Social media as a mechanism for protest mobilization in the modern Ukrainian society


The purpose of this study is to clarify the functioning mechanism of the social media mobilization with afocus on protest forms of political participation. In the presented article, author outlines the difference betweentraditional and social media withthe focus on mechanisms of mass mobilization; analyzes the prerequisitesrelevance of this matter in modern Ukrainian society.

In empirical part of the paper, the data of Omnibus studyconducted by the Department of History and Theory of Sociology, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv in Marchof 2014 (N-397) is presented. A number of parameters that characterize the respondents’ behavior in a socialmedia, and forms of respondents’ political participation offline were analyzed, using the index of destabilization ofprotest potential.

Author found evidence to support that activity in social media is related to the form ofrespondents’ political participation, as in the conventional terms (through membership in NGOs) and inunconventional terms (through integrated index of destabilization potential of protest). At the same time there is aquestion which author was unable to answer whether the willingness of social media users is real or only a virtualpolitical activity.

  1. Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42, 73-93.

  2. Friedland, J., Rogerson, K. (2009). How Political and Social Movements Form on the Internet and Hon-They Change Over Time. Literature Reviews prepared for the Internet Radicalization Workshop. Research Triangle Park. North Carolina: Institute for Homeland Security Solutions. URL:°/o20and%20Social%20Movements.pdf

  3. Corrado, A., Firestone, C. (1996). Elections in Cyberspace: Toward a New Era in American Politics. Washington.

  4. Stepanenko, V. (2002). ‘Who needs civil society?’: social capital and the problems of the national identity formation in Ukraine. In Civil society in Ukraine: analysis of social construction (pp. 334-341). Kyiv: Stylos [in Ukrainian].

  5. Migdal, J.S. (1987). Strong States, Weak States: Power and Accommodation. In M. Weiner, S.P. Huntington (Eds.), Understanding Political Development (pp. 391-434). Boston.

  6. Zhyro, T. (2006). Political Science. Kharkiv: Gumanitarnyi tsentr [in Russian].

  7. Panina, N. (2012). Selected works on sociology. Vol. III. Sociology of politics, ethnic relations, public opinion and social psychiatry.  Kyiv: Institute of Sociology, NAS of Ukraine [in Russian].

  8. SBU urged Ukrainians to boycott ‘Vkontakte’ and other Russian social networks. (2014, October 17). URL: [in Ukrainian].

  9. Vorona, V. (2011). Sociological dimensions of society (Speech at the General meeting of the NAS of Ukraine). Visnyk NAN Ukrainy, 7, 34-37 [in Ukrainian].

  10. Rosenau, J.N. (1974). Citizenship between Elections. An Inquiry into the Mobilizable American. N.Y.; L.

  11. Henrih, H.G. (1993). In the foreign country Russian bread cannot be grown. Dialog, 2, 54-56 [in Russian].

Full text