarket.
Faithandwomensgroups,tradeunions,developmentandclimate
campaignerswereallmixedtogetherononeofthemostcolourful
demonstrationsinyears.Notevensleetshowersandheavyrainputoffthe
thousandswhomadeitthefourmilesthroughcentralLondontoHydePark,to
hearthespeakers,filmsandmusic.
Thanksespeciallytoeveryonewhocoveredtodayseventsontheinternetso
peopleallroundtheworldhavearecordofwhathappenedinLondontoday.
CheckourTwitterbuzzpage,whereyoullfindsomelinkstogreatvideos,
photosandtextreports.(PutPeopleFirst,2009)

25

SamplephotosfromthePPFsiteshowedtheimagesofpeace,joyanddiversityin
thecrowd,asillustratedinFigure4.

Figure4.PPFimagesoftheMarch28events.

AlthoughfactionsoftheG20McoalitionjoinedinthesamePPFmarch,the
narrativeperspectiveusedtodescribetheirparticipationcontrastedsharplywith
thePPFcoverageabove.Evenwhentheyoccupiedthesamephysicalspace,the
twocoalitionsintroducedstarklydifferentimagesandnarrativestodefinetheir
positionswithinit.Figure5illustratesinindymediacoverageoftheMarch28
event,usingverydifferentpicturesandtonethanfoundinthePPFcoverageofthe
sameevent(indymediaservedasaprimarynewsandpublicityoutletforthe
G20Mcoalition.)TheheadlineontheMarch28protestinindymediaUKread:
TheSummerofRageStartsHereCallfromLondonAnarchists,asillustratedin
Figure5.

26


Figure5.IndymediacoverstheMarch28eventsfromtheG20Meltdown
perspective.
Thus,evenwhenbothcoalitionsoccupiedthesamephysicalspaceand
nominallyusedthesamecollectiveactionframe,itwasnotwiththesame
meaningsattached.AlthoughtheindymediaphotoinFigure5wascaptionedwith
PutPeopleFirstAntiG20demonstrationthestorytalkedaboutPutting
workingclassangerfirstandtookaswipeatunionswhomarchedwiththePPF
factionsonMarch28:
Puttingworkingclassangerfirst
TherecentwildcatstrikesattheLindsayOilRefinerysawworkerstakeaction
forthemselves,withoutunionbacking.Thousandsofworkersacrossthe
countrywalkedoutinsympathystrikesapracticestilloutlawedunderthe
Thatcheriteantitradeunionlaws(indymedialondon,2009)

27

ItseemsclearthatthetwocoalitionspartitionedtheECASverydifferentlyaround
contrastingnarrativestrategies.Thenextsectionshowshowthesedifferent
narrativedesignswereofferedtoindividualstohelpwiththeirchoicesabouthow,
when,where,andwithwhomtoaffiliatewiththeprotests.

Differencesinnarrativesignalstoindividuals

Digitalmediahavebeenatthecoreofprotestcoordinationatleastsincethe
adventofindymediacoverageandcellphonecoordinationofdemonstrationsin
thebattleofSeattleduringtheWTOprotestsin1999.Bothofthemaincoalition
sitesintheG20ECAScontainedvariousoptionsforvisitorstofolloweventswith
socialnetworkingtechnologiessuchasTwitterandFacebook.ThePPFsitealso
invitedbloggerstocovertheprotestevents.AsoneCNNaccountputit,both
protestersandpoliceusedthesecommunicationtoolstocoordinateactivities:
SocialnetworkingWebsitesaresettoplayacrucialroleinprotestsaheadof
nextweek'sG20meetingofworldleadersinLondonasdemonstration
organizersandpoliceuseTwitterandFacebookaskeysourcesofrealtime
informationandintelligence.
Flyersandpostersfornextweek'sG20Meltdownprotestsurgeparticipantsto
"Stormthebanks!"
MetropolitanPoliceleadershavewarnedthatthecityfacesan
"unprecedented"waveofprotestintherunuptoThursday'ssummittalkson
thestateoftheglobaleconomyandaresettodeployhugenumbersofofficers
tomaintainpublicorder.
Thousandsofprotestersareexpectedtomarchthroughthestreetsthis
Saturdayinarallyorganizedbytradeunionsandleftwinggroups.
Butitisplansbyanticapitalistandenvironmentalprotesterstoconvergeon
theBankofEnglandnextWednesdayApril1fora"massstreetparty"
dubbed"FinancialFoolsDay"thathavepromptedmostconcern.
Theprotest,organizedbyanumbrellagroupcalled"G20Meltdown,"will
featurefourseparate"carnivalparades,"eachledbygiant"Horsemanofthe
Apocalypse"puppets.Aflyerfortheevent,carriestheslogan"Stormthe

28

Banks!"andfeaturesimagesofFrenchrevolutionariesstormingtheBastillein
1789andamannequinofabankerhangingfromanoose.
MarinaPepper,oneoftheorganizersofG20Meltdown,saidthatTwitter,the
bloggingtoolthatallowsshortupdatestobefiled,publishedandreadvia
cellphones,wouldbeusedtocoordinatetheprotestsandwarnparticipants
ofpossibletrouble.
"Intermsofmobilizingpeopleandshiftingthemaround,Twitterwillbeused
nextweek,"PeppertoldCNN."Wecanalsokeeppeopleempowered,because
informationispower."
ButCommanderSimonO'Brien,oneoftheseniorofficersinvolvedinpolicing
securityaroundtheG20,saidsocialnetworkingsiteswouldalsobeakey
areaofourintelligencegathering.(CNN2009)

Althoughbothcoalitionsusedavarietyofdigitalmediatointeractdirectly
withindividuals,thenarrativestransmittedthroughthosemediawerevery
different.ThegroupsintheG20Mcoalitionjoinedaroundmoreradical
uncompromisingmessagesthatgiveindividualslesspersonalfreedomto
negotiatetheirownmeanings.Forexample,theG20Msiteproclaimedthebold
goalofendingcapitalismwiththismanifesto:
Canweoustthebankersfrompower?
Canwegetridofthecorruptpoliticiansintheirpay?
Canweguaranteeeveryoneajob,ahome,afuture?
Canweestablishgovernmentbythepeople,forthepeople,ofthepeople?
Canweabolishallbordersandbepatriotsforourplanet?
Canwealllivesustainablyandstopclimatechaos?Canwemakecapitalism
history?
YESWECAN!(G20Meltdown,2009)

TherewerenoopportunitiesontheG20Meltdownsiteforindividualsto
engagedirectlywiththeseideasorproposetheirownmessages.Eventhough
indymediaservedasanopencommunicationspacefortheG20Mcollectivity,it
didnotcontainmuchdebateaboutcommongoalsorwaysofexpressingthem.The

29

focuswasmoreonactivistaccountsofeventsandpoliceviolence(indymedia
london2009b).
AlthoughthePPFsitecalledforanendtobusinessasusualandproposeda12
pointreformagenda,therewerefewradicalslogansorindictmentsofcapitalism.
IncontrasttotheG20Msite,thePPFsiteofferedindividualsachancetopropose
theirownagendasandsendtheirownmessagestotheG20.AsshowninFigure1,
themostprominentaspectofthefrontpageofthePPFsitewasatextboxinviting
visitorstosendtheirownmessagetotheG20.Inaddition,thePPFsiteinvited
bloggerstoexpresstheirviews.Onebloggeroperatingunderthenameof
legofesto(http://legofesto.blogspot.com/)recreatedaLegosculptureofthe
incidentofpoliceactionresultinginthedeathofabystanderontheblogasshown
inFigure6(thiswaspostedonMay15onWhiteband,whichhostedthePPFblog
http://www.whitebandaction.org/en/g20voice/blog?page=1).Theexampleof
legofestoindicatesthatthePPFprotestspacewasopentoindividualsactingin
waysthatwerepersonallyexpressiveinnarrativeterms,butmayhavehadlittle
programmaticaffiliationwiththePPFcoalitionoritsrelatedorganizations.

30


Figure6:Abloggernamedlegofestorecreatesthedeathofabystander

Inthesevariousways,differentnarrativestrategiesmayhelporganizations
defineandarrangethemselvesinacollectiveactionspaceandhelpindividuals
makepersonalchoicesabouttheiraffiliationsandbehaviorwithinthatspace.It
wouldnotbesurprisingtofindcorrespondingdifferencesintheunderlying
networkrelationshipsamongorganizationsassociatedwithdifferentnarrative
strategies.

NetworkcompositionoftheG20ECAS

Inlightofthedifferencesinprotestnarrativesandthewaytheywere
communicatedtoindividuals,itwouldnotbesurprisingtofinddifferencesinthe
compositionandrelationshippatternsoforganizationsinthetwocoalitions,both
inthestreetsandincyberspace.Themostobviousexpectationisthatthetwo
coalitionswillcontainsubstantiallydifferentsetsoforganizations.Differencesin

31

thegeneralpatternsoforganizationalassociationwereevidentjustbyinspecting
thetwowebsites.TheG20Meltdownsitelistedmostlysmalllocalanarchistand
anticapitalistorganizations(e.g.,RhythmsofResistance,TheLaboratoryof
InsurrectionaryImagination,TheHaringeySolidarityGroup).ThePPFcore
membersconsistedmainlyoflarge,wellestablishednationalNGOsworkinginthe
areasofdevelopment,tradejusticeandenvironment(e.g.,Cafod,Oxfam,
Greenpeace).Themoreinterestingquestionishowthesolidaritynetworksofthe
twocoalitionsareorganized.Whataretheobservablepatternsofgivingand
receivingrecognitionamongtherangeoforganizationsintheG20ECAS?
Givenourlimitedaccesstoparticipantsintheseprotests,wecannotassess
networkrelationshipsinafinegrainedethnographicsense(e.g.,whoregularly
callswhomtocoordinateactions,whatofficialsorboardmembersattend
meetingstogether,whorecommendscontactingwhatorganizationsforwhat
purposes,divisionsoflaboramongpartnerorganizations,etc.).Evenwithfiner
analysis,theexistenceoftwolargeandverydifferentcoalitionscouldmakeit
difficulttofindthepointswherecoordinationofthecollectiveactionspacemay
occurgivenallofthepossiblepathwaysofcontactandavoidanceamongactivists
andorganizations.Inaninitialefforttogainsomepreliminaryunderstandingof
networkstructuresandpointsofpotentialcoordinationamongthesecoalitions,
wecanassessthewaysinwhichrecognitionisgivenorwithheldinoneofthe
mostvisiblewaysincontemporarycollectiveactionspaces:throughtheexchange
oflinksonwebsites.
Inordertofindouthoworganizationspositionedthemselvesinrelationto
eachotherthroughintentionalwebsitelinkages,weconductedwebcrawlsofthe

32

twonetworksusingasetofstartingpointsthateachsitedefinedascoremembers.
ThelistofstartingpointsfortheG20Mcoalitionwasalargeone(63mostlylocal
anarchistandradicalorganizations),takenfromtheWhosWhopageonthe
site.iiiThePPFstartingsetwasmuchsmaller,takenfromthelistoforganizations
authorizedtospeaktothemediaonbehalfofPPF.ivThetworespectivesetsof
URLswereplacedasstartingpoints,orasaseedlistintoIssueCrawler,atool
madeavailablebyRichardRogersattheUniversityofAmsterdam(foradetailed
accountofthistool,seehttp://www.govcom.org/scenarios_use.htmland
Rogers2004).TheIssueCrawleridentifiesnetworksofURLsbasedonlinkagesto,
from,andamonganoriginallistofURLsonthebasisofcolinkanalysis.We
followedRogers(2004)recommendedprocedureforderivingasolidarity
networkbysettingthereachofthecrawlattwoiterationsbeyondthestarting
pointlinks.Wealsosetthecrawlertodrilltwopagesdeepintothecrawledsites
beyondthehomepage,withtheintentofcapturingthemostprominentlinkages.
ThisistheprocedurethatRogersrecommendsforderivingasolidaritynetwork
thatincludeslinksamongorganizationsthatextendbeyondparticularissuesinto
supportnetworksforlargerprinciples(e.g.,economicjustice,environmental
justice,socialjustice,etc.)
Inclusioninthenetworkwasdeterminedbycolinking.Acolinkissimplya
URLthatislinkedtoorfromatleasttwoofthestartingpointsforthatiteration.
Thus,supposewebeginwithSiteA,SiteB,andSiteC,andcrawlsoftheinandout
linksforeachturnedupsiteD,whichhaslinkstoorfromsitesAandC.SiteD
wouldbeincludedinthenetworkascolinkingwithtwoofthestartingpoints.
SupposethatsiteDalsolinkstositeE,whichsuppliesaninlinktoSiteB.Under

33

thismethod,siteEwouldnotbeincluded.Thecrawlervisitedmorethantwo
thousandURLsineachcrawl,andrenderedamapandacolinkmatrix(including
directionalityoflinks)consistingofthetop(97PPFand99G20M)sitessharing
colinksineachnetwork.ThemapsofthetwonetworksareshowninFigures7
and8.Thesizesofthenodescorrespondtotherelativenumbersofinlinksasite
receivedfromotherorganizationsinthenetwork.

Figure 7: Core solidarity network of the G20 Meltdown coalition, with nodes
sized by relative numbers of inlinks organizations received from the network

34

Figure8:CoresolidaritynetworkofthePutPeopleFirstcoalition,withnodes
sizedbyrelativenumbersofinlinksorganizationsreceivedfromthenetwork.

Severalgeneralizationsaboutthesenetworksimmediatelybecomeapparent
fromthecrawls.First,manyofthesmallerlocalorganizationsfromwhichwe
launchedthecrawldropawayfromthecorenetworkoftheG20Mcoalition,as
moreprominentnationalorganizationsestablishthemselvesinmoretightly
linkedrelationshipswitheachother.Bycontrast,mostofthePPFstartingpoints

35

remainedprominentinthecorePPFnetwork.Wherejustoneofthefourteen
startingpointsdroppedoutofthePPFnetwork,fully30oftheoriginal63failedto
appearintheG20Msolidaritynetwork.Thereareseveralpossibleexplanations
forthissomewhatsurprisingresult.OnepossibilityisthattheG20consistedof
primarilysmalllocalanarchistorganizations,anditmaybethatanarchistsand
localradicalorganizationsdonotexchangelinksascommonlyaslargerNGOs
workingforacommoncause.Thismaybebecauselocalorganizationsareinmore
personalleveleverydaycontact,orevenbecausetheyfearpolicesurveillanceof
suchdisclosuresofinformation.Thereasonsfortheevaporationofsubstantial
numbersoftheG20coalitionmembersexchangingsolidaritylinksmeritfurther
exploration.WhateverthecausesfortheevaporationofsomanyoftheG20M
groupsintheresultingsolidaritynetwork,theappearanceoflargenumbersof
PPFnetworkorganizationsintheG20Mcrawlmayhelpilluminatethree
importantissues:coalitiondominanceintheECAS,coordinationoftheco
occupationoftheECAS,andrelationshipsbetweenmoreopenandpersonalizedor
closedandcollectivizedpoliticalnarrativesandthepropertiesofnetworks.
CoalitiondominanceintheECAS.ThefactthattheG20Mcoalition
organizationsexchangedrelativelylowlevelsofpublicrecognitionintheirweb
linksprovidesaroughindicatorofthegreaterdominanceofthePPFnetwork.The
corenodesofthePPFnetworkshowninFigure8aremostlyestablished
developmentandeconomicjusticeorganizationsandtheirpolicycampaignsites,
includingCafod(CatholicAgencyforOverseasDevelopment),Fairtrade
Foundation,TradeJusticeMovement,ChristianAid,alongwithseveral
governmentalorganizationsthatthoseNGOsengageinpolicynegotiations,

36

includingtheUKDepartmentforInternationalDevelopment,theUnitedNations
andtheWorldBank.Thissuggestsbothamoreestablishednetworksupporting
thePPFcoalitionthatlikelytranscendsthisparticularG20collectiveaction
episode.OtherresearchonsocialandeconomicjusticenetworksintheUK
(Bennett,Foot&Xenos,forthcoming)showsasimilarpatterninvolvingmanyof
thesameorganizationssurroundingissuesoffairtradeanddevelopmentpolicy.It
seemsthatthisnetworkoflarge,wellresourcedNGOsmaycooperateinmany
protestandpolicyinitiatives,andhavedevelopedsomethingofacommonbrand
fortheiractions.
AsafurthermeasureofPPFnetworkdominanceandprestige,itisinteresting
thatthemoreradicalG20McoalitionsitelinkedintothedominantNGOnetwork,
butthisrecognitionwasnotreciprocatedinlinksreturnedtositesthatwere
exclusivetotheG20Mcoalition.Infact,eventheG20Mcoalitionsitewasnoteven
inthenetworkmapofthePPFnetwork.BycontrastthePPFcoalitionsiteranked
number8inmostinlinksreceived(with21)intheG20Mnetwork.
ThisdominanceofthePPFcoalitionintermsofnetworkprestigewas
reflectedinvariouswaysinthedefinitionoftheECAS,including:thepublicitythe
G20MgavetothePPFmarch,withlittleornoreturnpublicityfromthePPFforthe
G20MFinancialFoolsDayactivities);thedecisionofG20MgroupstojointhePPF
marchbuttoavoiddisruptingthepeacefultone;andthemarkeddifferenceinthe
framingofnewscoverageofthedifferentcoalitionactivities,bothbytheirown
reportsandinthemainstreampress.Thisimbalanceinthedominanceandmutual
recognitionbetweenthetwocoalitionnetworksmayshedlightonarrangements
formutualoccupationandaccommodationwithintheECAS.

37

NetworkcoordinationoftheECAS.Theblatantpoliticaldifferencesadvertised
onthetwocoalitionsiteswouldmakeitsurprisingifthetwoprotestcoalitions
sharedthesamesolidaritynetworks.Yetitisalsointerestingthattheycontained
asmuchoverlapasouranalysisshows.Inthinkingaboutwaysinwhichnetworks
mightbeconfiguredsurroundingcollectiveactionspacescontainingdistinctly
differentorganizationalcoalitionsorclusters,thereseemtobethreegeneral
possibilities:networksmayformintomutuallyexclusiveandevenpolar
structures(thispatternistypicalofpartisanblogospheres);theymaymergeinto
fairlycloseandoverlappingrelations(thismaybetypicalofastroturfcampaigns
inwhichsponsoringorganizationsmayseektoappearseparateordistantfrom
organizationstheycovertlysponsor);ortheymaysharesomeperipherallinkages
whichprovidepointsofcommunicationandcollaboration.Thislastpatternseems
besttocharacterizetheG20ECAS.
Reflectingthepoliticaldifferencesbetweenthetwocoalitionsthehighest
prestigeorganizations(measuredintermsofinlinks)inthePPFnetworkdidnot
rankhighestinprestigeintheG20Mnetwork,andviceversa.Yettherewasalso
importantoverlapinnetworkmembership.Ifwecomparethetop20mostlinked
tositesinthetwonetworks,fully14ofthetop20sitesineachnetworkwere
different.The6organizationsthatappearednearthecentreofbothnetworks
were:Oxfam,FriendsoftheEarth,PeopleandPlanet,WorldDevelopment
Movement,andStopClimateChaos.Comparingthedifferencesatthecoreofthe
twonetworks,wefind,notsurprisinglythatthemoreprominentnonshared
G20Msitesweremoreradicalandlikelytobefocusedmoreonenvironmental
causes(perhapsreflectingthattheG20Mactivitiesincludedtheclimatecampin

38

thecentreofLondon).Thispatternofsomeoverlap,alongwithclearpolitical
differencesinsolidaritynetworksmayexplainhowitwaspossibletoworkouta
fairlycleandivisionoftheECASspace.Eachcoalitiongavetheotherconsiderable
spacetoconductactivitieswithoutmuchevidentpressuretosharemessages,
protestrepertoires,oreventsponsorshipandcoordination.Atthesametime,
therewereenoughsharedsolidaritylinkstoavoidopenconflictorrejectionofthe
respectiveactions.
Allofthissuggeststhatthedifferentnarrativesthatdistinguishedthetwo
coalitionsarereflectedinboththestructuringofsolidaritynetworksandthe
negotiationofthecollectiveactionspaces.However,itisnotclearwhether
offeringdifferentkindsofnarrativeengagementopportunitiestoindividual
participantsnecessarilyimpactedthecapacityoftherespectivecoalitionsortheir
organizationstoactwithcoherenceorclarityofpurpose.
Individualvs.collectivenarrativesandtheclarityofaction.Athirdinteresting
findingofouranalysisisthatthecoalitionwithfarlooserappealstoindividuals
(recallthePPFhomepageinvitationforindividualstosendtheirownmessagesto
theG20)turnedouttohaveamuchmorecoherentorganizationalnetworkthan
theG20Mcoalitionwithitsmuchstrongercollectivemessagethatofferedlittle
roomforindividualnegotiation.Atthesametime,thePPFmarchproducedafar
larger(35,000)turnoutthantheFinancialFoolsDayactions(5,000).Thissuggests
thatthetendencyofsomesocialmovementorganizationstoshopforsupporters
byinvitingmorepersonalizedconnectionsdoesnotnecessarilyendupweakening
organizationalcapacityornetworkstrength.Theorganizationsatthecoreofthe
PPFnetworkarelargeandwellresourced.And,theymaintainaclearagendaof

39

policygoalsandstrategiestargetinggovernmentandtransnationalorganizations
(recalltheshared12pointprogramthatwaspostedfartherintothecoalition
website).Itseemsthatthebasisofsolidarityrelationsamongorganizationsinthe
PPFnetworkisnotnecessarilyunderminedbythefarloosersignalssentto
individualsinthemobilizationeffort.Conversely,sendingmorefixedcollective
signalstoindividualsdoesnotnecessarilycorrespondtoatighternetworkamong
organizations,aswefoundintheG20Mcoalition.
OneexplanationhereisthatwhilethePPFnarrativewasfarmoreopento
personalizedcommunication,thedigitalspacewascenteredonatightlyknit
groupofcoreorganizations.OrganizationsandactivitiesoutsidethePPFcore(e.g,
organizationslistedintheG20Msite)werenotrecognizedascoconstitutiveof
theactionspace,meaningthatvisitorstothePPFsitewerenotencouragedto
roamabroad.Theindividualsrolewithinthisorganizationallyconstrainedspace,
however,isallthemoreaboutvoicingherownexperiences,reflections,and
concerns.Whilethispersonalizedinputmayhaveblurredthepublicexpressionof
analreadybroadbasicmessage,thenumbersmobilizedbyPPFwereimpressive.

Conclusion

Examiningdigitaltracessuchaslinksamongwebsitesandparticipantaccountsof
theG20demonstrationssuggeststhatPPFandG20Mnegotiatedtheecological
collectiveactionspaceindistinctways.Onagenerallevel,thetwocoalitions
convergedonthebroadthemessuggestedbythesummitmeetingitself(jobs,
justiceandclimate),butdifferentclustersoforganizationsformedaround

40

differentbasicframes,withtheG20MactionsstandingforanticapitalismandPPF
actionsinthespacerepresentingreformcapitalism.
Thecollectiveactionspacewasalsothusdividedbetweenalarge,
resourcerichorganizationnetworkthatofferedindividualsrathereasyand
negotiabletermsofassociationbasedonareformistagenda,andasmaller,less
wellorganizedG20Mclusterthatinvitedlessindividualfreedomofexpression
aroundmoreradicalanticapitalistmessages.Althoughitisclearthatsomesubset
ofindividualscooccupiedthesamespaces,theaccountsofwhattheiractions
entailedandwhattheysignifiedweresubstantiallydifferent,bothintheirown
reportsandinmainstreamnewscoverage.
Therelativeeaseofaccommodatingdifferentorganizationsandaction
narrativeswithinthesamespacemayaccountforthespeedandscaleof
contemporaryprotestpolitics,andflexibilitytomoveacrosstargets,issues,and
venues.Theincreasinglycomplexcontemporarycollectiveactionscenewithits
multipleandshiftingtargetsandactionopportunitiesmayrequirethekindof
mutualaccommodationthatthetwocoalitionsexaminedherewereableto
produce.Ourcasealsoseemsfairlytypicalofapoliticallyindividualizedaction
landscapeinwhichmobilizationoflargenumbersofparticipantsinshortperiods
oftimemayentailsomewhatdiverseopportunitiesforpersonalexpressionwithin
thesameECAS.
Thispaperhasarguedforexaminingsuchcollectiveactionsituationsasan
ecosystemofactors,theirrelationshipsandtheirenvironmentinwhichthereare
multipleprocessesofadaptationandcoadaptation.Examiningwaysinwhich
diverseactorscooccupyanECAShighlightswaysinwhichactorscoadapttothe

41

sharedactionspaceandthenetworksthatsupporttheseadaptations.Froman
ecologicalperspective,digitallyinscribednarrativenetworksplayanintegralrole
inthecohabitationofactorsatboththeorganizationalandindividuallevelsin
contemporaryprotestspaces.
InthecaseoftheLondonsummitprotests,thesedigitaltracesindicatedthat
theumbrellacoalitionsnegotiatedthechallengeofsharingthespaceindivergent
ways.NotonlywerethePPFeventsfarlargerinturnout,buttheinvitationfor
individualstojoinwasfarmoreopentodiversepersonalinterpretationand
engagementthanthecorrespondingtracesontheG20Msite.Itmaybethecase
thatifindividualassociationwithorganizationsisbecomingincreasingly
problematic,sustainedcapacitytoattractindividualidentificationwithcausesand
participationinactionsmayrequirethesortofloosesignalingthatwedetectedin
thedigitaltracesofthePPFcoalitionsite.Bycontrast,theG20Mnarrativespace
wasmorerestricted,buttheorganizationalopportunitiesforaffiliationand
dramaticexpressionweremorenumerousforthosewhomayhaveembracedthe
anticapitalistmessage.
Examiningthedynamicsinanactionecosystemmayhelptracemultiplepaths
throughevents,potentiallycontributingtoabetterunderstandingofconnections
betweenevents,actionsandactorsovertime(cf.Diani2003).Exploringthis
furtherwouldrequirelookingatactionandactorsovertimetoestablishthe
evolutionaryfocusthatourattentiontoasinglecasenecessarilyledustosetto
oneside.Examiningprotestsequencesinvolvingsubsetsofthesameactorsand
issuesmayoffermorecomprehensiveviewsofthecapacityofdifferentecologies
ofactorstoproducesustainedandeffectiveaction.

42

Despiteitslimitationsintheareasofevolutionaryandethnographic
perspectives,thepresentcaseofferssomecorrectivestopossiblemisconceptions
aboutcomplexcollectiveaction.Forexample,weseethatthereisnodeterministic
relationshipbetweenthepersonalizationorcollectivizationofactionnarratives
andthestrengthorcoherenceofthenetworksthatsupportthem.Inaddition,we
seethattheevidentpolarizationofprotestcoalitionsmaynotnecessarilyimply
conflictorlackofcapacitytosharecollectiveactionspaces.Whileourtwo
coalitionsproducedradicallydifferentprotestevents,theywerealsoabletoshare
thecollectiveactionspacewithconsiderabledegreesofcoordinationofactionand
timing.Finally,weseethatdespiteseeminglystarkdivisionsoforganizations
betweenthetwocoalitions,thesurroundingsolidaritynetworkscontained
enoughcommonorganizationalmemberstoaccountforsomeecological
accommodationofactivitiesevenifthecoalitionsthemselvesweremarkedby
starkpoliticaldifferences.

43

AccessedJuly26,2009.
AccessedJuly26,2009.
iii
TheLabourParty(actually,thealternativelaborparty)
TheAlternativeG20Summit
TheLaboratoryofInsurrectionaryImagination
Climaterush
ClimateCamp
Stopthewarcoalition
Campaignfornucleardisarmament
Risingtide
LondonActionResourceCentre
People&Planet
EarthFirst
RadicalAnthropologyGroup
HaringeySolidarityGroup
HackneySolidarityNetwork
LondonCoalitionAgainstPoverty
DayMer
Aluna
TransitionTowns
People'sGlobalAction
HandsoffVenezuela
RadicalActivist
SchNEWS
nobordernetwork
NetworktoEndMigrantandRefugeeDetention
Roadblock
AirportWatch
ClimateCrisisCoalition
PlaneStupid
Transport2000
AirportPledge
Permaculture
IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange
CampaignforNuclearDisarmament
PostCarbonInstitute
CampaignAgainstClimateChange
Greenpeace
ZeroCarbonCity
CorporateWatch
Corpwatch
TheHeatisOnline
TheCentreforAlternativeTechnology
TheWorldAllianceforDecentralizedEnergy
i

ii

44

BiofuelWatch
CarbonTradeWatch
Platform
SimultaneousPolicy
InternationalUnionofSexWorkers
IFIwatchnet
TheLastHours
Socialistworkers'party
Governmentofthedead
Rhythmsofresistance
Barkingbateria
Strangeworks
Peopleandplanet
Whitechapelanarchistgroup
StoparmingIsrael
Anarchistfederation
ClassWar
TheAnthillSocial
ReclaimingSpaces
TheLandisOursCampaign
NewSovereignty
PeopleinCommon
Project2012
theStudentOccupation

iv
*ActionAid,AnjaliKwatra07941371357Anjali.Kwatra@actionaid.organdAsha
Tharoor07912387396Asha.Tharoor@actionaid.org
*CAFOD,PascalePalmer07785950585ppalmer@cafod.org.uk
*FriendsoftheEarth,HenryRummins07761601666
henry.rummins@foe.co.uk
*GCAP,IreneNditiru07543362751irene.ndiritu@whiteband.org
*JubileeDebtCampaign,JonathanStevenson07932335464
*NewEconomicsFoundation,RuthPottsruth.potts@neweconomics.org
*OxfamGB,JonSlater07876476403JSlater@oxfam.org.uk
*Progressio,JoBarrett07940703911jo@progressio.org.uk
*SavetheChildren,RosieShannonr.shannon@savethechildren.org.uk07768
801854/07831650409
*StopClimateChaosCoalition,SarahJenkinson07766682624
*Tearfund,JonathanSpencer07767473516Jonathan.Spencer@tearfund.org
*TUC,LizChinchen02074671248/07778158175media@tuc.org.uk
*WaronWant,PaulCollins07983550728PCollins@waronwant.org
*WorldDevelopmentMovement,KateBlagojevic07711875345
Kate.Blagojevic@wdm.org.uk
*WorldVisionUK,SophiaMwangi07725372864
sophia.mwangi@worldvision.org.uk

45


References

Aldrich,Howard(1999).OrganizationsEvolving.London:SagePublications.
Astley,W.Graham(1986).TheTwoEcologies:PopulationandCommunity
PerspectivesonOrganizationalEvolution.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,
Vol.30(2):224241.
BBC(2009a).G20demonstratorsmarchinLondon.March28.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7968721.stm.AccessedJuly26,
2009.
BBC(2009b).PoliceclashwithG20protesters.April1.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7977489.stm.AccessedJuly26,
2009.
Baum,JoelA.C.,andJitendraV.Singh.(1994).EvolutionaryDynamicsof
Organizations.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.
Beck,Ulrich,andElisabethBeckGernsheim(2002).Individualization:
institutionalizedindividualismanditssocialandpoliticalconsequences.
London:SAGE.
Bennett,W.Lance.(2003).CommunicatingGlobalActivism:Strengthsand
VulnerabilitiesofNetworkedPolitics.Information,Communication&
Society.6(2):143168.
Bennett,W.Lance.(2005).SocialMovementsbeyondBorders:Organization,
Communication,andPoliticalCapacityinTwoErasofTransnational
Activism.InDonatelladellaPortaandSidneyTarrow(eds.)Transnational
ProtestandGlobalActivism.BoulderCO:Rowman&Littlefield:203226.

46

Bennett,W.Lance,Breunig,Christian&Givens,Terri.(2008).Communicationand
PoliticalMobilization:DigitalMediaUseandProtestOrganizationamong
AntiIraqWarDemonstratorsintheU.S.PoliticalCommunication25:269
289.
Bennett,W.Lance,Foot,Kirsten&Xenos,Mike.(Forthcoming).Narrativesand
NetworkOrganization:AComparisonofFairTradeSystemsinTwo
Nations.JournalofCommunication.
Bennett,W.L.&Toft,A.(2009).Identity,technologyandnarratives:Transnational
activismandsocialnetworks.InP.N.Howard&A.Chadwick(Eds.)The
HandbookofInternetPolitics.NewYork:Routledge:246260.
Bimber,Bruce,Flanagin,AndrewJ.,andCynthiaStohl.(2005).Reconceptualizing
CollectiveActionintheContemporaryMediaEnvironment.Communication
Theory,15:389413.
Boje,DavidM.(1991).TheStorytellingOrganization:Astudyofstoryperformance
inanofficesupplyfirm.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly36:106126.
Boje,DavidM.(1995).StoriesoftheStorytellingOrganization:Apostmodern
analysisofDisneyandTamaraland.AcademyofManagementJournal,
38(4):9971035.
Campbell,Donald.(1965).VariationandSelectiveRetentioninSocioCultural
Evolution.H.R.Barringer,G.I.Blanksten,R.W.Mack(eds.)SocialChangein
DevelopingAreas:AReinterpretationofEvolutionaryTheory,Cambridge
MA:Schenkman:1948.

47

CNN(2009).Protesters,policegoonlineinG20battle.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/03/26/g20.protests.social.ne
tworking/index.html.AccessedJuly26,2009.
Czarniawska,B.(1998).ANarrativeApproachtoOrganizationStudies.Thousand
Oaks,CA:Sage.
dellaPorta,Donatella.(2005).MultipleBelongings,FlexibleIdentitiesandthe
ConstructionofAnotherPolitics:BetweentheEuropeanSocialForumand
theLocalSocialFora.InDonatelladellaPortaandSidneyTarrow(eds.)
TransnationalProtestandGlobalActivism.Boulder,Colo.:Rowman&
Littlefield:175202.
Diani,Mario.(2003).NetworksandSocialMovements:Aresearchprogramme.In
MarioDianiandDougMcAdam.2003.Socialmovementsandnetworks:
relationalapproachestocollectiveaction.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
DiMaggio,PaulJ.(1994)TheChallengeofCommunityEvolution.InJoelBaumand
JitendraV.Singh.1994.EvolutionaryDynamicsofOrganizations.NewYork:
OxfordUniversityPress.
Flanagin,AndrewJ.,Stohl,CynthiaandBruceBimber.(2006).Modelingthe
StructureofCollectiveAction.CommunicationMonographs.73(1):2954.
Fisher,Dana,KevinStanley,DavidBermanandGinaNeff.(2005).HowDo
OrganizationsMatter?MobilizationandSupportforParticipantsatFive
GlobalizationProtests.SocialProblems52(1):102121.
G20Meltdown.(2009).http://www.g20meltdown.org/AccessedApril1,2009.

48

Giddens,Anthony.(1991).ModernityandSelfIdentity:SelfandSocietyintheLate
ModernAge,Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress.
Hawley,Amos Henry. (1950).HumanEcology:ATheoryofCommunityStructure,
NewYork:Ronald.
indymedialondon.(2009a).G20directaction:April1st.
http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/943. Accessed July 26, 2009.
indymedialondon.(2009b).
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/03/425262.html.AccessedJuly
26,2009.
Inglehart,Ronald.(1997).ModernizationandPostModernization:Cultural,
EconomicandPoliticalChangein43Societies,Princeton:Princeton
UniversityPress.
Kontopoulos,KyriakosM.(1992).Thelogicsofsocialstructure.Structuralanalysis
inthesocialsciences,6.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Latour,Bruno.(2005).ReassemblingtheSocial:AnIntroductiontoActorNetwork
Theory.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
McAdam,Doug,Tarrow,Sidney,andCharlesTilly.(2001).DynamicsofContention,
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Micheletti,Michele.(2003).PoliticalVirtueandShopping.NewYork:Palgrave.
Monge,Peter,&Contractor,Noshir(2003).TheoriesofCommunicationNetworks.
NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

49

Monge,Peter,Heiss,BettinaandDrewMargolin.(2008).CommunicationNetwork
EvolutioninOrganizationalCommunities.CommunicationTheory18:449
477.
Monge,PeterandMarshallScottPoole.(2008).Theevolutionoforganizational
communication.JournalofCommunication,58(4):67992.
Pentland,BrianT.andMarthaS.Feldman.(2007).NarrativeNetworks:Patternsof
TechnologyandOrganization.OrganizationScience,18(5):781795.
Polletta,Francesca(1998)."ItWasLikeaFever..."NarrativeandIdentityinSocial
Protest.SocialProblems,45(2):137159.
Powell,Walter,White,Douglas,Koput,Kenneth,andJasonOwenSmith.(2005).
NetworkDynamicsandFieldEvolution:TheGrowthofInterorganizational
CollaborationintheLifeSciences.AmericanJournalofSociology,110(4):
11321205.
PutPeopleFirst.(2009).http://www.putpeoplefirst.org.uk/.AccessedMarch28,
2009.
Rogers,Richard.(2004).InformationPoliticsontheWeb.Cambridge,MA:MIT
Press.
Shumate,Michelle,Bryant,AlisonandPeterMonge.(2005).Storytellingand
Globalization:TheComplexNarrativesofNetwar.Emergence:Complexity
andOrganization,7(34):7484.
Tilly,Charles.(2004).SocialMovements,17682004.Boulder,CO:Paradigm.
Wikipedia.(2009).2009G20Londonsummitprotests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_G20_London_summit_protests.AccessedJuly
26,2009.

50