Social Media Analysis: Activists and Influencers

Introduction

The past two years have marked a shift in terms of public and political interest concerning climate change, with more and more people across the globe, particularly the young, joining demonstrations, strikes, and movements such as Fridays for Future (FFF).

What is interesting is that much of this support has been mobilized not by traditional sources like television but through networked channels such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram. 


Research show that while television is more prevalent among respondents over the age of 35, alternative sources such as social media and blogs are more popular among younger groups: 18–24 are three times as likely to access alternative sources of news around climate change when compared to over-55s. Apparently, social media posts by activists and influencers are an important source.

But how do the dynamics of social media, namely interactions, likes, and comments, affect the presented content? Why do so many content-producers use such platforms rather than traditional outlets? 

We want to look at four examples of how the fossil fuel issue is addressed on four different platforms by four distinct actors. 

Task

Your task is to conduct a media analysis of the digital product assigned to your group, synthesize and present your findings using a tool of your choice. 

 

Group A: Greta Thunberg’s Address to the World Economic Forum 2021, 5:50 (https://www.instagram.com/tv/CKexqghJPtS/?hl=de)

Group B: Prager U: Fossil Fuels: The Greenest Energy, 5:08

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJWq1FeGpCw



Group C: Greg Abbot, Texas Governor, Orders Investigations Into Power Struggles, Blackouts https://www.facebook.com/15704546335/videos/3538398649622188

Group D: Dan Crenshaw: Here's the Truth: Destroying The Biden Climate Plan, 6:00 (thread with three videos)

https://twitter.com/RepDanCrenshaw/status/1358516000153628685

You should analyze

     a) authors and audiences,

     b) messages and meaning,

     c) representations and realities. 

 

Process

1) Analysis 

The following table suggests some questions you might want to ask yourselves when analyzing your piece of media. Many answers will have more than one answer, and you might as well want to highlight some aspects not covered by the questions. 

Rather than answering every single question, focus on the most striking aspects and their significance. 

Please watch you video together as a group and note remarkable aspects and their effects. You might want or need to re-watch the video or certain parts of it. Using an online collaborative word processing tool such as Word Online (https://office.live.com/start/word.aspx?omkt=de-CH) or a Pad (https://yopad.eu) is helpful for answering the questions and structuring your thoughts. 

Authors and Audiences Authorship

Purpose

Economics

Effects

Responses
  • Who made this?
  • Why was this made? What does it want the audience to do?
  • Who is the target audience?
  • Why is this particular audience used for distributing the product?
  • Who paid for this?
  • Who might benefit from this? Who might be harmed?
  • How do people respond to the content in the comments and with likes?
Messages and Meanings 

Contents

Techniques

Interpretations

  • What does this tell the audience about fossil fuels? What is the primary message?
  • What does this want the audience to think?
  • What ideas, information, points of views are included or implied? What is omitted? Why?
  • Is there a case for seeing any assumptions as ideological? 
  • How is the creator's viewpoint represented?
  • What language/style/register is used? What are the predominant speech functions (statement, question, demand, offer)? What types of statement are there (statement of fact, predictions, hypotheticals, evaluations)? What does this style evoke?
  • What techniques are used? Why?
  • How is the message communicated?
  • Are multiple interpretations of the message possible or intended? 
  • Is specific knowledge or information required to understand the intended message? Does this exclude some people? 
Representations and Reality Context

Credibility
  • When was this created?
  • When and how was it shared with the public?
  • Is this information, fact, opinion, or something else? Does it want to argue, instruct, persuade, explain, sell? 
  • How credible is this? How can you tell?
  • Which sources are quoted? Which other voices or viewpoints are included or omitted?
  • Which images and effects are used? What do they evoke?

2) Presentation 

After having analyzed you piece of media, take a look at your notes and think about how you want to present your main findings to your peers. You can get creative and create a response post or video for your respective platform, for instance, or prepare a presentation – everything is possible! But remember to convey your insights clearly and understandably.

Evaluation

The final evaluation of your by your peers and by me will take place via Evaluationszielscheibehttp://www.evaluationszielscheibe.ch/?disc=f43965

The depth of analysis, your handling of the key questions explained in the "Process" section, is decisive as well as the form and content of your presentation.

Thus, the critical aspects are:

     1) Authors and Audiences addressed?

     2) Messages and Meanings addressed?

     3) Representation and Reality addressed?

     4) Structure of Presentation: Clear? Understandable?

     5) Method of Presentation: Meaningful? Creative?

     6) Final Critical Evaluation of Media included?



The more or the better you think these criteria are met, the closer to the center of the target diagram you put the point. 

Finally, we will have a look at and a discussion about the evaluation of each product. 



 

Conclusion

Your work in this module and in the two previous modules has revealed some fundamental truths that are otherwise often obscured:

     1. All media messages are constructed. 

     2. Each medium has different characteristics, strengths, and a unique language or style of construction.

     3. Media messages are produced for particular purposes. 

     4. All media messages contain embedded values, interests, and points of view.

     5. Media and media messages can influence beliefs, attitudes, values, behaviors, and the democratic process. 

The analysis and discussion of the relation of fossil fuels and climate change as realized by all of you in the course of the unit makes these truths evident in an exemplary way; it is clear that there are conflicting interest at the very core of this issue, and the media(ted) representation of it is correspondingly ambiguous. 

In the very first module, you have created your own piece of media based on your review of traditional, established resources offered by me. You have implicitly discovered and applied criteria for good, reliable media in this process. 

We have made these criteria explicit in the beginning of the second module. This was the foundation for discussing the influence of fossil fuel companies on the coverage and framing of this issue. 

Finally, you have conducted a profound media analysis and identified some aspects and dynamics specific to social media. 

You have gained a deeper, a more sophisticated understanding of both the subject matter, the environmental effects of fossil fuels, and media messages – educators call this competence "critical media literacy". Well done!

 

Credits

Introduction partly adapted from:

Andi, Simge (2020). How People Access News about Climate Changehttps://www.digitalnewsreport.org/survey/2020/how-people-access-news-about-climate-change/#fn-11894-1. Accessed 8 February 2020.

Analysis Scheme in Process Section partly adapted from:

Fairclough, Norman (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge, p. 192-194.

Conclusion partly adapted from:

National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE) (2007). Core Principles of Media Literary Education in the United States. 

https://namle.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Namle-Core-Principles-of-MLE-in-the-United-States.pdf. Accessed 10 February 2020.