Harnessing Social Media Power: Human Rights Campaigns and their Influence During the Ukraine Crisis

Harnessing Social Media Power: Human Rights Campaigns and their Influence During the Ukraine Crisis

Gbemisola Simbiat Odejide¹, Babatunde Oriyomi Owolabi², Kingsley Okwuruoha Ikeokwu³, Esther Chinaza Nwachukwu⁴

 ¹Department of Communication, North Dakota State University, USA.

²Department of Mass Communication, Moshood Abiola Polytechnic Babatunde.

³Department of English and Literary Studies

⁴Department of Sociology

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8120032

Received: 17 November 2024; Accepted: 23 November 2024; Published: 28 December 2024

ABSTRACT

This study explores the impact of social media campaigns by human rights organizations during the 2022 Ukraine conflict, focusing on their effectiveness in raising public awareness, garnering support for humanitarian aid, and influencing international policy decisions. Through quantitative analysis of engagement metrics and participant perceptions, the research reveals that strategic hashtags like #StandWithUkraine significantly enhance awareness and support. However, translating online engagement into concrete policy changes remains challenging due to complex geopolitical factors. The findings provide insights into the role of digital advocacy in conflict settings and offer practical guidance for maximizing its effectiveness.

Keywords: Social media, digital advocacy, human rights organizations, Ukraine conflict, hashtags, digital diplomacy, media framing, humanitarian aid, policy influence, online engagement.

INTRODUCTION

The digital landscape has significantly altered the way information is disseminated, particularly in the context of international conflicts. The ongoing Ukraine conflict highlights the crucial role social media plays in raising awareness, mobilizing public support, and influencing policy decisions. Human rights organizations are increasingly using social media to advocate for humanitarian aid, document human rights abuses, and shape international narratives. This shift towards digital advocacy is driven by the unique capabilities of social media platforms, which offer real-time communication, extensive outreach potential, and the ability to engage directly with global audiences (Manor, 2019).

In conflict settings, social media’s power lies in its ability to frame issues, rally support, and prompt action. Framing theory, initially discussed by Goffman (1974) and later developed by Entman (1993), explains how the presentation of information influences public perception and interpretation. Regarding the Ukraine conflict, framing by human rights organizations has been vital in directing international attention to specific aspects of the crisis, such as human rights violations and the urgent need for humanitarian assistance. Hashtags like #StandWithUkraine and #StopRussianAggression have become central to these efforts, serving as digital rallying points that amplify messages and connect supporters worldwide (Bruns & Burgess, 2015).

Digital diplomacy also plays a critical role in this dynamic. Human rights organizations, like state actors, utilize social media to engage in digital diplomacy, aiming to influence foreign policy and international public opinion. The strategic use of social media platforms allows these organizations to bypass traditional media gatekeepers, directly reaching audiences and mobilizing support in real-time. This direct engagement is particularly crucial in rapidly evolving conflict scenarios, where the ability to quickly garner international support can have significant humanitarian implications (Bjola & Holmes, 2015).

However, the effectiveness of social media campaigns in translating online activism into tangible policy changes remains a complex issue. While social media has proven to be a powerful tool for raising awareness and mobilizing public support, its direct impact on policy decisions is less clear. The relationship between social media engagement and policy outcomes is influenced by various factors, including media coverage, public opinion, and geopolitical interests (Howard et al., 2011). This study seeks to explore these dynamics by examining the role of social media campaigns by human rights organizations during the Ukraine conflict, focusing on their impact on public awareness, humanitarian aid support, and international policy decisions.

Through a quantitative analysis of social media engagement metrics and participant perceptions, this research aims to provide a nuanced understanding of how digital advocacy can influence real-world outcomes during international conflicts. By addressing the gaps in existing literature, particularly regarding the strategic use of hashtags and the direct correlation between social media engagement and policy changes, this study offers both academic insights and practical guidance for human rights organizations seeking to maximize their impact through digital advocacy. The findings of this research will contribute to a broader understanding of the role of social media in modern conflict settings, highlighting its potential and limitations as a tool for humanitarian action and policy influence.

Research Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1: Social media campaigns by human rights organizations using specific hashtags (#StandWithUkraine, #StopRussianAggression) significantly increase public awareness about the Ukraine conflict.

Hypothesis 2: Engagement with social media campaigns by human rights organizations positively influences public support for humanitarian aid efforts in Ukraine.

Hypothesis 3: Social media campaigns by human rights organizations impact international policy decisions related to the Ukraine conflict.

METHODOLOGY

This study employs a quantitative research design to examine the impact of social media campaigns by human rights organizations during the 2022 Ukraine conflict. The research aims to test specific hypotheses related to the effectiveness of hashtags and the influence of social media campaigns on policy decisions and humanitarian aid efforts. A survey instrument will be used to collect data from participants, allowing for the quantitative analysis of engagement metrics and perceptions (Creswell & Poth, 2016).

Since this study involves human subjects to gather data on engagement and perceptions, the protection of participants’ rights and welfare is crucial. The study secured approval from the institutional review board (IRB) to ensure ethical standards are met, as highlighted by Keyton (2006). At the beginning of the survey process, participants received an informed consent form, which outlined the study’s details, confirmed their participation was voluntary, and assured confidentiality in the final report. Participants also had the option to withdraw their responses if they chose, though none did so.

Participants

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has thrust humanitarian efforts into the global spotlight. Social media has emerged as a powerful tool for human rights organizations to raise awareness, garner public support, and ultimately, deliver critical aid to those in need. However, understanding the true impact of these online campaigns requires a nuanced approach. This study delves into the influence of social media by examining the experiences of two key participant groups: general social media users and local community experts involved in humanitarian work.

The first group comprises everyday social media users who engage with content posted by human rights organizations. These individuals, following or interacting with such organizations on platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, form the bedrock of online engagement. They are frequently exposed to social media campaigns and advocacy efforts, making them a vital gauge for measuring the reach and effectiveness of these strategies.

To recruit this group, the study adopted purposive sampling. Purposive sampling involves selecting participants based on specific characteristics or qualities that align with the objectives of the study (Patton, 2023). Researchers directly posted invitations on their personal social media accounts, strategically targeting followers of human rights organizations. This ensured connecting with individuals already interested in humanitarian issues in Ukraine. Additionally, the study ventured into online communities specifically focused on the crisis, researchers were able to connect with a broader and more diverse audience of social media users who had likely encountered these campaigns.

The second participant group consisted of local community experts with firsthand knowledge of the humanitarian situation. This group encompassed individuals directly involved in delivering aid, such as staff and volunteers working with local NGOs or community organizations specializing in international aid and policy issues related to Ukraine. Additionally, the study included members of cultural and civic groups with a vested interest or background in international aid and policy. These community members offered invaluable insights on how social media campaigns translate from online engagement into tangible actions and decisions on the ground.

Recruiting participants from both spectrums – general social media users and those with on-the-ground experience – allowed the study to gather a comprehensive dataset. This dual approach not only enhanced the validity and reliability of the findings but also provided a robust foundation for analyzing the impact of social media campaigns in the context of the Ukraine conflict. By examining how social media shapes public awareness and influences the actions of both everyday users and humanitarian practitioners, the study aims to illuminate the true potential and limitations of social media as a tool for real-world humanitarian action.

Data Collection

A structured survey was designed to measure the variables of interest related to the impact of social media campaigns by human rights organizations during the 2022 Ukraine conflict. The survey is divided into several sections, each aimed at gathering data relevant to the research hypotheses.

To begin with, demographic information was collected, including age, gender, occupation, and frequency of social media usage. This section helps in understanding the background of the participants and allows for a more detailed analysis of the data based on different demographic groups (Creswell & Poth, 2016).

The next section focused on engagement with social media campaigns. Participants were asked about the frequency with which they engaged with posts from human rights organizations on social media. This included liking, sharing, or commenting on posts. The likelihood of engaging with posts that used specific hashtags, such as #StandWithUkraine and #StopRussianAggression, was also measured. These questions were designed to assess how actively participants interacted with these campaigns and the extent to which specific hashtags influenced their engagement (Bryman, 2012).

Following this, the survey explored participants’ perceptions of the effectiveness of these hashtags. Questions in this section asked participants to rate how effective they believed the hashtags were in raising awareness about the Ukraine conflict. Additionally, participants were asked whether they had noticed an increase in the reach of posts using these hashtags compared to other posts. This section aimed to gather insights into the perceived impact of hashtag campaigns on social media reach and visibility (Chong & Druckman, 2007).

The survey then delved into the influence of social media campaigns on policy and aid. Participants were asked about their perceptions of the impact of these campaigns on international policy decisions and their likelihood of supporting humanitarian aid efforts after engaging with the campaigns. This section was crucial for understanding the real-world implications of social media advocacy by human rights organizations (Bjola & Holmes, 2015).

For local community experts, a specific section was included to measure their exposure to social media campaigns. Questions in this section focused on the frequency with which these participants encountered social media campaigns from human rights organizations and the impact of these campaigns on their views and actions. This helped in assessing the direct influence of social media advocacy on those involved in humanitarian work (Howard et al., 2011).

To ensure comprehensive and reliable data, the survey was distributed through various channels. General social media users were recruited through posts on social media platforms, email lists provided by human rights organizations, and online communities focused on humanitarian issues. Local community experts were recruited through personal networks, collaborations with local NGOs, and connections with community organizations involved in humanitarian aid. This purposive sampling ensured a diverse and representative sample, allowing for a thorough analysis of the research questions (Creswell, 2014).

Overall, the data collection process was meticulously designed to gather detailed and relevant information from participants, providing a robust foundation for analyzing the impact of social media campaigns on engagement, perception, and policy decisions. By leveraging both general users and local community experts, the study aimed to offer comprehensive insights into the effectiveness of digital advocacy during the Ukraine conflict.

DATA ANALYSIS

The analysis of the data from the study “Harnessing Social Media Power: Human Rights Campaigns and Their Influence During the Ukraine Crisis” focuses on demographic characteristics, social media engagement patterns, perceptions of hashtag effectiveness, and the influence on policy decisions and humanitarian aid support. This section examines the data collected from 200 participants through a survey, providing insights into the role of social media in shaping public perceptions and behaviors related to the Ukraine conflict.

Demographics

The demographic profile of the participants offers insights into the typical social media user engaged in human rights campaigns.

Age Distribution

The survey covered a diverse age range, with the majority of respondents being young adults. Specifically, 43% of participants were aged 18-24, while 35% were aged 25-34 (see Figure 1). This distribution suggests that younger age groups, who are often more active on social media platforms, are more likely to engage with digital advocacy campaigns. This is consistent with findings by Katz et al. (2002), who observed that digital media engagement tends to be higher among younger populations. Such demographics are crucial for human rights organizations to consider when designing campaigns targeting awareness and support.

Gender Distribution

The gender distribution skewed towards female participants, with 59% identifying as female and 41% as male (see Figure 2). This aligns with prior research by Duggan et al. (2015), which noted that women are generally more engaged with social media for advocacy and social causes. The higher female participation might reflect greater interest or perceived relevance of humanitarian issues among women, indicating that human rights campaigns may benefit from gender-targeted content to maximize engagement.

Occupation

Participants reported a wide range of occupations, with students being the most prevalent group, accounting for over half of the respondents. This includes those identifying as “Student” (19%) and various derivatives such as “Graduate Student” and “Undergraduate” (totaling 38%). Other notable occupations include “Entrepreneur” (3%), “Engineer” (3%), and “Healthcare Worker” (2%). This occupational diversity highlights the broad appeal of the Ukraine crisis as a topic of concern, resonating across different professional and educational backgrounds​.

Social Media Usage

The frequency of social media use among participants was notably high, with 93.5% reporting daily use. This is indicative of the pervasive nature of social media in everyday life and its potential as a powerful tool for information dissemination and engagement in advocacy efforts. The high daily usage aligns with global trends observed by Pew Research Center, emphasizing the role of social media as a primary source of information and engagement for many individuals (Auxier & Anderson, 2021).

Platform Usage

In terms of platform preferences, Twitter (25%) and Instagram (13.5%) were identified as the most commonly used platforms for following human rights organizations, followed by Facebook. These findings are consistent with the research by Perrin and Anderson (2019), which emphasizes the growing influence of Twitter and Instagram in social advocacy due to their interactive features and wide reach. The choice of platform can significantly impact the reach and effectiveness of campaigns, suggesting that human rights organizations should tailor their strategies to leverage the strengths of these platforms (see Figure 3).

Engagement with Social Media Campaigns

The analysis of engagement frequency revealed that participants predominantly engage with human rights organizations’ posts occasionally (48%) or rarely (23%). This suggests a potential for increasing engagement through more targeted and interactive content. Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) emphasize the importance of strategic content that encourages user interaction, highlighting the need for human rights organizations to craft messages that resonate with audiences and encourage active participation (see Figure 4).

Likelihood of Engaging with Ukraine-Related Posts

The likelihood of participants engaging with posts related to the Ukraine conflict varied, with many expressing neutrality. This indicates an opportunity for organizations to enhance content appeal and relevance to convert passive viewers into active supporters. Engaging narratives, emotionally resonant content, and clear calls to action could improve engagement levels.

Perceptions and Effectiveness of Hashtag

The perception of hashtag effectiveness is a critical aspect of social media campaigns, as hashtags serve as powerful tools for organizing and amplifying messages. The survey results indicated that hashtags such as #StandWithUkraine are perceived as effective in raising awareness, with 41.5% of participants rating them as “Effective” and 23.5% as “Very Effective” (see Figure 5). This perception is supported by Bruns and Burgess (2011), who highlight the strategic role of hashtags in sustaining movements and drawing media attention. The significant association found through the chi-square test between hashtag engagement and perceived effectiveness (p = 0.00013) underscores the importance of well-crafted hashtags in digital advocacy (Small, 2011).

Influence on Humanitarian Aid and Policy

The analysis showed strong support for humanitarian aid among participants, with 51.5% agreeing and 21% strongly agreeing that engaging with social media campaigns increases their likelihood of supporting aid efforts (see Table 1). This finding is in line with Shirky’s (2011) work on the potential of social media to mobilize support for humanitarian causes, demonstrating the capacity of digital platforms to translate awareness into tangible support.

Influence on Policy Decisions

Participants expressed varied views on the impact of social media campaigns on international policy decisions regarding the Ukraine conflict. While some agreed that these campaigns could influence policy, statistical tests did not show significant evidence of a direct correlation. This complexity reflects Howard et al.’s (2011) observations on the challenges of linking online advocacy to policy changes, suggesting that while social media can shape public discourse, its direct influence on policy requires further exploration and empirical validation.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

This study examined the role of social media campaigns by human rights organizations during the 2022 Ukraine conflict, specifically looking at the effectiveness of hashtags, their impact on public awareness, support for humanitarian aid, and policy decisions. The research sought to address three main questions: (1) Do social media campaigns by human rights organizations using specific hashtags (#StandWithUkraine, #StopRussianAggression) significantly increase public awareness about the Ukraine conflict? (2) Does engagement with these social media campaigns positively influence public support for humanitarian aid efforts in Ukraine? and (3) Do these social media campaigns impact international policy decisions related to the Ukraine conflict?

The findings from this study shed light on the significant role that social media plays in raising awareness and mobilizing support during international conflicts. They highlight the power of digital platforms to shape public perception and encourage tangible action, especially in times of crisis. The results align with established theories and prior research on media framing, digital diplomacy, and social mobilization, emphasizing how strategic communication through social media can influence public opinion and support (Entman, 1993; Bjola & Holmes, 2015; Shirky, 2011). Furthermore, this study offers valuable perspectives on the difficulties and possibilities of converting online activism into tangible policy modifications, providing a more profound comprehension of the subtleties associated with digital advocacy in the context of global conflicts.

Hypothesis 1: Social media campaigns by human rights organizations using specific hashtags (#StandWithUkraine, #StopRussianAggression) significantly increase public awareness about the Ukraine conflict.

The findings robustly support this hypothesis. The analysis of the data indicated that a significant majority of respondents held the belief that hashtags such as #StandWithUkraine were efficacious in generating awareness regarding the situation in Ukraine. The survey results indicate that 41.5% of participants evaluated the hashtags as “Effective” and 23.5% as “Very Effective” in terms of their impact on increasing awareness. This current finding aligns with the research conducted by Bruns and Burgess (2015), which provided evidence that the strategic utilization of hashtags is of paramount importance in maintaining the momentum of social movements and capturing the interest of both the general public and the media.

The efficacy of hashtags within this particular setting can be elucidated by employing media framing theory, as initially posited by Goffman (1974) and then expanded upon by Entman (1993). The concept of media framing posits that the manner in which information is presented (framed) has a substantial impact on how it is perceived by audiences. Through the process of condensing intricate matters into succinct and emotionally impactful messages, hashtags function as potent mechanisms for framing, enabling them to influence public opinion and direct attention towards particular facets of a conflict, such as infringements upon human rights or pressing humanitarian needs.

Furthermore, the success of these hashtags in raising awareness is consistent with the ideological framework of digital diplomacy, as examined by Bjola and Holmes (2015). The utilization of social media by human rights organizations serves the purpose of not only disseminating information but also actively engaging with worldwide audiences, thereby influencing global narratives. The time-sensitive characteristics of social media, in conjunction with the viral capacity of hashtags, enable these entities to promptly garner global backing, a critical factor in rapidly evolving conflicts like the one in Ukraine

Hypothesis 2: Engagement with social media campaigns by human rights organizations positively influences public support for humanitarian aid efforts in Ukraine.

The study’s findings strongly support this hypothesis as well. The data suggests that active involvement in social media campaigns has a substantial impact on the propensity of individuals to endorse humanitarian aid initiatives. Specifically, 51.5% of the participants expressed agreement, while 21% strongly agreed with this assertion. This aligns with the theories of mobilization, particularly as elucidated by Shirky (2011), who underscored the efficacy of social media to turn awareness into action.

The substantial prevalence of daily social media usage, as indicated by 93.5% of participants, implies that these platforms serve as both a primary information source and a crucial conduit for motivating individuals to engage in action. The findings resonate with previous research by Muralidharan et al. (2011), who found that during natural disasters, nonprofit organizations effectively used social media to engage with stakeholders and coordinate relief efforts. In the context of the Ukraine conflict, the ability of social media to foster support for humanitarian aid underscores its potential as a tool for human rights organizations to mobilize resources and support in real-time.

The correlation between social media engagement and support for humanitarian aid can also be comprehended through the framework of crisis communication theory. Coombs (2007) underscored the significance of disseminating timely, precise, and coherent communication in periods of crisis. Human rights organizations that effectively communicate the urgency and humanitarian needs through well-structured social media campaigns can thus successfully translate online engagement into tangible support for aid efforts.

Hypothesis 3: Social media campaigns by human rights organizations impact international policy decisions related to the Ukraine conflict.

The findings regarding this hypothesis are more complex. While some participants agreed that social media campaigns could influence policy decisions, the statistical tests did not reveal a significant direct correlation between social media engagement and policy changes. This outcome aligns with the complexity of linking online advocacy directly to policy outcomes, a challenge noted by Howard et al. (2011) in their analysis of social media’s role in political change.

The absence of a distinct and immediate influence on policymaking may be attributed to various factors. In the realm of public communication, social media possesses the capacity to mold public sentiment and potentially exert an impact on policymakers through the manipulation of public opinion. However, the transformation of online activism into tangible policy modifications typically necessitates the involvement of various intermediaries, such as conventional media outlets, lobbying endeavors, and the evolving political landscape. For instance, Aday et al. (2012) examined the role of social media during the Arab Spring, highlighting how it was used by various actors to shape narratives and influence global perceptions, yet the direct translation of these efforts into policy changes was not always consistent.

Furthermore, although digital diplomacy has the potential to bring issues to the attention of the international community, the intricate relationship that exists between public opinion, media coverage, and the actions of governments means that the direct influence of social media campaigns on policy decisions is frequently mediated by other factors. These factors include the strategic interests of the countries that are involved as well as the geopolitical environment.

CONCLUSION

This study offers a comprehensive examination of the impact that social media campaigns by human rights organizations have on public awareness, support for humanitarian aid, and policy decisions during the Ukraine conflict. The findings confirm the crucial role of hashtags and social media platforms in raising awareness and mobilizing support, consistent with established theories in media framing and crisis communication. However, the study also underscores the complexities involved in influencing policy decisions directly through social media alone.

The evidence presented highlights the power of social media as a vital tool for digital advocacy, especially in the context of rapidly evolving conflicts. By strategically framing messages and engaging with international audiences, human rights organizations can significantly enhance public awareness and support for humanitarian initiatives. Nevertheless, the transition from online activism to policy change remains a complex and multifaceted process, indicating the necessity for a more integrated approach to advocacy that incorporates both digital strategies and traditional methods of influence.

LIMITATIONS

While this study provides valuable insights, several limitations must be acknowledged, which also point to directions for future research. The reliance on self-reported survey data presents potential biases, such as social desirability bias, where participants may overstate their socially desirable behaviors, like supporting humanitarian aid. Future research should consider incorporating more objective measures, such as analyzing actual social media activity data, to validate self-reported engagement.

The focus on the Ukraine conflict also limits the generalizability of the findings. Although the results offer important insights into this specific context, future research should explore whether these findings are applicable in other conflict settings, potentially with different cultural, political, and social dynamics.

Finally, the study did not find a significant direct correlation between social media engagement and policy changes, highlighting a gap in the current understanding of how digital advocacy influences policy outcomes. Future research should investigate the conditions under which social media more effectively impacts policy, considering factors such as media coverage, public opinion, and the responsiveness of governments.

REFERENCES

1. Aday, S., Farrell, H., Lynch, M., Sides, J., & Freelon, D. (2012). New media and conflict after the Arab Spring. United States Institute of Peace, 80, 1-24.
2. Auxier, B., & Anderson, M. (2021). Social media use in 2021. Pew Research Center, 1(1), 1-4.
3. Austin, L., & Jin, Y. (2016). Social media and crisis communication: Explicating the social-mediated crisis communication model. In Strategic communication (pp. 163-186). Routledge.
4. Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. (2011). The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics. In Proceedings of the 6th European consortium for political research (ECPR) general conference 2011 (pp. 1-9). The European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR).
5. Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. (2015). Twitter hashtags from ad hoc to calculated publics. In Hashtag publics: The power and politics of discursive networks (pp. 13-28).
6. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.
7. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci., 10(1), 103-126.
8. Coombs, W. T. (2007). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding. Sage.
9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
10. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.
11. Duggan, M., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2015). Social media update 2014. Pew Research Center, 19(1), 1-2.
12. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of communication, 43(4), 51-58.
13. Freelon, D., & Karpf, D. (2015). Of big birds and bayonets: Hybrid Twitter interactivity in the 2012 presidential debates. Information, Communication & Society, 18(4), 390-406.
14. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harper and Row.
15. Holmes, M. (2015). Digital diplomacy: theory and practice. Routledge.
16. Howard, P. N., Duffy, A., Freelon, D., Hussain, M. M., Mari, W., & Maziad, M. (2011). Opening closed regimes: what was the role of social media during the Arab Spring?. Available at SSRN 2595096.
17. Katz, J. E., & Rice, R. E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement, and interaction. MIT Press.
18. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68.
19. Keyton, J. (2006). Communication research: Asking questions, finding answers.
20. Kuzio, T. (2015). Ukraine: Democratization, Corruption, and the New Russian Imperialism. Praeger Security International.
21. Manor, I. (2019). The digitalization of public diplomacy (pp. 183-184). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
22. Meier, P. (2015). Digital humanitarians: how big data is changing the face of humanitarian response. CRC Press.
23. Muralidharan, S., Rasmussen, L., Patterson, D., & Shin, J. H. (2011). Hope for Haiti: An analysis of Facebook and Twitter usage during the earthquake relief efforts. Public relations review, 37(2), 175-177.
24. Papacharissi, Z., & de Fatima Oliveira, M. (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on# Egypt. Journal of communication, 62(2), 266-282.
25. Patton, M. Q. (2023). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage Publications.
26. Perrin, A., & Anderson, M. (2019). Share of US adults using social media, including Facebook, is mostly unchanged since 2018.
27. Shirky, C. (2011). The political power of social media: Technology, the public sphere, and political change. Foreign affairs, 28-41.
28. Small, T. A. (2011). What the hashtag? A content analysis of Canadian politics on Twitter. Information, communication & society, 14(6), 872-895.
29. Wang, Y. C., Burke, M., & Kraut, R. (2016, February). Modeling self-disclosure in social networking sites. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work & social computing (pp. 74-85).