Abstract
Digitalization and social media established world-encompassing publics that engage with international organizations. While scholarship has analyzed how international organizations communicate with such digital publics, this article determines who participates in these publics. We created a novel dataset to map the UN’s digital public on Twitter and analyzed the bios of 243,168 accounts that have interacted with the UN. Members of this public provide self-identifications (such as researcher, consultant, or scientist) that indicate a professional interest in the UN. We analyzed clusters of users that self-identify with similar words. We find high heterogeneity in the UN’s digital public: Clusters of professional, academic, and organizational users suggest that the technocratic history of international organizations reflects in the members of its digital public. At the same time, the digital public of the UN extends to very different groups (human rights activists and K-Pop fans feature in the UN’s public on Twitter). We demonstrate for future research how multiple correspondence analysis can reveal clusters in unstructured biographical data. The article contributes the first analysis of self-identifications in digital publics of global politics.
Subject
Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science
Reference46 articles.
1. Abdi, H., & Valentin, D. (2007). Multiple correspondence analysis. Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics, 2(4), 651–657.
2. Agné, H., Dellmuth, L. M., & Tallberg, J. (2015). Does stakeholder involvement foster democratic legitimacy in international organizations? An empirical assessment of a normative theory. The Review of International Organizations, 10(4), 465–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-014-9212-6
3. Anderl, F., Daphi, P., & Deitelhoff, N. (2021). Keeping your enemies close? The variety of social movements’ reactions to international organizations’ opening up. International Studies Review, 23(4), 1273–1299. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viaa103
4. Anderl, F., Deitelhoff, N., & Hack, R. (2019). Divide and rule? The politics of self-legitimation in the WTO. In F. Anderl, C. Daase, N. Deitelhoff, V. Kempf, J. Pfister, & P. Wallmeier (Eds.), Rule and resistance beyond the nation state: Contestation, escalation, exit (pp. 49–58). Rowman & Littlefield.
5. Bearce, D. H., & Jolliff Scott, B. J. (2019). Popular non-support for international organizations: How extensive and what does this represent? The Review of International Organizations, 14(2), 187–216.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献