‘It’s Twitter, a bear pit, not a debating society’: A qualitative analysis of contrasting attitudes towards social media blocklists

15Citations
Citations of this article
52Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This study of tweets (n = 2247) explores discussions about a pro-choice blocklist (@Repeal_Shield) used during the 2018 Irish abortion referendum campaign, capturing conflicting interpretations of engagement and political participation. Although qualitative Twitter studies bring methodological challenges, deep readings were needed to analyse arguments in favour and against the blocklist, and to consider what we can learn about users’ expectations of Twitter. Through deductive and inductive coding, opposing perspectives emerge on whether such lists are useful, democratic or regressive, but both sides share normative aspirations for Twitter to serve as a space for healthy debate, even if there is clear tension in how that is best achieved. Blocklists are traditionally cited as a harassment solution, facilitating participation from otherwise-excluded counterpublics. However, @Repeal_Shield demonstrates how this affordance has evolved towards omitting broad spectrums of undesired content, while using blocklists – and being listed – can be a bold political statement in itself.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wheatley, D., & Vatnoey, E. (2020). ‘It’s Twitter, a bear pit, not a debating society’: A qualitative analysis of contrasting attitudes towards social media blocklists. New Media and Society, 22(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819858278

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free