The difficulties in spreading housing rights discourse in the face of 'right now' pragmatism on Twitter
Social movements work in various overlapping dynamics: in the short term, trying to mobilize the largest number of sympathizers in their actions and in the long term, in a battle to change meanings and cognitive frameworks in a society. This article investigates how the Platform for Those Affected b...
| Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Publication Date: | 2022 |
| Country: | España |
| Institution: | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Repository: | Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| Language: | English |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddd.uab.cat:306058 |
| Online Access: | https://ddd.uab.cat/record/306058 https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.15581/003.35.2.299-311 |
| Access Level: | Open access |
| Keyword: | Housing Rights Collective mobilization Social media Framing theory Ciberactivism |
| Summary: | Social movements work in various overlapping dynamics: in the short term, trying to mobilize the largest number of sympathizers in their actions and in the long term, in a battle to change meanings and cognitive frameworks in a society. This article investigates how the Platform for Those Affected by Mortgages (PAH) uses Twitter in the two spheres above mentioned. The literature referring to collective mobilization explains activism in two complementary logics. A first one, rational, where participants only think about a concrete benefit, and a second, focusing on challenging established beliefs. As complex societies, the media and, more recently, social networks have gained in importance as a space where the legitimacy of these claims are discussed. In this analysis, frame theory has been applied to tweets referring to evictions published at the official account @LA_PAH. Twitter, unlike other social networks, allows quick mobilization to gather activists and stop evictions, a valuable and positive asset. However, it ends up giving a limited image, focused on avoiding evictions, instead of a message to establish housing access as a good that must be guaranteed, outside the market. The extreme cases, those about families including children and elderly, predominate in the posts. This visibility certainly generates empathy but leads to the false feeling that only the most vulnerable citizens are affected. |
|---|