Talk:Online social movement

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sgarc23. Peer reviewers: Crvazqu, Camomileviolet.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2020 and 27 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alex K. Tran, Jasdeep-SH. Peer reviewers: 23gobears, Malberk, Stan1500, Kilfmuny.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

== biased article --

Untitled

This article is quite biased as it talks about how it has raised money for causes or breaking pluralistic movements. Social media itself cannot personally raise money but rather the people raise money. It is more important to state what movements utilized social media to help raise money. Also using the word break makes it very biased as some may not agree and the word usage can stop it from being considered as truthful. I think its more important to put more facts and how social media was used in social movements than stating how it has helped in some ways and others. It also sites sources and quotes rather than trying to understand it and rewrite the sentences. It is important that you understood what they read and not simply quote what they said since that will itself make this even more biased. I think putting more facts of how it was used can make this a less biased article. VoicesNow (talk) 23:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

terrific article

This article did a good job of defining both online/social media and social movements aspects of online social movements. There was a mix of positive and negative aspects, which shows that the article was unbiased and fair. This article is also up to date on references and information listed. However, I would add some up to date examples of people under social figures. Fleming.sammy (talk) 04:31, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

no it isn't

I don't agree. I think it is badly worded, vague, repetitive, and poorly sourced, an undergrad essay at best. Online activism is different from a genuine social movement, but here they are conflated. Social movements use online platforms to organize and spread their message, but a purely online social movement is nothing. I think the article is actually misleading.--Shim shabim (talk) 02:33, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

the article presents a biased view of social movements

While the article maintains topic relevancy throughout (doesn't veer off course from the title), it presents an opinionated, poorly sourced version of online movements. The article is written in personal-essay format and relies incredibly on vague sentences and inserts credible sources very abruptly. It's also interesting to note that while the article chooses to dive into both the positive and negative consequences of social media and the Black Lives Matter movement, that it only presented one side for the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. In its future section, it doesn't mention anything about the controversy surrounding social media's role in certain movements.  Aileenxgui (talk) 02:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)Aileen

This article provides a great basic concept of social media and social movements. However, I am afraid that it contains biased content. It seems that the author presents social media as highly effective platforms, but does not provide data or arguments to defend their claim. How do we know that social media has been in fact effective and not just detrimental? Also, I believe it would be great to also to list the different methods that activists use to take advantage of social media for the causes they are concerned. Whether it is recruitment, storytelling to spread awareness and other methods. 05:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC) EstabanMiranda (talk) 05:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Biased, and lack of explanation

This article provides a great basic concept of social media and social movements. However, I am afraid that it contains biased content. It seems that the author presents social media as highly effective platforms, but does not provide data or arguments to defend their claim. How do we know that social media has been in fact effective and not just detrimental? Also, I believe it would be great to also to list the different methods that activists use to take advantage of social media for the causes they are concerned. Whether it is recruitment, storytelling to spread awareness and other methods. 05:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC) EstabanMiranda (talk) 05:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Biased, lack of supporting data and evidence.

1. The article is relevant to the topic; however, throughout the article it has a subtle biased undertone because it was not well-explained and it is not very thorough. 2. The article provides a great basic concept about social media and movements however it's not neutral. The author explains various large social media movements like Black Lives Matters and ALS Ice Bucket Challenge but fails to explain both sides of ALS Ice Bucket and explains negative and positive sides of Black Lives Matters. 3. It overrepresented the impact social media has in people's lives however, it underrepresented the data and factual data to defend their claim. 4. The links do work but the majority of them seems to be from individual authors, not a known news article or a scholars to back the claims which adds on to the biases undertone of the article. 5. The bias is not noted, facts are not from reliable reference and seems like a personal essay with no datas to actually back up the claims throughout the article. 6. The author can definitely edit and use less biased undertones, it does not talk about the detrimental effect of social media and just the good aspects of it without any backup datas to support it. 7. Behind the scenes, the majority of them mention the biased opinion of the author and the poor structure of the article. 8. It is not a part of any WikiProjects. 9. Wikipedia discusses this topic based on structure, format, verifying evidence & links and on the tone of the author - whether or not it is neutral. In class, students are allowed to express their views and opinions however, on Wikipedia one has to be more responsible on what they say since it impacts thousands of individuals who read it. -Dcanvas (talk) 07:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Suggested Additional Bibliography

We are intending to edit the article further. The following are some academic sources that we are hoping to reference, specifically to deal with the bias in the existing piece, as well as to raise the quality of the work.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Della Porta, Donatella, and Mario Diani. Social Movements: An Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub, 2006.

Mina, An Xiao, Memes to Movements: How the World's Most Viral Media Is Changing Social Protest and Power, Beacon Press, 2019.

Tilly, Charles. (2018). Social Movements, 1768-2004. Routledge.

Tufekci, Zeynep, Twitter and Tear Gas, Yale University Press, 2017.

Academic Journals

Benkler, Yochai, and Helen Nissenbaum. “Commons-Based Peer Production and Virtue.” Journal of Political Philosophy 14, no. 4 (December 1, 2006): 394–419.

Franco, Marisa , B Loewe and Tania Unzueta. Medium, Jun 22, 2015. “How We Make Change is Changing, Part II: Open Source Campaigns for the 21st Century”

Gurak, L.J. (1997). Persuasion and Privacy in Cyberspace: The Online Protests over Lotus MarketPlace and the Clipper Chip. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Heimans, Jeremy, and Henry Timms. “Understanding ‘New Power.’” Harvard Business Review, December 1, 2014. https://hbr.org/2014/12/understanding-new-power

Lim, Merlyna. Clicks, Cabs, and Coffee Houses: Social Media and Oppositional Movements in Egypt, 2004–2011, Journal of Communication, Volume 62, Issue 2, April 2012, Pages 231–248, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01628.x

Callahan, Molly. “#MeToo, #BlackLivesMatter, #NoBanNoWall: Social Movements Likely to Dominate 2018.” News Northeastern MeToo BlackLivesMatter NoBanNoWall Social Movements Likely to Dominate 2018 Comments, 12 Jan. 2018, news.northeastern.edu/2018/01/12/metoo-blacklivesmatter-nobannowall-social-movements-likely-to-dominate-2018/.

Hara, et al. “Indiana University.” Online Social Movements, Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 1 Jan. 1970, scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/handle/2022/18718.

Hara, Noriko, and Bi‐Yun Huang. “Online Social Movements.” Association for Information Science & Technology, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2 Jan. 2013, asistdl.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/aris.2011.1440450117.

Weber, Sam, and Laura Fong. “How Online Social Movements Translate to Offline Results.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 10 June 2017, www.pbs.org/newshour/show/online-social-movements-translate-offline-results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F140:400:A023:3CCA:FECE:BE38:58AA (talk) 06:09, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Jasdeep-SH (talk) 17:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review

As mentioned by many of the others on this talk page, the overall article does very much provide a biased view. Jasdeep-SH's comments on the talk page with the provided list of new references is a good start to changing the bias issue. The list has a good number of different sources that may be effective in providing strong and neutral writing within the article. "The impact of online movements" section does have a good start in changing existing article towards less bias one, as it provides both beneficial and detrimental impacts. However, it does seem like the beneficial impact sub-section is much more detailed than the detrimental sub-section, so adding more information in the lateral is a suggestion I have for the editors. 23gobears (talk) 17:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review

General info Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username)

 Jasdeep

Link to draft you're reviewing:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jasdeep-SH/sandbox

Lead evaluation

The lead does a good job of describing the main definition of Online social movements. They lack further discussing what will be mentioned in the coming paragraphs. I think a sentence about the major sections would be great to include in the lead section.

Content evaluation

I think Jasdeep and their group did an excellent job adding the "History of Online Social Movements" in the article. In my opinion, every good article has a history section to create context. All the information added into the article is from the 2000s which is pretty up to date. In addition, the group did a great job adding examples of online social movements. I think they should relevant pictures of each movement. All information stated is relevant.

Tone and balance evaluation

The tone of the article seems to be very "story-like." Although it does not seem to be biased, there are a lot of hefty sentences. I would recommend cutting out adjectives and making the sentences shorter and to the point. This way the tone of the article will be more encyclopedic.

Sources and references evaluation

All the links and new sources they included work and are up to date.

Organization evaluation

The organization of their article draft is very well written. I love the fact that they are adding a history section. In addition, I do agree that the "examples," "benefits" and "detriments" section need more work as Jasdeep added. I also love that for every example they listed, they added a brief description of the movement. The original article lacks a brief description of the movements. Although the original article includes redirects, I would recommend going ahead and adding short descriptions to the movements they previously listed as it would be really nice for the reader to have.

Overall evaluation

Overall, I really think this group put in work and provided substantial information to the article. Overall I really love all the content added. My main recommendation was changing the tone as alot of the time the writer wrote "For instance" which makes the article sound very essay like. I think by cutting down the sentences and making them more simple will make the article sound more neutral. Also, I would love to see a couple of images of some significant movements.

Overall you are doing amazing!! :) Malberk (talk) 01:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Peer Evaluation

When scanning through the article initially, some of the main points of interest that I found were: expansion on the “Important figures” section and adding more recent/relevant information to “The future” and “Examples of online movements”. When it comes to important figures, I think it would be beneficial to explain how they spurred a specific online social movement and what they did for that movement in terms of content-creation or inspiration. For the future, maybe talk about how as technology develops, social movements must develop as well. You can also reference recent speakers in our class, etc. With the examples of online movements, a lot of these movements given can be updated. When analyzing the diff links, I think your statement on how Social Media has broken the pluralistic ignorance is incredibly insightful and does add to the recent/relevancy points. Keep up the great work! Alex K. Tran (talk) 05:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Kim Ann Roam hidden social media relationships

Hidden texts 2600:6C40:1300:1508:FC89:4CD5:3CF3:8086 (talk) 14:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: COML 509: Social Media Engagement and Analysis

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2022 and 21 October 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): HelenGood 22 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by STXL18 (talk) 13:32, 24 September 2022 (UTC)