1. Introduction
1.2. Research Purpose
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
source as they not only establish references quicker to various injustices that ordinary people may relate to quicker than text based content, but they also contain images integral to the social media experience (Kharroub & Bas, 2015). Thus, image tweet content analysis will be used to understand the communication patterns of NAPs’ supporters in regard to their identification with the protests, perceived grievances, external blame for those grievances, and efficacy-eliciting strategies and how they changed throughout the season. In addition, image tweets will be analyzed to understand affective responses (both reciprocal and shared) present within online discourse related to the NAPs.
1.2 Research purposes
The purposes of this study is not only to examine how the public has responded to President Trump’s condemnation of the NAPs, protesters, and the NFL, but attempts to understand how citizens communicated via twitter when their collective identities as patriotic Americans, supporters of social justice, and fans of the NFL and its players were directly
attacked by the leader of the country and fellow protest opponents. Secondly, the purpose of this paper is to understand how protest supporters used different digital coping methods in response to protest opposition (such as different affective responses or responses that are
efficacy-eliciting). Literature on social movements and protests has centered around four motivators for collective action: salient social identities, shared grievances, group based protest emotions, and group efficacy (Jasper, 2011; Saab et al., 2015; Van Zomeren et al., 2008; Van Zomeren et al., 2012). However, confirming whether these key motivators actually influenced posting visual content to Twitter is not the main focus of this study.
Instead, this study will rely on these frames to understand how the prominent social identities evident in those protest supporters, as well as their perceived grievances and coping
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
approaches (emotional route: affective responses; instrumental route: efficacy) visibly changed (through various images posted on Twitter) throughout the NAPs.
1.3 Research significance and contributions
Although some studies have focused primarily on analyzing Twitter feeds of citizens participating in social protests during times of civil unrest (Kharroub & Bas, 2016, Kasra, 2017;
Wetzstein, 2017), few, if any, have analyzed polarized protests. In fact, scholars that have examined the NAPs only focused on traditional media outlets’ framing of the protest coverage (Coombs et. al, 2017) or athletes’ influence on activism in sports (McNeal, 2017). Therefore, this study is among the first to not only analyze citizens’ online reactions to the NFL NAPs after the leader of the country publicly denounced the protests in their entirety, but is also among the first to analyze Twitter visual content in a polarized social movement.
It will be worthwhile to see how the communication patterns of the NAPs’ advocates have changed throughout President Trump’s Twitter campaign. Theoretically, the findings of this study will shed light on the complex nature of the NAPs by analyzing how American participants use Twitter to voice concerns and criticisms about grievances (such as institutional racism). They also identify the competing social identities present in NAPs (race, constructive patriotism, and sport fandoms) which fuel civic protests. In addition, this study applies an adapted DPPM to analyze the polarized national civic protests via Twitter platforms as research has primarily addressed violent protests and social movements during widespread unrest (Kharroub & Bas, 2015; LeFebvre & Armstrong, 2016).
As mentioned previously, although the U.S Constitution protects the right to peaceful protest along with the freedom of speech, President Trump openly condemned the NAPs. In practice, the results of this study will be significant because they show the agenda setting
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
influence from those in power (i.e. political figures, and other high profile members of
throughout the protests) from their posts and comments about social movements and will also show that offline protests can potentially shape people’s discussions in digital public space over time. As the NFL NAPs could possibly start anew in the 2018 NFL season, addressing the concerns of the citizens (identified through visual analysis of Twitter images) can be beneficial in resolving the primary issues surrounding the protests.
Previous studies have analyzed the importance of social media platforms in aiding activists and advocacy groups with outreach efforts (Harpe et al., 2012; Obar, Zube, & Lampe, 2012), facilitate protest actions (Theochari et. al, 2013), and foster public diplomacy (Burns &
Eltham, 2009). However, few scholars have focused on the citizens themselves posting images to Twitter and instead have focused on organizations and large groups (i.e. Cowart et al., 2016; Seo, 2014). Lastly, as pictures will be collected using the Twitter Advanced Search function, using the hashtag #TakeAKnee and will employ visual content analysis to code the data,
methodologically, this study will help advance research involving analysis of images posted on social media during political protesting (Cowart et al., 2016; Kharroub & Bas, 2015; Russmann
& Svensson, 2017; Seo et al., 2014; Wetzstein, 2017).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review will encompass previous studies essential for understanding the background of the NAPs as well as concepts related to the theoretical framework that this study employs. The first section includes the history of the NAPs and how they are important in the context of sports activism. Not only is the historical background of the NAPs crucial for
providing relevance for this stud, but understanding how sports activism in the United States and other countries has shaped the political landscape is pertinent in evaluating the importance of the studying the NAPs in depth. Other sections of the literature review include elaborate pathways leading to the protests such as social identities, grievances, and ways in which the public copes (uses of affective responses and efficacy-eliciting content).
2.1 Sport activism and the NFL national anthem protests 2.1.1 Activism in sports
Colin Kaepernick and his fellow anthem protesters are not the first to protest against social injustice or to use sports as venue to become politicized. During the 1968 Olympics, track and field medalists, Tommie Smith and John Carlos, “stood on the victors’ stand at Mexico City, with clenched fists, wearing “black gloves” as a “radical response to American racism” (Spivey, 1983, p. 124). Moreover, during the 1960’s black athletes protested against:
stacking, where a number of blacks are placed in competition for the same position; racial stereotyping; the bias of local sports commentators in favor of white athletes; the athletic association's policing of their social activities (the most severely sanctioned social
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
activity was interracial dating); and against the policy of recruiting a limited number of blacks in order not to exceed the quota. (Spivey, 1983, p. 124)
Although these civil rights protests in American athletics were seen as controversial, extreme, and undesirable by sports administrators and the public (Henderson, 2009), that has not always been the case. For example, during the same 1968 Summer Olympics in which Tommie Smith and John Carlos protested during the national anthem, South Africa was banned from
participating because of their domestic system of racial apartheid (Henderson, 2009). In fact, according to Henderson, this ban can be considered as an “example of athletes successfully bringing the civil rights agenda inside the sporting arena and effecting change” (2009, p. 107).
Sports have a long tradition of providing a space for athletes to voice their disagreement with certain policies, domestic and foreign, as well as commonplace racial prejudices.
Muhammad Ali, a heavyweight boxing champion, refused to join the army due to his religious beliefs and strong opposition to the Vietnam War. He was later stripped of his title and sentenced to five years in jail (Warner et al., 2012). Arther Ashe, a professional tennis player from 1969-1980, was a prominent activist who brought attention to the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa and was arrested in Washington DC while protesting on multiple occasions (Warner et al., 2012).
However, activism in athletics is not confined to the United States nor to the athletes themselves. For example, in Spain, the Catalonian population were not allowed to assemble for demonstration during the regime of Francisco Franco (ending in 1975); instead, the home games for FC Barcelona in Nou Camp were often the only place where people could voice and
demonstrate their dissatisfaction (Burns, 2000). In addition, sports teams often provided the only
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
opportunity to express political opinions anonymously without having the risk of being arrested during the communist era in Eastern Europe (Kuper, 1995).
2.1.2 NFL national anthem protests: Historical background
The “Star Spangled Banner” was adopted as the official United States anthem in 1936 and was commissioned to play before sporting ever since 1918 (Selk, 2017). It is commonly seen as a national symbol of the United States and in 2005, a nationwide initiative was launched by the National Association for Music Education (MENC) in order to revive the United States’
patriotism by teaching students the importance of the Star-Spangled Banner and the national flag (Community Service Projects, 2018). Therefore, it is evident the role – and importance of that role – the national anthem plays in American citizens’ lives.
On August 26th, 2016, Colin Kaepernick, the quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers, caused a widespread uproar when he went against the status quo and sat during the U.S national anthem. National anthems serve as “malleable and dynamic symbols of collective unity of a country” and therefore, citizens are expected to follow certain social norms when the anthem is played (Abril, 2012, p. 5). Acceptable behavior during the anthem, is outlined in the United States Code, 36 U.S.C. § 301, which states that:
When the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand facing the flag with your right hand over your heart. Those present should also remove their hats.
Without the presence of the flag, individuals face the source of the music and act in the same manner. (National Anthem, 2008)
Although military law mandates specific mannerisms for active duty soldiers in and out of uniform, civilians are not required to follow the U.S.C. § 301 because it would interfer with their first amendment rights, which protects the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
the press, the right to peacebly assemble, and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievences (U.S. Const. amend. I). Therefore, the national anthem protest is under the protection of U.S Constitution and is by all means legal.
When asked why he began his protest, which changed from sitting during the U.S national anthem on August 14th, 2016, to taking a knee during the anthem on September 1st, 2016, Colin Kaepernick stated that:
I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder. (Wyche, 2016)
In this statement, Kaepernick refers to the violence between men of color and the state institutions, primarily the police and those officers who are charged but later acquitted or are only slightly reprimanded by their commanding officers. His protest is in conjunction with the recent Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, its stance against police brutality, and its goal to
“spark dialogue among Black people…and to facilitate the types of connections necessary to encourage social action and engagement” (Cullors et al., 2012). #BlackLivesMatter began in 2013 after George Zimmerman, a white neighborhood watch coordinator, was acquitted for the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old unarmed African American teenager (Cullors, 2012; Barry et. al., 2017).
Similar to the BLM movement, Kaepernick began his protest shortly after Philando Castile, a 32-year-old African American male, was fatally wounded during a traffic stop for a broken taillight. Castile’s girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, livestreamed a video of the event through Facebook after the officer had fired his gun at Castile. The graphic video was viewed
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
more than 2.5 million times and was briefly removed from Facebook for an hour due to a
“technical glitch,” receiving public outrage (Peterson, 2016).
2.2. Theoretic foundations
2.2.1. Social identity theory (SIT)
Tajfel and Turner (1979) proposed that belonging to groups, which they define as a people who identify as members of the same social category, are emotionally invested in this categorization of themselves, and achieve some level of social consensus about the appraisal of their group and their affiliation to it, provide members of the group with a sense of belonging in society. The social identity theory (SIT) suggests that there are three cognitive processes
involved when evaluating others as belonging to the group or out-group. According to SIT, in-groups are those in which an individual identifies with. Conversely, an out-group is a group in which they don’t identify with. For example, in the socially constructed group of race if one identifies themselves as white, they consider the in-group to be inclusive of white people while the out-group is non-whites.
It is this process of categorizing the social spectrum into conceivable and tangible groups (social categorization), assigning and adopting these groups to ourselves (social identification), and comparing these groups (social comparison), that typically lead to intergroup bias and stereotyping (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). However, during the social comparison process, if the result of said comparison is unsatisfactory, people can either leave their group or find ways to achieve a more “positive distinctiveness” for it (Brown, 2000). Thus, it can be reasonably argued that social identity plays an important part in assessing group disadvantages and can be a
motivator for collective action.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
A plethora of research has examined the role of social identity in social movement participation, political protesting, and other forms of collective action (Brown, 2000; Saab et al., 2015; Van Zomeren et al., 2012; Wright et al., 1990). For example, in a critical review of SIT, Brown (2000) noted that one of the theory’s major contributions is how group identification can sometimes better predict collective protest than relative deprivation. In addition, a line of recent work into the field of SIT research has focused on how identifying with a social movement or other politicized identities can connect individuals to the disadvantaged group, thus creating an obligation to act on its behalf (Simon & Klandermans, 2001; Stürmer & Simon, 2004).
These past studies are helpful to this research study as it aids in identifying possible social identities evident in the NAPs and theorizes how they are formed. This study specifically places an emphasis on social identity as a primary factor for those who post image tweets, elements from SIT are heavily relied on such as in-group favoritism and bystanders (Saab et al., 2015). In-group favoritism can be exhibited through the support of one’s in-group which can lead to changes in individual behavior and actions toward the out-group (i.e. minority members in NAPs emphasizing discriminatory differences; Dasgupta, 2004). Additionally, bystanders (those not belonging to the in-group) can support the disadvantaged group as they can identify with social movements instead (i.e. non-minority members kneeling in NAPs; Saab et al., 2015).
2.2.2 Dynamic dual pathway model (DDPM)
The theoretical framework of this study is primarily adapted from Van Zomeran’s et al.’s (2012) DDPM. (see Figure 1). The DDPM is an integrative theory, encompassing elements of collective actions (e.g., group identity, unfairness (grievances), anger, and efficacy) from a wide array of theories, including SIT.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Although there has been a plethora of research centered on the motivating factors of collective actions, such as the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA; Van Zomeren et al., 2008). However, Van Zomeren et. al (2012) criticized that SIMCA is a descriptive and predictive model derived from a meta-analysis of several studies. They argued that the DDPM is superior model to examine collective actions because it regards collective action as a result of emotion-focused and problem-focused coping approaches from identification to a disadvantaged social group. The former revolves around the experience of group-based anger, while the latter centers on group efficacy.
Figure 1. Van Zomeren et. al (2012) dynamic dual pathway model
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Instead of viewing identity, emotion, and efficacy as competing explanations of collective action, the DDPM considers these three elements separate but complimentary and considers social identity as a “bridge” between the emotional and efficacy (problem-focused) routes of collective action (Van Zomeren et al., 2008). This is because social identity
consolidation both empowers individuals for collective action and magnifies perceptions of unfairness and group-based emotions (illustrated in Figure 1). However, before continuing into either route to collective action, the individual must first go through the three step process laid out by SIT (categorization, identification, and comparison). If they identify to the social group, then they continue onto either pathway to collective action. Though, if the individual assesses that they don’t identify with the social group, then they consider the cost-benefit analysis of engaging in collective action to aid the disadvantaged group.
Additionally, DDPM also theorizes that during and after the development of engaging in collective action (identification to group, assigning external blame for unfairness, and coping – using an emotion focused or instrumental focused approaches), a process of reappraisal occurs. It is this reappraisal of social categorization and identification, collective disadvantages, and the external blames for unfairness (grievances) that fuel the continuance of collective actions throughout social movements and protests (see Figure 1; Van Zomeren et al., 2012).
2.3. Proposed Theoretic framework
As stated previously, this study incorporates social identity from SIT into DDPM, and makes adjustments in the conceptual framework in order to fit the context of twitter analysis of polarized NAPs. The proposed theoretic framework adds both negative and positive emotions for the emotion-focused approach to coping, because collective emotions not only include affective responses harbored toward members of the out-group but also entail on-going feelings about
in-‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
group members. Because the aim of this study is also to understand how overlapping social identities in American society impacted the 2017 NAPs, emphasis is placed on examining the complex nature of intergroup bias and ingroup favoritism.
Figure 2 shows this study’s proposed theoretic framework which incorporates key
concepts from the SIT and the DDPM. The key components of the theoretical framework include social identity, grievances, efficacy, and approaches to coping (emotional route: affective
responses; instrumental route: efficacy). Some key changes include removing the illustration of the reappraisal process, changing “social categorization” to “social identity,” relabeling “external blame for unfairness” to “grievances,” and expanding affective emotions. Firstly, although integral to the DDPM, the reappraisal process is not included in the proposed theoretic framework because this study does not focus on the process in which individuals choose to engage in collective action. The researcher agrees with the DDPM and understands that a reappraisal process occurs and is a driving factor for collective action tendencies, however the sole focus of this specific study is not to predict collective action in the future but to comprehend the communication patterns of those who have already engaged in collective action online. Also, using visual tweet analysis can hardly be used to comprehend the insights of the users’
reappraisal process. Therefore, the reappraisal process of the DDPM is not included in the proposed theoretical framework.
Secondly, the proposed theoretic framework changes “social comparison” to “social identity.” This is because the formation of social identity is a three-step process (social categorization, social identification, and social comparison) and be relabeling “social
comparison” to “social identity” this study can avoid the confusion that these two concepts are
comparison” to “social identity” this study can avoid the confusion that these two concepts are