University of South Florida
Digital Commons @ University of
South Florida
USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations
USF Graduate Theses and Dissertations
June 2023
Efficacy of Online Social Movements for Sparking Change: The
Case of the Missing Murdered and Indigenous Women Movement
(#MMIW)
Kacy A. Bleeker
University of South Florida
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd
Part of the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons
Scholar Commons Citation
Bleeker, Kacy A., "Efficacy of Online Social Movements for Sparking Change: The Case of the Missing
Murdered and Indigenous Women Movement (#MMIW)" (2023). USF Tampa Graduate Theses and
Dissertations.
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/9958
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the USF Graduate Theses and Dissertations at
Digital Commons @ University of South Florida. It has been accepted for inclusion in USF Tampa Graduate Theses
and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ University of South Florida. For more
information, please contact digitalcommons@usf.edu.
Efficacy of Online Social Movements for Sparking Change: The Case of the Missing Murdered
and Indigenous Women Movement (#MMIW)
by
Kacy A. Bleeker
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Department of Criminology
College of Behavioral and Community Sciences
University of South Florida
Major Professor: Ráchael A. Powers, Ph.D.
George W. Burruss, Ph.D.
Michael J. Lynch, Ph.D.
Bianca Fileborn, Ph.D.
Date of Approval:
June 1st, 2023
Keywords: Indigenous activism, social media activism, intersectional social movements,
victimization
Copyright © 2023, Kacy A. Bleeker
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This dissertation could not have been completed without the unwavering support,
guidance, and inspiration provided by my family, friends, and mentors. Dr. Powers, there are not
enough words to truly explain to you how important you have been to my success at USF,
though I’ll definitely continue to try. You have provided me with ample advice and guidance and
have made me feel never truly alone throughout my progress in the PhD program. I hope you
never forget the difference you have made to me and the thousands (I’m sure at least) of students
and faculty you have come into contact with. To Dr. Burruss, Dr. Lynch, Dr. Moule, and Dr.
Boggess, each of you have been instrumental to my progress and growth within the program and
has helped shape the kind of mentor I aspire to be. To Dr. Bromley, while I wish you could have
been there to see me walk across the stage, your kindness and enthusiasm for the field of
Criminal Justice and for your students will never be lost on me. To the rest of the faculty in the
Criminology Department, I have received unending support, from pep-talks to congratulations
for seemingly minor things, even from those I haven’t had the pleasure of working with directly.
All of your small acts of kindess and support have led me to where I am today and I am endlessly
grateful.
To my department girl gang turned life-long friends: thank you for being my academic
soulmates, my voices of reason, my go-tos for advice and silly quant questions, and the bright
spots in every good or bad day. To my parents: you have always supported my dreams and made
me feel like I could truly accomplish whatever it is I set my mind to. Thank you for your endless
faith in me, I couldn’t have done this without you. And to the rest of my family, I can never
repay you for your understanding and support, your excitement and care for me I will never
understand, but I’m truly appreciative of it. To my two precious fur babies, Miss Mandi and Miss
Lily: you both are my soul animals and I don’t think I could have made it through without you
both and your cuddles, kisses, screams, endless tufts of hair everywhere, and your love for me.
And finally, to the one who has been there for it all, through my low moments of “I’ll never get
this done” to all of my biggest triumphs, I’m the luckiest girl in the world to have you for a best
friend and husband. Thank you for being my number one fan and always believing in me, even
when I couldn’t believe in myself.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iii
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ iv
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................v
Chapter One: Introduction ...............................................................................................................1
Feminist Reflexivity.............................................................................................................5
Chapter Two: Theoretical Framework .............................................................................................7
Overview of Social Movements...........................................................................................8
Collective Identity and Collective Action..............................................................13
The Feminist Movement ....................................................................................................15
First Wave Feminism (1848 to the mid-1920s) .....................................................16
Second Wave Feminism (the 1960s to early 1990s)..............................................17
Third Wave Feminism (the mid 1990s to present) ................................................19
Indigenous Feminism .............................................................................................21
Intersectionality and Its Implications for Activism ...........................................................21
Feminist Online Activism ..................................................................................................24
Counter-Publics and Digital Spaces.......................................................................27
Chapter Three: Indigenous Activism .............................................................................................30
The Killing of Indigenous Activists...................................................................................33
Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women Movement (#MMIW) ..................................34
Chapter Four: Network Analysis of #MMIW Activists on Twitter...............................................37
Literature Review...............................................................................................................38
Social Media for Engagement ................................................................................38
Importance of Social Media Content .....................................................................39
Average Users as Activists ....................................................................................40
Social Network Analyses of Activism ...................................................................41
Social Media Activism in Indigenous Communities .............................................43
Current Study ....................................................................................................................44
Methodology ......................................................................................................................45
Results ................................................................................................................................48
Top User Characteristics ........................................................................................50
User Engagement ...................................................................................................52
Discussion ..........................................................................................................................57
i
Chapter Five: Media Representations of #MMIW ........................................................................61
Literature Review...............................................................................................................61
Media Coverage of Sexual Victimization and Other Minority Populations ..........62
United States Media Coverage of Indigenous Populations....................................63
Media Coverage of #MMIW .................................................................................65
Current Study .....................................................................................................................66
Methodology ......................................................................................................................66
Results ................................................................................................................................67
Victim-Blaming and Indigenous Stereotypes of Violence ....................................69
Erasure of Historical Violence ...............................................................................70
Disparities in Law Enforcement Response ............................................................71
Lack of Prevention and Intervention Coverage .....................................................72
Acknowledgment and Community ........................................................................72
Protest Paradigm and the Movement .....................................................................73
Discussion ..........................................................................................................................75
Chapter Six: Public Perceptions of Online Social Movements and #MMIW ...............................79
Literature Review...............................................................................................................80
In-Person Social Movements on Public Beliefs.....................................................84
Potential of Online Movements for Changing Public Beliefs ...............................85
Current Study .....................................................................................................................88
Methodology ......................................................................................................................89
Measures ............................................................................................................................90
Exposure and Attitudes Toward #MMIW and Indigenous Issues .........................90
User Experiences ...................................................................................................93
Beliefs About Social Media ...................................................................................95
Black Lives Matter (#BLM) Movement ................................................................96
MeToo (#MeToo) Movement ................................................................................97
Climate Change (#ClimateChangeIsReal) Movement...........................................98
Gender and Race-based Beliefs .............................................................................99
Demographics ......................................................................................................100
Analytic Strategy .............................................................................................................101
Results ..............................................................................................................................102
Descriptives..........................................................................................................102
Regressions ..........................................................................................................104
Discussion ........................................................................................................................108
Chapter Seven: Discussion and Implications ...............................................................................112
References ....................................................................................................................................118
Appendix A: Public Opinion Survey ...........................................................................................128
Appendix B: IRB Approval/Exemption Letters ..........................................................................136
ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1:
Centrality of Top Users in Sampled Network........................................................49
Table 2:
Descriptives of Top User Accounts in Sampled Network .....................................52
Table 3:
Descriptive Statistics of Independent and Dependent Variables .........................103
Table 4:
Binary Logistic Regression of Attitudes Toward Awareness and Activism
Related to #MMIW ..............................................................................................105
Table 5:
Binary Logistic Regression of Attitudes Toward External and Internal
Causes and Responses to #MMIW ......................................................................106
Table 6:
Binary Logistic Regression of Perceptions of Importance of #MMIW ...............107
Table 7:
Binary Logistic Regression of Exposure to #MMIW ..........................................108
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1:
Full Matrix of Users and Relationships .................................................................48
Figure 2:
Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users ................................................................50
Figure 3:
Color-coded Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users ...........................................53
Figure 4:
Matrix of Edges between Top In-Degree Users ....................................................54
Figure 5:
Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from August 2022 ..................................55
Figure 6:
Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from September 2022 ............................55
Figure 7:
Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from October 2022 ................................56
Figure 8:
Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from November 2022 ............................56
Figure 9:
Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from December 2022 .............................57
iv
ABSTRACT
The current study examined the context of the Missing and Murdered Indigenous
Women Movement (#MMIW) in the context of activist engagement, media representations, and
public awareness and beliefs related to the movement. The present study framed the movement
within the context of social movement theory, intersectionality, and feminism, to determine the
applicability of these frameworks in explaining an Indigenous social movement. While the use of
social media to facilitate and mobilize social movements is not a new phenomenon, limited
research has examined the functionality of online social movements, particularly in the context
of movements concerned with intersectional identities. Research highlights, however, that online
social movements have the potential to influence public opinion, particularly when they are
sustained over time and have widespread exposure and mobilization (Weeks et al., 2015; Donks,
2004). Three separate methodologies were used to examine the movement, including a social
network analysis of online Twitter activists, a content analysis of media representations of
#MMIW, and a survey of public beliefs related to #MMIW and use of social media. The findings
highlight the lack of activism engagement and exposure to the movement outside of Indigenous
communities, particularly in the context of social media and mainstream media coverage of the
movement. Further, exposure to #MMIW and having a more diverse online network impacts
support for the movement and Indigenous concerns more generally. Implications of the studies
are presented, particularly related to the need for future research to identify ways in which
v
Indigenous activists and community members may be better supported within their work and the
need for more culturally-specific models of social movement and feminist perspectives.
vi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Extant research suggests that social movements can be influential in enacting social
change. Early movements, such as the women’s rights and civil rights movements, found success
in changing public opinion through their achievements in receiving the right to vote,
reproductive rights, and equal employment policies, among many other achievements. However,
it is important to acknowledge that these movements have been critiqued for their limitations and
their ongoing challenges in achieving full societal transformation and addressing intersecting
forms of oppression. Research has found that early in-person social movements have contributed
to social change through mobilization efforts that target specific movement goals and create a
collective identity among participants (Flesher Fominaya, 2010; McCarthy & Wolfson, 1996).
The development of collective identity, of shared values and goals among movement members,
largely influences social movements, as the effectiveness of a movement is often contingent on
its durability over time.
While much of society’s everyday functions, such as shopping, banking, and
entertainment, have moved online, few studies have examined online social movements and
activism. Research that has examined online social movements has noted that efforts are made at
social change, albeit often in different forms than in-person movements (Murthy, 2018), though
the two are not entirely disparate. The growing popularity of using hashtag activism, which is
defined as the use of social media hashtags to promote a cause or bring about social change
(Dadas, 2017), to spread awareness of controversial topics provides one example of these efforts.
1
Research is mixed, however, on the effectiveness of the various efforts that may be enacted
online. In some capacities, hashtag activism may be considered “slacktivism,” which suggests
that using a hashtag within an online post involves little effort and commitment, minimizing the
activism's potential effects and overall longevity (Lacetera et al., 2016). On the other hand, some
research suggests that any online engagement with a movement may be beneficial, such that
even negative or minimal activism efforts suggest an acknowledgment of the movement and may
lend to awareness (Kristofferson et al., 2014; Lane & Dal Cin, 2018). Similarly, research on
hashtag feminism suggests that it may give voices to those most often ignored online and can
assist in empowerment and the fight for social justice (Chen et al., 2018). Further, research
suggests that social media use to promote social movements can lead to social change. Weeks
and colleagues (2015) examined whether active opinion leaders on social media attempt to
persuade perceptions of political ideologies, suggesting that the use of social media for spreading
awareness can inform public understanding of social and political topics. Though, this may be
compounded by the particular goals of the movement, as narratives that depart too much from
mainstream ideas of socio-political topics may not receive as much attention or “popularity”
(Boyle et al., 2004).
The Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women movement (#MMIW) presents a unique
case for an online social movement, as it is intersectional in nature and has primarily been
promoted through Indigenous communities and activists (Parsloe & Campbell, 2021). #MMIW
began in Canada in 2014 to create awareness of the high rates of violence Indigenous women
face, mostly advocated for by Indigenous organizations, before trending in the United States in
2017. The murder of an Indigenous woman, Savanna LaFontaine-Greywind, in 2017 contributed
to the rise of the hashtag within the United States, kickstarting data collection efforts of missing
2
and murdered Indigenous people and the development of policies to improve responses to crimes
against Indigenous people. Savanna was a 22-year-old Indigenous woman from the Spirit Lake
tribe, who was originally reported missing in August of 2017 in Fargo, North Dakota. The search
efforts following her disappearance led to national news coverage and the identification of two
individuals whom were later found to have assaulted Savanna and were arrested and sentenced
for kidnapping and a conspiracy to commit murder. Savanna had been a victim of fetal
abduction, having her child forcibly removed from her and subsequently dying of blood loss.
Despite the long history of violence, Indigenous communities have faced, the attention this case
received sparked interest in the cause and initiated numerous policies to improve resources and
support for Indigenous communities, particularly regarding inadequate law enforcement
responses and data collection efforts. Notwithstanding the acknowledgment of Savanna’s case
and initial efforts into prevention and response to cases of violence against Indigenous women,
little research has examined how activism efforts continue to work for awareness and how their
efforts translate to greater mobilization of activism effort.
This dissertation is a multi-modal examination of engagement with the Missing Murdered
and Indigenous Women movement (#MMIW). More specifically, this project examines networks
of #MMIW activists, public perceptions, and mass media representations of the movement and
Indigenous communities more generally. #MMIW is particularly important, as indigenous
women have a high rate of sexual and domestic violence (Breiding et al., 2014), while
simultaneously being largely ignored as victims by the criminal justice system and society. The
movement is of distinct interest for this project, as it is intersectional in nature and can be used to
examine how social movements concerned with race and gender-based violence exist online.
3
Chapter two provides an overview of the theoretical framework and historical
developments of the feminist movement, how intersectionality may be used to better understand
social movements, and provides background into the feminist framework and development of
feminist movements in digital spaces. Chapter three discusses Indigenous populations in relation
to their historical experiences of oppression and efforts at activism, in addition to a more
thorough overview of #MMIW. Chapter four examines networks of the most prominent #MMIW
activists on Twitter and their engagement with other users, to better establish who is engaged in
these activism efforts. Thus , through social network analysis, I explore the engagement among
the most active Twitter users in relation to #MMIW and what this may imply for establishing
communication networks among activists. The fifth chapter explores media representations of
#MMIW and the use of stereotypical representations of Indigenous people to situate the current
state of mainstream media narrative development of the movement. Of interest here is whether
coverage of the movement is consistent with other mainstream stereotypical narratives of
Indigenous people, which function to delegitimize them as victims, and if #MMIW is depicted as
a positive or negative social movement. Chapter six considers public perceptions of #MMIW and
other race and gender-based social movements, in addition to general use and beliefs of social
media, to provide context to societal understandings, the perceived legitimacy of, and support for
online social movements. More specifically, this section examines the public’s exposure to
#MMIW and attitudes related to Indigenous concerns and activism, to better understand the
impact that these features may have on the advancement of the movement. And the final chapter
provides a discussion of the implications of these findings for future research, particularly as it
relates to support for Indigenous activists. Together, these projects collectively contribute to a
more comprehensive understanding of the #MMIW movement and its dynamics. They examine
4
the engagement and communication networks among prominent activists on Twitter, analyze
media representations to assess the alignment with existing stereotypes of Indigenous people,
explore public perceptions of #MMIW and other social movements, and discuss the implications
of these findings for future research, specifically regarding support for Indigenous activists.
Thus, these investigations shed light on the movement's reach, challenges in media portrayal,
public attitudes, and potential avenues for advancing the cause.
Feminist Reflexivity
The development of feminist empiricism arose in the 1960s to call attention to and
remedy the androcentric bias apparent in much of social science research. The 1960s and 1970s
saw a surge in feminist research which sought to include women in social science research, as
both academics and subjects, and specify their experiences rather than subjugate them as the
same as men. Further, feminist scholars of the time attempted to argue against the emphasis of
complete objectivity, a concept promintentwithin positivism; rather, they argued for a reflexive
approach in which researchers disclose their values, attitudes, and biases in their approach to
research (Hesse-Biber, 2012). Contrasting perspectives exist, which suggest the benefit of
complete objectivity within the positivist perspective and social science research, is that it
minimizes bias and subjective influences in order to produce reliable, replicable, and universally
applicable findings. However, those of the feminist perspective highlight that all knowledge is
situated and each researcher inevitably brings their own perspectives, experiences, and values to
their work. Thus, feminist empiricists do not necessarily reject empirical methods or the concept
of objectivity, rather they suggest that these methods and concepts should be reevaluated and
reformed to account for gender and other forms of bias (Hesse-Biber, 2012). This approach
allows for researchers to consider who is left out of research and social issue considerations, and
5
an acknowledgment of power dynamics and that the voices of women are not a monolith. In
engaging with this work from a feminist epistemological standpoint, I acknowledge my
standpoint as an educated White woman who is not a member of the Indigenous community.
However, my research and academic career are shaped through a critical feminist lens that
attempts to provide support to minority communities who have experienced historical oppression
and high rates of violent victimization by amplifying their voices and supporting their activism.
Thus, the current work aims to provide a critical examination of #MMIW, both in terms of how
it has previously functioned within the framework of social movement theory, in addition to
providing historical and theoretical context to the development and engagement of Indigenous
activism, in order to push forward sociological examinations of Indigenous activism,
victimization, and the ways in which institutions may attempt to remedy historic harms they have
been complicit in.
6
CHAPTER TWO: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Social movement theory has largely focused on how in-person social movements develop
and gain traction, including efforts at recruitment and mobilization to create change. Crucial to
each aspect of a social movement is collective identification, whereby members of a group have
a sense of similarity and solidarity in desired goals surrounding a movement’s main concerns.
Klandermans’ (1997; 1987) theoretical model of how social movements recruit and develop over
time, used as the overarching framework for this project, emphasizes the role of mobilization
and motivation in movement development and sustainment. Flesher-Fominaya (2010) further
emphasizes these aspects of mobilization and motivation through collective identification,
whereby a sense of “sameness” assists in building stronger ties across movement members and a
greater likelihood of working together to achieve goals.
The feminist movement and civil rights movement provide examples of how groups in
society have come together, mobilized, and made impacts to cultural understandings of gender
and race and to policy development. While these early movements largely existed in-person,
social movements have recently made a shift online. Despite this shift, it is unclear whether
social media allows for the same processes of mobilization and collective identity formation to
take place. This is particularly important, as the Internet and social media are more accessible
and may provide more opportunities for minority populations and counter-narratives to take
place because of the popularization of content creation and distribution and number of online
platforms, enabling individuals from diverse backgrounds to share their perspectives and
7
experiences (Chrispal & Bapuji, 2020). However, despite this increased access, the content on
these platforms is still regulated, which can shape visibility and influence in ways that may not
fully support the amplification of marginalized voices or the formation of collective identities
(Dahlberg, 2005). This can be seen in the considerable number of social movements that have
emerged online, including the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women (#MMIW) movement,
which acknowledges the intersectional role, or acknowledgment of how intersecting identities
differentialy impact experiences of concerns for change, of social movements in creating justice
across race and gender.
The remaining portion of this chapter provides a theoretical framework for how social
movements develop and motivate people to become part of and participate in movement
mobilization efforts. Then, the traditional feminist movements are situated within that
framework, to provide an overview of how in-person social movements have allowed for a
collective identity of members to develop. Implications for how intersectionality may impact
social movement development and how #MMIW can be situated in this framework are
discussed, followed by an overview of previous research examining feminist social movements
in both in-person and online spaces.
Overview of Social Movements
Social movements are organized collectives of individuals which aim to create change on
social, cultural, and political issues (Snow et al., 2004). Prior research has extensively examined
how in-person social movements are mobilized to promote social change, often emphasizing the
role of group consciousness (Duncan, 1999; Thomas et al., 2019). Group consciousness suggests
that members of an organization must share the samevalues and believe that they have enough
resources to act on those values (Duncan, 1999; van Zomeren et al., 2008). Research has found
8
that group consciousness, particularly that of collective identity, influences movement
involvement and the overall stability of a social movement (Duncan, 1999; Thomas et al., 2019).
However, a social movement organization’s goals are considered fluid, meaning that they
fluctuate over time based on access to resources, political climate, activist involvement, and
overall collective action goals (Meyer et al., 2002). Thus, member involvement in social
movements, from initiation to continued engagement, is complex.
Accordingly, Tajfel (1981) suggests that collective identification with a movement is a
crucial motivator for movement participation. Collective identification refers to the role of the
group and how individuals define themselves as part of a group, which means individuals’
willingness to be associated with and consider themselves as part of a specific group is essential
to participation. Further, Tajfel (1981) argues that collective identification, which is the
psychological process through which individuals develop a sense of belonging to a certain social
group, allows for mass participation or coalescence in a movement and leads to the success of a
social movement. However, researchers have criticized this model as being too simplistic
(Huddy, 2013; Simon et al., 1998), suggesting that additional factors must be related to the
development and continuation of a cohesive identity.
Consequently, Klandermans (1997) identified a four-step model to explain how people
become and remain a part of social movements. The model maintains that individuals must (a)
become a part of mobilization potential, (b) be targets of mobilization attempts, (c) become
motivated to participate, and (d) overcome any barriers to participation (Klandermans, 1997).
Mobilization potential means that a subsection of the population must be inclined to participate
and have a positive outlook on the social movement. Those who may be so inclined to participate
are not limited to those who may benefit from the social movement’s goals but also may be those
9
who become sympathetic to the movement’s goals. Mobilization potential, then, refers to the
existence of a group of individuals who find value in a social movement and may consider
participating in said social movement. The mobilization potential of #MMIW can be seen
through the support of Indigenous communities themselves, many of whom have firsthand
knowledge or personal connections to victims, which creates a sense of urgency and motivation
to take action. These community members find value in the movement as it directly addresses
their own experiences of loss, trauma, and systemic injustice (Parsloe & Campbell, 2021). Social
media may also lend itself to mobilization potential with other communities, as social media
campaigns and collaborations with other social justice movements can contribute to raising
awareness and attracting people who find value in the movement's goals.
The next step in the model, becoming a target of mobilization attempts, refers to
individual members of the mobilization potential being solicited to participate within the social
movement. Crucial to mobilization recruitment is the network that social movements establish
(Snow et al., 1980). Klandermans (1997) argues that social movements must establish their own
organization and create relationships with other existing organizations and networks.
Klandermans and Oegema (1987) found formal networks to be the most influential, with
members of a human rights campaign mobilized largely by associated organizations or media.
Thus, the broader the network a social movement establishes and the more resources available,
the greater the number of potential mobilization targets. Motivating individuals to participate is
crucial to a social movement gaining momentum and having continued influence. Within the
#MMIW movement, established organizations often play a crucial role in mobilizing individuals
to participate in various actions and initiatives, as can be seen through the initiation of the
movement by various Indigenous organization (e.g., Sovereign Bodies Institute, MMIWUSA,
10
National Indigenous Women's Resource Center, etc.). After becoming aware of mobilization
potential, either through shared community interests or through social media attempts at
increasing awareness, soliciting participation through various initiatives and actions can assist in
organizations empowering individuals to become active contributors, amplifying their voices and
efforts within the movement.
Klandermans (1997) suggests that an individual’s perceived costs and benefits of
participation are what motivates one to participate; meaning that individuals, before engaging in
a movement, must consider the specific activities in which they may be asked, and therefore
willing, to participate in. Benefits may range from those which are social (e.g., social ties),
psychological (e.g., empowerment, provide a sense of purpose), collective (e.g., social change,
advancement of cause), moral (e.g., moral satisfaction working in accordance with personal
ideals), or symbolic (e.g., self-expression, identity formation) (Klandermans, 1997; Klandermans
& Oegema, 1987). Similarly, costs of and risks of movement involvement may include things
such as time and effort, personal sacrifices, monetary loss, social stigma, or potential harm or
conflict. Further, Klandermans (1997) emphasizes that this cost-benefit analysis is subjective
and may change from person to person and activity to activity. The cost-benefit analysis can be
conceptualized as the weighted sum of three types of expected costs and benefits: collective
motive (e.g.,, equal rights, etc.), normative motive (e.g., the admiration by family or friends,
etc.), and the reward motive (e.g., gaining/losing money, etc.). Empirical examinations of the
three motives have found them predictive of social movement engagement among various types
of movements, including labor and humanitarian efforts (Klandermans & Oegema, 1987;
Stürmer & Simon, 2004). Additionally, McCarthy and Wolfson (1996) suggest that agency is the
key to the proliferation of a movement, referring to the effort activists put into a particular social
11
movement. Further, these authors argue that strategy, such as public education (i.e., bringing
information to broad audiences, etc.) or structural change (i.e., attempting to change laws, etc.),
are crucial to continued engagement because of the number of resources required for each of
these tactics, and ultimately agency (McCarthy & Wolfson, 1996). Thus, while costs and benefits
may be subjective, potential costs and benefits related to #MMIW may be the weighing of
financial burdens (e.g., donations) versus potential rewards such as personal growth or finding a
sense of purpose in their efforts, similarly the cost of gaining condemnation for participating in
the movement may be weighed against the admiration from various friends and family members
for contributing to a humanitarian effort.
The final step of the social movement engagement model emphasizes overcoming
participation barriers in a movement. In this step, Klandermans (1997) notes that motivation to
participate is not sufficient to ensure actual participation; rather, it is the ability to overcome
barriers to participation in combination with the motivation that ensures participation. Meaning
that while intentions to participate are a necessary part of the process of engagement, intentions
in and of themselves do not guarantee that a behavior can or will be enacted. Klandermans
(1997) then argues that barriers or obstacles (i.e., illness, lack of transportation, etc.) are what
separates intentions from enacted behavior. Research examining Klandermans’ (1997) model,
though primarily focused on the role of motivation and cost-benefit analysis of participation, has
found consistent support (Klandermans & Oegema, 1987; Simon et al., 1998). Within #MMIW
and other movements, individuals may face personal barriers such as illness, lack of
transportation, or other logistical challenges that hinder their ability to actively engage in rallies,
events, or meetings. Additionally, systemic barriers, including social stigmas, limited resources,
or cultural barriers, can pose challenges to participation for some individuals within the
12
Indigenous community. The movement may able to assist in overcoming these barriers, through
offering resources such as transportation assistance or organizing virtual events or events in
accessible spaces; further, if collective identity is established, individuals may be more likely to
feel empowered to overcome personal and systemic barriers, as they are part of a larger
community working towards a common goal.
Simon and colleagues (1998) theorize that both cost-benefit analysis and identification
with the group are important to predicting social movement participation. While research on
motivations to participate in social movements has primarily been disparate in terms of
motivations considered, Simon and colleagues (1998) study was the first to examine both
frameworks and find support for their mutual existence. These authors conducted surveys among
two social movements, an elderly rights movement in Germany and the gay movement in the
United States, measuring participants’ identification with related organization goals as well as
the three motives identified by Klandermans’ (1997) cost-benefit analysis. Accordingly, their
research highlights that identification with a social movement and social category is important to
collective action, as is the calculation of costs and benefits (Simon et al., 1998). More
specifically, the authors found that the reward and collective motives were particularly important
to participation, as was identification as an older person and as a member of the Gray Panther
movement (Simon et al., 1998).
Collective Identity and Collective Action
Collective identity has largely remained abstract in the literature, as it encompasses
various moving parts within its definition and researchers may not always conceptualize it in its
entirety (Flesher Fominaya, 2010). The disparity in defining collective identity is rooted in an
understanding of group dynamics needed to be considered a united front. Is being part of a group
13
with a singular purpose enough, or does the engagement with members and shared beliefs and
values contribute to this identity? Flesher Fominaya (2010) unite the literature to identify a
general definition of collective identity, maintaining that individuals within a group develop a
collective identity with one another through individual and shared understandings of a mutual
goal and needed action. In the context of #MMIW, we may see collective identity within the
Indigenous community through the shared experiences of personal victimization, exposure to
others who have been victimized, and a general awareness of the alarming rates because of how
rampant it is within their community. These shared experiences lend to the concern for needed
action and can be seen through the initiatives which started #MMIW by Indigenous specific
organizations, such as the Sovereign Bodies Institute, an organization founded by Indigenous
members which is dedicated to conducting research, collecting data, and advocating for missing
and murdered Indigenous people. Likewise, Flesher Fominaya (2010) also emphasize that
collective identity development is multidimensional and not an “either-or” phenomenon. Instead,
participation in a social movement helps to reinforce and strengthen collective identity, rather
than requiring prior identification. Through engagement in collective action, individuals develop
a stronger sense of belonging, solidarity, and shared identity with other participants, contributing
to the reinforcement of collective identity.As identified by Flesher Fominaya (2010), the
development of a collective identity is integral for social movement sustainment. Klandermans’
(1997) emphasis on motivation and connection as needed for participating in mobilization
attempts of a social movement are particularly relevant here. If collective identity refers to
having mutually agreed upon beliefs and goals among a group of individuals, then an
organization or movement with a strong collective identity may be particularly adept at
14
motivating individuals to become involved and have a higher benefit to costs ratio to influence
continued participation and help individuals overcome barriers to mobilization.
The wider social movement literature described here provides the context for
understanding how social movements emerge and become stable and their potential for
substantiating change and remaining stable over time. The theory suggests how shared
experiences and collective identity serve to recruit individuals within a social movement,
motivate them to become involved, and how this identity, in addition to organizational
assistance, may help those recruited to overcome any potential barriers to participation.
Mobilization is key for movement growth and sustainability (Flesher Fominaya, 2010) and the
volatility of many social movements is potentially problematic in creating counter-narratives, or
perspectives that challenge or oppose the dominant or mainstream narratives, (Louis et al.,
2020). The volatility can be attributed to shifting goals and concerns of social movements
(Flesher Fominaya, 2010), in addition to a reluctance of society to actively participate in a
movement due to fear of social or collective costs.The ability for online social movements to
reach a larger network and evidence that online networks can help in identity formation within
these networks (Donk, 2004) is potentially helpful in ensuring the maintenance of these
movements. Collective identity formation assists in recruitment, as well as engagement in actions
related to achieving movement goals (e.g., protest participation, etc.), and retainment within the
collective (Flesher Fominaya, 2010).
The Feminist Movement
Broadly, feminism is a social justice movement that advocates for equity based on sex
and gender, though dependent on the type of feminist perspective, and for human liberation.
Activism in efforts to achieve equity has often been categorized into waves of action by some
15
feminists, for easier delineation in progress and changes in thought over time, with the first wave
of feminism beginning as early as 1848. This section briefly discusses each wave related to their
collective goals and mobilization. However, it is important to note that various feminist
perspectives exist under the umbrella of the feminist movement and the emphasis among each
perspective has fluctuated over time, the current discussion presents information largely in the
context liberal and radical feminism, though considers other perspectives’ critiques of these
waves. Broadly, liberal feminism focuses on achieving gender equality through legal and
political reform and advocates for equal rights and opportunities for women within the existing
social and political systems, a common feature of the first two waves of feminism (Baumgardner
& Richards, 2010). Similarly, radical feminism posits that gender inequality is rooted in
patriarchy, a system of male domination, and aims to dismantle the patriarchy and transform
social structures by challenging gender norms, practices, and institutions and was prominent
during the second wave of feminism (Baumgardner & Richards, 2010). Throughout, racial
considerations in these efforts (or lack thereof) are highlighted through intersectional feminist
critiques.
First Wave Feminism (1848 to the mid-1920s)
The first wave of feminism is generally suggested to have started in 1848, with the
Seneca Falls meeting in New York. Women abolitionists, including Jane Hunt, Mary Ann
McClintock, Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Martha Wright, also known as the
Seneca Falls 5, ratified the Declaration of Sentiments. The Declaration of Sentiments, drafted
based on the Declaration of Independence, emphasized the need for women to have fundamental
rights. Following the 1848 meeting, the Seneca Falls Five were joined by other women
abolitionists, including Susan B Anthony, Matilda Joslyn Gage, and Sojourner Truth, which was
16
instrumental in emphasizing the collaborative nature of the feminist movement and civil rights
movement of the time, oppression from White men.
Activism in the 1920s, marked by protest demonstrations, helped get the Nineteenth
Amendment passed in 1920, giving women the right to vote. Despite the implementation, Black
citizens were still kept from voting based on racist practices such as poll taxes, which continued
until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed. The first wave of feminism accomplished multiple
efforts toward equality, assisting in abolishing slavery in 1865 and giving women the right to
divorce, own their own property, and claim inheritance.
The National Organization of Women (NOW), though occurring two generations after
the Seneca Falls Meeting, assisted greatly in the activism of the first wave of feminism. Efforts
were made at the development of an Equal Rights Amendment by Alice Paul, which aimed to
create legal gender equality for men and women. More organizations began to pop up at this
time, fighting for equality based on sex, such as the International Ladies Garment Workers
Union, the National Council of Negro Women, and other efforts aimed to start labor laws and the
legalization of birth control.
Second Wave Feminism (the 1960s to early 1990s)
Second wave feminism is generally thought to have centered on efforts for legal equality
and originated out of political women working in the civil rights and anti-war movements of the
1970s. During this time, the Black Power movement had also replaced the racially integrated
civil rights movement, barring White people from participation, and stifling the role of Black
women. Thus, many Black women, such as Fannie Lou Hamer, Florynce Kennedy, Pauli
Murray, and Aileen Hernandez, helped create or work with feminist organizations such as NOW,
the Women’s Action Alliance, and the National Women’s Caucus. Though, Betty Friedan (1963)
17
is credited as instrumental in sparking the second wave of feminism in relation to considerations
of women’s social roles, family, sexuality, and reproductive writes, through her book “The
Feminine Mystique” and the creation of the National organization for Women (NOW) in 1966.
This pivotal work challenged the widely accepted notion of women's happiness being tied solely
to the home and family, arguing that women had the right to pursue personal and professional
ambitions outside these traditional roles (Friedan, 1963).
Consequently, the second wave of Feminism sparked the development of feminist
organizations in large cities such as Washington, DC, Chicago, and Gainesville, Florida. These
organizations used efforts such as consciousness-raising, speak-outs, and zap action (e.g., public
demonstration to call out a celebrity while bringing attention to a particular issue)
demonstrations to facilitate the movement. In the 1970s, the Women’s Health Movement, known
at the time as the Women’s Self-Help Movement, began and was proliferated through books
such as Our Bodies, Ourselves. The second wave of feminism also started backup work on the
ERA, with NOW being instrumental in getting the amendment started in Congress. However,
seven years after the first states ratified the ERA, it was still three states short of a supermajority
vote and was not implemented. And while the ERA still has not been passed, many states have
implemented their own equal rights amendments.
The second wave was integral in many avenues of gender equality, including hiring of
women withinpolice departments, implementing the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Title IX, and
legal redress for child sexual abuse, domestic violence, and sexual assault and harassment.
Further, the second wave created an overall awareness of sexism through click consciousnessraising and political involvement. Women historians and the development of African American
studies, Native American studies, and many others proliferated during this time, acknowledging
18
the White-washing of much of the history taught. While the second wave of feminism achieved
many important victories in the fight for women's rights, it also faced significant criticism for its
lack of inclusivity. Many women of color and working-class women felt excluded from the
movement, which was often led by and focused on the issues of white, middle-class women.
Prominent Black feminists of the time argued that sexism cannot be separated from other forms
of oppression like racism and classism, and that these intersections of identity must be central to
the feminist struggle (Crenshaw, 1991; Hill Collins, 2022; hooks, 2000).
Third Wave Feminism (the mid 1990s to present)
The third wave of feminism emerged in part as a response to the perceived failures of the
second wave, including its lack of attention to racial and class disparities. Key figures in the third
wave, such as Kimberlé Crenshaw and Patricia Hill Collins, developed theories like
intersectionality and Black feminist thought, which emphasized the interconnectedness of
different forms of oppression. Intersectionality, a term coined by Crenshaw (1991), asserted that
people's experiences of oppression are shaped not just by their gender, but also by their race,
class, sexual orientation, and other aspects of their identity. In this wave, more emphasis was
also put on understanding and appreciating the experiences of women outside the Western
context. There has been a recognition that feminism is not a monolithic concept, but rather, it
must be understood and practiced in ways that respect and incorporate the diverse experiences
and struggles of women worldwide (Grande, 2003). Further, the 1990s acknowledged queer
feminism and sought to challenge and deconstruct traditional norms and assumptions related to
gender and sexuality, and advocates for the rights, visibility, and liberation of LGBTQ+
individuals, contributing to the need for a more nuanced, inclusive, and intersectional approach
to understanding gender and the fight for equality. Butler (1990) and Rubin (1984) asserts that
19
gender is not a fixed identity or a stable category, but is instead a kind of performance that is
socially and culturally constructed. This perspective challenges traditional feminist views that
often rely on a stable and binary understanding of gender, wherein women are universally
oppressed by men in the same way. By arguing that gender is performative, Butler (1990)
implies that it can be subverted and challenged, opening up possibilities for resistance and
change.
Thus, the 1990s were marked by feminists not satisfied by the efforts of the second wave
and who began to call themselves the third wave. In 1989 and 1992, feminists flocked to
Washington mall to support reproductive freedom. In 1991, seven hundred young women
attended a NOW conference in Ohio, and in 1992 the Third Wave Direct Action organization
held a voter registration drive in reference to early freedom rides during the civil rights
movement, registering over 20,000 new voters. In this way, the beginning of the third wave of
feminism was marked by more direct efforts at activism engagement. Contrary to other waves,
however, many of the actions of feminists during this wave, such as embracing sexuality through
low-cut clothing and bright make-up, had been reminiscent of oppression by men in previous
waves. The Riot Grrls were one of these efforts, redefining femininity and attempting to takeback sexist oppressive language (i.e., slut, bitch, etc.) through protests in which they wrote these
words across their bodies or on protest signs.
Media coverage of the introduction of the new wave of feminism was poorly executed in
the sense that presented a simplified and stereotyped view of the movement, representing
feminism at face value and not acknowledging the intent of the movement (Baumgardner &
Richards, 2010). Further, feminist action, as depicted in the media, dwindled down to only a few
examples, showing examples of activists and campaigns, such as The Vagina Monologues by V
20
(formally known as Eve Ensler), which may be considered more obscene or controversial. The
media coverage was reminiscent of media coverage of the second wave, which represented the
movement by a few White women writers. Though arguably not as clearly “present” as past
activist groups, other organizations emerged during the third wave, such as the San Francisco
Young Women’s Work Project, the Girlies, Medical Students for Choice, and the Third Wave
Foundation.
Indigenous Feminism
Despite the growth of feminism and feminist work to be more inclusive, it is important to
acknowledge that not all Indigenous women consider themselves to be a feminist. Research
typically delineates between two lines of consideration, the acknowledgement of the importance
of the feminist movement but reluctance to use the term, and the need for an Indigenous-specific
version of feminism. The underlying idea behind both is that traditional forms of feminism have
been complacent in stereotypical and paternalistic narratives related to Indigenous people and
that it often lacks cultural considerations across different racial and ethnic groups (Cunningham,
2006; Grande, 2003). However, the first perspective, suggests that we must not focus on women
specifically but should consider Indigenous people equally in our work (Grande, 2003;
Prindeville, 2003); whereas the second still embraces the underlying premise of feminism to
work towards equality for women. Thus, the Indigenous feminist perspective combines feminist
principles with the unique experiences and struggles of Indigenous women, aiming to challenge
patriarchal and colonial systems while advocating for empowerment, self-determination, and the
rights of Indigenous communities. Various Indigenous activism organizations embrace
Indigenous feminism, suggesting that it is “an intersectional theory and practice of feminism that
21
focuses on decolonization, Indigenous sovereignty and autonomy, and human rights for
Indigenous women and their families” (Gharon, 2021, p. 1).
Intersectionality and Its Implications for Activism
Participatory action in social movements has primarily only recognized singular
identities, such as causes which only focus on gender or race and not how these two identities
may intersect to create varying experiences, as evidenced in the feminism movement and civil
rights movement, the multiple identities of individuals have been mainly ignored.
Intersectionality refers to the idea that social identities intersect to create different experiences of
discrimination or power. More specifically, Crenshaw (1991) argues that women of marginalized
racial and ethnic groups encounter different structural barriers when accessing support for
violence, when compared to other groups, such as White women or Black men. Within the
feminist movement and civil rights movement, Black women were largely ignored, highlighting
the multiple types of oppression experienced based on the intersection of racial and gender
identities. Hill Collins (2022) critiqued mainstream feminism as primarily focusing on the
experiences of white, middle-class women, arguing that it often ignored the unique challenges
faced by women of color due to its limited perspective. Likewise, Kendall (2020) argues that
mainstream feminism tends to focus on issues that primarily affect privileged women,
overlooking pressing concerns such as access to quality healthcare, affordable housing, food
insecurity, and racial inequality. Further, Hill Collins (2022) contends that feminist theory must
consider the intersecting systems of oppression that shape the lives of Black women and other
women of color. Similarly, hooks (2000) emphasizes the importance of collective action,
solidarity, and inclusivity in feminist movements, stressing that feminism should be for
everybody regardless of their social location. By ignoring the combined experiences of gender
22
and race, we only allow for those more privileged voices (e.g., White, middle-class, heterosexual
women) to inform our research, policy, and practice. Hill Collins (2022) also emphasizes the
significance of "outsider within" status, arguing that Black women, due to their marginalized
position within society, often have a unique and critical perspective on social, economic, and
political issues. Thus, she argues that acknowledging and valuing the perspectives of Black
women is essential for a more comprehensive understanding of society and a truly inclusive
feminist movement (Hill Collins, 2022). Further, intersectionality is situated in systems of power
and oppression, which acknowledges that historical and institutional actions which reinforce
these concepts impact experiences, rather than personal identity (Cooper, 2016).
Research acknowledges social movements’ emphasis on single instances of identity, such
that most social movements are generally concerned with only one social categorization, such as
race, gender, or class (Montoya, 2021). As indicated above, however, social movements do not
often follow a streamlined process of mobilization or development, ascentral ideas of a
movement often change over time. Thus, the potential for social movements to be simplified on
their “face” to allow for activists to spread a message more quickly may be a reason for this
emphasis on a singular identity. However, this is particularly problematic because creating a
collective identity within a movement is crucial to mobilization and sustainability efforts (Meyer
et al., 2002). Snow and colleagues (2013) argues that other more marginalized social identities
are often left out because they are considered more political subjects in traditional narratives.
More specifically, this suggests that these identities are seen as inherently intertwined with
political dynamics and are often considered controversial or sensitive topics, and therefore,
overlooked. For example, Tyree (2020) studied how Black women were framed in #MeToo
movement stories within Black news sources, analyzing 47 news stories published in the six
23
months following the proliferation of the hashtag on Twitter in 2016. The results indicated that
Black women's voices, historically muted in traditional news outlets, were prioritized in the
Black press. They were provided with space to share information, personal stories, and opinions
and sources advocated for Black women and framed sexual violence and assault as serious
issues. However, the discourse within these stories also revealed the layers of stigma and trauma
associated with Black women being disbelieved, disrespected, and discredited, which often
pushed many into the shadows with their allegations (Tyree, 2020). These findings suggest how
Black women in the United States are faced with divisions and differences that both legitimized
and undermined their abilities to name their abusers or detail their experiences both within the
Black community and U.S. society pre and post #MeToo.
Intersectionality plays, perhaps, an even more significant role in online social movements
because of issues of accessibility. Though they are arguably platforms that provide a space for
discourse contrary to dominant narratives (Salter, 2013), online spaces are still regulated. Whose
voices are heard and who is seen on these platforms can be regulated by the site used, as the
organization which owns a platform may influence the type of narratives shown and discourse
allowed (Gillespie, 2018). Further, users can choose to delete comments from their posts or
profiles, limiting accessibility of engagement. An intersectional approach to examining online
platforms is crucial, as marginalized groups are often left out of dominant narratives of
discourse, and this may afford online platforms the ability to reproduce forms of oppression
within their exclusivity (Trott, 2020).
Feminist Online Activism
In recent years activism has begun to move online, however this does not suggest
activism efforts only occur online, but that many of these movements begin online and primarily
24
engage in recruitment online. Online networks, particularly social media platforms, provide an
avenue in which it is easier to engage large numbers of individuals. Thus, online networks
provide a space where there are potentially more mobilization targets for recruitment by social
movement organizations. Further, engagement in online activism, compared to in-person
activism, is considered to have “lower stakes,” as the attention is often less direct and can be
more anonymous for participants. Arguably, however, these lower stakes efforts at activism may
also be considered slacktivism and can vary in their effectiveness for a social movement
(Lacetera et al., 2016). Relatedly,, the sustainment of online social movements is less
understood, as online action may be considered lower stakes and less direct, and mobilization of
these groups may function differently. Thus, with mobilization being key to Klandermans’
(1997) argument of social movement sustainability, understanding social media users’
engagement with movements and organizations’ mobilization attempts is particularly important.
Preliminary research comparing online and offline social movements have identified
differences between the two in terms of participants and engagement. Historically, engagement
in online activism has been marked by more experienced and embedded activists, those who had
already been engaged in an in-person social movement, moving online (Van Laer, 2010).
Further, those who could engage in these online movements were often those of more privilege,
who had higher education, better jobs, and higher income, and were interested in and had been
involved with politics. Thus, early online social movements were marked by a disparate divide in
participation, largely due to access to the Internet. Despite this, research by Van Laer (2010)
suggests that the function of online social movements’ mobilization is consistent with
Klandermans’ (1997) model, with a few inconsistencies (e.g., online activists tend to be those
with strong organizational ties, though information can still be consumed and enacted by other
25
users). Additionally, evidence for the sustainment of Internet activism has been mixed, with early
research suggesting online activism was insufficient for sustained collective action, but more
recent research suggesting that there may be more consistency between in-person and online
activism in terms of sustainment and impact (Greijdanus et al., 2020; Van Laer, 2010).
Further, research examining online feminist movements specifically have found them to
be beneficial in creating counter-publics of voices and action against misogyny (Keller, 2016;
Mendes, 2015; Powell, 2015; Rentschler, 2014). More recent online social movements which
have received wide-scale recognition, such as #MeToo, have received an overwhelmingly
supportive response. For example, the resurgence of #MeToo on Twitter led to an increase in
individuals using the hashtag to share their own stories to combat stereotypes surrounding sexual
assault, with many of those disclosing online receiving support in the form of empathy or
emotional support from other online users (Bogen et al., 2019; Kunst et al., 2018). Despite this,
research has also suggested that #MeToo has received unsupportive responses, as have survivors
who have disclosed online using the hashtag, with some individuals negatively engaging with the
hashtag suggesting the movement is an attention-seeking tactic used by women whom make
false accusations, is used to demean survivors, or to share rape myth beliefs (Bogen et al., 2019;
Lanius, 2019). For example, Boyle and Rathnayake (2019) examined the emergence of a hashtag
counter to #MeToo, #HimToo, though originally was used in conjunction with #MeToo to
increase awareness of sexual assault among men, ultimately became used as a tactic against
#MeToo to acknowledge men’s increased vulnerability to accusations of sexual assault. Despite
the attempts of #HimToo to diminish #MeToo, the counter-hashtag lost considerable attention
over time, while #MeToo did not (K. Boyle & Rathnayake, 2019). Similarly, Lisnek and
colleagues (2022) highlight how #MeToo has led to an increase in perceptions that awareness of
26
violence against women has only served to increase false accusations against men, particularly
among individuals who previously held more conservative beliefs. And similar to traditional
feminist movements, the resurgence of #MeToo which has continued to receive traction on social
media platforms has been argued to leave out minority populations, often characterizing women
victims of sexual assault as affluent or White (De Benedictis et al., 2019; Fileborn & LoneyHowes, 2019). The existence of a digital divide, which refers to the divide between those with
and without access to the Internet, has historically reflected systems of inequality, whereby racial
and ethnic minorities are disproportionately affected (Zhang, 2014). However, more recently the
concept of the digital divide has been extended to online social movements, as the Internet has
opened up other “divides” such as in skills and the specific uses of the Internet (Elliott & Earl,
2018). Further, when considering the early divide in engagement related to online social
movements and the concurrent lack of inclusion and emphasis of diverse voice within more
recent social movements, it is important to acknowledge the potential biases and the narratives
that may be left unheard. This may be particularly important within Indigenous communities, as
Intahchomphoo (2018) argues that while cyberactivism is prominent among urban Indigenous
people and has been more heavily researched, very little else is known about the functionality of
the digital divide, particularly among more rural Indigenous communities.
Counter-Publics and Digital Spaces
The use of social media as a means of challenging cultural and social narratives suggests
a changing platform of not only social movement formation and mobilization, but also, its
embeddedness in everyday activities. Salter (2013) suggested that social media may be
considered a counter-public, whereby marginalized populations who have consistently been
restricted from participating in mainstream discourse, are able to have their voices heard.
27
Further, he suggests that these spaces allow for the realities of lived experiences, which
highlights the importance of personal narratives that may not be captured in more generalized
accounts, particularly related to gender-based violence, to be heard and counter stereotypical
misinformation (Salter, 2013). Fileborn and Loney-Howes (2019) also highlight the ability for
digital media to be forums where individualscan speak out about their experiences and engage in
consciousness-raising, but also highlight the potential for these spaces to allow for technologyfacilitated victimization and misogynistic rhetoric. For example, within their examination of
digital content related to various feminist campaigns and survey of activist perspectives who
have engaged in this work, Mendes (2018) found that 72% of their survey respondents
experienced some kind of negativity when engaging in hashtag feminism online, such as being
called names or receiving rape and death threats. Indeed, while digital platforms have the
potential to amplify voices and foster consciousness-raising, it is often marred by hostility and
derogatory treatment, particularly for those engaging in hashtag feminism who attempt to
provide support for and argue against the status quo related to violence against women (BanetWeiser & Miltner, 2016; Bleeker et al., 2022; Bogen et al., 2019; Dickel & Evolvi, 2022).
While these digital spaces allow for individuals to share their stories, interact with others,
and make attempts at social change, they remain mediated digital spaces. While the ability for
social media to function as a counter-public is possible, these spaces still reflect gender, race, and
class-based stereotypes of victims who are considered “ideal” victims (Hayes & Luther, 2018).
Further, access to digital spaces and the knowledge of navigating these platforms impacts the
ability for minority populations to use these spaces because these platforms inevitably mirror the
social inequalities of our offline world, making them less accessible and more challenging to
navigate for marginalized groups, therefore limiting their potential to fully engage in these digital
28
conversations (Latina & Docherty, 2014). Moreover, the organizations which run these platforms
are also often regulated, as are the pages in which users interact; providing the potential for what
discourse is visible to vary across platform and page (Renninger, 2015). Thus, social movements,
particularly those which are concerned with historically marginalized groups, may differentially
function online. More specifically, the ability for activists within intersectional social
movements, such as #MMIW, to be successful in their efforts at consciousness-raising may be
variable depending on the discourse, tactics, and identity of the activist and platform used.
29
CHAPTER THREE: INDIGENOUS ACTIVISM
Indigenous women experience higher rates of overall violence, having higher sexual
victimization and murder rates than any other group (Breiding et al., 2014), in addition to higher
rates of non-traditional crimes such, as exposure to environmental harms (Lynch & Stretesky,
2012; Runyan, 2018; Tsosie, 2015). Indeed, Indigenous communities worldwide confront
disproportionately high rates of environmental crime, exemplified by the pervasive issue of toxic
exposure and uranium mining (Fegadel, 2023; Runyan, 2018; Tsosie, 2015). Rooted in historical
marginalization and ongoing systemic injustices, Indigenous people face significant ecological
harm and health risks as a result of environmental crimes (Fegadel, 2021; Tsosie, 2015). These
crimes, including illegal waste disposal and resource extraction, have severe implications for
Indigenous populations, necessitating a critical examination of the complex dynamics
surrounding victimization within this population. Indigenous women have a long history of
colonialism and other forms of systemic oppression, whereby gender and race intersect to form a
deep-rooted power hierarchy over Indigenous women (Kuokkanen, 2008). Historical oppression
refers to the intergenerational subjugation of Indigenous people that have exploited Indigenous
communities and exposed them to an increased risk of marginalization, poverty and violence
(Burnette, 2015). While historical oppression of Indigenous people occurs globally, the extent of
normalized and internalized oppression of Indigenous people in the United States is of particular
concern. The Indian Boarding School initiative (1819-1870) is one early example of the
subjugation Indigenous communities faced, whereby the United States government pushed to
30
culturally assimilate American Indian children by forcibly removing them from their families
into boarding schools off of the reservations in which they live, where they often were subjected
to physical and metal abuse within these contexts. Further, the relocation and destruction of
Indigenous territories and subsequent genocide of Indigenous people begginning with 17th
century European settlers has resulted in Indigenous people across the United States having lost
98.8% of their historical lands (Farrell et al., 2021). This forced relocation has left them with
lands considered less-habitable, which now contributes to many of the environmental harms
Indigenous communities are exposed to.
Burnette (2015; 2019) suggests that historical oppression is a structural source of
violence against Indigenous women. Through interviews with Indigenous survivors of intimate
partner violence (IPV) and IPV service providers, Burnette (2019) identified five main themes
which may lend to the increased risk of IPV among Indigenous women: experiences of
oppression of tribal community members (e.g., sharecropping, government enforced boarding
schools, etc.), historical and contemporary losses (e.g., loss of language, tradition, high mortality
rate), cultural disruption (e.g., communication methods, housing patterns, etc.), manifestations of
oppressions (e.g., distrust among “others,” private personal matters, etc.), and dehumanizing
beliefs and values about Indigenous people held by non-Indigenous people (e.g., collectivism vs.
self-interest, patriarchal vs. egalitarian gender roles, normative violence, etc.). These findings
highlighted how not only experiences of oppression, but patriarchal colonization, have become
embedded within society and may structurally contribute to violence against Indigenous women
through exposure to environmental crimes (Fegadel, 2021, 2023;Lynch & Stretesky, 2012;
Runyan, 2018; Tsosie, 2015), structural violence and a lack of resources (Galtung & Fischer,
31
2013; M. J. Lynch et al., 2018), and cultural degradation (Burnette, 2019; Monchalin et al.,
2019).
Victimization of Indigenous women is most often at the hands of a person of another race
(Rosay, 2016), yet the ability of Indigenous people to prosecute crimes by non-Indians on tribal
lands within the United States is limited, because of limits the United States government has
placed on tribal sovereignty, such as the The Major Crimes Act in 1885, which imposed federal
jurisdiction on reservations regarding more violent crimes, such as rape and homicide. Further,
the Oliphant v. Squamish supreme court ruling in 1978 indicated that the United States
government would have full jurisdiction over offenses committed by non-Indigenous people on
reservations. Indeed, contemporary, and historical traumas of Indigenous communities are
interwoven, with experiences of environmental and cultural degradation beginning with the
forceful removal and cultural genocide of First Nations people from Tribal lands. Often,
geographic locations of missing and murdered women cases are near poor environmental sites,
such as fracking and drilling, oil extraction, coal ash dumping, and pollution, all of which have
traditionally infiltrated Indigenous spaces (Joseph, 2021). Further, Indigenous people have been
victims of not only direct violence, but also structural violence whereby resources are not equally
available, resulting in further disadvantages (Galtung & Fischer, 2013). Indigenous people have
one of the highest rates of social and economic inequality across income, poverty, employment,
education, and healthcare; often exacerbated because of their exposure to environmental hazards
and environmental injustice (Lynch & Stretesky, 2011). Moreover, the erasure of Indigenous
culture has led to the devaluation of Indigenous women, who prior to colonization were
considered equal to their male counterparts and crucial to cultural transmission, which assists in
perpetuating violence against Indigenous women (Burnette, 2015;Burnette, 2015). The effects of
32
colonization are further complicated, as they have also led many Indigenous communities to
internalize these beliefs (Burnette, 2015).
The Killing of Indigenous Activists
Activist efforts led by Indigenous people are not a new phenomenon and are particularly
prominent among environmental justice campaigns. Indigenous populations, particularly in tribal
lands, have been extensively exposed to environmental harms and their environments exploited.
Proximity to toxic hazards dumped in tribal lands, forced extraction of natural resources from
tribal lands, and nuclear waste spills on tribal lands only account for a few of the environmental
injustices Indigenous populations have faced. Thus, engagement in efforts to prevent and
intervene in these environmental injustices, while tactics have evolved, has been prominent
within Indigenous communities throughout the United States and other countries since the 1990s
(Ali, 2009; Hall & Fenelon, 2009). Relatedly, engagement in these efforts have left Indigenous
environmental activists at risk for violence as a result of their efforts. Media coverage and
concern for these activists remain limited, however, environmental, and Indigenous
organizations have attempted to bring awareness to the killing of Indigenous activists. The
Global Witness database has continued to collect data on environmental activist killings since
2002, with 1733 activists being murdered between 2012 and 2021 (Global Witness, 2022). While
these numbers are indicative of activists killed internationally, they represent environmental
activists who have been killed while actively engaging in activism efforts to protect their
communities, often referred to as “Land Defenders” within their communities (Global Witness,
2022). For example, Manuel Esteban Paez Terán, also known as Tortuguita, was a Venezuelan
environmental activist who was shot and killed in Atlanta in 2023, while engaging in a protest
related to the Defend Atlanta Forest campaign. Tortuguita sustained 57 wounds after having been
33
suggested to have fired at police, despite having no visible gunpowder residue on their hands
following the incident. Thus, Indigenous populations are not only plagued by genocide and
ecocide but are also targeted when engaging in efforts to save their communities, an important
consideration when acknowledging concerns Indigenous activists may have when choosing to
engage in this work.
Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women Movement (#MMIW)
Missing and murdered Indigenous women (#MMIW) is an international crisis, though
only recently has the United States taken action. Savanna’s Act was officially established in
2019 to clarify government and law enforcement responsibilities in terms of enforcing
investigative measures and resources towards cases of missing and murdered Indigenous women.
Further, a number of state taskforces, in addition to the Presidential task force, were created in
2020 and 2021 with aims in preventing and improving responses to violence against Indigenous
women. Canada was the first to take action toward the MMIW movement, establishing the
National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls commission (2016)
which provided a report in 2019 establishing colonialism and oppression against Indigenous
people as a leading cause of violence against Indigenous women and girls and the need for better
access to resources (Reclaiming Power and Peace, 2019). The MMIW movement itself was a
grassroots efforts started in 2014 by Indigenous communities in Canada, with the aim of raising
awareness of the high rates of violence against Indigenous women and girls. Importantly,
Indigenous individuals have largely engaged in the work to bring awareness to issues faced by
their people and despite colonialism and violence having a long with-standing history within the
United States, the work remains largely limited to communities which still face these harms.
34
Efforts at social mobilization of Indigenous people are often seen as disruptive because
they highlight inequities and issues by the government, such as a lack of access to resources and
opportunities which contribute to health, economic, and educational disparities, as well as
environmental injustices, land disposession, and limited self-governance at the hands of the
United States government. Indigenous people must assert their right to peacefully protest,
resulting from people often seeing their issues as an “Indian problem” rather than historical
oppression. Mobilization efforts allow Indigenous people to reclaim their voice and Indigenous
identity to receive acknowledgment and create a collective identity within their communities
through their shared experiences. Because of the deep-rooted harms face by the community, the
mobilization potential, at least for Indigenous community members, is rampant. Further, these
shared experiences present a greater awareness of the harms faced within their own communities
and contribute to the motivations needed to participate in activist work. Many Indigenous
organizations have created hashtags as safe spaces for those to engage with efforts (Ficklin et al.,
2021).These hashtags may be considered safe spaces, as they provide a platform for amplifying
Indigenous voices and experiences, as well as a symbolic gathering place to find solidarity and
build social connections which support Indigenous causes. These hashtags may also form a sense
of community and empowerment, allowing for collective identities to be established and shared.
Social media is becoming more prominent for Indigenous women as a place to share correct
information and have their voices heard. #MMIW or the Missing, Murdered, and Indigenous
Women movement is one of those social media campaigns that aims to provide a more accurate
depiction of and keep stories and concern for Indigenous women at the forefront. Research by
Moeke-Pickering and colleagues (2018) suggests that Indigenous people are using social media
to push the public agenda forward in terms of concern for Indigenous issues and that it is actively
35
used as a means of mobilization. While it is clear how current activism efforts may be
maintained through social movement theory, it is not clear whether this model functions to
explain how other groups outside of the Indigenous community may become targets of
mobilization and motivated to participate in the movement. The use of social media, rather than
in-person communicative networks, presents a possible platform for expanding mobilization
potential and targets within #MMIW.
The current chapter shows how efforts at examining social movement frameworks within
online social movements have been mixed, however, more recent research presents the unique
utility of online spaces for social movements. Online social movements are particularly helpful
for amplifying the issues and voices of marginalized populations, as racial and ethnic minorities
have largely been ignored within these larger social movements, such as the feminist
movements. #MMIW provides an instance of a pressing social movement, which encompasses
efforts to push back at both race and gender-based resistance and has proliferated online.
However, the certainty for these movements within these mediated digital spaces to be effective
in these crucial movement stages, such as recruitment and mobilization, let alone in
consciousness-raising and information-sharing, is still unclear.
36
CHAPTER FOUR: NETWORK ANALYSIS OF #MMIW ACTIVISTS ON TWITTER
While it is not particularly clear how online social movements can sustain mobilization
and facilitate long-term change, research highlights that social media platforms are widely used
by activists and organizations involved in social movements (Obar et al., 2012). Even so, tactics
used by activists within these online social movements vary by the use of hashtags and sharing
specific incidents related to the movement of interest (Brown et al., 2017; Li et al., 2021).
Moreover, online activism efforts are not limited to those who call themselves activists or those
involved in organizations. The average social media user may be just as likely to participate in
activism efforts, though most often at a less engaged level, such as through resharing posts or
“liking” them (Chon & Park, 2020). Differences in the level of engagement are perhaps the most
integral difference between activist users and regular users. Activism tactics engaged in online
directly affect a user’s relationships, such that an activist user who is more engaged, such as
through sharing multiple informational posts, commenting on others’ posts, and organizing
events related to a movement, will likely have more connections. This is particularly relevant for
determining the interconnectedness of an activist, which is beneficial for activism outcomes
(Wonneberger et al., 2020). Despite this, it is apparent that different movements may have
different actors involved in their activism efforts, which may impact how social movements
function online and their outcomes. This may be particularly relevant to #MMIW, as movement
efforts are often facilitated by Indigenous community members, rather than structured
organizations or individuals with significant resources at hand.
37
Literature Review
Social Media for Engagement
Research examining mobilization efforts by activists within social movements has been
limited mainly to in-person social movements. However, online activism has become more
popular for activists and the general user to participate because of the ease of use of the Internet
and social media. Further, research has also suggested that social media is generally a valuable
platform for activists and activist groups. For example, Seelig and colleagues (2022) examined
how non-profit organizations can use social media to encourage engagement with social topics.
Further, these authors examined the extent to which these methods of online engagement by
activist groups may differ from traditional media efforts. A random sample of non-profit
organizations were identified and their use of social media for civic engagement was analyzed,
including the type of social media platform used, type of campaign (e.g., violence prevention,
education, etc.), and mobilization efforts (e.g., donations, petitions, etc.). Findings highlighted
that adaptations for civic engagement had included a less direct and more interactive effort at
engaging others with their organization, whereby a significant social media presence and
discussion with other users was integral to their actions and encourages others to become
involved (Seelig & Deng, 2022).
Additionally, Obar and colleagues (2012) examined the extent to which activist groups
found value in social media for facilitating user engagement with social issues, surveying critical
members of these groups to identify how social media is effective in specific advocacy-related
tasks, such as educating the public. Social media was used by all 53 organizations surveyed and
the majority of organizations used social media to engage with the public daily (Obar et al.,
2012). In terms of the usefulness of social media for advocacy, most of the organizations
suggested that popular social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, etc.) were helpful in
38
educational efforts, allowing users to share their voices, and mobilize individuals. Further, the
authors highlight the four main benefits of social media for activist groups, including
strengthening outreach efforts, enabling engaging feedback loops (i.e., two-way feedback),
strengthening collective action, and cost-effectiveness (Obar et al., 2012). Thus, these findings
highlight the potential for social media to be an effective platform for advocacy groups to
facilitate collective identity and emphasize civic engagement.
Importance of Social Media Content
Research that has examined activism online has primarily focused on the content that
users share rather than tactile efforts of activism. Brown and colleagues (2017) examined tweets
that included #SayHerName to identify how users engage with mobilization of the movement.
The authors categorized efforts used by users to highlight inequities of the movement when
sharing the hashtag, identifying intersectional micro mobilization and consciousness-raising as
strategies most often used. Users most frequently engaged in this through sharing information on
specific instances of violence against Black women, through sharing names and links to news
articles and calls for action for change (Brown et al., 2017). These authors also examined
categories of users who most often engaged with micro mobilization and consciousness-raising
efforts surrounding the movement, such as activists, celebrities, politicians, and media or news
sources. Activists made up the most significant portion of user engagement and were also the
most retweeted (Brown et al., 2017).
Similarly, Carney (2016) examined how youth of color engaged with the
#BlackLivesMatter and #AllLivesMatter hashtags in calls for action. Carney (2016) notes that
various efforts were used to draw attention to the primary purpose of the movement, the systemic
racism faced by Black people in the United States. Many efforts were those attempting to shift
39
discourse towards collective action in terms of organizing events and encouraging participation
in offline events, such as protests. Further, there were conflicting posts against the
#BlackLivesMatter movement, primarily those using the #AllLivesMatter hashtag, which
activists and other users attempted to mitigate through sharing information and providing
anecdotal stories. Likewise, movements within other controversial socio-political domains
experience similar efforts in activism attempts. For example, Li and colleagues (2021) examined
specific efforts at social activism surrounding the #MeToo and #WhyIDidntReport hashtags on
Twitter. The authors found that activism efforts included engaging in conversation with others,
sharing information, suggesting and encouraging action, and promoting social awareness through
victim stories (Li et al., 2021). The authors’ findings indicated that users may use various efforts
to engage with a movement, but they primarily center around encouraging discussion and
collective action. Taken together, these findings highlight the utility of social media as a means
for not only information sharing but also for identifying the type of information shared and those
who are more likely to share information and be seen.
Average Users as Activists
Social media engagement with movements is not limited to only those who label
themselves as activists. Chon and Park (2020) suggest that the average social media user may be
just as likely to engage in online activism efforts as a general public member in in-person
activism efforts when motivated by a specific topic. The authors find that individuals on social
media often engage in social media activism efforts and participatory mobilization behaviors,
such as sharing information on social issues (Chon & Park, 2020). Additionally, the authors
highlight that social media efficacy or the belief that one can create meaningful change is
positively related to activism for several social issues, as is offline activism. This presents
40
important implications for social media to potentially encourage collective identity formation
and mobilization outside of larger organizations.
Social Network Analyses of Activism
The majority of research on socio-political activism efforts has centered around the
content analysis of Tweets or other social media engagement. This research has been beneficial
in providing information on the type of content users share surrounding movements, but not
necessarily the extent to which content shared by users is seen and further re-shared. Social
network analysis provides a way to examine the interconnectedness among social media users.
Research using social network analysis in activism efforts has been able to further elaborate on
the type of online user who may be more influential and what information shared by these more
influential users may look like. Xu and colleagues (2014) used social network analysis to
examine user connectivity within a political campaign. The authors examined this by identifying
follower relationships and Twitter hashtags used by Twitter users. Through the use of a network
analysis tool, the authors were able to establish relationships between users and how many
connections a specific user had to identify higher levels of connectivity (Xu et al., 2014).
Further, the authors examined how higher levels of connectivity may impact influence related to
the political campaign of interest. The authors’ findings suggest that those who are more
connected, thus having more associations or followers, are more likely to have their content
reshared. In a similar way, Wonneberger and colleagues (2020) conducted a network analysis of
Twitter users who published a certain number of tweets regarding an online animal welfare
movement. The users identified were coded into eight categories (citizens, organizations,
political actors, etc.). A network analysis was conducted based on users within identified
categories who were the most popular in terms of retweets and username mentions, and
categories were compared to one another. Further, the authors analyzed the co-occurrences of
41
topics with actor categories to determine how each category was engaging with the movement.
The findings suggest that activism-oriented organizations and citizens were different from media
actors in their engagement surrounding the animal welfare movement (Wonneberger et al.,
2020). Environmental organizations and citizens often targeted specific mobilization efforts and
were more prevalent (e.g., a higher number of retweets).
Correspondingly, research has also used social network analysis within the context of
gender and race-based online social movements. Brunker and colleagues (2020) conducted a
content analysis and social network analysis on Tweets using #MeToo, to better examine the
most influential users related to this movement. Social network analysis was used to identify
relationships between power users or users who received the highest number of retweets on their
comments. Power users were classified into specific roles (e.g., activist, celebrity, politician,
etc.). Networks were identified among power users to determine the interconnectedness of
different classifications of power users and to determine power users’ relative popularity.
Further, the top ten tweets of each power user were analyzed to examine their method of
engagement (e.g., sharing of opinion, calls for action, etc.). Media organizations and journalists
composed the highest proportion of power users, though celebrities, self-declared activists, and
private persons were also familiar (Brunker et al., 2020). Of methods of engagement, activists
were more likely to use calls for action or references to specific cases of victimization or quotes
from another third party (Brunker et al. 2020). These findings highlight the utility of social
network analysis in examining online activists' efforts to better understand not only what content
shared looks like but also what voices may also be more powerful and accessible.
42
Social Media Activism in Indigenous Communities
Efforts at Indigenous issue awareness often consider additional concerns, such as a
cultural emphasis on land and environment or unique experiences of violence. This is
particularly apparent when examining the intersectional nature of Indigenous experiences.
Correspondingly, Parsloe and Campbell (2021) examined how activists have facilitated the
#MMIW movement on Twitter. Using a thematic analysis framework, the authors identified how
activists framed the movement compared to other traditional media representations of violence
against the Indigenous community. The three most common themes identified by the authors
were Indigenous trauma as personal and pervasive, structural and systemic, and continued
injustice (Parsloe & Campbell, 2021). The personal and pervasive theme centered around
violence or fear of violence regularly impacting Indigenous women because of the trauma from
their experiences as members of the #MMIW community. Further, the structural and systemic
theme connected experiences of trauma to historical mistreatment and colonization, mainly
through popular media examples of cultural appropriation, such as Pocahontas, and discussions
of genocide. The continued injustice theme captured the ways ongoing trauma has been produced
through structural issues, such as through policing and policymaking, with users providing
instances of police-involved cases of MMIW or ways in which the government has failed to
protect the Indigenous community. Thus, Parsloe and Campbell (2021) suggest how activists
engaged with #MMIW attempt to provide a voice to Indigenous community members and recenter the focus of the movement on the realities of the community and the need for structural
and institutional change.
Similarly, activists of other Indigenous specific movements have focused on representing
the identities of the community. Raynauld and colleagues (2018) examined tweets using the
43
#IdleNoMore movement, which aims to mobilize Indigenous people and non-Indigenous allies in
advocating for government and socio-economic change for the Indigenous community. The
authors found that Indigenous culture (e.g., cultural priorities related to land and environment,
etc.) and the idea of solidarity and group membership within the Indigenous population were
central among those who used the hashtag. Further, Duarte and Vigil-Hayes (2017) examined
several hashtags used by Indigenous activists during the 2016 presidential election to better
understand how Indigenous activists use social media to promote change. Taken together, these
findings similarly highlight how Indigenous activists highlight the voices of the community by
providing individual experiences of victimization and the specific struggles experienced by the
Indigenous community.
Current Study
Prior research highlights that social media platforms are often used in some manner by
activists to further a cause (Brown et al., 2017; Carney, 2016; Obar et al., 2012; Parsloe &
Campbell, 2021; Raynauld et al., 2018). Although some tactics are similar among activists, other
tactics differ based on the cause in which a movement is related and pre-conceived beliefs about
the cause, such as is exemplified in the online movement #BlackLivesMatter (Carney, 2016).
Further, tactics often vary based on who is involved in activism efforts, with regular users often
employing more “slacktivist” measures when compared to those more integrated in a movement.
Thus, understanding who is involved in a social movement is integral for understanding how
activism functions and provides implications for movement outcomes. This chapter extends this
methodology to examine #MMIW. While prior research has focused on the content of the
activism, research has not explored the interconnected nature of the activists themselves. This
study examines the connections among activists, including the interconnectedness among
44
activists themselves, in addition to other users on Twitter, to identify activists most integral to
#MMIW.
Methodology
Social network analysis examines patterns of connections among human relationships
and connections between other things. Based in graph theory and network science, social
network analysis allows us to estimate relationships between two phenomena, such as how
densely related a network of various phenomena are or how important one particular
phenomenon is within a network. Unlike many other analytic methods in the social sciences,
social networks are particularly concerned with relational data rather than attribute data.
Relational data include connections and ties which relate one agent to another within a network.
While social network analysis requires relational data, it can also examine attribute data of
agents within a network, such as examining certain characteristics of one agent compared to
another. Networks can be derived from a number of data sources, so long as relations exist
among agents within a source. Social media platforms have become increasingly used in social
network analysis, as networked communications are so integral and widely available on these
platforms (Hansen et al., 2011). However, some social media platforms are often used over
others, due to the accessibility of the data for researcher use.
Twitter is a unique social media site and ideal for the proposed study, as it has an opensource application programming interface (API) that allows the collection of the sites’ publicly
posted content. Further, the academic research API used within this study, allows for the
collection of historical Twitter data; whereas the original API only allows for data to be collected
from within the last seven days. Twitter data in academic research is common, particularly in
content analyses; many studies that have focused on social issues have used the Twitter API to
extract data (Barker-Plummer & Barker-Plummer, 2017). While Twitter is not automatically
45
organized into specific subsections of topics, hashtags and keywords can be used within query
searches to target specific topics. The current study used the following hashtags and keywords,
including “#MMIW”, “#MMIWG”, “Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women”, and “Missing
and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.” Tweets using these hashtags were identified and a
network developed based on Tweet mentions and replies.
A number of measures were estimated including the number of vertices and edges, indegree centrality, out-degree centrality, and betweenness centrality. Additionally, characteristics
of top activists were identified, including the “type” of user (e.g., Indigenous community
member, celebrity, etc.) and the number of followers an activist has. Vertices and edges refer to
the Twitter users under examination and the connections between them. Thus, vertices can be
thought of as the activists of interest, while edges are the relationships between different
activists. Centrality is related to how central or important a vertex is within the network of
vertices and edges. Centrality can be based on different objective criteria, such that in this
context, an activist would be seen as more central based on the number individuals engaging
with them through retweets or mentions within tweets (e.g., suggesting they have a large base in
which to share information). Different variations of centrality exist, with in- and out-degree
centrality and betweenness centrality being particularly relevant in this context. Degree centrality
refers to the number of edges or connections that a vertex or activist has. Thus, in degree
centrality refers to the number of connections others have initiated toward the activist (e.g.,
another user tagged the activist in a tweet), while out-degree centrality is based on the number of
connections an activist has made to other users (e.g., an activist tagged another user in a tweet).
Typically, users who have high in-degree centrality are those with more attention to their tweets
and can be thought of as a measure of the community’s engagement with the activist (Hansen et
46
al., 2020). On the other hand, a high out-degree centrality reflects the outreach of an activist to
the Twitter community, as it measures the engagement of the activist with others.
Betweenness centrality is concerned with how a vertex may “bridge” the relationship
between two other vertexes in a network. This is particularly relevant in examining the
relationships among more central vertices; the potential for central vertices to have several
bridging connections to the next most central vertex is important to consider. Additionally, it is
important to consider which vertices bridge the most connections, such that removal of that
vertex may disrupt important connections between other activists. Similarly, clustering measures
how cohesive sets of vertices are, such that certain collections of vertices may be denser than
others within a network. Clusters represent more tight-knit networks that may be particularly
impactful because of their ability to quickly gather and enact resources. Clusters may be apparent
even if the activists do not readily acknowledge they’re a part of the cluster.
While a number of software programs exists for conducting social network analysis, the
current study used NodeXL pro to import and analyze the desired data. NodeXL pro was chosen
because of its ease of use, as it allows for data to be directly imported from Twitter, such that a
search query for relevant tweets can be run through NodeXL pro and directly imported into the
software. In addition, the software presents data in an easy-to-read format, allowing for basic
network analyses measures to be run (e.g., centrality, reciprocity, etc.), and graphical displays of
networks to be visualized. The relational network was estimated based on content within Tweets
(e.g., an activist who uses #MMIW mentioning another user in the same post). The full network
is comprised of Tweets from August-December 2023, based on time constraints of the data
collection; the first 500 tweets were retrieved from each month, beginning on the first of the
month. The full network contained 852 vertices, or users, and 1,574 edges, or relationships.
47
However, 82 users were removed from the matrix, as they were identified as bot or trolling
accounts through the content of their tweets and text of their profile biographies, resulting in 410
edges being removed from the matrix. Additionally, one user was removed, resulting in the loss
of one edge, as the Tweet identified in the network was unsupportive of #MMIW. Thus, the final
sample contained 769 users and 1164 edges (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Full Matrix of Users and Relationships.
Results
A smaller subsample of the network was identified to provide more context to the nature
of the relations between the activists, as a matrix of 769 users would be difficult to provide
detailed characteristics about. Users which had an in-degree or out-degree centrality of more than
five were retained within the matrix, suggesting that they had either interacted with or been
engaged by another user five or more times. This resulted in a new network comprised of 29
users, 19 of which were those who had a high in-degree centrality and 10 which had a high out-
48
degree centrality. The centrality of the sampled network, including their betweenness centrality,
is available in Table 1.
Table 1. Centrality of Top Users in Sampled Network.
Username
In-Degree Centrality Out-Degree Centrality
spottedelk7
119
2
americanindian8
54
2
delschilling
46
1
birgitomo
30
1
thesheilanorth
18
1
songstress28
17
2
leahgazan
11
1
aptnnews
11
1
creewarrior2010
10
1
jamesa135488247
10
1
castletongreene
7
1
justintrudeau
7
0
tdsbdirector
7
0
nehiyahskwew
6
2
afn_updates
6
1
heiltsuk_paleo
6
1
canadianlabour
5
1
marcmillervm
5
0
markruffalo
5
0
oligarchaverse
1
44
donkoclock
1
33
haidaprincess
2
17
bluestormcomin1
2
16
liamlong85
1
16
marcellemroy
0
9
hedrickmal
0
9
realcreewarrior
0
8
can_femicide
1
6
advocate_habiba
1
5
Betweenness Centrality
148405.500
67720.167
65299.427
39450.000
23161.667
226945.141
21710.267
13140.133
88.000
72.000
9366.000
32777.833
42.000
7038.000
5364.000
5364.000
30.000
20028.794
20.000
22671.000
22696.000
48421.954
20564.000
120.000
1562.800
1562.800
7513.260
7139.486
207428.360
Betweenness centrality provides a measure of users who are more integrated within a network, as
a higher betweenness centrality suggests that a user bridges connections between users. For
example, in Figure 2, user “nehiyahskwew” would be considered a bridge between user
“leahgarzan” and “heitsukpaleo”. Further, within the matrix of Figure 2, larger “dots” indicate an
activist with a greater in-degree centrality, while directional arrows of edges represent which
49
user initiated a relationship with the other user (tagged within a Tweet). Users with self-loops
highlight users which have tagged themselves in their own tweet, have retweeted their own
tweet, or have retweeted others’ tweets in which they were tagged.
Figure 2. Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users.
Top User Characteristics
The top users identified in the network were identified as either an activist or Indigenous
community member, an organization, a regular user, or a “follower” account. Indigenous
50
community members and activist accounts readily identified themselves within their Twitter bio
description. Organizations included users who suggested they were a representative of or an
account for a particular organization, such as a news organization. Regular users were
individuals that did not provide information within their Twitter bio that directly connected them
to the Indigenous community or activism, but generally engaged in support of the movement.
Finally, unique to the top out-degree users, were users identified as “follower” accounts.
Follower accounts were a unique type of user, as the Twitter bio often indicated that the purpose
of the account was to increase voting among democratic or liberal populations, but engaged
mostly in Tweeting other Twitter accounts with similarly aligned views for users to follow, with
an intent to increase follower counts within these tagged accounts. Celebrity or politician users
included public figures whose Twitter bio descriptions indicated that they were a famous
celebrity or politician. For each of these top users, follower accounts and country location were
also identified. The follower counts of each top user varied greatly, with celebrity and politician
accounts having the most followers, followed by activists and Indigenous community members
with high in-degree centrality. The majority of users were located within Canada (45%), which is
consistent with the attention and popularity of the movement when compared to the United
States. The descriptives of the top users can be found in Table 2.
51
Table 2. Descriptives of Top User Accounts in Sampled Network.
Username
spottedelk7
americanindian8
delschilling
birgitomo
thesheilanorth
songstress28
leahgazan
aptnnews
creewarrior2010
jamesa135488247
castletongreene
justintrudeau
tdsbdirector
nehiyahskwew
afn_updates
heiltsuk_paleo
canadianlabour
marcmillervm
markruffalo
oligarchaverse
donkoclock
haidaprincess
bluestormcomin1
liamlong85
marcellemroy
hedrickmal
realcreewarrior
can_femicide
advocate_habiba
Type
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Organization
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Regular
Celebrity/Politician
Regular
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Organization
Celebrity/Politician
Celebrity/Politician
Regular
Follower Account
Organization
Follower Account
Regular
Regular
Regular
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Activist/Indigenous
Followers
8239
131114
40776
55260
13243
41593
27460
108409
12609
6600
7046
6412930
5880
10719
64837
7046
25984
28501
8378073
2777
43334
6863
46178
59768
584
560
490
8241
2045
Location
US
N/A
N/A
Canada
Canada
Canada
Canada
N/A
Canada
US
N/A
Canada
N/A
Canada
US
Canada
Canada
N/A
US
US
US
Canada
US
US
N/A
Canada
Canada
N/A
Canada
User Engagement
Users within the matrix who have a high in-degree centrality may be considered
particularly impactful as potential activists, because they highlight that the information they are
sharing is being viewed. While many users with high in-degree centrality do not have high outdegree centrality (e.g., outreach), the majority of their relationships with other users in the
network is because their tweets are being retweeted. More specifically, their Tweets which
highlight information about #MMIW are being retweeted by other users in the network. This can
52
be seen through some of the edges shown in Figure 3, which disaggregates between high indegree (red) and high out-degree (blue) users. The matrix of top users also suggests that there is
little engagement between top in-degree users with other top in-degree users, which can be seen
in Figure 4.
Figure 3. Color-coded Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users.
53
Figure 4. Matrix of Edges between Top In-Degree Users.
Separate matrices were modeled by month, to determine consistency in user engagement. While
fluctuations occur across each month, Indigenous community members and activists were the
only users to be within the top users (centrality greater than 5) month after month. Across top indegree users, only 2/19 were the same across all five months, however, across all months, the top
three users in the full sampled model were within the top 20 of users each month. Among the
remaining top users, about half were within the matrix identified for at least two months. The
disaggregated matrix models by month can be found in Figures 5 through 9.
54
Figure 5. Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from August 2022
Figure 6. Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from September 2022
55
Figure 7. Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from October 2022
Figure 8. Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from November 2022
56
Figure 9. Matrix of Top In and Out Degree Users from December 2022.
Discussion
Consistent with prior research on Indigenous activism, the findings highlighted above
suggest that the majority of users actively engaging with #MMIW are part of the Indigenous
community (Parsloe & Campbell, 2021). Despite this, the top users do not necessarily engage
with one another, and even less so represent a “tight-knit” network of activists. This presents
implications related to resource utilization and movement expansion, as prior research suggests
that social movements may be more effective and sustainable through organizational
partnerships (Wonneberger et al., 2020). The ability to leverage connections, which can enable
resource distribution, in terms of monetary resources as well as volunteer time, allows for
activists to improve their mobilization efforts (Mundt et al., 2018; Nardini et al., 2021). This is
57
also important when considering how mobilization efforts may extend to non-Indigenous
community members who do not share the same experiences of victimization and thus may be
less likely to establish the collective identity which permeates much of Indigenous activism.
Further, it is important to note here, that while the top users examined provide context to who is
most often engaged with and who may be “seen” more often by those on social media, those who
are not examined within this matrix may also present implications for understanding Indigenous
activism. Thus, future research should examine disparities in content and engagement by various
types of activists to achieve a more nuanced understanding of activism efforts, particularly in
how various definitions of “goals” and movement success by different activists may contribute to
these efforts.
The stability in engagement with the movement over time is also particularly interesting,
as many of the same top users remain centrally located throughout the five months in which data
was collected. This suggests that the activists involved remain engaged in sharing information
related to the movement over time, in addition to suggesting the promise of sustainment for the
movement. However, additional research is needed to better understand the potential for
sustainment, particularly as it relates to how activists may be best supported to continue to
engage in this work. While the initial network identified contains a large number of users
generally using the hashtag, which bodes well for the consistent attention the movement has
received, only a small few are engaging in the bulk of the work. Better understanding the
emotional tax of social media activism may present implications for supporting activists, and,
thus movement sustainment. Prior research suggests activist burnout is a frequent result of the
stress encountered while engaging in racial justice and feminist movement work; which may lead
activists to completely disengage in their work and thus threatens social movement stability
58
(Gorski & Chen, 2015). Thus, determining what support and resources Indigenous activists need
in order to continue their work is crucial to movement stability, and ultimately, change. Further,
understanding how non-Indigenous activists may be encouraged to participate in the movement
and engage in efforts to support Indigenous activists is crucial.
The findings in this study are both consistent with although also depart from other social
network content analyses in the make-up of key users. While other research suggests that the
average person is just as likely to engage with activist efforts online (Xu et al., 2014), the present
findings suggest that media organizations, non-profits, and journalists do not make-up a large
proportion of top users as they may in other social movements (Brunker et al., 2020). Rather, the
majority of top users are individual accounts (some Indigenous, some not) who feel passionately
about the movement. Moreover, while the inclusion of users from celebrity and politician
identities were few, they provide another potential resource for activists involved in the
movement; largely because of these public figure’s ability to influence larger audiences and
enact policy change. This is particularly notable, as the overarching purpose of the movement is
to provide awareness to high rates of violence against Indigenous women, but also to encourage
change related to institutional-level acknowledgement and accountability, and intervention and
prevention efforts. Engagement with celebrities and politicians, however, was not common
among the more prolifically engaged with top users. Thus, more research is needed to examine
the nature of communication networks among Indigenous activisms, to determine whether the
choice to engage with other users is a conscious one. Additionally, because of historical
experiences of oppression, discrimination, and having their concerns largely ignored by wider
society, there is likely a level of distrust among Indigenous in regard to non-Indigenous people
(Dennison, 2020), therefore determining ways in which non-Indigenous people can re-establish
59
trust is essential. Further, the frames and content of these activists is important to better
understand; as the majority of top users are Indigenous community members, and therefore are
not likely garnering attention based off popularity as celebrity and other public figures might,
understanding why these activists are receiving increased attention to their tweets is important.
60
CHAPTER FIVE: MEDIA REPRESENTATIONS OF #MMIW
Limited research examines the representation of #MMIW within mainstream media, and
most research focuses on the content of social media posts and comments related to the
movement. While important for understanding nuances of newer media, traditional media
remains impactful in shaping understandings of social phenomenon (Barak, 2013; Gamson,
2004; McCombs & Valenzuela, 2020) and raising awareness of social issues among the general
public. Research that has examined media representations of the movement largely focus on the
Canadian context or smaller localities within the United States, rather than larger media network
organizations. This is particularly important, as more established news organizations tend to have
larger viewership and a greater impact on public perceptions (Gamson, 2004). It is important to
note, however, that not all topics covered in the media are covered the same across different
identities, such as race and social class (or at times, at all). Thus, understanding the extent of
coverage and framing of #MMIW is important for understanding the potential exposure to and
perceptions of the movement.
Literature Review
Research suggests that news media framing of social problems is crucial to determining
public understanding and calls to action in mitigating the issue (Jewkes, 2015). The most
consistently used depictions of Indigenous communities may be considered “controlling images”
which are mediated depictions of racial minorities that highlight widespread and problematic
stereotypes of these minority groups (Hill Collins, 2022). While originally used to explain the
61
depiction of Black women within the media, more recent research suggests this is applicable to
other racial and ethnic minority groups (Davidson et al., 2023; Delia Deckard et al., 2020). Much
of the research on media coverage of Indigenous populations acknowledges the “erasure” of
Indigenous identities and culture that has occurred, particularly since the Indian Removal Act,
which forcefully took tribal lands and sent Indigenous children to boarding schools (Davidson et
al., 2023). This erasure, or deindividualization, of Indigenous population sought to show them as
having “assimilated” and has been transmitted within the Indigenous community. In addition, a
trope of Indigenous populations as “savages” and communities being plagued by crime, drug
use, and homelessness are common within and have been perpetuated through media coverage
(Davidson et al., 2023). Thus, at both ends of the spectrum, Indigenous people are either
represented as “like us” with their history and culture ignored or shown as violent and aggressive
“others.”
Media Coverage of Sexual Victimization and Other Minority Populations
Prior research on media representations of Indigenous women victims of sexual assault
and murder acknowledge how racism, colonialism, and sexism interact and result in media
representations blaming survivors for their own experiences (Cripps, 2021). Dominant media
framing of victimization and crime often leaves out minority voices and realities of
victimization, and left without counternarratives, allow for victims who do not fit these frames to
be diminished as a worthy victim (Jiwani, 2009). Stereotypes and misrepresentations of
Indigenous women have been pervasive in media coverage and popular culture, suggesting that
Indigenous women are either submissive and assimilated, successfully “deindividualizing” and
allowing the person to be considered in the mainstream or dominant hegemonic group, or are
represented as promiscuous, criminal, and inept as caregivers (Jiwani, 2009). Thus, the
62
normalization of violence against Indigenous women can be justified and maintained through
these “othering” narratives (Tucker, 2016) and membership to the dominant hegemonic group
and experiences of victimization to be treated as “choices.” In more current representations of
sexual violence among Indigenous women in Canada and Australia, Cripps (2021) found that
these narratives of violence assist in categorizing Indigenous victims as hopeless and helpless,
allowing for their stories to be silenced and them to be blamed in their victimization. Further,
Cripps (2021) highlighted that even despite increased exposure in the media, these narratives of
victims not maintaining lifestyles which are consistent to the dominant understandings or
expectations (e.g., alcohol use, homelessness, etc.) are leveraged to make them “less of a victim”
and perceived as less likely to be missed.
United States Media Coverage of Indigenous Populations
Mainstream media coverage of Indigenous issues within the United States, though having
increased over the last few years (Native American Journalists Association, 2022), still remains
relatively uncommon. Although research suggests that most racial and ethnic minority groups are
depicted in stereotypical ways within mainstream media, coverage of and research on Indigenous
populations is severely lacking (Slakoff, 2020). The lack of coverage of Indigenous populations,
though potentially partially attributable to lack of knowledge of Indigenous issues due to the
separation of Tribal lands, is likely congruent with historical oppressive tendencies of the erasure
of their people and culture. When the mainstream media does cover Indigenous issues, it often
uses misrepresentations and stereotypes of Indigenous communities. The Native American
Journalists’ Association (2022) examined racial stereotypes of Indigenous communities often
represented in both Indigenous authored and non-Indigenous authored New York Times (NYT)
media coverage, using their “bingo card” which lists a number of common tropes historically
63
represented in Indigenous-centered coverage. They found that between 2015 and 2021,
approximately 300 articles were published on Indigenous-centered topics, with about 35% of
articles having included two or more of the identified tropes (Native American Journalists
Association, 2022). For example, the depiction of Indigenous peoples as savages, violent, and
alcohol or drug users were three of the main tropes identified by NAJA (2022) across NYT
articles from 2015 to 2021. Further, the authors found that coverage by Indigenous authors,
though uncommon, accountedfor the lowest racial category of employees at the NYT, and
resulted in the use of more Indigenous-informed resources and materials for the basis of content
discussed within articles and less stereotypes (Native American Journalists Association, 2022).
Similarly, Davidson and colleagues (2023) compared the representation of Indigenous
people in mainstream news media versus Native news media during COVID-19. They found that
mainstream news was more likely to use paternalistic and negative themes of representation,
such as suggesting Indigenous populations were “primitive” and helpless, whereas Native
controlled media was more likely to use themes such as empowerment and community
(Davidson et al., 2023). This suggests the need for more diverse newsrooms and more culturally
sensitive coverage of racial and ethnic issues, particularly that of Indigenous people.
Further, prior research suggests that mainstream media coverage is particularly impactful
in increasing exposure to social movements and overall perceptions of the movement (Gamson,
1988, 2004). The protest paradigm, as introduced in chapter four, suggests that social movements
are often delegitimized within popular media, as the movement’s concerns often do not align
with mainstream discourse and understandings related to political, cultural, and social justice
topics (Boyle et al., 2004; Chan & Lee, 1984). This is particularly the case when social
movements focus on minority populations, as minority victims are often not portrayed within
64
traditional media as “worthy” or legitimate victims (Hayes & Luther, 2018). The protest
paradigm can be viewed through the media’s use of specific news frames (e.g., riot frames),
reliance on official sources, invocation of public opinion, delegitimization, and demonization
(Leopold & Bell, 2017).
Media Coverage of #MMIW
Media coverage of missing and murdered Indigenous women, while lacking within the
United States, has been more common in Canada, consistent with their earlier adaptations and
acknowledgements of the extent of violence against Indigenous women. Gilchrist (2010)
examined the amount and type of coverage amassed to Indigenous missing and murdered women
compared to White victims, finding that the extent of coverage was largely lacking and deemed
not newsworthy. Within Gilchrist’s (2010) findings, she noted that Indigenous women remained
largely invisible and that sentiments were uncompassionate, compared to that of White women,
noting that this is consistent with ideas of newsworthiness, in which news sources write for the
mainstream audience (Jewkes, 2015). Despite this, the author underscores that among local press
coverage of Indigenous victims, there was some resistance to the narrative of invisibility, and an
acknowledgement of the epidemic of violence against Indigenous women and structural
inequalities imposed on them (Gilchrist, 2010). On the contrary, more recent research examining
the movement following Canadian policy implementation, suggests that while there remains
some instances of blame-attribution which feature some stereotypes of violence, the Canadian
news media coverage acknowledges historical causes of violence against Indigenous women, has
received a more positive frame, and has seen more extensive mainstream coverage (Drache et al.,
2016). Further, the coverage, even within mainstream news, has consisted of more Indigenous
voices and a focus on cases of violence against Indigenous women (Drache et al., 2016).
65
Current Study
The culmination of media coverage research suggests that media framing of social issues
is impactful in leveraging calls to action and perceptions of violence and victimization (Jewkes,
2015), though is usually done so consistent with mainstream narratives of violence (Jiwani,
2009). Further, Indigenous victims are often characterized as “outsiders” or “others” who are
represented through stereotypes as violent and criminally-inclined, as inept mothers, and as
sexually promiscuous and deemed as less worthy victims and partially responsible for their
circumstances based on these representations (Cripps, 2021; Jiwani, 2009) Thus, the current
study seeks to examine media representations of the movement, in terms of common stereotypes
of Indigenous people and whether support is shown for the movement more generally (e.g.,
protest paradigm). As such, this study seeks to examine the inclusion of Indigenous authorship
and use of Indigenous informants and resources to support their articles and be more culturally
sensitive to Indigenous issues.
Methodology
A content analysis was conducted using news articles which were compiled using the
Nexi Uni search engine. News articles were included in the content analyses if they included one
of the following key phrases “MMIW”, “MMIWG”, “Missing and murdered Indigenous
Women”, or “Missing and murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.” Additionally, articles must
have been text-based and published within the United States. Articles were retrieved from
January 1st, 2017 through December 31st, 2021, marking the creation of the MMIW hashtag and
emphasis on the issues within the government and resurgence in interest of the movement
following the murder of Gabby Petito at the close of 2021. A total of 304 articles resulted from
the initial search. Duplicate articles (14) and articles in which the movement were not a key
66
focus of the article (161) were removed from the sample, resulting in a total of 129 relevant
articles. Articles in which the movement were not the key focus of the article consisted largely of
articles which were primarily about political candidates or actors and included a byline of an
upcoming vote related to MMIW policies, articles which discussed community festivals in which
a #MMIW-related workshop or talk was listed as an event, reviews of fictional true crime or
books related to Indigenous issues, or articles about the Women’s March in which #MMIW was
minimally discussed as a related concern. As the current study was concerned with the news
coverage and representation of the movement and Indigenous persons related to the movement,
the newspaper articles were the unit of analysis. Each of the news articles were base-coded to
include the news source, author, location of publication, word count, and date of publication.
Articles were thematically analyzed using both inductive and deductive methods, as informed by
prior research on media depictions of Indigenous people and codes directly elicited from the
articles (Cripps, 2021; Davidson et al., 2023; Drache et al., 2016; Jiwani, 2009). A priori codes
were created based on common prior stereotypes and tropes used with news coverage of
Indigenous women and #MMIW internationally (e.g., violence, inept mothers, etc.) to analyze a
subset of articles (n=32). The coding instrument was then revised and new codes were added
based on additional information and themes that emerged during initial coding. All articles were
analyzed using NVivo 12 Pro software.
Results
Notably, only three of 129 (2%) articles identified were published within national news
sources. Two articles were published by the New York Times, one in 2020 and one in 2021, and
one by USA Today in 2019. The remaining articles were published within regional and state
news organizations. Six state and regional organizations published 59% of the articles posted
67
about #MMIW, The Bismarck Tribune (16%), The Bemidji Pioneer (10%), The Star Tribune
(10%), The Salt Lake Tribune (8%), Alaska Dispatch News (8%), and the Spokesman Review
(8%). The most common states in which the articles about the movement were published were
Montana, Minnesota, North Dakota, and Alaska, congruent with many of the states having
higher rates of violence among Indigenous women (Urban Indian Health Institute, 2018) and
Indigenous populations. The majority of articles were published in 2019 (31%), four articles
(3%) were published in 2017, 24 (19%) in 2018, 26 (20%) in 2020, and 35 (27%) in 2021.
Women were significantly more likely to have authored a news article (X2=16.98, p=0.001), with
approximately 53% of articles written by a female author, 29% by a male author, and 18% with
an unlisted author. Race and ethnicity were not explicitly stated within author biographies or
within the articles except for in one case, in which the author was identified as part of the
Indigenous community. The average word count among all articles was 704 words, with womenled articles having an average word count of 795 and men-led articles an average word count of
662. Articles were divided into five main mutually exclusive categories of content related to
#MMIW, including reporting on an activist event (32%), policy implementation (28%), a case of
a missing or murdered Indigenous person (16%), advocacy related to the movement (16%), or
sharing rates of missing and murdered Indigenous women (9%). While some articles did have
overlapping discussions, such as the mention of rates of violence when discussing the need for
policy implication, the article was only coded for what the main concern of the article was
related to. Four main negative overarching themes were identified in the coverage of the
movement, victim-blaming and Indigenous stereotypes, erasure of historical violence, disparities
in law enforcement response, and a lack of in-depth prevention and intervention coverage. One
main positive theme was identified in the coverage of the movement, acknowledgement and
68
community. Further, the coverage specific to mobilization efforts of the movement are framed
through evidence of the protest paradigm.
Victim-Blaming and Indigenous Stereotypes of Violence
The victim-blaming and Indigenous stereotype theme represented coverage which
highlighted traditional rape myth beliefs, which blames victims for their victimization, in
addition to stereotypes and tropes identified in prior research of media coverage of Indigenous
people. Prior research highlights that Indigenous people are often represented as helpless,
alcoholics or drug users, and that communities are rife with homelessness and crime, which
highlights a theme of violence among Indigenous people (Cripps, 2021; Native American
Journalist Association, 2022). The theme of victim-blaming and violence was apparent in 10% of
the articles and only within case-specific articles, which is notable, as only 16% of all articles
focused on specific cases of missing and/or murdered Indigenous women. While few cases of
missing and/or murdered Indigenous women were discussed (e.g., only 12 unique cases), of the
five cases which described victims who were mothers, three represented the women as incapable
of adequately caring for their children, as evidenced by the following quote “[Victim name] had
struggled with alcohol, her family members acknowledged, but she was a mother of four and
they did not believe that she would take her own life.” Following this statement, the news article
noted that the victim was also no longer in the care of her children before she was murdered.
Further, the cases of murdered or missing Indigenous women were often depicted graphically
and aggressively; for example, one article mentioned a victims’ “charred body” and how she was
only identified by her teeth. Perhaps best summarized by a quote from one of the articles
concerned with espousing rates of violence against and historical disavowal of Indigenous
people, the director of the Division of Victim Services in the Office of the Wyoming Attorney
69
General was quoted by the Wyoming Tribune as stating "Indigenous victims were far more
likely to have negative character framing, and stories were far more graphic using more violent
language, really just distilling the story down to a crime, a body, a location and in graphic
detail.”
Erasure of Historical Violence
Erasure of historical violence, as prior research highlights, referred to the
disacknowledgement of Indigenous culture, history of violence that they have faced, and the role
of colonial and systemic factors which led to their victimization. The erasure of historical
violence theme was present in 22% of articles. This erasure can be seen through the following
quote, which comes from an article describing a senate hearing related to cases of murdered
Indigenous women “what authorities call a “silent crisis” — the deaths and disappearance of
hundreds of Native American women.” The reference to the genocide of Indigenous women as a
“silent crisis” ignores the efforts of Indigenous people to receive acknowledgement for their high
rates of victimization, in addition to the quote suggesting that only a few “hundreds” of
Indigenous women have been affected, despite the long withstanding high rates of violence they
have faced. While most articles discussed the current high rates of violence against Indigenous
women in recent years (68%), only 25% of articles mentioned that violence against women has
historically been a problem within these communities. Further, even less (19%) acknowledged
the systemic role of colonialism in contributing to this acceptance of violence, such as evidenced
in the following quote regarding how to stop the violence against Indigenous women “‘It's
domestic violence... We have to teach our young men, our young children, our boys how to treat
women to prevent those things.’” The emphasis that education alone would remedy the issue of
violence against women is oversimplistic and ignores the lack of law enforcement response
70
Indigenous victims have seen and how Indigenous women have been treated as commodities
historically.
Disparities in Law Enforcement Response
Disparities in law enforcement response were discussed within 23% of the articles,
primarily through accounts and quotes by Indigenous community members. More specifically,
within this theme, Indigenous people and other organizations highlighted how recent policy
implementations had either failed to be implemented correctly or failed to make an impact on the
epidemic of violence that their communities faced. In one article, the Representative Greg
Stanton of Arizona is quoted saying “‘I can see why so many Native American families feel like
their missing or murdered loved one does not matter to the federal government... we have unique
trust responsibilities to our Tribal Nations and rarely, if ever, has our federal government
delivered.’” Here, Stanton indicates that despite suggestions and commitments from the Attorney
General about efforts to combat violence against Indigenous women, it has been met with little
follow-through. These sentiments are mirrored in other articles, where law enforcement suggest
they are limited in resources and that there is a sense of confusion among Indian, local, and
federal jurisdictions, but Indigenous people in the same localities are suggesting that
“discrimination, apathy, and incompetence” from law enforcement is to blame. Further, some
families of the victims indicated that law enforcement had not been responsive or helpful. For
example, one article provided the following quote from a victim’s mother “‘Just because your
daughter died, the world doesn't revolve around you,’ she said one officer told her.” Combined,
these disparities between statements and action, and poor treatment, leads to a reluctance of
Indigenous communities to work with law enforcement, as can be seen in the following quote
from an Indigenous community member when asked about the law enforcement response to a
71
local murder case “There's a hesitancy within our communities to work with law enforcement
because law enforcement doesn't care about us.”
Lack of Prevention and Intervention Coverage
Many of the articles lacked detailed information about violence against Indigenous
women prevention tactics. Although perhaps most alarming, was the lack of information
provided about policies being implemented related to preventing and addressing violence against
Indigenous women. While 28% of articles were concerned with policy implementation, many did
not identify the specific policy, bill, or committee they were discussing or failed to provide
context to the goals of these policies. More specifically, 69% discussed some sort of initiative to
reduce violence against Indigenous women, but only 28% discussed a specific policy or
prevention effort. Of those that identified a specific effort, 75% of them referred to Savanna’s act
as the necessary resolve to the epidemic. Other recommendations included state and federal task
forces, state study committees, the Not Invisible Act, Operation Lady Justice, and state specific
house bills, however, very few were described in depth regarding the specific measures being
implemented and intended goals.
Acknowledgement and Community
Media coverage of the movement was not limited to negative representations, despite
negative coverage being more common, at approximately 72% of coverage, and positive
representations at 28%. Within this theme, media coverage often acknowledged the Indigenous
peoples’ cultural background and emphasized community and identity among Indigenous people.
The theme of acknowledgement and community was the most common within articles
categorized as advocacy related (36%), activist-centric events (31%), or policy implementation
(31%). The majority of these articles represented this theme through their inclusion of
72
Indigenous voices, with approximately 45% of articles including a quote from an Indigenous
community member or organization. For example, one article quoted a member of the
Indigenous Environmental Network who hosted a walk for the #MMIW movement, noting
“‘Traditionally the roles of women in many indigenous societies were one of strength and
influence. Women have real power and are greatly respected. Colonizing forces recognized this
and set about their work on tearing down female and two-spirit structures of power.’” The use of
Indigenous voices is important in ensuring more culturally sensitive and accurate messages
related to violence against Indigenous women. Articles which fit into this theme were not limited
to the use of Indigenous quotes, however, many authors emphasized with and espoused notions
of support for Indigenous women and the issues they face, such as the following quote related to
the implementation of Minnesota’s state task force for #MMIW “Lawmakers are now fully
informed about a tragically under-the-radar public safety problem - the plague of crimes
committed against women from tribal nations. There is no excuse for inaction.”
Protest Paradigm and the Movement
The majority of the articles failed to discuss #MMIW in relation to awareness and
overarching goals of the movement. Rather, #MMIW was largely used as an umbrella term for
acknowledging violence against Indigenous women. When the movement was represented in
alignment with the goals and aims of the movement, it was done so entirely within the selection
of articles categorized as activist events (68%). Generally, the movement, and efforts at
mobilization events, which were primarily protests or art shows, were represented positively.
Thus, the protest paradigm was not readily apparent within the news articles, at least in terms of
negative news framing and demonization. The protests were generally represented as positive
and peaceful events, there was no mention within any of the articles about the events being
73
destructive, disorderly, or characterized through language such as “riots”. Further, the invocation
of public opinion was largely limited. The majority of articles which discussed a movementoriented event used quotes from Indigenous activists and community members participating in
the movement (85%). Only one article interviewed an individual not participating in the
movement, rather, the person interviewed was engaging in a counter-protest and was quoted
stating ““The women’s marches are a constant political anti-Trump bias...My friend, [redacted],
got us to show some spirit and that we find these events unnecessary. We also wanted to show
that we have our freedom of speech, too, and without resorting to violence.’” The rest of the
articles used quotes from local state representatives or other government actors not participating,
but positively speaking about the events.
Even so, the articles did exhibit a reliance on official sources and definitions of violence
against Indigenous women, and ultimately delegitimization. Most of the articles, even outside of
activism specific movement events, used the same statistics from the Urban Indian Health
Institute (30%), which indicated there were 5,000 missing American Indian and Alaska Native
women and that rates of violence against Indigenous women on reservations was ten times
higher than the national average (Urban Indian Health Institute, 2018). Moreover, while many of
the activism specific movement events were covered in relation to the existence of the movement
and the need for some kind of change to acknowledge the problem of violence against
Indigenous women, there was little information about the larger social issues and proposed
solutions in accordance with movement specific goals. Thus, the articles, though mentioning the
movement by title, largely engaged in the delegitimization and erasure of the movement.
74
Discussion
Perhaps the most glaring finding from United States media coverage of #MMIW is the
lack of mainstream national news coverage. Research suggests that local media is much more
likely to cover a social movement protest if it is supported by local constituents and businesses
(Amenta et al., 2017; Oliver & Meyer, 1999), of which the majority of articles related to activist
events indicated. Further, the emergence of policy related to a social movement issue and
partnerships with larger organizations assist in media coverage at all levels (Elliott et al., 2016).
The development of policies and taskforces related to #MMIW included local and state
implementation, which accounts for a significant portion of articles in the sample which were
derived from the local news. Research highlights that communication between larger and wellconnected organizations may be impactful in increasing national news coverage (Gamson, 1988,
2004), thus efforts to re-establish trust and repair harms among Indigenous organizations and
mainstream organizations may be beneficial in increasing national news coverage and
mobilization and motivation efforts.
Moreover, the local and state coverage of the movement and violence against Indigenous
women more generally, largely failed to acknowledge the history of violence and role of
colonialism in causing this violence. This is problematic for several reasons, but most
importantly, it does not allow for an in-depth understanding of the causes of violence against
Indigenous women and there for may not allow for adequate prevention and responses to
violence. Further, the stereotypical depictions of Indigenous women, consistent with prior
research (Cripps, 2021) allows for Indigenous women to be delegitimatized as victims and
deemed blameworthy for their experiences. When victims are “othered” and not characterized as
people with whom we can empathize with and who seemingly “mattered” to others, it lessens the
75
ability for readers to connect with these victims and their deaths to be sympathized with (Hart &
Gilbertson, 2018). Thus, media depictions of murdered and missing Indigenous women as
violent, inept mothers, and sexual deviants allow for Indigenous victims to be considered at least
partially responsible for their victimization and reduces sympathy and connection by media
audiences (Cripps, 2021). This presents implications for the ability of collective identities to be
developed among non-Indigenous community members; if non-Indigenous individuals are
unable to reflect and acknowledge the need for awareness and resource needs among the
Indigenous community, they are less likely to become part of mobilization potential, let alone
overcome any barriers to participate in movement activities. Negative and misconstrued
representations of victims, combined with a lack of acknowledgement of the historical
victimization of Indigenous women, presents underwhelming prospects for the potential
mainstream acknowledgement and response to this epidemic. Further research is needed to
determine the extent to which this coverage is consistent internationally, particularly in Canada
where the movement has seen more widespread coverage.
The lack of descriptions of needed policy and program efforts and disparities in
implemented practices among law enforcement agencies is also cause for concern. Again,
combined with the lack of acknowledgement of historical violence and the impacts of
colonialism in contributing to violence and mistrust among Indigenous populations, this does not
allow for the development or correct implementation of culturally informed policies and
practices. The development and implementation of policies, such as Savanna’s Act, is
diminished when no perceivable outcomes are witnessed by the Indigenous community and
widespread miscommunication between tribal, state, and federal law enforcement remains.
Similarly, the lack of information provided about the policies and research being conducted at
76
the state and federal level limit the general public’s knowledge of response efforts and thus limit
the ability to be able to be critical of the outcomes of said policies. Future research is needed to
determine the extent to which commonly reported on policies and procedures, particularly at the
local and state level, are effective in reducing violence against Indigenous women and are
implemented consistently with identified processes and have the desired outcomes. While
policies in the United States have been developed consistent with early policies in Canada, the
extent to which proper implementation and expected outcomes are consistent has not currently
been examined.
Finally, while much of the media coverage of #MMIW has been consistent with prior
work on lack of and stereotypical coverage of the Indigenous population (Cripps, 2021;
Davidson et al., 2023; Drache et al., 2016; Gilchrist, 2010; Native American Journalists
Association, 2022), the findings present some cautiously promising avenues for activism work
related to the movement. A significant number of articles reported on activist-specific events
related to the movement, the majority of which, were written in a way which empowered and
emphasized the contribution of the movement. The only protest paradigm readily apparent was
related to the use of official statistics and delegitimization through the erasure of detailed
movement efforts and goals. While at odds with prior research on the protest paradigm and
movements which go against the status quo (Brown & Harlow, 2019; Leopold & Bell, 2017), as
the majority of news sources were community specific and many of the events occurring within
those communities, there is a potential for #MMIW concerns to be moreso mainstream within
localities who are heavily impacted and regulated by these efforts. This is consistent with
considerations of mobilization within Indigenous communities, where experiences and exposure
to violence are more likely to be shared and concern and awareness more likely to be present,
77
lending to increased opportunities for recruitment and motivations to participate based on this
collective identity. While the lack of inclusion of specific movement goals compounded with the
erasure of historical violence may present difficulties in accurately addressing the root causes of
violence against Indigenous women, the findings also provide implications for the potential of
#MMIW activism to be impactful if provided with additional support and increased exposure,
which highlights the specific efforts of the movement and broader concerns. Thus, future
research should examine the extent to which the movement remains covered among local and
state news sources over time and whether mainstream national news sources fluctuate in their
coverage.
78
CHAPTER SIX: PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF ONLINE SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND
#MMIW
Research suggests that public perceptions surrounding socio-political topics have a
reciprocal impact on policy-making, values, and beliefs surrounding controversial topics
(Rasmussen et al., 2018). Despite this, the way in which public opinion is formed and shaped is
less clear. Some research highlights that social movements may have an influential impact on
public opinion formation, when they function in specific ways (Amenta & Polletta, 2019), such
that, in-person and online social movements which are stable over time, engage more “public”
organizations and influencers (Sterrett et al., 2019; Turcotte, 2015), and have media coverage
and visibility (Banaszak & Ondercin, 2016; Moeke-Pickering et al., 2018) are more likely to
impact public opinion and related outcomes (Meyer et al., 2002). However, the extent to which
this is consistent across different types of movements, and the more minute aspects of social
movements, which help to create lasting change and more significant shifts in public opinion are
less known. However, this is potentially problematic for online social movements as they often
receive less coverage in more traditional forms of media (Brown & Harlow, 2019). This may be
particularly true when considering social movements that depart from mainstream and
stereotypical understandings of race and gender, such as #MMIW or #BLM, because of their
emphasis on counter-narratives which highlight the realities of experiences of victimization,
particularly related to the increased risk of victimization among marginalized populations and
whom are more likely to perpetrate these crimes. Thus, understanding the extent of exposure and
79
perceptions, and perhaps other ways in which public understanding about online social
movements are formed is important.
Literature Review
Limited research has examined how social movements, particularly those on social
media, impact public opinion and support for a movement. Amenta and Polletta (2019) provide a
review of research on social movements’ impacts on public opinion and culture more generally,
and of particular interest, discussed why certain movements have had impacts. These authors
highlight that how institutions and activists function is critical to movement influence, such that
the tactics in which they engage in congruence with the environment around them are imperative
(Amenta & Polletta, 2019). More specifically, tactics engaged with should be in-line with
movement goals, take into account related subcultures of concern and mobilization efforts that
have been previously made, and consider any organizational or institutional barriers or benefits
(e.g., if an activist works for an organization what are ways in which the organization can
leverage mobilization of the movement’s efforts to gain traction and support). For example, in
the context of #MMIW, it would be important to align mobilization efforts with desired goals,
such as broader goals of awareness and acknowledge how culture and prior experiences may be
related to particular mobilization efforts. The recognition of how culture and previous
experiences of oppression and colonialism has impacted Indigenous efforts of activism is
particularly important, as it requires non-Indigenous scholars and activists to reflect and attempt
to remedy ways in which they may be complicit, in order to assist in mobilization efforts.
Related to how the context in which a movement is situated, Lewandowsky and
colleagues (2019) examined how the content of blog posts endorsing a particular cause, in
addition to perceptions of wider public beliefs, influenced participants’ beliefs about climate
80
change. Lewandowsky and colleagues (2019) used an experimental survey design, in which type
of blog post (e.g., rejecting or endorsing a viewpoint) and comments in response to the blog post
(e.g., endorsing or rejecting)were used to examine participant’s agreement with the blog
information and their overall attitude toward climate change as discussed in the blog. Further, the
authors examined whether there was congruence in agreement among those whom had
commented in response to the blog post (Lewandowsky et al., 2019). The authors’ most
noteworthy finding was that readers were more likely to support and agree with the content of
the blog when other users’ comments were supportive of the post (Lewandowsky et al., 2019).
This suggests that opinions on socio-political topics may be influenced by perceptions of others’
attitudes regarding a particular topic. This phenomenon may be more readily apparent with social
media, as responses to mobilizing posts are easily viewable, allowing for a quicker consensus to
be made by the reader.
Further, Johri and colleagues (2018) examined how different aspects of a movement
aimed at changing gender diversity in the field of engineering impacted engagement with and
success of the movement. Using social network analysis, the authors captured tweets that
included the hashtag “IlookLikeAnEngineer” and examined the density and centrality of users
involved with the campaign. The authors examined potential triggers that led to increased
activity among users identified, conducting a temporal analysis of central users’ tweets, retweets,
and favorites. Four main triggers of user engagement were identified, including that the
movement was 1) event-driven (e.g., online campaign which promoted offline activities), 2)
media-driven (e.g., news coverage of the movement), 3) industry-driven (e.g., any other
organizations were engaged with the movement), and 4) personality-driven (e.g.,political and
social elites were aligned with the movement). This is particularly important to consider, as
81
while Twitter was a suitable platform for the campaign to emerge, there are several other factors
for activists to consider to capture a broader and more engaged audience. The online social
movement in this study spurred in-person activism almost immediately, in addition to news
coverage from traditional media outlets, suggesting the potential for greater awareness and
impact of the movement. Visibility and coverage, particularly in the case of in-person social
movements, such as national news coverage which clearly and accurately portray a movement’s
concerns, has historically been impactful in knowledge creation and social change (Barabas &
Jerit, 2009; Brown & Harlow, 2019). Andrews and colleagues (2015) highlighted how the
attitudes toward protesters in support of the civil rights movement and political discussions
surrounding segregation and protests changed with an increase and scope in protest activity.
More specifically, while they emphasize that the number of White southerners in support of
Black protesters and civil rights was small, the proximity to protests, and therefore proximity to
alternate frames of discourse surrounding the cause, such as counter-publics, was related to more
positive attitudes of White individuals toward protesters (Andrews & Gaby, 2015).
Alternatively, while media coverage is important for public awareness, it also impacts
perceptions of the utility of a movement depending on the way in which protest actors are
covered (Brown & Harlow, 2019). Known as protest paradigm, prior research suggests that
traditional media typically delegitimizes and may depict movements based on whether they are
in congruence with mainstream narratives (Boyle et al., 2004). For example, social movements
which are associated with counter-narratives, such as #MeToo, may be more likely to be
delegitimized by mainstream media because they attempt to challenge existing power structures
and expose system injustices. Thus, discrediting a social movement with a counter mainstream
narrative may serve to protect the status quo and maintain the influence of those currently in
82
power. Thus, not only considering exposure, but the way in which content is framed, is important
to consider. This is also particularly relevant for online spaces, as frames may also be apparent in
the messages and hashtags organizations and activists use to engage with social movements. For
example, Xiong and colleagues (2019) used a thematic analysis to identify frames used by
various types of social media organizations to engage the public with the #MeToo movement.
The authors identified a several frames used by organizations, such as using action-oriented
hashtags to promote mobilization efforts of other users and references to victims, underscoring
the importance of survivor’s stories as a direct tie to the movement’s goals. Research has found
that when organizations strategically use frames to gather support online, it is beneficial for
mobilizing and motivating other users to join social movements (Holton et al., 2012; Hon, 2016).
While potentially industry-driven, research suggests that social media activism across multiple
types of users is usually action-oriented to create collective action (Poell & van Dijck, 2018).
Moreover, Moscato (2016) and Moeke-Pickering and colleagues (2018) acknowledge
how media framing of Indigenous rights campaigns has impacted the outcomes of those related
movements. Moscato (2016) emphasized the use of framing tactics within hashtags by news
organizations as beneficial for legitimizing the #Idlenomore movement, despite different framing
tactics being used by different organizations. One user, that of a news organization examined by
Moscato (2016), emphasized the global impact of the movement’s concerns, and highlighted the
social media representations of the movement, while another news source emphasized elite (e.g.,
government institutions, celebrities, etc.) involvement with and the entertainment value of the
movement. Despite the polarizing takes of the movement, both framing tactics encouraged user
engagement, as the first source encouraged legitimate action and the second increased
accessibility and knowledge spread to a more casual audience. Moeke-Pickering and colleagues
83
(2018) examined framing techniques of #MMIW by Twitter users, informed by the idea that
engagement with #MMIW by activists and other users is different than many other movements,
as it is situated in specific Indigenous ideas of restoration, reframing, and returning. Each of the
three frames used by activists (e.g., restoring, reframing, and returning) encouraged user
responses, in the form of replies, retweets, and likes of #MMIW posts. The engagement with
these frames is important, as it provides context to the narratives which may provoke user
mobilization and motivation for participation in the movement. The authors argue that the
visibility of these narratives and frames is particularly important, as they have historically been
invisible in broader society.
In-Person Social Movements on Public Beliefs
Despite mixed findings on what aspects of social movements are specifically related to
movement impact, some research has found in-person social movements to be effective at
changing opinion. Banaszak and Ondercin (2016) found that social movement events,
particularly related to the U.S. Women’s Movement, were influential in changing attitudes
related to gender. Increased activity by the movement was associated with public opinion of
gender shifting to a more liberal outlook (Banaszak & Ondercin, 2016). The authors
contextualize social movement events as all pro-women collective action events related to the
women’s movement or abortion that were mentioned in the New York Times from 1960 to 1995.
Gender attitudes were measuredthrough various items, such as from the General Social Survey,
and included questions that measured attitudes towards women’s roles (e.g., “It is much better
for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of
the home and family?”) and those which asked about attitudes towards policies that were
emphasized by the women’s movement (e.g., “Do you favor or oppose the Equal Rights
84
Amendment – also known as ERA – the constitutional amendment concerning women?”). While
not conclusive, the authors found that as the number of movement events increased, so did
positive gender attitudes and that this relationship was stable over time.. This was after
controlling for lifestyle changes, political leadership, and policy changes on issues. Further,
Banaszak and colleagues (2021) examined whether women’s protests impacted the gender
attitudes of youth in 32 countries. Using secondary data of gendered attitudes (e.g., “Men and
women should have equal opportunities to work in government”) from the 2009 IEA
International Civic and Citizenship Study in combination with data on occurrences of nonviolent protests regarding women’s rights during 2009, the authors examined how protests
differentially impacted male and female youth’s beliefs of egalitarian gender roles. The authors
found that the protests were impactful on gendered attitudes, such as perceptions of women’s
rights and roles within society (e.g., “men and women should have equal opportunities to take
part in government”), however much more so for female youth, particularly in countries where
more progressive gender beliefs were already held (Banaszak et al., 2021).
Potential of Online Movements for Changing Public Beliefs
Beyond in-person social movements, online social movements are potentially more
desirable because of the potential for broad networks of users to be connected, and therefore
more information to be spread. Research is mixed on whether news available on social media is
deemed trustworthy, though social media has becoming increasingly used as a source of news
and information (Walker & Matsa, 2022). Some research has examined what features of social
media platforms may encourage the public to engage with news and movements online and deem
them more trustworthy, indicating a number of factors, such as who is posting, and tactics used
by posters, as impacting trustworthiness, and support of online campaigns. In general, research
85
indicates that the trustworthiness of the person sharing a story and the credibility of the outlet
reporting a story affect whether people will trust news on social media (Sterrett et al., 2019;
Turcotte, 2015). Particularly interesting, Sterrett and colleagues (2019) found that who shares the
story is of much more importance than the outlet reporting the story, such that stories that
“elites” (e.g., those with a more celebrity status) share are found to be more trustworthy. Using
vignettes of social media posts of news stories, the authors examined differences in opinions of
story trustworthiness based on whether eight public figures (e.g., Dr. Oz, Gwyneth Paltrow) and
two new agencies (e.g., the Associated Press and DailyNewsreview.com) had posted the story.
The results suggested that who shares the articles is much more important in terms of whether an
individual trusts the news story, while both the sharer and reporting agency are important in the
likelihood of an individual engaging with the story. Participants were also asked to rank the
trustworthiness and familiarity of the eight public figures, and with increased
trustworthiness/familiarity of the figure, came increased trustworthiness of the news story
shared.
Relatedly, perceptions of one’s network on social media may also impact exposure to and
attitudes toward social movements and information sharing. Wohn and Bowe (2016) conducted
focus groups and interviews with college students about the role of their online social networks
in shaping their understanding of news events. Conducted across two studies, the researchers
examined resources that individuals use to get information on news events, their perceptions of
what public opinion about specific news events was, how social media impacts their discussions
of political topics and how discussions with others on social media impacts their attitudes. The
first study examined what resources students used to stay informed, finding that many students
learn about events on social media and that social media discussion of an event impacts their
86
awareness of the event. More specifically, they found that when local events were widely
discussed on social media, or a singular account was particularly vocal about a particular event,
they were more likely to remember the event. Further, the first study measured how participants’
individual networks influenced their perceptions of the event, with each participant having a
somewhat varied understanding of the same event. Diversity in one’s network was related to
having a more balanced understanding of local events, however, in general, beliefs of what
others think about a topic may be different from person to person (Wohn & Bowe, 2016). In
study two, the authors used a specific political campaign to examine how social media impacts
participants’ discussions and how discussions with others impact their attitudes. Again, the
authors found that beliefs around political discussions on social media varied from person to
person, however, participants indicated attempting to use social media features (e.g., liking or
sharing posts) to shape their network’s beliefs, and particularly for those with more neutral
opinions on topics, more receptive to differing opinions (Wohn & Bowe, 2016). Similarly, users
who consider themselves influential in their networks are more likely to try and persuade others
in their network (Weeks et al., 2015), which may be particularly important for encouraging
activism efforts online.
Similarly, Jhang and colleagues (2018) examined the impact of different types of activist
efforts on the public’s likelihood to engage with them. Using an experimental design, the authors
varied activist type (e.g., moderate vs. radical) and activism tactics engaged in (e.g., protests,
humiliation, terrorism) within social media posts, to determine a participant’s likelihood to “like”
a post, share the post, or donate to the particular cause. The authors found that the type of activist
played no role in a participant’s view of an activist, however, the tactics engaged in by activists
did have differential effects (Jahng & Lee, 2018). Such that when an activist relayed protest
87
tactics within a social media post, participants were much more likely to have a positive
response, in terms of sharing the post and donating to it, when compared to the humiliation and
terrorism tactics.
Current Study
Taken together, the findings highlighted above suggest that a number of factors
potentially impact public trust in information being shared and their likelihood to participate in
or support a cause. Thus, attempting to identify a more definitive understanding of factors which
impact belief in and adherence to a particular cause shared on social media is of particular
importance. The current study uses a survey to examine public use of social media, engagement
with and support of social movements by the general public, and the extent to which social
movements engaged with have the potential to influence public opinion on social concerns.
Further, the study examines the extent to which the public have been exposed to #MMIW and
Indigenous issues, as well as their attitudes and beliefs related to the movement. The current
study helps to bridge a better understanding of public sentiment toward online social movements,
ways in which the public use social media, and how these factors may impact the public’s
perceptions of a trending, intersectional online social movement. More specifically, this study
examines the impact of social network favorability and use on perceptions and exposure to
#MMIW and attitudes toward Indigenous issues more generally. It is suggested that increased
exposure to the movement will leverage greater acknowledgment and contemplation of
Indigenous concerns and more positive perceptions of the movement, as will more positive
perceptions of the utility of social media in terms of use, support, and credibility. More
specifically, those with more positive perceptions of the utility of social media, such as those
who view social media as more credible and use social media as a support system, may have
88
more favorable impressions of #MMIW, compared to those with less favorable perceptions of
social media.
Methodology
The survey was entered into Qualtrics and pilot tested through an undergraduate
criminology course to determine any potential issues or challenges with the survey instrument.
The survey was distributed through Prolific following pilot testing and revision of the survey
instrument. A total of 300 surveys were completed through Prolific, with a payment amount of
$3.35 per survey, and an average time of 16 minutes for completion. Prolific is a research
platform that allows for data collection from participants and provides the option of obtaining a
nationally representative sample. Notably, the sample was not a random sample, which may
present implications for sample representativeness due to certain characteristics of those who
self-select to participate, thus potentially not reflecting diversity and characteristics of the
broader population. Prolific allows for quality checks and screener questions of participants
while taking surveys to allow for quality data collection. Further, Prolific’s pricing is transparent,
aligning with recommended ethical guidelines for online research (Amory & Burruss, 2021).
Two attention check questions and time elapsed verification, in addition to Qualtrics built-in bot
detection features, were used to ensure data integrity. The final sample consisted of 274
respondents, with a mean age of 36.5, 50% women, 78% non-Hispanic White, 61% heterosexual,
54% Democratic, 44% ever married, and 56% with a college degree. Gender identity and race
are comparable to that of the United States Census, with women accounting for 50.5% of the
population and non-Hispanic White individuals accounting for 75.8% of the population in 2022
(U.S. Census, 2023).
89
Measures
The survey included measures of online users’ experiences and beliefs about social
media, in addition to their exposure and attitudes surrounding #MMIW and indigenous women,
the Black Lives Matter movement, #MeToo, the Climate Change movements, and gender and
race-based beliefs. While the main concern of this study is perceptions related to #MMIW, the
other social movements provide comparisons of other race, gender, and environmentally based
social movements. The inclusion of these movements provides implications for better
understanding the context in which perceptions of #MMIW are situated and whether perceptions
and exposure are unique to this movement. The survey questions can be found in Appendix A.
Exposure and Attitudes Toward #MMIW and Indigenous Issues
The three main variables of interest include exposure to #MMIW, perceptions and
importance towards #MMIW, and attitudes toward Indigenous issues generally. To measure
exposure with #MMIW, three items were presented to participants. Items were adapted from
previous measures of public perceptions of varying social movements (Szekeres et al., 2020) as
no current measures exist specific to #MMIW. The items measured how often users were
exposed to #MMIW on social media, TV, and through other people. All three items were
measured on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to it
very much). The items were dichotomized based on the data distribution across each variable, as
responses were largely split between having no exposure or having moderate exposure, where 0
equals “no exposure” and 1 equals “any exposure” to the movement for each platform. The three
items were then combined into a binary indicator of exposure to #MMIW, with a Cronbach’s
alpha of the scale at .65 with similar item-rest correlations and a Krippendorff’s alpha of .36.
90
Participant attitudes toward Indigenous women’s issues and ability for #MMIW to effect
change was gauged through a 14-item scale measured on a 4-point Likert scale, which asks the
user how strongly they agree with statements such as “The police are less likely to investigate a
case if the victim is an Indigenous woman” and “MMIW is an attention-seeking tactic”. The
items were developed based on prior research of common themes that exist in discourse related
to violence against women in the Indigenous community (Diehl, 2019; Morton, 2018; Parsloe &
Campbell, 2021).
The attitudes toward Indigenous issues and the Missing and Murdered Women scale were
separated into two sub-scales: awareness and activism related to #MMIW and external and
internal causes and responses to #MMIW. The initial exploratory factor analysis indicating a
single factor suggested the existence of two separate factors based on the disparate factor
loadings across the variables. Thus, a two-factor model with varimax rotation was estimated,
delineating the two factors as indicated above. Four items were dropped from the model due to
low factor loadings below .4 or due to the correlation of loadings between scales. The #MMIW
awareness and activism subscale consisted of five items, including “What happens in Indigenous
communities is of no concern to me,” “The mainstream media should pay more attention to
Indigenous problems,” “Social media can create a more inclusive and stronger Indigenous
community,” “If a friend or family member asked me to share information about MMIW on my
social media accounts, I would,” and “If a friend or family member asked me to attend a rally to
increase awareness of MMIW, I would go if I could.” Factor analysis of this subscale all had
factor loadings above .4 and minimal unique variance for most items, suggesting that these five
items best fit this factor. The causes and responses to #MMIW factor also consisted of five items,
including “The criminal justice system cares equally about Indigenous victims and other
91
victims,” “Indigenous communities need to address internal issues that cause MMIW instead of
blaming colonialism and oppression,” “Cultural practices in Indigenous communities increase
the risk of women going missing or being murdered,” “Indigenous activists need to stop seeing
the world as "us" and "them" if they want to affect change,” and “The police are less likely to
investigate a case if the victim is an Indigenous woman.” All factor loadings were above .5, also
indicating a good fit for this specific factor.
To measure perceptions of the movement, participants were asked the extent to which
they agreed with five statements regarding support for and importance of the movement (e.g., I
feel positively about MMIW; I feel that the MMIW campaign is important, etc.). The perception
measures were ranked on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = strongly agree), with
the ability to select “does not apply” for individuals who are not familiar with the movement.
Respondents who selected “does not apply” were excluded for analysis. For those who indicated
they do not support or feel negatively towards the MMIW campaign, users were asked to explain
their opinion through an open-ended question. Based on Cronbach’s alpha and factor analysis
results, only four out of the five items were retained. The second item, “I feel negatively (do not
support),” was removed from the scale, as the item-rest correlation was significantly different for
this item compared to other items, and the unique variance of the item in the factor analysis was
significantly higher and factor loading lower. Items maintained include “I feel positively
(support),” “I feel that the MMIW campaign is important,” “The MMIW movement raised my
awareness about violence against Indigenous women,” and “The #MMIW movement raised my
level of concern about violence against Indigenous women.” The Cronbach’s alpha suggested
good reliability at .84, moderate agreement with a Krippendorff’s alpha of .49 and factor analysis
provided factor loadings above .68 and a low unique variance across each item.
92
User Experiences
As discussed, individuals who are more embedded in their online communities,
particularly within diverse communities in which they trust, are generally more likely to be think
favorably of information shared by their networks, as well as be more engaged with information
shared (Sterrett et al., 2019; Turcotte, 2015; Wohn & Bowe, 2016). Further, individuals are
increasingly seeking out news and information about social issues online (Walker & Matsa,
2022). Thus, user experiences, motivations and connection-building online are integral to better
understanding user beliefs on online social movements.
The social media use integration scale measured the level of engagement an individual
had across social media (Jenkins-Guarnieri et al., 2013; Maree, 2017). Though previous versions
have applied the scale to particular social media platforms (e.g., Facebook), the current study
used the phrasing “social media” as to not limit the examination to any singular platform. The
scale consisted of 10 items, which are split between two subscales, social integration and
emotional connection and integration into social routines. The emotional connection subscale
consists of six items, which ask questions such as “I feel disconnected from friends when I have
not logged into social media”. The social routines subscale consists of four items, with one item
reverse-coded, with questions such as “Using social media is part of my everyday routine”. Both
subscales were ranked on a 4-point Likert scale (e.g., 1 = strongly disagree, 4 = strongly agree).
Prior research has established reliability and validity of the scale across diverse populations
(Jenkins-Guarnieri et al., 2013; Maree, 2017). Consistent with prior research, the ten-item model
for social integration and five item model for routine integration were a good fit, with a
Cronbach’s alpha of .92 and .89 respectively for each subscale.
93
The extent to which the public engaged with a range of other online users in terms of
gender, opinion, race and ethnicity, religion, and socioeconomic status was measured through the
network heterogeneity scale. The current scale is adapted from the communication network
heterogeneity scale (Kim & Chen, 2016), adding in a measure of race/ethnicity and religion to
create a seven-item index. Using a 4-point Likert scale, participants were asked how often they
talk about social or political issues on social media with others of varying characteristics
indicated above (e.g., “People who do not share my background”). Previous research has
suggested that the six items used in the original scale adequately load onto a single factor (Kim
& Chen, 2016). The network heterogeneity maintained a good fit in its full model, with a
Cronbach’s alpha of .95.
The social capital scale examined both efforts at bridging and bonding social capital.
Bridging social capital measures are those that examine online users’ efforts at building
connections with other users and are suggested to be beneficial for linking users to assets and for
information sharing purposes (Williams, 2006). Bonding social capital measures, on the other
hand, are related to creating strong networks, in which the purpose is emotional support and
solidarity and access to valuable or limited resources (Williams, 2006). The social capital scale
consists of 20 items, 10 bonding subscale items (e.g., there are several people online I trust to
help solve my problems) and 10 bridging subscale items (e.g., I am willing to spend time to
support general online community activities), with responses on a 4-point Likert scale. Previous
research evaluating the scale has found it to be both reliable and valid (Williams, 2006). All
items were retained for the bridging social capital subscale, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .94,
however one item was dropped from the bonding social capital scale based on disparate item-rest
correlations and a high unique variance for item three, which asked “There is no one on social
94
media that I feel comfortable talking to about intimate personal problem”. The model with the
remaining nine items resulted in an alpha of .92.
The motivation for social media scale measured reasons for which people use the Internet
and includes five subscales. Only two of the subscales were used for the current study, due to
relevancy, familiarity and perceptions with online social movements; the use of social media for
convenience, entertainment, and passing time subscales were not included. The interpersonal
utility subscale refers to the use of the Internet for communicating with others (e.g., "To show
others encouragement”) and included ten items measured on a 4-point Likert scale. The
information seeking subscale measured the use of Internet for gaining knowledge (e.g., “To get
information easier”) through six items on a 4-point Likert scale. Each subscale has been found to
be reliable and have good internal consistency (Dookhoo & Dodd, 2019). Two items were
dropped from the interpersonal utility and interaction subscale, the use of social media “To tell
others what to do” and “Because I wonder what other people are talking about” based on
incompatible item-rest correlations and low factor loadings for both items. The re-estimated
model resulted in an alpha of .90 and factor loadings above .6. The information seeking subscale
resulted in one item being dropped, “To learn what my social connections are posting about”.
The five-item model resulted in an alpha of .9, factor loadings above .68 and unique variances
below .45.
Beliefs About Social Media
Previous research has indicated that an individual’s perceptions of the outlet and sources
from which information is shared is particularly important to whether they trust and believe the
information shared (Sterrett et al., 2019; Turcotte, 2015). Thus, perceived credibility of social
media and traditional media sources was gauged through a three-item scale, measuring media
95
credibility, which measures assessments of social media believability, fairness, and accuracy.
Participants were asked how believable, fair, and accurate they judge political information found
on Twitter, Facebook, other social network sites, blogs, and broadcast television news. Prior
research has established these three factors as reliable measures of public perceptions of media
credibility (Gaziano & McGrath, 1986) and have been successfully established in research
examining social media credibility (Johnson & Kaye, 2015). Media credibility was divided into
two subscales, beliefs of believability, fairness, and accuracy within social media (e.g., Twitter,
Facebook, and blogs) and beliefs of believability, fairness, and accuracy within television news.
Cronbach’s alpha suggested good reliability for both models, with an alpha of .91 for social
media credibility and .89 for television credibility, with consistent item-rest correlations across
each item in the subscales.
Black Lives Matter (#BLM) Movement
Beliefs regarding other critically framed social movements are important for
contextualizing the support for #MMIW. Thus, three other social movements were examined, the
first of which is the Black Lives Matter (#BLM) movement. The perceptions of #BLM scale
consisted of five items which ask about the perceived importance of and need for the movement
(e.g., “The Black Lives Matter movement is an effective movement to bring attention to police
brutality”). Consistent with each of the other movements, this scale was measured on a 4-point
Likert scale, from strongly disagree to strongly agree. No previously validated scale exists
regarding perceptions of #BLM, thus items were developed based on prior research of common
themes and beliefs about the movement (Ilchi & Frank, 2021; Setter, 2021). The perceptions of
the Black Lives Matter scale had one item dropped, the statement “The Black Lives Matter
movement is anti-police”. Its item-rest correlation was lower than the other items, and the factor
96
loading and unique variance were inadequate. Items retained included “The Black Lives Matter
movement is an effective movement to bring attention to police brutality,” “Protests during the
Black Lives Matter movement are most often violent,” “Black Lives Matter as a social
movement is just as important today as the Civil Rights Movement was in the 1950s and 1960s,”
and “The Black Lives Matter movements does more harm than good.” The second and fourth
items mentioned above were reverse coded. Cronbach’s alpha for the final four item scale was
.90 indicating good reliability, and fair agreement with a Krippendorff’s alpha of .38.
MeToo (#MeToo) Movement
Perceptions of the #MeToo movement were measured on a pre-validated scale of eight
items (Roth-Cohen et al., 2019). Items on the scale reflect understandings of the need for (e.g.,
“The #metoo campaign sheds light on an important challenge that society faces”), benefit of
(e.g., “The #metoo campaign gives a good and precise picture of how wide-spread sexual
assaults actually are”), and importance of the movement for creating change (e.g., “The #metoo
campaign is important because it gives victims of sexual assault a voice”). Perceptions of
#MeToo maintained all items, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .91, a Krippendorff’s alpha of .35, and
factor analysis of the scale suggested a good fit for each item. The scales items included “The
#metoo campaign sheds light on an important challenge that society faces,” “The #metoo
campaign is important because it gives victims of sexual assault a voice,” “The #metoo
campaign gives a good and precise picture of how wide-spread sexual assaults actually are,”
“The #metoo campaign is important because it makes it easier for victims of sexual assault to out
themselves,” “The #metoo campaign legitimizes false accusations,” “The #metoo campaign does
more harm than good,” “The #metoo campaign wrongfully labels a lot of people as sexual
97
assaulters,” and “The #metoo campaign creates an exaggerated vigilantism/witch hunt.” The last
four items indicated above were reverse-coded.
Climate Change (#ClimateChangeIsReal) Movement
Due to the lack of an existing validated scale on perceptions of the Climate Change
movement, the items in the scale used were developed by drawing upon prior research on
common beliefs related to the movement and environmental issues more generally (Egan &
Mullin, 2017; Kellstedt et al., 2008). Perceptions of the #ClimateChangeIsReal was measured
out of five items which asked participants about their understanding (e.g., “The
#ClimateChangeIsReal campaign claims that human activities are changing the climate are
exaggerated”) and perceived importance (e.g., “The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign is
important because it spreads awareness about global warming”) of the movement. Two items
were dropped from the scale based on the item-rest correlation, factor loadings, and unique
variances. Items maintained include “The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign is important because
it spreads awareness about global warming,” “The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign is too
alarmist about issues like global warming,” and “The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign presents
too much conflicting evidence about global warming to know whether it is actually happening.”
The last two items mentioned above were reverse coded. The Cronbach’s alpha for the final
model was .85 and Krippendorff’s alpha .45, with factor loadings for all items were above .7 and
a unique variance below .5.
Similar to #MMIW participants were asked about their exposure to each of the
movements through social media, television, and from others. #MeToo and
#ClimateChangeIsReal resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha that suggested good reliability, with
similar item-rest correlations across each of the items for each separate exposure scale, .72 and
98
.85 respectively. Further, the Krippendorff’s alpha for #MeToo suggested moderate agreement at
.44 and .64 for #ClimateChangeIsReal. The Cronbach’s alpha for #BLM was lower, at .51, and
showed fair agreement with a Krippendorff’s alpha of .26, but factor analysis of the scale
suggested a decent fit with factor loadings above .6 and moderate uniqueness across each item.
Gender and Race-based Beliefs
Beliefs regarding gender and race may also impact perceptions and beliefs regarding the
benefits of #MMIW. For example, Lake and colleagues (2021) found that individual awareness
of oppression and privilege was associated with having greater support and participation within
the Black Lives Matter movement. Thus, the updated Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale
(IRMA) (McMahon & Farmer, 2011) was used to examined participants levels of rape myth
acceptance, as it may be related to beliefs about the MMIW movement. The scale consists of
four subscales of common rape myth beliefs including, she asked for it (e.g., “If a girl acts like a
slut, eventually she is going to get into trouble” ), he did not mean to (e.g., “When guys rape, it is
usually because of their strong desire for sex”), it was not really sexual assault (“If a girl doesn’t
physically fight back, you can’t really say it was rape”), and she lied (“A lot of times, girls who
say they were raped agreed to have sex and then regret it”). The IRMA scale has been
consistently found to be reliable and valid across a number of diverse populations (Fakunmoju,
2022; McMahon & Farmer, 2011). Consistent with prior research, the IRMA scale resulted in
good internal consistency among each of its subscales and resulted in an alpha of .88.
The Modern Racism Scale (MRS) (McConahay, 1986) was used to examine covert
racism among participants, as it is potentially related to perceptions of the Indigenous
community. The scale has been adapted for this context to include “racial minorities” rather than
“Blacks” to be more inclusive. Six items out of the original seven items were used from the MRS
99
scale, which measure attitudes such as “It is easy to understand the anger of racial minorities in
America” and “Discrimination against racial minorities is no longer a problem in the United
States.” The MRS scale was developed in 1986, thus one measure was removed due to the
irrelevance to the current socio-political climate of the United States (e.g., the item is related to
school desegregation). While the scale was developed in 1986, it remains widely used and few
other scales of racism have been developed since. Further, recent research has still found it to be
a viable measure of racism in the current period (Morrison & Kiss, 2017). The modern racism
scale had one item dropped, due to contrasting item-rest correlations and a disparate factor
loading and high unique variance among the question “It is easy to understand the anger of racial
minorities in America”. The remaining five items resulted in an alpha of .92 and consistent factor
loadings above .75.
Demographics
Participant demographics were captured as controls, including education, marital status,
income, gender, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, and political affiliation. Education was
measured through a question which asked the highest degree or level of school that the
participant had received, ranging from a high school diploma to a doctorate degree. The item was
dichotomized as having no college degree (0) or any college degree (1). Marital status asked
participants to indicate whether they were single and never married, married, widowed, divorced,
or separated. This item was dichotomized as never married (0) or ever married (1). Income was
measured as an ordinal variable, which respondents selecting their current annual income
ranging from below $25,000 to $200,000 or more. Gender identity was measured through six
items, including male, female, transgender male, transgender female, non-binary/nonconforming, or prefer not to say. Because of low responses for non-cisgender identities,
100
responses that were not “male” or female” were dropped. The gender variable was then
dichotomized as male (0) and female (1). Sexual orientation was measured through the following
options, heterosexual/straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or not listed. Responses for “not listed”
were dropped and gay, lesbian, and bisexual (LGB) were combined into one category. The
variable for sexual orientation was then dichotomized into straight (0) or LGB (1). Race and
ethnicity were dichotomized into Non-White including Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian
or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (0) and Non-Hispanic White (1). Political
affiliation was measured through an item which asked participants to identify whether they
“usually think of themselves as a republican, democrat, an independent, or something else.”
Response choices other than republican, democrat, and independent were dropped, and
remaining items dichotomized into two dummy variables, one for republican (0 = anything else,
1 = republican) and one for democrat (0 = anything else, 1 = democrat). The survey
questionnaire can be found in Appendix A.
Analytic Strategy
Descriptive statistics were run across exposure and perception variables to show variation
across movement and demographic characteristics. Cronbach’s alpha and factor analysis were
used to determine the model fit and internal consistency of variables for each scale. Many of the
dependent variables of interest were skewed, suggesting non-normality within the data. Each of
the dependent variables was made into a binary variable, such that 0 was indicative of
disagreement and 1 was indicative of agreement with each of the variables. Thus, binary logistic
regression was used to examine perceptions of #MMIW, the two attitudinal factor models, and
exposure to #MMIW on online users’ experiences and social media beliefs, while controlling for
participant demographics and gender and race-based beliefs. The uncentered variance inflation
factor (VIF) was used to measure multicollinearity among the predictor variables within the
101
binary logistic regression models. The uncentered VIF is more appropriate in logistic regression
because it measures the inflation of variance due to multicollinearity without centering the
variables around their mean. Two variables were dropped because of their high VIF,
interpersonal utility (54.81) and bridging social capital (54.41). Missing data was accounted for
using listwise deletion for each of the models, which resulted in 243 cases being maintained.
Cases dropped were due to missing values for demographic questions, including political
affiliation (n=14), gender (n=11), and sexual orientation (n=3), and for the perceptions of
#MMIW variable, as the survey question allowed respondents to choose “not applicable” (n=31).
Results
Descriptives
Mean scores and standard deviations of all key variables can be found in Table 3.
Over 54% of the sample reported having some exposure to the #MMIW movement, either
through social media (48%), television (24%), or from other people (27%). Despite this,
participants reported having the least amount of exposure to MMIW across social media, TV,
and from friends and family, compared to #MeToo (94%) and #BLM (98%).
#ClimateChangeIsReal also had lower exposure among participants, with 66% of participants
having any exposure to the movement. Further, over half of the participants agreed at least
slightly that each social movement was important. Approximately 96% of participants agreed in
some capacity that #MMIW was an important social movement, whereas 93% of participants
agreed that #MeToo, 84% #ClimateChangeIsReal, and 62% that #BLM were important
movements. Participants who identified as women were significantly more likely to view #BLM
as important, with 72% of participants who identified as women and 54% who identified as men,
indicating that the movement was important (χ2=19.6, p=0.01), however Cramer’s V suggested a
102
weak to moderate associate at .25. Similarly, those who identified as women were significantly
more likely to view #MMIW as important (98%) than men (94%) (χ2=9.07, p=0.03). Notably,
however, Cramer’s V was .26, suggesting a weak to moderate association between gender and
perceptions of the importance of #MMIW. Participants who identified as women were also more
likely to feel that #MeToo was important (98%), compared to men (88%) (χ2=16.33, p=0.01),
with a Cramer’s V of .36 suggesting a moderate association. There were no significant gender
differences for the #ClimateChangeIsReal movement. In terms of race, only perceptions of the
importance of #BLM had any significant racial differences, with 57% of non-Hispanic White and
75% of all other racial categories indicating that the movement was important (χ2=8.42, p=0.04).
Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of Independent and Dependent Variables
Attitudes Awareness/Activism
Attitudes Causes/Responses
Perceptions of MMIW
Exposure to MMIW
Social Media Credibility
TV Credibility
Information Seeking
Social Media Integration
Social Media Support
Network Heterogeneity
Bonding Social Capital
Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance
Modern Racism Scale
Age (In Years)
Income
College Degree
Non-Hispanic White
Female
LGB
Republican
Democratic
Ever Married
M
0.70
0.49
0.84
0.60
2.03
2.53
3.08
2.38
3.31
2.49
2.08
1.51
1.58
36.5
1.57
0.56
0.73
0.50
0.14
0.13
0.54
0.45
SD
0.46
0.50
0.37
0.49
0.56
0.71
0.79
0.62
0.70
0.64
0.80
0.52
0.76
13.5
1.14
0.50
0.45
0.50
0.35
0.33
0.50
0.50
Range
0-1
0-1
0-1
0-1
1-4
1-4
1-4
1-4
1-4
1-4
1-4
1-4
1-4
18-79
0-4
0-1
0-1
0-1
0-1
0-1
0-1
0-1
***All variables, besides the two attitude scales, perceptions of #MMIW, exposure to #MMIW, and
demographics, are mean-averaged scales. Attitudes, perceptions and exposure to #MMIW and
demographics, excluding age and income, are dichotomized.
103
Regressions
The main dependent variables of interest are related to participant attitudes toward
#MMIW and Indigenous issues. Internal consistency measures resulted in two main scales of
attitudes, (1) awareness and activism related to #MMIW and (2) external and internal causes and
responses to #MMIW. Thus, two separate binary logistic regression models were estimated for
the dependent variable of attitudes. In order to investigate the relationship between attitudinal
outcomes related to Indigenous issues and #MMIW and several independent variables, including
beliefs related to race and gender, and social media use, binary logistic analyses was employed.
By considering the influence of other control variables, binary logistic regression enables the
estimation of the extent to which the independent variables predict the likelihood or probability
of the binary outcome.
The first regression estimated the extent to which exposure to the movement, media
credibility, social media integration, network heterogeneity, social capital, rape myth beliefs, and
racism beliefs predicted variability in attitudes toward awareness and activism related to
#MMIWwhile controlling for the effects of other demographic variables (see Table 4). Results
suggest that exposure to #MMIW, social media credibility, network heterogeneity, and rape and
race-based beliefs were significant predictors for these attitudes at p<.05. For each one-unit
increase in exposure to the movement, the odds of more positive attitudes related to awareness
and activism of the movement increased by a factor of 2.50 (p=0.01). Similarly, for each oneunit increase in social media credibility and network heterogeneity, the odds of more positive
awareness and activism attitudes increase by a factor of 2.16 (p=0.05) and 1.99 (p=0.03),
respectively. In terms of rape and race-based beliefs, the odds of more positive attitudes
increased by a factor of 0.36(p=0.03) for each one-unit increase in rape myth beliefs and 0.50
104
(p=0.01) for each one-unit increase in racist beliefs. Exposure to #MMIW represents a medium
effect size (d = 0.51), while social media credibility (d = 0.43) and network heterogeneity (d =
0.38) suggest a smaller effect size (Chen, Cohen, & Chen, 2010) . The model achieved a
McFadden’s pseudo R-squared value of 0.29, indicating a a moderate level of goodness-of-fit
(McFadden, 1979).
Table 4. Binary Logistic Regression of Attitudes Toward Awareness and Activism Related to
#MMIW (n=243; R2=.29)
Exposure to MMIW
Social Media Credibility
TV Credibility
Information Seeking
Social Media Integration
Social Media Support
Network Heterogeneity
Bonding Social Capital
Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance
Modern Racism Scale
Age (In Years)
Income
College Degree
Non-Hispanic White
Female
LGB
Republican
Democratic
Ever Married
Constant
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
Coefficient
0.92***
0.77**
-0.23
0.30
0.55
0.33
0.69**
-0.23
-1.01**
-0.69***
0.01
-0.24
-0.64*
0.02
-0.06
0.93
-0.22
0.62*
0.30
-2.45
Std. err.
0.37
0.39
0.27
0.27
0.41
0.27
0.32
0.30
0.44
0.27
0.02
0.18
0.42
0.41
0.38
0.71
0.56
0.42
0.45
1.46
OR
2.50
2.16
0.80
1.35
1.72
1.40
1.99
0.80
0.36
0.50
1.01
0.79
0.53
1.02
0.94
2.53
0.80
1.86
1.36
-
P>t
0.01
0.05
0.40
0.27
0.18
0.21
0.03
0.45
0.02
0.01
0.63
0.19
0.13
0.96
0.88
0.19
0.70
0.14
0.50
0.09
The second model assessed the degree to which attitudes towards external and internal
causes and responses to #MMIW were predicted by the same predictor variables indicated in
model one, while accounting for the influence of other demographic variables (see Table 5).
Results suggested that bonding social capital, rape and race-based beliefs, and identifying as
LGB were statistically significant predictors for attitudes related to external and internal causes
105
and responses to #MMIW, all significant at p<.05. The odds of more positive external and
internal cause and response attitudes increased by a factor of 0.55 (p=0.04) for each one-unit
increase in bonding social capital. Regarding control factors, for each one-unit increase in rape
myth beliefs, racist beliefs, and LGB identification, the odds of more positive attitudes increased
by a factor of 0.18 (p=0.01), 0.21 (p=0.01), and 6.26 (p=0.01), respectively. LGB identification
had a rather larger effect size, with a Cohen’s d greater than 0.8 (d = 1.01). The McFadden’s
pseudo R-squared for the current model was 0.38, suggesting a moderate amount of goodness-offit.
Table 5. Binary Logistic Regression of Attitudes Toward External and Intenal Causes and
Responses to #MMIW (n=243; R2=.38)
Exposure to MMIW
Social Media Credibility
TV Credibility
Information Seeking
Social Media Integration
Social Media Support
Network Heterogeneity
Bonding Social Capital
Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance
Modern Racism Scale
Age (In Years)
Income
College Degree
Non-Hispanic White
Female
LGB
Republican
Democrat
Ever Married
Constant
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
Coefficient
0.45
0.17
-0.13
-0.46
0.53
-0.18
0.38
-0.60**
-1.72***
-1.55***
-0.01
-0.12
0.77*
0.22
0.47
1.83***
-0.68
-0.07
-0.25
4.94
Std. err.
0.40
0.40
0.29
0.29
0.39
0.27
0.34
0.29
0.51
0.36
0.02
0.18
0.42
0.40
0.38
0.68
0.68
0.42
0.46
1.59
OR
1.58
1.18
0.88
0.63
1.69
0.84
1.47
0.55
0.18
0.21
1.00
0.89
2.16
1.25
1.60
6.26
0.51
0.93
0.79
-
P>t
0.25
0.68
0.67
0.11
0.17
0.51
0.25
0.04
0.01
0.01
0.86
0.51
0.07
0.59
0.22
0.01
0.32
0.87
0.59
0.01
The third model estimated the impact of the predictor variables on perceptions of
#MMIW, while controlling for demographics (see Table 6). Independent variables significant at
p<.05 in this model included exposure to #MMIW and race. Such that for each one-unit increase
106
in exposure to the movement, the odds of more positive perceptions of the movement increased
by a factor of 9.38 (p=0.01). Further, the odds of having more positive perceptions of the
importance of #MMIW for all other racial categories was approximately 0.26 (p=0.3) times the
odds for the non-Hispanic White category. Exposure to #MMIW had a large effect size, with a
Cohen’s d equivalent to 1.23. The model obtained a McFadden’s psuedo R-squared value of
0.35, indicating a moderate level of goodness-of-fit.
Table 6. Binary Logistic Regression of Perceptions of Importance and Need of #MMIW (n=243;
R2=.32)
Exposure to MMIW
Social Media Credibility
TV Credibility
Information Seeking
Social Media Integration
Social Media Support
Network Heterogeneity
Bonding Social Capital
Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance
Modern Racism Scale
Age (In Years)
Income
College Degree
Non-Hispanic White
Female
LGB
Republican
Democrat
Ever Married
Constant
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
Coefficient
2.24***
0.78
0.06
0.25
0.28
-0.22
-0.11
0.43
-0.59
-0.27
0.01
-0.07
0.91*
-1.36**
0.13
-1.20*
0.05
0.04
-0.41
-0.26
Std. err.
0.54
0.53
0.35
0.34
0.52
0.31
0.38
0.40
0.52
0.35
0.02
0.22
0.53
0.63
0.51
0.70
0.70
0.54
0.59
1.74
OR
9.38
2.18
1.07
1.29
1.32
0.80
0.90
1.53
0.55
0.76
1.01
0.93
2.48
0.26
1.14
0.30
1.05
1.04
0.66
-
P>t
0.01
0.14
0.86
0.46
0.59
0.47
0.78
0.28
0.26
0.42
0.50
0.73
0.09
0.03
0.80
0.09
0.94
0.94
0.48
0.88
The final model examined the effect of social media and TV credibility, social media
integration and support, network heterogeneity, and bonding social capital on exposure to
#MMW, while controlling for IRMA, MRS, and the other demographic variables (see Table 7).
Information seeking and network heterogeneity were significant predictors of exposure to
#MMIW at p<.05. For each one-unit increase in information seeking and network heterogeneity,
107
the odds of exposure to the movement increased by a factor of 1.82 (p=0.2) and 1.81 (p=0.3)
respectively. Both predictor variables, information seeking (d = 0.33) and network heterogeneity
(d = 0.32) had small effet sizes. This model achieved a McFadden’s pseudo R-square of 0.19,
indicating a relatively low level of goodness-of-fit.
Table 7. Binary Logistic Regression of Exposure to #MMIW (n=243; R2=.19)
Social Media Credibility
TV Credibility
Information Seeking
Social Media Integration
Social Media Support
Network Heterogeneity
Bonding Social Capital
Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance
Modern Racism Scale
Age (In Years)
Income
College Degree
Non-Hispanic White
Female
LGB
Republican
Democrat
Ever Married
Constant
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
Coefficient
-0.29
0.14
0.60**
-0.09
0.37
0.60**
0.50**
-0.65*
-0.02
0.02
-0.06
0.51
-0.14
0.14
0.94*
0.06
0.60*
-0.03
-5.06
Std. err.
0.33
0.24
0.25
0.36
0.23
0.28
0.26
0.38
0.25
0.02
0.15
0.35
0.36
0.34
0.53
0.51
0.36
0.41
1.42
OR
0.75
1.15
1.83
0.92
1.44
1.81
1.65
0.52
0.98
1.02
0.94
1.66
0.86
1.15
2.56
1.07
1.83
0.97
-
P>t
0.39
0.56
0.02
0.81
0.12
0.03
0.06
0.08
0.93
0.16
0.67
0.15
0.68
0.68
0.08
0.90
0.10
0.94
0.00
Discussion
Findings highlight the potential utility of social media in certain aspects for increasing
public exposure to and positive perceptions toward race and gender-based social movements.
Network heterogeneity was associated with more positive attitudes toward awareness and
activism related to #MMIW, in addition to exposure to #MMIW, suggesting that exposure to
diverse others may increase your exposure to race and gender-based social movements.
Arguably, this suggests that having a more diverse network means you are more likely to see
information about various racial and gendered backgrounds (Montgomery, 2018). Further, to a
108
lesser degree, the use of social media for seeking out information may also be impactful in
increasing exposure to movements online. This is particularly important because of the
significance that exposure to #MMIW had across attitudes towards awareness and activism
attitudes toward #MMIW, as well as perceptions of the importance of the movement more
generally. Thus, future research should examine how diverse online networks influence exposure
to determine whether diverse networks directly expose online users to varied content or perhaps
make users more inclined to seek out this information. Similarly, this provides implications for
activism efforts by engaging in targeted content sharing within their own networks. Exposure to
the movement presents implications for increasing mobilization potential and targets, as more
individuals become aware of and concerned regarding the high rates of victimization of
Indigenous women, the pool of potential activists increases.
Across the attitudinal scales related to Indigenous issues of violence, activism, and
culture, rape myth beliefs and racist beliefs were the only consistent predictors across almost all
of the scales, excluding perceptions of the importance of the movement. This suggests that
having more rape myth and racist beliefs is associated with more negative attitudes toward
Indigenous victimization and related concerns, which is consistent with prior research suggesting
that rape myth acceptance contributes to hostile sexism and perceptions of #MeToo (Kunst et al.,
2018) and that racist beliefs impact victim-blaming (George & Martínez, 2002). Notably, race
was a significant predictor in perceptions of the importance of #MMIW, while sexual orientation
was impactful for attitudes toward external and internal causes and responses to #MMIW. These
items suggest that diverse lived experiences may impact perceptions of other diverse groups. For
example, Grollman (2018) found that White individuals who identified as lesbian, gay, or bisexual had more positive racial attitudes and acknowledgment of racism, accounted partially by
109
their perceptions of homophobic discrimination. Future research should more thoroughly study
diverse identities' role in supporting social movements that do not directly affect them. This may
be particularly important when we consider the ability of individuals not part of the Indigenous
community to establish a collective identity, without exposure to the shared experiences of
victimization that plague Indigenous communities. Relatedly, while the current study was limited
in it’s ability to examine differences across racial and ethnic groups, some research finds that
non-White groups are more likely to support race-based movements. Moreover, Merseth (2018)
finds that Asian Americans who culturally identify with their racial group (e.g., linked fated)
were more likely to support the Black Lives Matter movement and suggests that this concept of
“linked fate” could be crucial to coalition building among inter-racial groups and organizations.
Future studies should also look to explore differences in exposure to and perceptions of other
social movements based on race and ethnicity.
Outside of network heterogeneity, many of the social media specific variables were
unrelated to attitudes, perceptions, and exposure scales. The bonding social capital subscale was
the only other social media specific variable impactful, and only significant within attitudes
toward causes and responses to #MMIW. Consequently, this may be related to the wording and
content of the other measures as only the activism-specific attitude scale specifically mention the
use of social media, outside of exposure to the movement through social media. Internet
While social media credibility was important to awareness and activism attitudes,
findings also highlight inconsistencies in perceptions of media credibility being integral to social
change. Thus, this provides implications for a more nuanced understanding of how beliefs of the
authenticity of social media content may impact perceptions of social issues. Despite disparities
in what research suggests in relation to perceptions of credibility, these findings might mirror
110
perceptions of and reliance on traditional media (Sterrett et al., 2019). While approximately 49%
of the United States acknowledge that traditional media holds a great deal of bias in coverage
(Brenan & Stubbs, 2020), traditional media remains one of the most commonly used channels of
knowledge creation. Combined with the findings on exposure to #MMIW being the most
impactful to attitudes and perceptions of the movement, this might suggest that media coverage
may be the most influential in social movement sustainment and social change.
111
CHAPTER SEVEN: DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
The current study examined online #MMIW activists in relation to their networks of
engagement, media representations of the movement, and public attitudes, perceptions, and
exposure to the movement; highlighting that while the movement has remained in the online
sphere and made some progress in policy implementation, tthere is still progress to be made on
behalf of non-Indigenous people in ameliorating past harms against Indigenous communities and
attempting to re-establish trust. Prior research highlights the complexities in social movement
mobilization, effectiveness, and sustainment, particularly within intersectional social movements.
The findings highlighted within the above studies, mirror many of these same sentiments,
however, they are particularly confounded due to the increased discrimination, victimization, and
isolation in which Indigenous women, and subsequently Indigenous activists, face.
The network analysis of #MMIW activists suggests that #MMIW activism is engaged in
online and has been maintained since it originated in 2014, but is still largely limited to a few
main Indigenous actors that are unconnected to other larger Indigenous and non-Indigenous
organizations. This is notable, as Klandermans (1997; 1987) suggests that organizational
networks are crucial to social movement mobilization and notoriety. A potential benefit of online
social movements lies in their ability to connect with a broader audience and facilitate identity
formation among members. As Donk (2004) suggests, online networks can play a critical role in
maintaining these movements over time. Moreover, research highlights that organizational
involvement, and particularly that of more sizeable organizations, encourages mass media
112
coverage (Elliott et al., 2016). Thus, establishing ways in which to increase trust among
Indigenous and non-Indigenous activists and organizations and repair harms caused by complicit
acts of oppression is particularly important.
The media coverage chapter shows that #MMIW is not receiving mainstream coverage
and that it is limited to local and state coverage with a primary focus on limited policy
implementation. This is compounded by the fact that the coverage largely erases the historical
violence and colonialism faced by Indigenous people, and ultimately the source of the high rates
of violence they face. Similarly, discussion of #MMIW as a social movement is sparse, and when
covered, often does not address the goals of the movement in terms of awareness and prevention.
Accordingly, this may mimic other intersectional social movements which are simplified to
allow for easier transmission (Meyer et al., 2002) and because they are considered political
subjects within traditional media narratives (Snow et al., 2013). Thus, developing a collective
identity to encourage mobilization and movement sustainment could pose a significant challenge,
as it requires individuals to adopt shared understandings of mutual goals and actions (Flesher
Fominaya, 2010). Conversely, while the local coverage of the movement suggests that activism
related events are peaceful, the lack of national coverage may be attributable to this same feature.
Amenta and colleagues (2012) highlighted that social movement organizations are less likely to
receive quality news coverage when they are not organization-oriented or assertive and
disruptive in nature. This is at odds with research on social media coverage of the movement,
though most often initiated by Indigenous women, which suggests content receives greater
support when it is reconciliatory and reframes the narrative (Moeke-Pickering et al., 2018).
Moreover, this traditional media coverage is still filled with common misconceptions of
113
Indigenous people, which helps proliferate negative stereotypes and lead to ideas of Indigenous
women as unworthy victims.
The chapter which examines public perceptions of #MMIW and Indigenous issues
highlights that general social media use may not be all that important to perceptions of social
movements, rather that exposure and diversity within one’s online networks and beliefs related to
sexual assault and racism are impactful in intersectional issues. In conjunction with the media
coverage chapter's findings, this may suggest that if positive perceptions rely on exposure and
the mainstream media is not covering the subject matter, then the sustainability of the movement
over time may be called into question. More specifically, this presents implications for
mobilization within #MMIW, and the ability for individuals, and particularly non-Indigenous
individuals to become motivated to participate within the movement. Moreover, despite the
willingness of some participants to engage in activism tactics related to the movement (e.g.,
attitudes toward awareness and activism scale), intentions in and of themselves do not guarantee
that a behavior can or will result in mobilization (Klandermans, 1997). Therefore, there is a need
for future research to further disentangle how online social movements may encourage, yet also
help facilitate, participation. To be precise, research needs to better understand how nonIndigenous people may be most effectively made aware of, or reflective of, the high rates of
crimes that Indigenous people have historically and still continue to face, and may be motivated
towards repairing harms and supporting Indigenous communities and activists in their specific
concerns and goals related to the movement.
Taken together, the findings discussed above emphasize several implications for future
work. First, is the need for activist-centered research, which examines their intentions for and
tactics used when engaging in online activist work. This includes the need for activist-specific
114
beliefs related to their engagement in activism and related experiences, such as the resources or
assistance needed and how their work can be maintained and supported in terms of the emotional
tax engaging in this work entails. Likewise, more in-depth examinations of public opinion and
social movements is needed to better predict how social media may lend itself to exposure and
positive perceptions of the movement, in addition to how mobilization may be facilitated. For
example, examining how network diversity, both online and offline, contribute to exposure to
various social movements, and how identification with various intersectional groups may further
impact this. Additionally, there is a need for comparative coverage of the movement in terms of
media coverage and public perception; such as how Canadian coverage of the movement departs
from United States coverage and whether public perceptions and exposure to the movement
imitate this relationship. Further research should also examine the public discourse in relation to
#MMIW on social media, to determine what the context of support for the movement looks like
online, in relation to the Indigenous-led narratives that proliferate online.
Importantly, this work highlights the need to reconsider social movement theory and the
applicability of broad perspectives, such as feminism, in structuring our understanding of how
crime and victimization impact the Indigenous community and subsequent responses to these
experiences. While the aforementioned studies suggest that prior social movement theories and
ideas may apply to basic conceptions of #MMIW activism, such as the shared experiences and
collective identity that permeates Indigenous communities, it is gravely limited in it's ability to
acknowledge how concerns which affect more marginalized communities may function.
Criminological research, in addition to sociological and public health research, is in dire need of
restructuring to have models that can more adequately address Indigenous concerns and other
racial and ethnic groups. An over-assumption of how factors work for mainstream populations
115
has led to a lack of acknowledgment of the different traumas, experiences, and harms faced by
other racial and ethnic populations and the variations within, in both acknowledgment of
victimization, but also in addressing these concerns through policy implementation, prevention
efforts, and service availability. Largely, Indigenous and minority groups have been treated as a
monolith within social science research without consideration of how experiences and culture
may differ within various tribal and racial and ethnic identities. For example, research on
feminism has suggested that much of contemporary feminist work lacks culturally relevant
policies and does not address the needs of all women, largely still leaving out minority voices
(Cunningham, 2006). Further, no current racially or culturally specific theories of activism, and
how it functions to remedy specific concerns of the communities affected, currently exist.
Therefore, future research should identify culturally specific explanations of activism to better
understand varying definitions of “success” within social movements and concerns and
behaviors specific to these communities, which differentially experience victimization and
subsequent responses by larger systems of power.
Within my research, attempts were made to connect with the Indigenous community to
provide more culturally sensitive contexts to these findings and expand on the impacts of
engaging in this emotionally taxing work within populations directly affected by #MMIW. Due
to time constraints and low response rates, I was, unfortunately, unable to incorporate that
important contextual component within the current work. However, this presents important
implications for acknowledging the complicit nature of academics in the historical experiences of
oppression faced by Indigenous people and the need to identify ways in which academics may be
able to improve relationships and trust within these communities. Similar to Indigenous feminist
critiques of mainstream feminism (Cunningham, 2006; Grande, 2003), academics have long been
116
complicit in maintaining stereotypical and oppressive narratives of Indigenous populations, often
ignoring the harms these communities faced and how their cultural identities may differentially
impact their experiences. Similarly, an acknowledgment that movement goals may differ across
activists, particularly among Indigenous activists, is an important nuance future research should
examine. The broader, and often more well-known goals are often what is transmitted within
mainstream media and used within analyses of social movement performance; however,
definitions of “success” and the importance of certain movement goals may differ from activist
to activist, particularly in the context of social media where activists are largely independent of
organizations. Taken together, this highlights the dire need for the inclusion of Indigenous voices
in framing work on Indigenous concerns, while simultaneously recognizing the need for
academics and other scholars to be reflective and engaged in attempting to repair harms and
rebuilding trust and fostering effective, responsive, and culturally-informed communication.
117
REFERENCES
Ali, S. H. (2009). The political economy of environmental inequality: The social distribution of
risk as an environmental justice. In Speaking for ourselves: Environmental justice in
Canada. UBC Press.
Amenta, E., Gharrity Gardner, B., Celina Tierney, A., Yerena, A., & Elliott, T. A. (2012). A
story-centered approach to the newspaper coverage of high-profile SMOs. In J. Earl & D.
A. Rohlinger (Eds.), Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change (Vol. 33, pp.
83–107). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163786X(2012)0000033007
Amenta, E., & Polletta, F. (2019). The cultural impacts of social movements. Annual Review of
Sociology, 45(1), 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073018-022342
Amory, K., & Burruss, G. W. (2021). Conducting ethical research with online populations in the
United States. In A. Lavorgna & T. J. Holt (Eds.), Researching Cybercrimes. Palgrave
Macmillan.
Andrews, K. T., & Gaby, S. (2015). Local protest and federal policy: The impact of the civil
rights movement on the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Sociological Forum, 30, 509–527.
https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12175
Assari, S. (2020). Social epidemiology of perceived discrimination in the United States: Role of
race, educational attainment, and income. International Journal of Epidemiologic
Research, 7(3), 136–141. https://doi.org/10.34172/ijer.2020.24
Banaszak, L. A., Liu, S.-J. S., & Tamer, N. B. (2021). Learning gender equality: How women’s
protest influences youth gender attitudes. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1926296
Banaszak, L. A., & Ondercin, H. L. (2016). Public opinion as a movement outcome: The case of
the U.S. women’s movement. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 21(3), 361–378.
https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-21-3-361
Barabas, J., & Jerit, J. (2009). Estimating the causal effects of media coverage on policy-specific
knowledge. American Journal of Political Science, 53(1), 73–89.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00358.x
Barak, G. (2013). Media, process, and the social construction of crime: Studies in newsmaking
criminology. Taylor and Francis.
Barker-Plummer, B., & Barker-Plummer, D. (2017). Twitter as a feminist resource:
#YesAllWomen, digital platforms, and discursive social change. In Social Movements
and Media (Vol. 14, pp. 91–118). Emerald Publishing.
Bogen, K. W., Bleiweiss, K., & Orchowski, L. M. (2019). Sexual violence is #NotOkay: Social
reactions to disclosures of sexual victimization on twitter. Psychology of Violence, 9(1),
127–137. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000192
118
Boyle, M. P., McCluskey, M. R., Devanathan, N., Stein, S. E., & McLeod, D. (2004). The
influence of level of deviance and protest type on coverage of social protest in Wisconsin
from 1960 to 1999. Mass Communication and Society, 7(1), 43–60.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0701_4
Breiding, M., Chen, J., & Black, M. (2014). Intimate partner violence in the United States—
2010. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Contrrol
and Prevention.
Brenan, M., & Stubbs, H. (2020). News media viewed as biased but crucial to democracy.
Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/poll/316574/news-media-viewed-biased-crucialdemocracy.aspx
Brown, D., & Harlow, S. (2019). Protests, media coverage, and a hierarchy of social struggle.
The International Journal of Press/Politics, 24(4), 508–530.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161219853517
Brown, M., Ray, R., Summers, E., & Fraistat, N. (2017). #SayHerName: A case study of
intersectional social media activism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(11), 1831–1846.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1334934
Brunker, F., Wischnewski, M., Murbabaie, M., & Meinert, J. (2020). The role of social media
during social movements – observations from the #metoo debate on Twitter. Proceedings
of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2356–2365.
Burnette, C. (2015). Historical oppression and intimate partner violence experienced by
Indigenous women in the United States: Understanding connections. Social Service
Review, 89(3), 531–563. https://doi.org/10.1086/683336
Burnette, C. E. (2019). Disentangling Indigenous women’s experiences with intimate partner
violence in the United States. Critical Social Work, 16(1).
https://doi.org/10.22329/csw.v16i1.5913
Carney, N. (2016). All lives matter, but so does race: Black lives matter and the evolving role of
social media. Humanity & Society, 40(2), 180–199.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160597616643868
Chan, J., & Lee, C. C. (1984). Journalistic paradigms on civil protests: A case study of Hong
Kong. In A. Arno & W. Dissanayake (Eds.), The News Media in National and
International Conflict (pp. 183–202). Westview Press.
Chen, H., Cohen, P., & Chen, S. (2010). How big is a big oods ratio? Interpreting the magnitudes
of odds ratis in epidemiological studies. Communication in Statistics – Simulation and
Computation, 4(39), 860-864.
Chon, M.-G., & Park, H. (2020). Social media activism in the digital age: Testing an integrative
model of activism on contentious issues. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,
97(1), 72–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699019835896
Cooper, B. (2016). Intersectionality. In The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory (pp. 385–406).
Oxford University Press.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence
against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
Cripps, K. (2021). Media constructions of Indigenous women in sexual assault cases: Reflections
from Australia and Canada. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 33(3), 300–321.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10345329.2020.1867039
119
Davidson, T., Miller, N. P., & Day, B. (2023). Primitive or empowered: Representations of
Native Americans and COVID-19 in news media. Communication Quarterly, 71(1), 43–
63. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2022.2105654
De Benedictis, S., Orgad, S., & Rottenberg, C. (2019). #MeToo, popular feminism and the news:
A content analysis of UK newspaper coverage. European Journal of Cultural Studies,
22(5–6), Article 5–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549419856831
Delia Deckard, N., Browne, I., Rodriguez, C., Martinez-Cola, M., & Gonzalez Leal, S. (2020).
Controlling images of immigrants in the mainstream and Black press: The discursive
power of the “illegal Latino.” Latino Studies, 18(4), 581–602.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41276-020-00274-4
Dennison, J. (2020). Relational accountability in Indigenous governance. In Routledge handbook
of critical indigenous studies (1st ed.). Routledge.
Diehl, S. (2019). Is social media only for white women?: From #METOO to #MMIW. ProQuest,
1–67.
Donk, W. B. H. J. van de. (2004). Cyberprotest: New media, citizens, and social movements.
Routledge.
Dookhoo, S. R., & Dodd, M. (2019). Slacktivists or activists? Millennial motivations and
behaviors for engagement in activism. Public Relations Journal, 13(1), 1–17.
Drache, D., Fletcher, F., & Voss, C. (2016). What the Canadian public is being told about the
more than 1200 missing & murdered Indigenous women and first nations issues: A
content and context analysis of major mainstream Canadian media, 2014-2015. SSRN
Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2758140
Duarte, M. E., & Vigil-Hayes, M. (2017). #Indigenous: A technical and decolonial analysis of
activist uses of hashtags across social movements. MediaTropes, 7(1), 166–184.
Duncan, L. E. (1999). Motivation for collective action: Group consciousness as mediator of
personality, life experiences, and women’s rights activism. Political Psychology, 20(3),
611–635. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00159
Egan, P. J., & Mullin, M. (2017). Climate change: US public opinion. Annual Review of Political
Science, 20(1), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051215-022857
Elliott, T. A., Amenta, E., & Caren, N. (2016). Recipes for Attention: Policy Reforms, Crises,
Organizational Characteristics, and the Newspaper Coverage of the LGBT Movement,
1969–2009. Sociological Forum, 31(4), 926–947. https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12290
Fakunmoju, S. B. (2022). “She lied”: Relationship between gender stereotypes and beliefs and
perception of rape across four countries. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 51(2), 833–847.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-02119-0
Ficklin, E., Tehee, M., Killgore, R. M., Isaacs, D., Mack, S., & Ellington, T. (2021). Fighting for
our sisters: Community advocacy and action for missing and murdered Indigenous
women and girls. Journal of Social Issues, josi.12478. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12478
Fileborn, B., & Loney-Howes, R. (2019). # MeToo and the olitics of social change (1st ed.).
Springer Nature.
Flesher Fominaya, C. (2010). Collective identity in social movements: Central concepts and
debates. Sociology Compass, 4(6), 393–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17519020.2010.00287.x
Galtung, J., & Fischer, D. (2013). Violence: Direct, structural and cultural. In J. Galtung & D.
Fischer, Johan Galtung (Vol. 5, pp. 35–40). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32481-9_3
120
Gamson, W. (1988). Political discourse and collective action. In International Social Movement
Research (Vol. 1, pp. 219–244).
Gamson, W. (2004). Bystanders, public opinion, and the media. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, &
K. Hanspeter (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Blackwell Pub.
Gaziano, C., & McGrath, K. (1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism Quarterly,
63(3), 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908606300301
George, W. H., & Martínez, L. J. (2002). Victim blaming in rape: Effects of victim and
perpetrator race, type of rape, and participant racism. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
26(2), 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.00049
Gilchrist, K. (2010). “Newsworthy” victims?: Exploring differences in Canadian local press
coverage of missing/murdered Aboriginal and White women. Feminist Media Studies,
10(4), 373–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2010.514110
Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden
decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press.
Global Witness. (2022, September 29). A deadly decade for land and environmental activists—
With a killing every two days. https://www.globalwitness.org/en/press-releases/deadlydecade-land-and-environmental-activists-killing-every-two-days/
Gorski, P. C., & Chen, C. (2015). “Frayed all over:” The causes and consequences of activist
burnout among social justice education activists. Educational Studies, 51(5), 385–405.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2015.1075989
Greijdanus, H., de Matos Fernandes, C. A., Turner-Zwinkels, F., Honari, A., Roos, C. A.,
Rosenbusch, H., & Postmes, T. (2020). The psychology of online activism and social
movements: Relations between online and offline collective action. Current Opinion in
Psychology, 35, 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.03.003
Grollman, E. A. (2018). Sexual orientation differences in Whites’ racial attitudes. Sociological
Forum, 33(1), 186–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12405
Hall, T. D., & Fenelon, J. V. (2009). Indigenous peoples and globalization: Resistance and
revitalization. Paradigm Publishers.
Hansen, D. L., Schneiderman, B., & Smith, M. A. (2011). Analyzing social media networks with
NodeXL: Insights from a connected world. Morgan Kaufmann.
Harpe, S. E. (2015). How to analyze Likert and other rating scale data. Currents in Pharmacy
Teaching and Learning, 7(6), 836–850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2015.08.001
Hart, C., & Gilbertson, A. (2018). When does violence against women matter? Gender, race and
class in Australian media representations of sexual violence and homicide. Outskirts, 39,
1–31.
Hayes, R. M., & Luther, K. (2018). #Crime: Social media, crime, and the criminal legal system
(1st ed. 2018). Springer International Publishing : Imprint: Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89444-7
Hesse-Biber, S. N. (Ed.). (2012). Handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis (2nd ed).
SAGE.
Hill Collins, P. (2022). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of
empowerment (30th anniversary edition). Routledge.
Holton, A., Weberling, B., Clarke, C. E., & Smith, M. J. (2012). The blame frame: Media
attribution of culpability about the MMR–autism vaccination scare. Health
Communication, 27(7), 690–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.633158
121
Hon, L. (2016). Social media framing within the Million Hoodies movement for justice. Public
Relations Review, 42(1), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.11.013
Huddy, L. (2013). From group identity to political cohesion and commitment. Oxford University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199760107.013.0023
Ilchi, O. S., & Frank, J. (2021). Supporting the message, not the messenger: The correlates of
attitudes towards Black lives matter. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 46(2), 377–
398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09561-1
Jahng, M. R., & Lee, N. (2018). When scientists tweet for social changes: Dialogic
communication and collective mobilization strategies by Flint water study scientists on
Twitter. Science Communication, 40(1), 89–108.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017751948
Jenkins-Guarnieri, M. A., Wright, S. L., & Johnson, B. (2013). Development and validation of a
social media use integration scale. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 2(1), 38–50.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030277
Jewkes, Y. (2015). Media & crime (3rd edition). SAGE.
Jiwani, Y. (2009). Symbolic and discursive violence in media representations of Aboriginal
missing and murdered women. In M. Guggisberg & D. Weir (Eds.), Understanding
Violence: Contexts and Portrayals (pp. 63–74). Inter-Disciplinary Press.
Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2015). Reasons to believe: Influence of credibility on motivations
for using social networks. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 544–555.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.002
Johnston, R., Jones, K., & Manley, D. (2018). Confounding and collinearity in regression
analysis: A cautionary tale and an alternative procedure, illustrated by studies of British
voting behaviour. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1957–1976. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135017-0584-6
Johri, A., Heyman-Schrum, C., Ruiz, D., Malik, A., Karbasian, H., Handa, R., & Purohit, H.
(2018). More than an engineer: Intersectional self-expressions in a hashtag activism
campaign for engineering diversity. Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCAS Conference on
Computing and Sustainable Societies, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209811.3212700
Joseph, A. S. (2021). A modern trail of tears: The Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women
(MMIW) crisis in the US. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 79, 102136.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2021.102136
Keller, J. (2016). Girls’ feminist blogging in a postfeminist age. Routledge, Taylor & Francis
Group.
Kellstedt, P. M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2008). Personal efficacy, the information
environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United
States. Risk Analysis, 28(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01010.x
Kim, Y., & Chen, H.-T. (2016). Social media and online political participation: The mediating
role of exposure to cross-cutting and like-minded perspectives. Telematics and
Informatics, 33(2), 320–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.08.008
Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Blackwell Publishers.
Klandermans, B., & Oegema, D. (1987). Potentials, networks, motivations, and barriers: Steps
towards participation in social movements. American Sociological Review, 52(4), 519.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2095297
122
Kunst, J. R., Bailey, A., Prendergast, C., & Gundersen, A. (2018). Sexism, rape myths and
feminist identification explain gender differences in attitudes toward the #metoo social
media campaign in two countries. Media Psychology, 1–26.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2018.1532300
Kuokkanen, R. (2008). Globalization as racialized, sexualized violence: The case of Indigenous
women. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 10(2), 216–233.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14616740801957554
Lake, J. S., Alston, A. T., & Kahn, K. B. (2021). How social networking use and beliefs about
inequality affect engagement with racial justice movements. Race and Justice, 11(4),
500–519. https://doi.org/10.1177/2153368718809833
Lanius, C. (2019). Torment porn or feminist witch hunt: Apprehensions about the #MeToo
movement on /r/AskReddit. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 43(4), Article 4.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859919865250
Latina, D., & Docherty, S. (2014). Trending participation, trending exclusion? Feminist Media
Studies, 14(6), 1103–1105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2014.975449
Leopold, J., & Bell, M. P. (2017). News media and the racialization of protest: An analysis of
Black Lives Matter articles. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal,
36(8), 720–735. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-01-2017-0010
Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Fay, N., & Gignac, G. E. (2019). Science by social media: Attitudes
towards climate change are mediated by perceived social consensus. Memory &
Cognition, 47(8), 1445–1456. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00948-y
Li, P., Cho, H., Qin, Y., & Chen, A. (2021). #MeToo as a connective movement: Examining the
frames adopted in the anti-sexual harassment movement in China. Social Science
Computer Review, 39(5), 1030–1049. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439320956790
Louis, W., Thomas, E., McGarty, C., Lizzio‐Wilson, M., Amiot, C., & Moghaddam, F. (2020).
The volatility of collective action: Theoretical analysis and empirical data. Political
Psychology, 41(S1), 35–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12671
Lynch, M., & Stretesky, P. (2011). Native Americans and social and environmental justice:
Implications for criminology. Social Justice, 38(3), 104–124.
Maree, T. (2017). The social media use integration scale: Toward reliability and validity.
International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 33(12), 963–972.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1301041
McCarthy, J. D., & Wolfson, M. (1996). Resource mobilization by local social movement
organizations: Agency, strategy, and organization in the movement against drinking and
driving. American Sociological Review, 61(6), 1070. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096309
McCombs, M. E., & Valenzuela, S. (2020). Setting the agenda: The news media and public
opinion (Third edition). Polity Press.
McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the modern racism scale. In
Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism (pp. 91–125). Academic Press.
McFadden, D. (2021). Quantitative methods for analysing travel behaviour of individuals: Some
recent developments. In Behavioural Travel Modeling (pg. 279-318). Routledge.
McMahon, S., & Farmer, G. L. (2011). An updated measure for assessing subtle rape myths.
Social Work Research, 35(2), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/35.2.71
Mendes, K. (2015). SlutWalk: Feminism, activism and media.
https://nls.ldls.org.uk/welcome.html?ark:/81055/vdc_100059903626.0x000001
123
Merseth, J. L. (2018). Race-ing solidarity: Asian Americans and support for Black Lives Matter.
Politics, Groups, and Identities, 6(3), 337–356.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2018.1494015
Meyer, D. S., Whittier, N., & Robnett, B. (Eds.). (2002). Social movements: Identity, culture,
and the state. Oxford University Press.
Moeke-Pickering, T., Cote-Meek, S., & Pegoraro, A. (2018). Understanding the ways missing
and murdered Indigenous women are framed and handled by social media users. Media
International Australia, 169(1), 54–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X18803730
Monchalin, L., Marques, O., Reasons, C., & Arora, P. (2019). Homicide and Indigenous peoples
in North America: A structural analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 46, 212–218.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2019.01.011
Montgomery, B. L. (2018). Building and sustaining diverse functioning networks using social
media and digital platforms to improve diversity and inclusivity. Frontiers in Digital
Humanities, 5, 22. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdigh.2018.00022
Montoya, C. (2021). Intersectionality and social movements: Intersectional challenges and
imperatives in the study of social movements. Sociology Compass, 15(8).
https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12905
Morrison, T. G., & Kiss, M. (2017). Modern racism scale. In V. Zeigler-Hill & T. K.
Shackelford (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences (pp. 1–3).
Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1251-1
Morton, K. (2018). Ugliness as colonial violence: Mediations of murdered and missing
Indigenous women. In S. Rodrigues & E. Przybylo (Eds.), On the Politics of Ugliness
(pp. 259–289). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-31976783-3_13
Moscato, D. (2016). Media portrayals of hashtag activism: A framing analysis of Canada’s
#Idlenomore movement. Media and Communication, 4(2), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v4i2.416
Mundt, M., Ross, K., & Burnett, C. M. (2018). Scaling social movements through social media:
The case of Black lives matter. Social Media + Society, 4(4), 205630511880791.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118807911
Nardini, G., Rank‐Christman, T., Bublitz, M. G., Cross, S. N. N., & Peracchio, L. A. (2021).
Together we rise: How social movements succeed. Journal of Consumer Psychology,
31(1), 112–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1201
Native American Journalists Association. (2022). 2021 NAJA media spotlight report. Native
American Journalists Association. https://najanewsroom.com/2021-naja-media-spotlightreport/
Obar, J. A., Zube, P., & Lampe, C. (2012). Advocacy 2.0: An analysis of how advocacy groups
in the United States perceive and use social media as tools for facilitating civic
engagement and collective action. Journal of Information Policy, 2(1), 1–25.
https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.2.2012.1
Parsloe, S. M., & Campbell, R. C. (2021). “Folks don’t understand what it’s like to be a Native
woman”: Framing trauma via #MMIW. Howard Journal of Communications, 32(3), 197–
212. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646175.2021.1871867
Poell, T., & van Dijck, J. (2018). Social media and new protest movements. In J. Burgess, A.
Marwick, & T. Poell (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media (pp. 546–561). Sage.
124
Powell, A. (2015). Seeking rape justice: Formal and informal responses to sexual violence
through technosocial counter-publics. Theoretical Criminology, 19(4), 571–588.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480615576271
Rasmussen, A., Mäder, L. K., & Reher, S. (2018). With a little help from the people? The role of
public opinion in advocacy success. Comparative Political Studies, 51(2), 139–164.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414017695334
Raynauld, V., Richez, E., & Boudreau Morris, K. (2018). Canada is #IdleNoMore: Exploring
dynamics of Indigenous political and civic protest in the Twitterverse. Information,
Communication & Society, 21(4), 626–642.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1301522
Reclaiming Power and Peace. (2019). Place: The final report of the national inquiry into missing
and murdered Indigenous women and girls. National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered
Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG).
Renninger, B. J. (2015). “Where I can be myself … where I can speak my mind”: Networked
counterpublics in a polymedia environment. New Media & Society, 17(9), Article 9.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814530095
Rentschler, C. A. (2014). Rape culture and the feminist politics of social media. Girlhood
Studies, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.3167/ghs.2014.070106
Rosay, A. (2016). Violence against American Indian and Alaska Native women and men: 2010
findings from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NCJ 249736).
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Roth-Cohen, O., Ne’eman-Haviv, V., & Bonny-Noach, H. (2019). #MeToo empowerment
through media: A new multiple model for predicting attitudes toward media campaigns.
International Journal of Communication, 13, 5427–5443.
Salter, M. (2013). Justice and revenge in online counter-publics: Emerging responses to sexual
violence in the age of social media. Crime, Media, Culture, 9(3), Article 3.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659013493918
Seelig, M., & Deng, H. (2022). Connected, but are they engaged? Exploring young adults’
willingness to engage online and off-line. First Monday.
https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v27i3.11688
Setter, D. (2021). Changes in support for U.S. Black movements, 1966-2016: From civil rights to
Black lives matter. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 26(4), 475–488.
https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-26-4-475
Simon, B., Loewy, M., Stürmer, S., Weber, U., Freytag, P., Habig, C., Kampmeier, C., &
Spahlinger, P. (1998). Collective identification and social movement participation.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 646–658.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.646
Slakoff, D. C. (2020). The representation of women and girls of color in United States crime
news. Sociology Compass, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12741
Snow, D. A., Porta, D., Klandermans, B., & McAdam, D. (Eds.). (2013). The Wiley‐Blackwell
Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements (1st ed.). Wiley.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470674871
Snow, D. A., Soule, S. A., & Kriesi, H. (Eds.). (2004). The Blackwell companion to social
movements. Blackwell Publishers.
125
Snow, D. A., Zurcher, L. A., & Ekland-Olson, S. (1980). Social networks and social movements:
A microstructural approach to differential recruitment. American Sociological Review,
45(5), 787–801.
Sterrett, D., Malato, D., Benz, J., Kantor, L., Tompson, T., Rosenstiel, T., Sonderman, J., &
Loker, K. (2019). Who shared It?: Deciding what news to trust on social media. Digital
Journalism, 7(6), 783–801. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2019.1623702
Stürmer, S., & Simon, B. (2004). The role of collective identification in social movement
participation: A panel study in the context of the German gay movement. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(3), 263–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203256690
Szekeres, H., Shuman, E., & Saguy, T. (2020). Views of sexual assault following #MeToo: The
role of gender and individual differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 166,
110203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110203
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge
University Press.
Thomas, E. F., Smith, L. G. E., McGarty, C., Reese, G., Kende, A., Bliuc, A., Curtin, N., &
Spears, R. (2019). When and how social movements mobilize action within and across
nations to promote solidarity with refugees. European Journal of Social Psychology,
49(2), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2380
Trott, V. (2020). Networked feminism: Counterpublics and the intersectional issues of #MeToo.
Feminist Media Studies, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2020.1718176
Tucker, A. (2016). Media and the perpetuation of western bias: Deviations of ideality. Mount
Royal University, Institute for Community Prosperity.
Turcotte, M. (2015). Political participation and civic engagement of youth. Statistics Canada.
Urban Indian Health Institute. (2018). Missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls.
Urban Indian Health Institute. https://www.uihi.org/wpcontent/uploads/2018/11/Missing-and-Murdered-Indigenous-Women-and-GirlsReport.pdf
Van Laer, J. (2010). Activists Online and Offline: The Internet as an Information Channel for
Protest Demonstrations. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 15(3), 347–366.
https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.15.3.8028585100245801
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model
of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological
perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/00332909.134.4.504
Walker, M., & Matsa, K. (2022). News consumption across social media in 2021. Pew Research
Center.
Weeks, B. E., Ardèvol-Abreu, A., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2015). Online influence? Social media
use, opinion leadership, and political persuasion. International Journal of Public Opinion
Research, edv050. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edv050
Williams, D. (2006). On and off the ’net: Scales for social capital in an online era. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 593–628. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.10836101.2006.00029.x
Wohn, D. Y., & Bowe, B. J. (2016). Micro agenda setters: The effect of social media on young
adults’ exposure to and attitude toward news. Social Media + Society, 2(1),
205630511562675. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115626750
126
Wonneberger, A., Hellsten, I. R., & Jacobs, S. H. J. (2020). Hashtag activism and the
configuration of counterpublics: Dutch animal welfare debates on Twitter. Information,
Communication & Society, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1720770
Xiong, Y., Cho, M., & Boatwright, B. (2019). Hashtag activism and message frames among
social movement organizations: Semantic network analysis and thematic analysis of
Twitter during the #MeToo movement. Public Relations Review, 45(1), 10–23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.10.014
Xu, W. W., Sang, Y., Blasiola, S., & Park, H. W. (2014). Predicting opinion leaders in Twitter
activism networks: The case of the Wisconsin recall election. American Behavioral
Scientist, 58(10), 1278–1293. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214527091
127
APPENDIX A: PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY
Social Media Use Integration Scale
Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements (Strongly disagree,
disagree , agree, strongly agree)
1. I feel disconnected from friends when I have not logged into social media
2. I would like it if everyone used social media to communicate
3. I would be disappointed if I could not use social media at all
4. I get upset when I can’t log on to social media
5. I prefer to communicate with others mainly through social media
6. Social media plays an important role in my social relationships
7. I enjoy checking my social media account(s)
8. I don’t like to use social media (reverse coded)
9. Using social media is a part of my everyday routine
10. I respond to content that others share using social media
11. I have close relationships that provide me with a sense of emotional security and well-being
12. There is someone I could talk to about important decisions in my life
13. I have relationships where my competence and skill are recognized
14. I feel part of a group of people who share my attitudes and beliefs
15. There are people I can count on in an emergency
Measuring Media Credibility
Believability
Please rate the extent to which you feel that the following sources provide believable information. (1-4
Likert scale; 1 = not at all believable, 4 = very believable).
Twitter
Facebook
Other Social Network Sites
Blogs
Broadcast Television News
Fair
Please rate the extent to which you feel that the following sources provide fair information. (1-4 Likert
scale; 1 = not at all fair, 4 = very fair).
Twitter
Facebook
Other Social Network Sites
Blogs
128
Broadcast Television News
Accurate
Please rate the extent to which you feel that the following sources provide accurate information. (1-4
Likert scale; 1 = not at all accurate, 4 = very accurate).
Twitter
Facebook
Other Social Network Sites
Blogs
Broadcast Television News
Network Heterogeneity
How often do you talk about social or political issues on social media with….. (4-point Likert scale; 1 =
never, 4 = very frequently)
People who do not share my age
People who do not share my race/ethnicity
People who do not share my socioeconomic status
People who do not share my gender
People who do not share my religion
People who disagree with my views
People who agree with my views (reverse coded)
Bridging Social Capital
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements. (1-4 Likert scale; 1 = strongly
disagree, 4= strongly agree).
1. Interacting with people on social media makes me interested in things that happen outside of my town.
2. Interacting with people on social media makes me want to try new things.
3. Interacting with people on social media makes me interested in what people unlike me
are thinking.
4. Talking with people on social media makes me curious about other places in the world.
5. Interacting with people on social media makes me feel like part of a larger community.
6. Interacting with people on social media makes me feel connected to the bigger picture.
7. Interacting with people on social media reminds me that everyone in the world is connected.
8. I am willing to spend time to support general social media community activities.
9. Interacting with people on social media gives me new people to talk to.
10. On social media, I come in contact with new people all the time.
Bonding Social Capital
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements. (1-4 Likert scale; 1 = strongly
disagree, 4 = strongly agree).
129
1. There are several people on social media I trust to help solve my problems.
2. There is someone on social media I can turn to for advice about making very important
decisions.
3. There is no one on social media that I feel comfortable talking to about intimate personal
problems. (reversed)
4. When I feel lonely, there are several people on social media I can talk to.
5. If I needed an emergency loan of $500, I know someone on social media I can turn to.
6. The people I interact with on social media would put their reputation on the line for me.
7. The people I interact with on social media would be good job references for me.
8. The people I interact with on social media would share their last dollar with me.
9. I do not know people on social media well enough to get them to do anything important.
(reversed)
10. The people I interact with on social media would help me fight an injustice.
Motivations for Internet Use
Please respond to the following statements regarding the ways in which you typically use social media
(e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Tumblr, SnapChat, and others) on the following scale from
“Strongly Disagree” (1) to “Strongly Agree” (4).
Interpersonal Utility/Social Interaction
1. To help others
2. To meet new people
3. To participate in discussions
4. To show others encouragement
5. To belong to a group with the same interests as mine
6. To express myself freely
7. To give my input
8. To get more points of view
9. To tell others what to do
10. Because I wonder what other people are talking about
Social media platforms allow me:
Information Seeking
1. To get information for free
2. To look for information
3. To see what is out there
4. To get information easier
5. To learn what my social connections are posting about
6. To keep up with current issues and events
130
Exposure to #MMIW
1. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the MMIW or “Missing, Murdered, and
Indigenous Women” campaign through social media? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been
exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to it very much)
2. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the MMIW or “Missing, Murdered, and
Indigenous Women” campaign through TV? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all,
4 = I was exposed to it very much)
3. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the MMIW or “Missing, Murdered, and
Indigenous Women” campaign through people around you talking about it? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 =
I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to it very much)
Perceptions of #MMIW
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements about the MMIW or
"Missing, Murdered, and Indigenous Women" campaign (1-4 Likert Scale, 1=strongly agree,
4=strongly disagree).
1. I feel positively (support)
2. I feel negatively (do not support)
3. I feel that the MMIW campaign is important
4. The #MMIW movement raised my awareness about violence against Indigenous women
5. The #MMIW movement raised my level of concern about violence against Indigenous women
6. (Only displayed if negative opinions are identified) You indicated that you may not support or
feel negatively towards the MMIW campaign. In the space below, please briefly explain your
support. (Open-ended)
Attitude toward Indigenous Women/MMIW
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements (1-4 Likert scale,
1=strongly agree, 4=strongly disagree)
1. The criminal justice system cares equally about Indigenous victims and other victims
2. Indigenous women are more at risk of becoming a victim of violent crime compared to White
women
3. What happens in Indigenous communities is of no concern to me
4. The mainstream media should pay more attention to Indigenous problems
5. Social media can create a more inclusive and stronger Indigenous community
6. Indigenous communities need to address internal issues that cause MMIW instead of blaming
colonialism and oppression
7. If more non-Indigenous activists got involved, the problem is more likely to be addressed
8. Non-Indigenous activists should not get involved with Indigenous issues
9. Cultural practices in Indigenous communities increase the risk of women going missing or
being murdered
10. Indigenous activists need to stop seeing the world as "us" and "them" if they want to affect
change
11. If a friend or family member asked me to share information about MMIW on my social
media accounts, I would
12. If a friend or family member asked me to attend a rally to increase awareness of MMIW, I
would go if I could
13. The police are less likely to investigate a case if the victim is an Indigenous woman
131
14. MMIW is just an attention-seeking tactic
Exposure to #BLM
1. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the BLM or “Black Lives Matter”
movement through social media? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was
exposed to it very much)
2. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the BLM or “Black Lives Matter”
movement through TV? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to
it very much)
3. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the BLM or “Black Lives Matter”
movement through people around you talking about it? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been
exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to it very much)
Perceptions of #BLM
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements about the #BLM or
“Black Lives Matter” movement (1-4 Likert Scale, 1=strongly agree, 4=strongly disagree).
1. The Black Lives Matter movement is an effective movement to bring attention to police
brutality.
2. Protests during the Black Lives Matter movement are most often violent.
3. The Black Lives Matter movement is anti-police.
4. Black Lives Matter as a social movement is just as important today as the Civil Rights
Movement was in the 1950s and 1960s.
5. The Black Lives Matter movements does more harm than good.
Exposure to #MeToo
1. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the #metoo movement through social
media? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to it very much)
2. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the #metoo movement through TV? (1-4
Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to it very much)
3. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the #metoo movement through people
around you talking about it? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was
exposed to it very much)
Perceptions of #MeToo
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements about the #metoo
movement (1-4 Likert Scale, 1=strongly agree, 4=strongly disagree).
1. The #metoo campaign sheds light on an important challenge that society faces.
2. The #metoo campaign is important because it gives victims of sexual assault a voice.
3. The #metoo campaign gives a good and precise picture of how wide-spread sexual assaults
actually are.
4. The #metoo campaign is important because it makes it easier for victims of sexual assault to
out themselves.
5. The #metoo campaign legitimizes false accusations.
6. The #metoo campaign does more harm than good.
7. The #metoo campaign wrongfully labels a lot of people as sexual assaulters.
8. The #metoo campaign creates an exaggerated vigilantism/witch hunt.
132
Exposure to #ClimateChangeIsReal
1. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign
through social media? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to it
very much)
2. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign
through TV? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4 = I was exposed to it very
much)
3. To what extent do you feel you were/are exposed to the #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign
through people around you talking about it? (1-4 Likert scale, 1 = I haven’t been exposed at all, 4
= I was exposed to it very much)
Perceptions of #ClimateChangeIsReal
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements about the
#ClimateChangeIsReal campaign (1-4 Likert Scale, 1=strongly agree, 4=strongly disagree).
1. The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign is important because it spreads awareness about global
warming.
2. The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign claims that human activities are changing the climate
are exaggerated.
3. The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign encourages us to all do our bit to reduce the effects of
climate change.
4. The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign is too alarmist about issues like global warming.
5. The #ClimateChangeIsReal campaign presents too much conflicting evidence about global
warming to know whether it is actually happening.
IRMA
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements (1-4 Likert Scale,
1=strongly agree, 4=strongly disagree)
1. If a girl is raped while she is drunk‚ she is at least somewhat responsible for letting things get
out of hand.
2. When girls go to parties wearing slutty clothes‚ they are asking for trouble.
3. If a girl goes to a room alone with a guy at a party‚ it is her own fault if she is raped.
4. If a girl acts like a slut‚ eventually she is going to get into trouble.
5. When girls get raped‚ it’s often because the way they said “no” was unclear.
6. If a girl initiates kissing or hooking up‚ she should not be surprised if a guy assumes she
wants to have sex.
Subscale 2: He didn’t mean to
7. When guys rape‚ it is usually because of their strong desire for sex.
8. Guys don’t usually intend to force sex on a girl‚ but sometimes they get too sexually carried
away.
9. Rape happens when a guy’s sex drive goes out of control.
10. If a guy is drunk‚ he might rape someone unintentionally.
11. It shouldn’t be considered rape if a guy is drunk and didn’t realize what e was doing.
12. If both people are drunk‚ it can’t be rape.
13. If a girl doesn’t physically resist sex—even if protesting verbally—it can’t be considered
rape.
14. If a girl doesn’t physically fight back‚ you can’t really say it was rape.
133
15. A rape probably doesn’t happen if a girl doesn’t have any bruises or marks.
16. If the accused “rapist” doesn’t have a weapon‚ you really can’t call it rape.
17. If a girl doesn’t say “no” she can’t claim rape.
18. A lot of times‚ girls who say they were raped agreed to have sex and then regret it.
19. Rape accusations are often used as a way of getting back at guys.
20. A lot of times‚ girls who say they were raped often led the guy on and then had regrets.
21. A lot of times‚ girls who claim they were raped have emotional problems.
22. Girls who are caught cheating on their boyfriends sometimes claim it was rape.
Modern Racism Scale
Please rate the extent to which you agree with the following statements (1-4 Likert scale,
1=strongly disagree, 4=strongly agree)
1. It is easy to understand the anger of racial minorities in America.
2. Racial minorities are getting too demanding in their push for equal rights.
3. Over the past few years racial minorities have gotten more economically than they deserve.
4. Over the past few years the government and news media have shown more respect to racial
minorities than they deserve.
5. Racial minorities should not push themselves where they're not wanted.
6. Discrimination against racial minorities is no longer a problem in the United States.
Demographics
What is your current age? (Open-ended)
What is the highest degree or level of school you have completed? If currently enrolled, highest
degree received.
a. High school graduate, diploma or the equivalent
b. Some college credit, no degree
c. Trade, technical, or vocational training
d. Associate degree
e. Bachelor’s degree
f. Master’s degree
g. Professional degree
h. Doctorate degree
What is your marital status?
a. Single, never married
b. Married or domestic partnership
c. Widowed
d. Divorced
e. Separated
What is your annual household income?
a. Less than $25,000
b. $25,000-$49,999
c. $50,000-$99,999
d. $100,000-$199,999
e. $200,000 or more
What is your gender identity?
134
a. Male
b. Female
c. Transgender male
d. Transgender female
e. Non-binary/Non-conforming
f. Prefer not to say
What is your sexual orientation?
a. Heterosexual/straight
b. Gay
c. Lesbian
d. Bisexual
e. Not listed (please specify)
What is your race and ethnicity? Select all that apply.
a. White
b. Black or African American
Asian
c. American Indian or Alaska Native
d. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
e. Hispanic
f. Not listed (please specify)
Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a Republican, a Democrat, an
Independent, or something else?
a. Republican
b. Democrat
c. Independent
d. Not listed (please specify)
135
APPENDIX B: IRB APPROVAL/EXEMPTION LETTERS
136
137