IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v10y2022i1p146-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Same Same but Different? Gender Politics and (Trans-)National Value Contestation in Europe on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Wallaschek

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for European Studies, Europa-Universität Flensburg, Germany)

  • Kavyanjali Kaushik

    (Department of Social Sciences, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain)

  • Monika Verbalyte

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for European Studies, Europa-Universität Flensburg, Germany)

  • Aleksandra Sojka

    (Department of Social Sciences, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain)

  • Giuliana Sorci

    (Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, Scuola Normale Superiore, Italy)

  • Hans-Jörg Trenz

    (Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, Scuola Normale Superiore, Italy)

  • Monika Eigmüller

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for European Studies, Europa-Universität Flensburg, Germany)

Abstract

The progress achieved in women’s rights and gender equality has become the target of a backlash driven by “anti-gender” activists and right-wing populists across EU member states. To a large extent, this conflict takes place in the digital and social media spheres, illustrating the new mediatized logic of value contestation. Therefore, we ask to what extent are the debates about gender equality on Twitter similar in three European countries, and how do users engage in these debates? We examine these questions by collecting Twitter data around the 2021 International Women’s Day in Germany, Italy, and Poland. First, we show that the debate remains nationally segmented and is predominantly supportive of gender equality. While citizens engage with the gender equality value online, they do so in a prevailingly acclamatory fashion. In contrast, political and societal actors show higher levels of engagement with the value and receive more interactions on Twitter. Our study highlights the relevance of national contexts to the analysis of (transnational) social media debates and the limited political engagement of citizens on Twitter across Europe. We also critically discuss the strengths and weaknesses of a cross-country social media comparison.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Wallaschek & Kavyanjali Kaushik & Monika Verbalyte & Aleksandra Sojka & Giuliana Sorci & Hans-Jörg Trenz & Monika Eigmüller, 2022. "Same Same but Different? Gender Politics and (Trans-)National Value Contestation in Europe on Twitter," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 146-160.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v10:y:2022:i:1:p:146-160
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v10i1.4751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4751
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v10i1.4751?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pieter de Wilde & Astrid Rasch & Michael Bossetta, 2022. "Analyzing Citizen Engagement With European Politics on Social Media," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 90-96.
    2. Stefan Wallaschek & Christopher Starke & Carlotta Brüning, 2020. "Solidarity in the Public Sphere: A Discourse Network Analysis of German Newspapers (2008–2017)," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 257-271.
    3. Stefan Wallaschek & Christopher Starke & Carlotta Brüning, 2020. "Solidarity in the Public Sphere: A Discourse Network Analysis of German Newspapers (2008–2017)," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 257-271.
    4. Pieter de Wilde & Astrid Rasch & Michael Bossetta, 2022. "Analyzing Citizen Engagement With European Politics on Social Media," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 90-96.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Philip Leifeld, 2020. "Policy Debates and Discourse Network Analysis: A Research Agenda," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 180-183.
    2. Stefan Wallaschek & Kavyanjali Kaushik & Monika Verbalyte & Aleksandra Sojka & Giuliana Sorci & Hans-Jörg Trenz & Monika Eigmüller, 2022. "Same Same but Different? Gender Politics and (Trans-)National Value Contestation in Europe on Twitter," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 146-160.
    3. Helena Seibicke & Asimina Michailidou, 2022. "The Challenges of Reconstructing Citizen-Driven EU Contestation in the Digital Media Sphere," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 97-107.
    4. Renate Fischer & Alexa Keinert & Otfried Jarren & Ulrike Klinger, 2021. "What Constitutes a Local Public Sphere? Building a Monitoring Framework for Comparative Analysis," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(3), pages 85-96.
    5. Mijailoff, Julián Daniel & Burns, Sarah Lilian, 2023. "Fixing the meaning of floating signifier: Discourses and network analysis in the bioeconomy policy processes in Argentina and Uruguay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Helena Seibicke & Asimina Michailidou, 2022. "The Challenges of Reconstructing Citizen-Driven EU Contestation in the Digital Media Sphere," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 97-107.
    7. Olga Eisele & Tobias Heidenreich & Nina Kriegler & Pamina Syed Ali & Hajo G. Boomgaarden, 2023. "A window of opportunity? The relevance of the rotating European Union presidency in the public eye," European Union Politics, , vol. 24(2), pages 327-347, June.
    8. Eisele, Olga & Heidenreich, Tobias & Kriegler, Nina & Syed Ali, Pamina & Boomgaarden, Hajo G., 2022. "A window of opportunity? The relevance of the rotating European Union presidency in the public eye," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue OnlineFir, pages 1-21.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v10:y:2022:i:1:p:146-160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.