The Existence of Social Movement Organization(SMO) &Comparison of Collective and Connective Action in the Digital Era ---- an Analysis of 15-M Movement in Spain

Updata:01-01-1970

Source:
By:Author(s)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/mmpp.v2i3.1849

Abstract:

Social movement organizations (SMOs) have been performing a significant role in terms of gathering like-minded civil individuals with common interests during social movements. Stepping into the digital era, the social media becomes prevailing in transforming people’s lifestyles. This essay will discuss the 15-M Movement in Spain to explore the transition of SMO’s position from conventional social movements to those in the digital era in the light of collective action logic and connective action logic. With the phenomenon that SMO itself sometimes is the original source of problems to trigger social movements, it is reasonable to see the decreasingly important SMO with the successful example of the 15-M Movement to engage over 60 cities in Spain and avoid the “free ride” problem via completely excluding brick and mortar organizations.

References:

[1] McCarthy, John D., Mayer N. Zald. Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American journal of sociology, 1977, 82(6), 1212-1241. [2] Morris, Aldon, Cedric Herring. Theory and research in social movements: A critical review, 1984. [3] Bennett, W. Lance, Alexandra Segerberg. The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge University Press, 2013. [4] Olson, Mancur. The logic of collective action. Harvard University Press, 2009, 124. [5] Chorev, H.. The spring of the networked nations:Social media and the Arab Spring. The Levantine Review, 2012, 1(2), 120-139. [6] Anduiza, Eva, Camilo Cristancho, José Sabucedo.The political protest of the outraged in Spain: what’s new, 2011. [7] Tilly, Charles. Contentious choices. Theory and Society, 2004, 33(3-4), 473-481. [8] Benkler, Yochai. The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press, 2006.

Tags: