Networked Activism and the BrokenMultiplex: Exploring Fractures in theResistance Performance ParadigmJoshua D. Atkinson

The current research explored a new social movement network in the northeastern UnitedStates in order to build on past research concerning a Resistance Performance Paradigm(RPP). In particular, I found that the network in the northeastern community displayedcharacteristics of RPP but did not construct a ‘‘multiplex’’ of coordinated resistance as hademerged in past RPP research. I interviewed 20 activists in order to assess how the north-eastern network was different from previous RPP research, and whether such differencesaccounted for the lack of a multiplex of coordinated resistance. The interviews revealedthat the network was fractured over (a) what issues to address and (b) how to approach=protest any such issues. Further data analysis revealed that the fractures stemmed in partfrom activists’ uncertainty about a listserv used by all of the activists in the network. Suchfindings constitute an additional characteristic of RPP: the capacity of a network toefficiently circulate narratives to all points in a network.

Keywords: Alternative Media; Listservs; Narrative Capacity; Networked Activism;Resistance Performance Paradigm

Contemporary research concerning new social movements has adopted the network con-cept (e.g., Arquilla & Ronfeldt, 2001; Eriksson, 2005; Huesca, 2001), which has helped todemonstrate the integral role of narratives circulated through diffused activist organiza-tions in the establishment of temporary communities of resistance (Pickard, 2006a,2006b; Stengrim, 2005). Using media produced through their new social movementnetworks, activists pass information framed within nebulous narratives that contained

Correspondence to: Joshua D. Atkinson, (PhD, University of Missouri-Columbia), School of CommunicationStudies, 302 West Hall, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH 43043, U.S.A. E-mail: jatkins@bgsu.edu

Communication Studies

Vol. 60, No. 1, January–March 2009, pp. 49–65

ISSN 1051-0974 (print)/ISSN 1745-1035 (online) # 2009 Central States Communication AssociationDOI: 10.1080/10510970802623609

common themes such as ‘‘be themedia’’ (Pickard, 2006a) or ‘‘human rights’’ (Atkinson&Dougherty, 2006). Such narratives attract a broad array of activists, who can unite andform temporary protest communities when those themes seem to be threatened (Best,2005; Stengrim, 2005). Best (2005) refers to the construction of such temporary commu-nities as networked activism. In addition, recent research concerning networked activismhas examined the role of alternative media in new social movement networks. The termalternative media has been used to reference media content produced by noncommercialsources that challenges power structures and attempts to transform social roles (e.g., Arm-strong, 1981; Atkinson, 2005; Atton, 2002; Downing, 2003; Meikle, 2002). The termincludes Web sites such as CounterPunch.org, radio programs such as Democracy Now!,and print sources such as Adbustersmagazine. Atkinson and Dougherty (2006) providedinsight into the role of alternative media in new social movement networks throughresearch concerning a social justicemovement in aMidwest city. Social justicemovementsare those movements that work to advocate for economically, socially, and=or politicallymarginalized communities (see Frey, 1998; Ryan, Carragee, & Schwerner, 1998). Throughtheir research, Atkinson and Dougherty developed the Resistance Performance Paradigm(RPP), which illustrated how activist interactions with alternative media processes con-structed multiple communities of activism, or ‘‘theatres,’’ where resistance to corporateglobalization was performed by activists. Essentially, activists used narratives concerningspecific social justice problems found in alternative media to build ‘‘theatres’’ where mili-tant or adjustive communicative resistance against corporations was performed. In addi-tion, the activists used nebulous narratives about ‘‘human rights’’ and ‘‘democracy’’ foundwithin a national level Web site and on a local listserv to construct a broader ‘‘multiplex’’that allowed for co-performance of resistance by a variety of activist groups. Such co-per-formanceswere temporary as themilitant and adjustive tactics advocated by different acti-vist groups created tensions that dissolved the multiplex.

The findings from Atkinson and Dougherty’s (2006) study complementedresearch concerning networks and new social movements by providing a rich,detailed illustration of the role of alternative media in the circulation of narrativesto bridge divergent social justice organizations and to construct temporary commu-nities of resistance. However, questions remain about the applicability of RPP as theauthor has encountered new social movement networks that exhibit RPP characteris-tics without the emergence of a ‘‘multiplex.’’ The current essay seeks to build on pastresearch concerning RPP and networked activism by examining such a new socialmovement network in which temporary communities or a ‘‘multiplex’’ have failedto emerge. The research was conducted in a large northeast city called Erie City1

so as to examine the applicability, limits, and gaps in RPP. In order to address theconcept of RPP within a range of environments not included in the original research,this essay is organized around the following questions:

RQ1: In what ways does the Erie City new social movement network conform tothe characteristics of RPP?

RQ2: What problems have arisen in the Erie City new social movement network tohinder the emergence of a multiplex?

50 J. D. Atkinson

RQ3: In what ways does the Erie City new social movement network deviate fromthe characteristics of RPP?

RQ4: If there are any deviations from RPP, do such deviations account for theproblems that have hindered the emergence of a multiplex?

The findings from the research refine the RPP concept by providing evidence thatsuggests that the capacity of a network to efficiently circulate narratives to activiststhrough listservs constitutes a dimension of RPP that can hinder the emergence ofthe overarching multiplex. In the following pages, I provide a review of literature con-cerning RPP, as well as a description of the methods used to collect data in Erie City.

Resistance Performance: Alternative Media and Networked Activism

Past communication and media research has explored the content of alternativemedia, such as Atkinson’s (2005) examination of constructions of power in alterna-tive media texts. In addition, past research has also addressed the active role of audi-ences in the production and circulation of alternative media, as Atton (2002) andDowning (2003) illustrated the fluctuating production roles of audience-producersin alternative media sources such as Squall. Atkinson and Dougherty (2006) builton both lines of research by adopting a performance-oriented paradigm (seeAbercrombie & Longhurst, 1998; Conquergood, 1985; Denzin, 1997; Langellier,1983) for their exploration of the role of alternative media in a new social movementnetwork in a Midwest community called Mystical City. At the center of the networkwas a hub-like social justice organization, called Peace Alliance, which was intercon-nected with a conglomeration of different social justice organizations. Peace Allianceitself was an organization dedicated to ‘‘creating a peaceful, sustainable world,’’ whilethe interconnected organizations focused on different social justice topics; theStudent Action Committee focused on corporate crime, and Midwest Forests workedto address environmental issues in the region. At the hub of this conglomeration,Peace Alliance was guided by a steering committee that planned events and produceda listserv that was circulated to other social justice organizations and activists inMystical City. Demonstrations or social justice events coordinated by Peace Alliancewere in response to some ‘‘threat’’ to the broad narratives circulated through thelistserv, such as the War on Terror, or labor practices of the Mystical City Walmart.

The emergent RPP illustrated different critical worldviews and interactions ofaudiences with alternative media production within intertwining ‘‘theatres’’ shapedby alternative media content, which were coordinated by common visions and goalsand separated by the differing themes in the alternative media content. Essentially,the (a) worldviews of activists and (b) how the activists used alternative mediaconstructed the theatres of performance where (c) communicative resistance couldbe performed. Social justice organizations with differing worldviews (radical or refor-mist) about war and corporate power in Mystical City used a variety of alternativemedia sources such as Indymedia.org, Z Magazine, and Democracy Now! in eithera participatory (i.e., interactive) lay (i.e., passive) manner.2 Four ‘‘theatres’’ or socialspaces in which resistance to corporate globalization and war emerged from the

Broken Multiplex 51

convergence of activists’ worldviews and interactions with alternative media: theradical-participatory theatre, the reformist-participatory theatre, the reformist-laytheatre, and the radical-lay cafe (see Figure 1).3

Each of the four theatres emphasized a different collection of problems posed bycorporations to society, and each demanded different strategies for the performanceof communicative resistance in order overcome such problems. The two reformisttheatres focused on the ideological problems associated with corporate controlledmedia and called for adjustive resistance (e.g., peaceful marching and communityeducation). Meanwhile the radical theatres focused on the monopoly of resourcesby corporate power structures, and necessitated more drastic militant resistance inorder to take back resources (e.g., stopping traffic, destroying corporate property).4

Integral to the concept of RPP was the emergent multiplex. Themultiplex was a com-mon space that temporarily linked each of the theatres inMystical City through commonthemes of ‘‘human rights’’ and ‘‘democracy’’ allowing for coordinated performances ofresistance by adjustive and militant organizations associated with the four theatres. Themultiplex was made possible by (a) the prevalence of the common themes found in alter-native media used in all the theatres and (b) the use of Commondreams.org and thePeace Alliance listserv in all the theatres. All of the alternative media sources used inthe four theatres contained some elements of the themes of ‘‘human rights’’ and ‘‘democ-racy.’’ In addition, Commondreams.org and the Peace Alliance listserv were used by all ofthe activists, regardless of the theatre within which they performed. Commondreams.orgwas a Web site that presented a pool of articles about human rights and democracy fromall of the different alternative media sources and contained links to those different sources(e.g., The Nation, Indymedia.org), thus providing all of the activists with a glimpse intoall of the other activist theatres. The Peace Alliance listserv was used to forward articles

Figure 1 Critical Worldview Continuum and Interaction Continuum.

52 J. D. Atkinson

from Commondreams.org and other such alternative media sources to activists acrossMystical City. The listserv also presented a calendar of social justice events around Mys-tical City, providing opportunities for activists to interact; places where the multiplexcould emerge. However, the multiplex of common visions and goals was a temporaryspace as the opinions about militant and adjustive resistance advocated by activists fromdiffering theatres created tensions that dissolved coordinated efforts. Therefore, the newsocial movement network in Mystical City was always in a cycle of construction and dis-solution as the different theatres would come together into the multiplex of commonvisions and goals, only to move apart again because of tensions between activists.

Method

In this research, I used active interviews to collect data from activists who were affiliatedwith one or more social justice organizations in Erie City. The open-ended questionsassociated with the active interview process provide a framework for the participantsto describe a particular communication phenomenon according to their own autono-mous perceptions and interpretations (see Holstein & Gubrium, 1995; Kvale, 1996).The interviews allowed the activists in the research to describe their opinions aboutsocial justice and corporations (e.g., Has enough been done by the local governmentto reform corporations?), their opinions about new social movement networks (e.g.,Do you see any collaborative efforts between social justice organizations? If so, provideexamples.), their role in new social movement networks (e.g., Tell me about the socialjustice organizations of which you are a member), their interactions with other activists(e.g., Do you ever interact with alternative media producers in Erie City?), and their useof alternative media (e.g., Do you use any alternative media sources? If so, what are thetitles of those sources?). Twenty activists were gathered for the research using snowballsampling (Babbie, 2002; Lindlof & Taylor, 2002). The activists were referenced by aninitial contact group of 5 participants who were recruited at the Erie City Peace Fair,a city-sponsored event that several social justice organizations participated in throughbooths, speakers, and performances. The active interviews were conducted and tape-recorded in a setting chosen by each activist so that they would feel comfortable, suchas a cafe or at their workplace. All of the interviews were analyzed using thematicanalysis (see Rubin & Rubin, 2004; Ryan & Bernard, 2000), in which I searched thetranscribed interviews for quotations that helped to illustrate worldviews, uses of alter-native media, and performances of resistance. As quotations were identified they werecopied and pasted into a Word file so that all of the relevant quotes could be printedand cut out. I then proceeded to sort through the quotations using the constant-comparative method and pasted them onto the wall of my office so as to developdistinct and separate categorical themes.

Verification

Verification of qualitative research helps to establish the trustworthiness of the dataobtained (Creswell, 1997; Huberman & Miles, 1998). To verify the trustworthiness of

Broken Multiplex 53

the data from the interviews, I sought feedback from three participants (Huberman &Miles). These three participants were provided with a summary of the data analysis andasked if the findingsmatched their perceptions of alternativemedia within their new socialmovement network. Each participant concurred with the findings of the research.

Results

The interviews with the activists revealed RPP characteristics that had been identified inAtkinson and Dougherty’s (2006) research. The interviews illustrated diverse criticalworldviews concerning corporations and social justice among the activists, the use ofdifferent alternative media by different social justice organizations, and common alter-native media among all of the activists—including a listserv produced by a hub-likesocial justice organization called the Olive Branch Association (OBA). Like PeaceAlliance, OBA was interconnected with a conglomeration of different social justiceorganizations in the region. OBA was a grassroots organization that worked to servethe broad cause of ‘‘building a planet of peace and justice for all humanity’’ throughprotest and the production of alternative media (a listserv and a newsletter calledtheOBA Times). The organizations that were interconnected with OBA were each dedi-cated to addressing different social justice topics: the Erie City Urban Partnershipfocused on community education about the economy and the Forest League wasconcerned about global warming. As the hub of the network, OBA organized and coor-dinated demonstrations that focused on international social justice issues such as theWar in Iraq, and local issues like the construction of a sewage processing plant inone of the low-income sectors of Erie City. Many of the activists were directly affiliatedwith OBA, while others worked with organizations that were interconnected with OBA.

In addition, two categorical ‘‘fractures’’ emerged from the interviews; such fracturesseemed to hinder the multiplex that had emerged in past RPP research. The interviewsalso revealed an important category that was divergent from the past RPP research,most notably confusion concerning the listserv produced by the hub-like OBA. Inthe following pages, I provide detailed description of the similar and divergent cate-gories that emerged from the interviews, as well as a description of the fractures inthe network that hindered the construction of any multiplex of coordinated resistance.

RPP Categories in Erie City

Through the interviews, I found that all of the activists exhibited the three primarycategories from the earlier RPP research: critical worldviews about corporations(reformist to radical), use of alternative media (participatory to lay), and strategiesfor the performance of resistance (adjustive to militant). As in the earlier RPPresearch, critical worldviews and use of alternative media converged to construct fourtheatres: radical participatory, reformist participatory, reformist lay, and radical lay.Each of these theatres used alternative media unique to their own theatre thatdemanded either militant or adjustive strategies for resistance. In addition to the fouremergent RPP theatres, the interviews revealed alternative media common to the four

54 J. D. Atkinson

theatres in Erie City. One alternative media source used by activists in each of thefour theatres was Commondreams.org, the Web site that played a crucial role inthe establishment of common visions and goals in previous RPP research. Anothersource common to all of the activists in Erie City was the OBA listserv, which wasused to circulate news stories from alternative media sources and notification aboutupcoming protests and events in Erie City. The listserv was produced by the OBAsteering committee and circulated to over one thousand people in the Erie Citymetropolitan area. The OBA steering committee members who worked to organizeevents and produced the listserv were all activists within the reformist participatorytheatre, which was also similar to the Peace Alliance in Mystical City.

Ultimately, all of the important characteristics of RPP were observed in the newsocial movement network in Erie City. However, despite the similarity to the networkin Atkinson and Dougherty’s (2006) research, activists never reported examples of amultiplex of coordinated resistance emerging within the Erie City new social move-ment network nor were any such examples observed during the course of thisresearch. Instead, many reformist participatory activists who were direct membersof OBA frequently spoke of taking part in protests and actions coordinated byOBA, while most activists affiliated with the other three theatres (and even someaffiliated with the reformist participatory theatre) described a reluctance to take partin those actions. Essentially, activists outside of OBA were rarely involved in thatorganization’s actions, even though most of those activists reported using the listservas a source of information about social justice issues and events in Erie City, as well asfrequently engaging in face-to-face interactions with OBA members and the OBAsteering committee at various sites across Erie City. The fact that many activists usedthe hub organization’s listserv and interacted with members of that organization butwere reluctant to take part in actions organized by the hub represented a significanthindrance for the emergence of the multiplex demonstrated in Atkinson andDougherty’s research. In order to explore such a hindrance, I turned my attentionto divisive fractures that emerged from the interviews with the activists.

Fractures

The interviews with the activists revealed two categorical problems that seemed tohinder the emergence of a multiplex in which coordinated resistance could beperformed by different activists and organizations in the network. I called theseproblems ‘‘fractures’’ as they were divisive in nature, involving two competing visionsabout the OBA. These problematic fractures emerged in the interviews during discus-sions about (a) the social justice issues addressed by OBA and (b) the protest actionsorchestrated by OBA.

Fracture #1: IssuesThe first fracture stemmed from divergent visions about the social justice issuesaddressed by OBA in its protests and events. Specifically, this category encapsulated

Broken Multiplex 55

the beliefs among activists that OBA was either ‘‘open’’ to a wide variety of socialjustice issues or that OBA was ‘‘restricted’’ solely to the topic of the wars in Iraqand Afghanistan. The activists who discussed the organization as open to diverse issuesclaimed that OBA was a place in which activists could bring any idea to the steeringcommittee and receive support to move their idea to action. Activist #11, a memberof the OBA steering committee, stated the following:

People look at our mission statement, which talks about trying to create a societythat is based on mutual cooperation and respect rather than oppression and hier-archy. I think people who are working on corporate globalization and economicstuff or racism feel like they can fit into OBA.

From this excerpt, Activist #11 felt that the broad mission of OBA allowed activistsall over Erie City to come to the organization and to address a diverse range ofsocial justice issues. She described the organization as a place where activistsconcerned with racism or economics could go to, ‘‘fit in,’’ and work on those issues.Activist #8, owner of an ‘‘alternative’’ bookstore in downtown Erie City, noted thatOBA conducts workshops on a wide range of social justice issues such as sustainablelifestyles, how to recycle, ‘‘the nuclear message’’ and ‘‘what [President George W.]Bush is really saying.’’ Activist #15, who worked with an Erie City Latina=o commu-nity center, said that lately OBA ‘‘had been working with the immigration issues’’ andprotesting the construction of a sewage treatment plant in the predominantly AfricanAmerican quarter of Erie City. Each of these activists felt that the OBA was a placethat was broad in its mission to social justice, allowing for the organization to addressa broad range of social justice issues.

Conversely, activists who discussed OBA as restricted on issues claimed that theorganization’s sole interest was antiwar issues and little else. For instance, Activist #6,an organizer who worked with a community-centered organization called Erie CityUrban Partnership, described the different kinds of ‘‘social justice movements’’ foundin Erie City:

There’s sort of the peace and justice movements that coalesce around not reallylocal issues. Bigger issues about war and peace . . .[OBAs] work tends to be moresymbolic. [OBA will] hold a rally. Big deal. War is bad. Yeah! Okay. There doesn’tseem to be a strategy to move it forward.

In this excerpt, Activist #6 complained that some social justice movements in ErieCity were only concerned with ‘‘issues about war and peace’’ and nothing else; heincluded OBA in this category. Activist #6, as well as other activists, claimed thatOBA occasionally made ‘‘awkward’’ attempts to dabble in local issues with groupslike the Partnership. However, they felt that such dabbling was only a charade usedto draw attention to the OBAs ‘‘symbolic’’ work against war. Activist#16, owner andoperator of an ‘‘independent African-American newspaper’’ in Erie City, claimed thatOBA protests against the sewage plant previously mentioned were only organized toget ‘‘African-Americans to stand in the picture and smile.’’ According to Activist

56 J. D. Atkinson

#16, OBA had no intention of ever stopping the construction of the sewage plant orempowering the people in those communities. The attention paid to the issue wasmerely a photo opportunity to help OBA demonstrate that they were a raciallydiverse antiwar organization.

Fracture #2: ActionsThe second fracture stemmed from contrasting views about the nature of OBA protestactions and events. In particular, this category entailed the opinion among activists thatOBA protest actions were inclusive and allowed for anyone to partake or exclusive to aselect group of activist ‘‘elites.’’ Those activists who discussed the actions as inclusiveclaimed that OBA reached outward to bring in as many perspectives as possible. Forinstance, Activist #2, who had worked on the steering committee in the past, saidthe following:

I think OBA has been working hard to use its broad focus to—to welcomepeople from different backgrounds. And even though OBA is still primarily awhite organization they’ve made some incredible progress connecting with theMuslim community.

In this excerpt, Activist #2 acknowledged that OBA had been limited andnarrow in terms of the background of their membership, but they had workedto ‘‘connect’’ to international communities and communities of color and includethem in OBA actions. Other activists who worked directly or indirectly with OBAconfirmed this perception that the organization worked to include different com-munities. Activist #15, a Latina activist, noted how OBA often included theLatino community in their protests and actions, while Activist #8, an AfricanAmerican activist, felt OBA had effectively included the African American commu-nity in their efforts.

On the other hand, many activists discussed OBA actions as exclusive and that theorganization was elitist, recruiting select individuals and groups to take part inmarches and protests. Activist #14, a Rastafarian activist, claimed to have observedOBA exclusion of young people in the community:

[OBA is] kind of elitist. I’ve seen them be approached by youth who were veryinterested in becoming involved. And they turned them away more or less. Youknow? It’s almost like certain demographics aren’t even welcomed.

She went on to tell stories about how she had witnessed OBA turn away youngAfrican American activists who had hoped to get involved in activities. In addi-tion, Activist #14 claimed to have experienced such exclusion herself when sheattended an OBA meeting and requested for the members of the steering commit-tee to take part in an AIDS walk. She claimed that her request was met with a fewkind words and a refusal, ‘‘It’s like the feeling that you get when you walk in. It’snot open arms. It’s not opened minds all the way. . . . A lot of times you don’t

Broken Multiplex 57

feel—you walk in and you feel awkward.’’ Such claims of exclusion were notlimited to merely closing access to events or protests. Many of the activistsclaimed that they or their organizations were invited to take part in OBA actions,only to be denied the opportunity to speak or take an active role at those actions.For instance, Activist #7, a labor organizer, stated: ‘‘I think when it comes topeace rallies particularly, [Labor One is] invited to show, but not invited to speakon the podium.’’

In part, the fractures about issues and actions that emerged in the interviews con-structed an overarching perception held by many activists that OBA had claimed‘‘ownership’’ over concepts of social justice. Activist #14 explained, ‘‘There’s likean ownership thing to [OBA] that, you know—people try to take [social justice]as their own. It’s just bad business.’’ Essentially, Activist #14 saw OBA as owningthe concept of social justice, which she felt leads to a ‘‘this is the way I want thisto work . . . this is how I want it run’’ approach to social justice protest and actions.Other activists agreed with this notion of ownership as Activist #1, #6, and #12described OBA as ‘‘branding’’ themselves as the social justice organization ofErie City. Activist #14 claimed that such ownership=branding made other activistsfeel, ‘‘a little bit pushed back . . . a little bit less welcomed . . . a little bit less motivated,and a little bit less apt to become involved.’’ Ultimately, the perception of ownership=branding led many activists to feel that they were unwelcome in the Erie City newsocial movement network dominated by OBA.

Based on the interviews, two disparate stories emerged from activists’ discus-sions about OBA—the central hub of the network. There was a positive visionof OBA as an inclusive organization that was open to a diversity of issues andworked collaboratively in their actions throughout Erie City. Direct members ofOBA (Activist #2, #3, #8, #11, #15, and #17), most of which were associatedwith the reformist participatory theatre, held such a view.5 Conversely, there was anegative vision of OBA as an elitist organization that used the issues of otherorganizations to funnel attention to OBAs primary antiwar issue. Activists asso-ciated with the radical participatory theatre held such a Machiavellian view ofOBA (Activist #5, #6, #7, #13, and #14). In addition, three activists looselyaffiliated with OBA within the reformist participatory theatre (Activist #1,#12, and #16) also held the Machiavellian view of the organization. It shouldalso be noted that most of the activists within the reformist lay theatre (Activist#4, #9, and #10) and all of the activists within the radical lay theatre (Activist#18, #19, and #20) were apathetic about OBA or felt it was in the best interestof their organizations that they avoid OBA actions. Such disparate visions ofOBA—the hub of the network—divided not only the four theatres but cut acrossthe reformist participatory theatre.

Such divisiveness is not unheard of, as past research has demonstrated how dif-fering sympathies or tactics create animosities between opposing factions withinsocial movements (see Fantasia, 1988; Gustainis & Hahn, 1988). In fact, fracturesover tactics had emerged in the Peace Alliance network described in Atkinson andDougherty’s research. However, those fractures emerged during the course of

58 J. D. Atkinson

protests and demonstrations, leading to the dissolution of the temporary multi-plex of resistance; such fractures were part of a cycle of building temporary protestcommunities, protesting together, and then breaking apart. In the case of ErieCity, the fractures that emerged during the interviews stood as an obstacle thatprevented the emergence of temporary protest communities altogether. Interestingly,past research by Pickard (2006b) provides clues about the nature of the fracturesin Erie City. Pickard’s research illustrated ‘‘tyrasnnies’’ associated with the inter-active technology used to coordinate and circulate narratives in new socialmovement networks: tyranny of ideology, tyranny of structuralessness, and tyrannyof editor. Essentially, the inflexible ideologies held by activists within a network,elites shrouded in a nebulous structuralessness, and the uncertainty associated withvague editorial policies can limit efforts for democratic processes within a new socialmovement network. Pickard’s clues concerning the tyrannies of interactive technologyled to a closer investigation of the alternative media used by the Erie City activists,which revealed a significant deviation from Atkinson and Dougherty’s (2006) originalRPP research.

RPP Deviation in Erie City: Listserv

The interview questions concerning activists’ use of alternative media—particularlytheir use of the OBA listserv—revealed a category that deviated from the RPPfindings in Mystical City: confusion concerning the listserv. In past RPP research,Atkinson and Dougherty (2006) found that the Peace Alliance listserv was used toboth forward articles about ‘‘human rights’’ and ‘‘democracy’’ to audiences and acti-vists and to circulate a calendar of social justice events that provided opportunitiesfor activists to coordinate protest activities. According to Atkinson and Dougherty‘‘the information sent out on listservs, such as the Peace Alliance listserv, oftenbrought audience participants together into a forum where they could express theirworldviews or perform communicative strategies’’ (p. 81). Ultimately, the listserv wasintegral to the emergence of the multiplex because it not only allowed each theatre aglimpse into the other theatres, but it also informed all activists involved with thenetwork about opportunities for the four theatres to unite and protest an issue thatthreatened ‘‘human rights’’ and ‘‘democracy.’’

As in the case of the Atkinson and Dougherty (2006) research, many of the acti-vists in the reformist participatory theatre were steering committee members whoproduced the OBA listserv or worked with those producers, and most of the activistsin the other three theatres claimed to be on the listserv. However, when discussingtheir use of alternative media many of the activists—particularly activists in the refor-mist participatory theatre in which the listserv was produced—told conflictingaccounts about (a) the functions of the listserv in the network and (b) how thelistserv was operated. For some of the activists, the function of the listserv withinthe network was similar to those functions of the Peace Alliance listserv demon-strated in previous research: forwarding articles and a community calendar. Forinstance, Activist #17, a steering committee member, said about the OBA listserv,

Broken Multiplex 59

‘‘It’s consciousness raising. There’s articles. It alerts readers about events that areupcoming, events that occurred, and helps to foster notions of peace and justiceand non-violence.’’ However, other activists felt the listserv served altogether differ-ent functions. Activist #8 and #15 perceived the listserv as a tool that could be usedby OBA members to communicate directly with the steering committee. Activist#11, another steering committee member, claimed the listserv was a tool used bythe steering committee to gauge what issues were being discussed and raised byOBA members in their postings:

I think the listserv for us more serves as a kind of flag raising tool. People seem tobe talking about this certain thing. . . . It’s good just to be aware of—well, peopleare raising these issues and it can be put on the agenda for us. Makes us awareof something we should think about.

In this excerpt, Activist #11 demonstrates a perception that the listserv is not somuch a community calendar but a device to find out about issues important tomembers. Therefore, unlike in Mystical City where the Peace Alliance listserv wasseen as a community calendar and a source for social justice articles about ‘‘humanrights’’ and ‘‘democracy,’’ the OBA listserv in Erie City was a medium that seemed toserve different functions within the network according to different activists, with littleconsensus about those functions.

Furthermore, there were conflicting perceptions among activists about theoperation and maintenance of the OBA listserv as they discussed their own useof the listserv. Some activists, such as Activist #8 and #15 claimed that the listservwas open; anyone could post comments on the listserv. Conversely, some activistsclaimed that the listserv was closed; posts for the listserv passed through some kindof a ‘‘gatekeeper.’’ Activist #1 and #14 described such a gatekeeping process asphysical; one had to speak directly to steering committee members about postingmessages on the listserv. In particular, Activist #1, a frequent user of the listserv,described the need to make arguments to steering committee members for theinclusion of ‘‘after action reports’’ in listserv postings, ‘‘For a long time I have com-plained to [the steering committee], ‘why don’t you use the OBA listserv to reportabout the actions? What the hell happened at some of the events?’’’ For Activist#1, the listserv was controlled by the steering committee, and any changes tothe listserv or materials for the listserv, such as reports about actions, had to beposted by the steering committee. Other activists described a process in which mes-sages could be posted on the listserv, but those messages had to first pass throughsome ‘‘core leaders’’ in order to be circulated on the listserv. Activist #3, a directmember of OBA, struggled to provide a description of the process of postingmessages to the listserv:

I don’t know. I mean, sometimes I think I know, but I know there’s a group of realcore leaders who pretty much have a lot to say with how [the listserv]—what [thelistserv] responds to, and how [the listserv] responds.

60 J. D. Atkinson

For Activist #3, ‘‘core leaders’’ were integral to the uncertain process of postingmessages on the listserv. Interestingly, even one of the steering committee members,Activist#17, also described a listserv process that involved some kind of ‘‘gatekeeper’’who reviewed materials sent along by activists before uploading those materials to thelistserv, ‘‘I send [an article] on to the OBA listserv. And the gatekeeper probablyglances at that to see that it is appropriate and then uploads it on to the list.’’

Such inconsistencies concerning the function and operation of the listserv in theErie City network raised a significant question: Why did so many activists, includ-ing steering committee members, see such radically different functions and opera-tions? This question led to further investigation of the listserv on the OBA Website. Through the Web site, it was discovered that there were in fact multiple list-servs available to anyone who wished to sign up for one: a general listserv that pro-vided the OBA Times online, a discussion listserv, a listserv devoted to articlesabout the economic impacts of the Iraq War, and a community calendar listserv.6

All of the activists noted the OBA listserv as an alternative media source during theinterviews. However, none of the activists ever noted the existence of any otherOBA listservs; not even the current (Activist #11 and #17) and former (Activist#2) steering committee members who were interviewed. Instead, when each acti-vist was asked about their use of alternative media they would report the OBA list-serv as a primary alternative media source, not one of the OBA listservs. Ultimately,the interviews suggest that the confusion concerning the listserv stemmed fromactivists’ focus on a single OBA listserv, or the fact that they were unaware of otherOBA listservs.

The Broken RPP and Implications for New Social Movement Networks

The present study has revealed fractures within the Erie City new social movementnetwork that stem from activists’ perceptions about the social justice issues andprotest actions of OBA. These fractures served as the foundation for an overarchingperception by many activists that OBA had ‘‘branded’’ themselves as the social justiceorganization or claimed ‘‘ownership’’ to the concept of social justice, thus pushingany activists who did not share OBA visions and goals out of the network. Such aperception helps to explain the lack of a multiplex necessary for the emergenceof temporary protest communities, which left the RPP in the Erie City new socialmovement network ‘‘broken.’’

However, interviews with members of OBA, two OBA steering committeemembers, and a former steering committee member revealed no such attempts atownership or exclusion. Instead of the Machiavellian methods of OBA describedby several activists, the interviews provide evidence that confusion concerning theOBA listserv was an important factor in the ‘‘breaking’’ of the RPP in Erie City. Manyof the activists—even steering committee members—were unaware of the multiplelistservs used by OBA in the Erie City network, unsure about the functions of thelistserv(s) within the network, or uncertain how the listserv(s) operated altogether.7

Such uncertainties represent the only significant deviation from past RPP research in

Broken Multiplex 61

Mystical City, in which the Peace Alliance listserv played an integral role in thecirculation of narratives necessary for the emergence of the multiplex. Becausethe listserv was so important for the RPP in Mystical City, the confusion aboutthe listserv(s) in Erie City stands as a problematic factor associated with the fracturesin the network. Activist #5, who was affiliated with the before-mentioned Erie CityUrban Partnership, spoke at length about this problematic factor; a problem that hecalled the crisis of ‘‘cross-pollination’’:

I think the tensions bubble up because we don’t cross-pollinate each other. Theseorganizations of five hundred members are actually smaller groups of twentycommunicating with each other. And their point of conversation is—maybe they’llread about something in the paper, they’ll hear about it on the radio . . . but theydon’t hear it in our media. We don’t know what’s going on in each others stuff veryoften.

Although he was not speaking about listservs in general or the OBA listservspecifically, Activist #5 claimed that narratives were not adequately circulated,or ‘‘cross-pollinated,’’ between the OBA and the different interconnected organiza-tions in the network. He went on to explain that such a lack of narratives ‘‘leavestoo many unanswered questions’’ in the minds of activists, which erodes feelingsof trust in the network. Consequently, he said that you have many activists point-ing at one another ‘‘saying that someone’s a liar, or they haven’t told the wholetruth.’’ Activist #5 explained how he had worked with a separate hub-like net-work years before. In that instance, the different organizations affiliated withthe network made efforts to ‘‘cross-pollinate’’ one another through the use ofcommunity radio and listservs: ‘‘We began to trust one another. . . . That networkreally began to grow.’’ He noted that such ‘‘trust’’ and ‘‘growth’’ never seemed toemerge in the Erie City network, due in large part to this lack of ‘‘cross-pollina-tion.’’ However, most of the activists who participated in the research read orused one of the OBA listservs but were confused about the role and=or operationof the listserv(s) in the network. Ultimately, the research suggests that activists’confusion concerning the listserv(s) hindered the circulation of narratives andplayed a role in the fractures of the network.

The findings concerning the listserv in Erie City build on communicationliterature concerning new social movement networks in general and the RPPresearch of Atkinson and Dougherty (2006) specifically. In their past RPPresearch, Atkinson and Dougherty illustrated the emergence of common visionsand goals within the four theatres but did not critically examine the role of thelistserv used to establish those common visions and goals. The findings buildon their research by providing additional evidence of how vital the ‘‘cross-pollination’’ of narratives through a listserv, or any locally produced media, canbe for the construction and maintenance of a multiplex where performances ofresistance can be coordinated. In addition, the interviews with Erie City activistshave provided evidence for a new RPP characteristic: the capacity of a network toefficiently circulate common narratives to all of the theatres, or narrative capacity.

62 J. D. Atkinson

The narrative capacity of a network can be conceptualized as a dimension thatranges from efficient to inefficient. Those new social movement networks thathave efficient narrative capacity are those in which (a) members within one ofthe RPP theatres are capable of producing media necessary for the circulationof narratives (e.g., stories, articles, and calendars of events) to all of the othertheatres in the network and (b) activists within the other theatres have knowledgeabout the functions and operation of the media produced by the hub theatre.Atkinson and Dougherty’s research in Mystical City would constitute an exampleof a network with efficient narrative capacity. Inefficient networks are those inwhich media production is not possible, or the members of the network do notpossess the cultural capital necessary to accurately read=use the media produced.Such inefficient narrative capacity may hinder the construction of a multiplex, asobserved in the Erie City new social movement network.

The primary weakness of this emergent characteristic lies in the fact that theinterviews do not help explain how the confusion about the listserv emergedamong Erie City activists. The interviews focused on the activists’ use of alterna-tive media and affiliation=work with social justice organizations in Erie City.Future research should work to address this problem through interviews thatexplore the interpretive strategies used by activists to read alternative=interactivemedia circulated in a similarly ‘‘broken’’ RPP in which the multiplex fails toemerge. Past research by communication and media scholars such as Lindlof(1988) and Machin and Carrithers (1996) has demonstrated how the interpretivestrategies shape content and genres experienced by audiences as they use=readmedia texts. It could be that the many tendrils of information reaching out fromthe hub of the network through the multiple listservs, coupled with contrary andconflicting interpretive strategies, created a sort of tyranny of information similarto the tyrannies of interactive technology that had emerged from Pickard’s(2006b) research of Indymedia.org.

Notes

[1] Names of people or organizations have been changed to protect the anonymity ofparticipants. Erie City is a large city in the United States northeast with a population of150,000; the population of the metropolitan area is 500,000.

[2] See Denzin (1997) for a complete discussion on participatory and lay audiences.[3] Atkinson and Dougherty (2006) claim that the radical lay audiences use of alternative media

was like that of a mass audience as described by Abercrombie and Longhurst (1998), in thatmedia content was mere background noise. Therefore, they termed the radical lay space ofperformance a cafe rather than a theatre.

[4] For a complete description of the four theatres, see Atkinson and Dougherty (2006).[5] Activist #3 was affiliated with the reformist lay theatre.[6] Activist X, the Web site and listserv coordinator, was contacted to verify that each of the

listservs were still in use. Activist X confirmed that each listserv was still functional butrefused to take part in an interview.

[7] I use ‘‘(s)’’ in my discussion about the OBA listserv(s) because the perception among activistswas that there was a single listserv, whereas there were actually four listservs produced by OBA.

Broken Multiplex 63

References

Abercrombie, N. & Longhurst, B. (1998). Audiences: A sociological theory of performance andimagination. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Armstrong, D. (1981). A trumpet to arms: Alternative media in America. Boston: South End Press.Arquilla, J. & Ronfeldt, D. (2001). The advent of netwar (revisited). In J. Arquilla & D. Ronfeldt

(Eds.), Networks and netwars: The future of terror, crime, and militancy (pp. 1–25).Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Atkinson, J. D. (2005). Towards an understanding about complexities of alternative media:Portrayals of power in alternative media. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication,6, 77–84.

Atkinson, J. D. & Dougherty, D. S. (2006). Alternative media and social justice movements: Thedevelopment of a resistance performance paradigm of audience analysis. Western Journalof Communication, 70, 64–88.

Atton, C. (2002). Alternative media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Babbie, E. (2002). The basics of social research (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Best, K. (2005). Rethinking the globalization movement: Toward a cultural theory of contemporary

democracy and communication. Communication and Critical=Cultural Studies, 2, 214–237.Creswell, J. (1997). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Conquergood, D. (1985). Performing as a moral act: Ethical dimensions of the ethnography of

performance. Literature in Performance, 5, 1–13.Denzin, N. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Downing, J. (2003). Audiences and readers of alternative media: The absent lure of the virtually

unknown. Media, Culture & Society, 25, 625–645.Eriksson, K. (2005). On the ontology of networks. Communication and Critical=Cultural Studies, 2,

305–323.Fantasia, R. (1988). Cultures of solidarity: Consciousness, action, and contemporary American workers.

Berkeley: University of California Press.Frey, L. R. (1998). Communication and social justice research: Truth, justice, and the applied

communication way. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 26, 155–164.Gustainis, J. J. & Hahn, D. F. (1988). While the whole world watched: Rhetorical failures of

anti-war protest. Communication Quarterly, 36, 203–216.Holstein, J. & Gubrium, J. (1995). The active interview: Qualitative research methods series 37.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Huberman, A. & Miles, M. (1998). Data management and analysis methods. In N. Denzin &

Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (pp. 179–210). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Huesca, R. (2001). Conceptual contributions of new social movements to development communi-cation research. Communication Theory, 11, 415–433.

Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Langellier, K. (1983). A phenomenological approach to audience. Literature in Performance, 3, 34–39.

Lindlof, T. (1988). Media audiences as interpretive communities. In J. Anderson (Ed.), Communi-cation Yearbook 11 (pp. 81–107). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Lindlof, T. & Taylor, B. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods (2nd ed.). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Machin, D. & Carrithers, M. (1996). From ‘‘interpretive communities’’ to ‘‘communities ofimprovisation.’’ Media, Culture & Society, 18, 343–352.

Meikle, G. (2002). Future active: Activism and the internet. New York: Routledge.

64 J. D. Atkinson

Pickard, V. W. (2006a). United yet autonomous: Indymedia and the struggle to sustain a radicaldemocratic network. Media, Culture & Society, 28, 315–336.

Pickard, V. W. (2006b). Assessing the radical democracy of Indymedia: Discursive, technical, andinstitutional constructions. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 23, 19–38.

Rubin, H. & Rubin, I. (2004). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage Publications.

Ryan, G. & Bernard, H. (2000). Data management and analysis methods. In N. Denzin &Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 769–802). Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage Publications.

Ryan, C., Carragee, K. M., & Schwerner, C. (1998). Media, movements, and the quest for socialjustice. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 26, 165–181.

Stengrim, L. A. (2005). Negotiating postmodern democracy, political activism, and knowledgeproduction: Indymedia’s grassroots and e-savvy answer to media oligopoly. Communicationand Critical=Cultural Studies, 2, 281–304.

Broken Multiplex 65