Engin ARIK, Sema AKBOĞA

Türkiye'deki Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları (STK'lar) için Kutuplanmış Bir Alan Olarak Twitter

Sosyal medyada sivil toplum kuruluşlarının (STK) ne kadar yer aldığı ve sosyal medyanın sivil toplum kuruluşları tara-fından kullanılması üzerine araştırmaların sayısı artmaktadır. Bu alandaki çalışmalara katkı vermek amacıyla, bu araştırma, Türkiye’de Twitter’da en çok adı geçen STK’ları inceleyerek bu STK’lardan ne kadar bahsedildiğini ve bahsedilen STK'ların özelliklerini ortaya çıkarmayı hedeflemektedir. Bunu yaparken, STK'lardan bahsedilme sıklığının Türkiye'deki sosyal ve si-yasi gelişmelerden ne kadar etkilendiğini araştırmaktadır. Bu amaçla, 18 Ağustos 2019 ve 17 Eylül 2019 tarihleri arasında yazılmış tweetler incelenmiştir. Analizler, Türkiye’de STK’lardan Twitter’da sayısal olarak eşit bir şekilde bahsedilmediğini göstermiştir. Dernek ya da vakıflardan bahseden toplam 29.387 tweet vardır ve bu tweetlerde 4.941 dernek ya da vakıftan bahsedilmiştir. Bu da Türkiye’de bulunan STK’ların sadece %3,98’inden Twitter’da bahsedildiğine işaret etmektedir. Buna ek olarak, birkaç istisna dışında, STK’lar ile ilgili yazılmış tweetler zaman içinde eşit dağılmamıştır. Ayrıca, bu araştırma STK’lar ile ilgili yazılan tweetlerin Türkiye’deki siyasi gelişmelerle ilişkili olduğunu ve dolayısıyla Türkiye’deki bu kuruluşlarla ilgili siyasi açıdan kutuplaşmış görüşleri yansıttığıni göstermiştir. Bu nedenle, Türkiye gibi siyasi kutuplaşmanın yüksek olduğu ülkelerde ideolojik ayrımların Twitter’da STK’lardan bahsedilmesi üstünde belirleyici bir etkisi olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır

Twitter as a Polarized Space for Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in Turkey

Research on the coverage of CSOs on social media and the use of social media by CSOs has been gaining momentum. To contribute to this line of research, this study investigates the coverage of civil society organizations (CSO) on Twitter in Turkey by focusing on the most frequently mentioned organizations. It examines the characteristics of these CSOs as well as the effect that social and political developments in Turkey have on their coverage on Twitter. The data were collected from Twitter for the period between August 18, 2019 and September 17, 2019. We found that CSOs were not equally mentioned on Twitter; a total of 29,387 tweets mentioned 4,941 different CSOs, representing only 3.98% of all CSOs in Turkey. We also found that, with a few exceptions, tweets were not equally distributed in number across the CSOs or over time. Furthermore, the content of the tweets about the most frequently mentioned CSOs was strongly related to the political developments in Turkey, thereby reflecting the politically polarized views about the organizations in Turkey. Therefore, we concluded that ideological divisions in politically polarized countries such as Turkey shape the coverage of CSOs on Twitter.Keywords: Turkey, CSOs, Twitter, polarization, democracy.

PDF

___

Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2008). Is polarization a myth? The Journal of Politics, 70(2), 542-555.
Akboğa, S., & Arık, E. (2018). Türkiye’de sivil toplum kuruluşlarının medyada görünürlüğü [Media publicity of civil society organizations in Turkey]. The Journal of Humanity and Society, 8(1), 37-65. doi: 10.12658/M0224
Akboga, S., & Arik, E. (2019). The ideological convergence of civil society organizations and newspapers in Turkey. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1007/s11266-019-00144-1
Anagnostopoulos, C., Gillooly, L., Cook, D., Parganas, P., & Chadwick, S. (2016). Stakeholder communication in 140 characters or less: A study of community sport foundations. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(5), 2224–2250. doi: 10.1007/s11266-016-9802-4
Andı, S., Aytaç, S. E., & Çarkoğlu, A. (2019). Internet and social media use and political knowledge: Evidence from Turkey. Mediterranean Politics, 1-21. doi:10.1080/13629395.2019.1635816
Andrews, K. T., & Caren, N. (2010). Making the news: Movement organizations, media attention, and the public agenda. American Sociological Review, 75(6), 841–866. doi: 10.1177/0003122410386689
Anthony, L. (2018). AntConc (Version 3.5.7) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Retrieved from http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
Aydın-Duzgit, S., & Balta, E. (2019). When elites polarize over polarization: Framing the polarization debate in Turkey. New Perspectives on Turkey, 59(1), 153–176.
Barberá, P., & Metzger, M. M. (2013, June 3). Twitter and the Turkish protests: Post-weekend update [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://themonkeycage.org/2013/06/twitter-and-the-turkish-protests-post-weekend-update/
Bekafigo, M. A., & McBride, A. (2013). Who tweets about politics? Political participation of Twitter users during the 2011 gubernatorial election. Social Science Computer Review, 31(5), 625-643. doi: 10.1177/0894439313490405
Bortree, D. S., & Seltzer, T. (2009). Dialogic strategies and outcomes: An analysis of environmental advocacy groups’ Facebook profiles. Public Relations Review, 35(3), 317-319. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.05.002
Bozkanat, E. (2020). Sivil Toplum kuruluşlarının sosyal medyada ilişki kurma ve iletişim stratejileri: Yeşilay Türkiye Facebook sayfası örneği. Erciyes İletişim Dergisi, 7(1), 149-168.
Bruns, A. (2011). How long is a Tweeter? Mapping dynamic conversation networks on Twitter using Gawk and Gephi. Information, Communication, and Society, 15(9), 1323-1351. doi: 0.1080/1369118X.2011.635214
Bulut, E., & Yörük, E. (2017). Digital populism: Trolls and political polarization of Twitter in Turkey. International Journal of Communication, 11, 4093– 4117.
Chalmers, A. W., & Shotton, P. A. (2016). Changing the face of advocacy? Explaining interest organizations’ use of social media strategies. Political Communication, 33(3), 374-391. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2015.1043477
Clement, J. (2019, November 20). Leading countries based on number of Twitter users as of October 2019.Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/242606/number-of-active-twitter-users-in-selected-countries/
Çetinkaya, A., Şahin, Ö.E., & Kırık, A. L. (2014). A research on social and political use of social media in Turkey. International Journal of Science Culture and Sport, 2(8), 49–60. doi: 10.14486/IJSCS207
Çobanoğlu, Y. (2019). Değişen kamusallığın yeni “siyaset yapma” mekanı olarak sosyal medya - (Politik kimlikler ve kamusal haklar ilişkisi bağlamında Twitter örneği) [Social media as the new venue of “political activity” of the changed publicity – (The case of Twitter in the context of the relations between political identities and public rights)]. Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10(17), 696-737. doi: 10.26466/opus.520312
Depeli, G. (2014). Anayasa yazım sürecine LGBT müdahilliğinin merkez medyadaki görünümü [The View of the intervening of LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual And Transgender) on the constitution writing process]. Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi, 18, 37–60.
Deren Van Het Hof, S. (2014). The media publicity of NGOs in Turkey. European Journal of Research on Social Studies, 1(1), 108–114.
Doğu, B. (2017). Turkey’s news media landscape in Twitter: Mapping interconnections among diversity. Journalism, 1-9. doi:10.1177/1464884917713791
Doğu, B., & Mat, H.O. (2019). Who sets the agenda? Polarization and issue ownership in Turkey’s political twittersphere. International Journal of Communication, 13, 229-250.
Diamond, L. (1994). Rethinking civil society: Toward democratic consolidation. Journal of Democracy, 5(3), 4-17. doi: 10.1353/jod.1994.0041
Dodge, J. (2015). The deliberative potential of civil society organizations: Framing hydraulic fracturing in New York. Policy Studies, 36(3), 249-266. doi: 10.1080/01442872.2015.1065967
Doğu, B., Özçetin, B., Bayraktutan, G., Binark, M., Çamu, T., Telli Aydemir, A., & İslamoğlu, G. (2014). Siyasetin yeni hali: Vaka-i sosyal medya. İstanbul, Turkey: Kalkedon.
Dondurucu, Z. B. (2014). Sivil toplum kuruluşlarının sosyal medya üzerinden halkla ilişkiler çalışmaları ö [The public relations affairs of civil society organizations in social media] (Unpublished master’s thesis). İstanbul Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Turkey.
Duggan, M., & Smith, A. (2016) The political environment on social media. Pew Research Center. Erdoğan, E., & Uyan Semerci, P. (2018). Fanus’ta diyaloglar: Türkiye’de kutuplaşmanın boyutları [Dialogues in bell glass: The dimensions of polarization in Turkey]. Istanbul, Turkey: Bilgi Universitesi Yayınları.
Fiorina, M. P. , Abrams, S. A., & Pope, J. C. (2008). Polarization in the American public: Misconceptions and misreadings. The Journal of Politics, 70(2), 556-560.
Foa, R. S., & Ekiert, G. (2017). The weakness of post-communist civil society re-assessed. European Journal of Political Research, 56(2), 419-439. doi: 10.1111/1475-6765.12182
Gao, F. (2016). Social media as a communication strategy: Content analysis of top nonprofit foundations’ micro-blogs in China. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 10(4), 255-271. doi: 10.1080/1553118X.2016.1196693
General Directorate of Civil Society Relations (2019). The number of associations. Retrieved from https://www.siviltoplum.gov.tr/dernek-sayilari General Directorate of Foundations (2019). Distribution of new foundations by years. Retrieved from https://cdn.vgm.gov.tr/genelicerik/genelicerik_945_290519/03-yeni-vakiflarin-yil-ba.pdf
Greenberg, J., & MacAulay, M. (2009). NPO 2.0? Exploring the web presence of environmental nonprofit organizations in Canada. Global Media Journal—Canadian Edition, 2, 63-88.
Greenberg, J., & Walters, D. (2004). Promoting philanthropy? News publicity and voluntary organizations in Canada. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 15(4), 383–404. doi: 10.1007/s11266-004-1238-6
Gries, S. Th. (2015). Quantitative designs and statistical techniques. In D. Biber & R. Reppen (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of English Corpus Linguistics (pp. 50-71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.,
Gümüş, N., & Ağaçcı, L. (2018). Sivil toplum örgütlerinin pazarlama iletişiminde sosyal medya kullanımı: Kızılay ve Yeşilay üzerinde bir araştırma. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi, 53(2), 637-661.
Güran Yiğitbaşı, K. (2016). Medya ve mültecileri sivil toplum üzerinden okumak: Mülteci-Der örneği [Understanding media and refugees through civil society: Mülteci-Der case]. Marmara İletişim Dergisi, 25, 53–76. doi: 10.17829/midr.20162520717
Hale, M. (2007). Superficial friends: A content analysis of nonprofit and philanthropy coverage in nine major newspapers. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 36(3), 465–486. doi: 10.1177/0899764006296849
Hatipoğlu, E., Gökçe, O. Z., Dinçer, B., & Yücel, S. (2016). Sosyal medya ve Türk dış politikası: Kobani tweetleri üzerinden Türk dış politikası algısı [Social media and Turkish foreign policy: Turkish foreign policy perceptions through Kobane tweets]. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 13(52), 175–89
Hatipoğlu, E., Gökçe, O. Z., Arın, İ., & Yücel, S. (2019). Automated text analysis and international relations: The introduction and application of a novel technique for Twitter. All Azimuth, 8(2), 183-204. doi: 10.20991/allazimuth.476852
Helmig, B., Spraul, K., & Tremp, K. (2012). Replication studies in nonprofit research: A generalization and extension of findings regarding the media publicity of nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(3), 360–385. doi: 10.1177/0899764011404081
Hetherington, M. J. (2001). Resurgent mass partisanship: The role of elite polarization. American Political Science Review, 95(3), 619-631.
Joyce, M. (2010). Introduction: How to think about digital activism. In M. Joyce (Ed.), Digital activism decoded: The new mechanics of change (pp. 1-14). NY: Ideabate Press.
Kim, D., Chun, H., Kwak, Y., & Nam, Y. (2014). The employment of dialogic principles in website, Facebook, and Twitter platforms of environmental nonprofit organizations. Social Science Computer Review, 32(5), 590–605. doi: 10.1177/0894439314525752
Körösényi, A. (2013). Political polarization and its consequences on democratic accountability. Cornivus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 4(2), 3-30.
Lam, W.F., & and Nie, L. (2020). Online of offline? Non-profits’ choice and use of social media in Hong Kong. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 31(1), 111-128. doi: 10.1007/s11266-019-00128-1
Lee, T. E., Chen, J. Q., & Zhang, R. D. (2001). Utilizing the Internet as a competitive tool for non-profit organizations. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 41(3), 26–31.
Levendusky, M. S. (2010). Clearer cues, more consistent voters: A benefit of elite polarization. Political Behaviour, 32(1)111-131.
Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 337–353. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01576.x
Lovejoy, K., Waters, R. D., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Engaging stakeholders through Twitter: How nonprofit organizations are getting more out of 140 characters or less. Public Relations Review, 38(2), 313-318. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.01.005
Marberg, A., van Kranenburg, H., & Korzilus, H. (2016). NGOs in the news: The road to taken-for-grantedness. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(6), 2734–2763. doi: 10.1007/s11266-016-9757-5
McCoy, J., Rahman, T., & Somer, M. (2018). Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: Common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 16–42.
Miller, D. (2011). Nonprofit organizations and the emerging potential of social media and internet resources. SPNHA Review, 6(1), 32–52.
Nah, S., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Modeling the adoption and use of social media by nonprofit organization. New Media & Society, 15(2), 294–313. doi: 10.1177/1461444812452411
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, 1-15. doi: 10.5325/jinfopoli.2.2012.0001
Onat, F. (2010). Bir halkla ilişkiler uygulama alanı olarak sosyal medya kullanımı: Sivil toplum örgütleri üzerine bir inceleme [Social media practices as a public relations application field: An analysis about nongovernmental organizations]. İletişim: Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi, 31, 103-121.
Örselli, E. (2016). Türkiye’de yargıya güven [Trust in judiciary in Turkey]. Konya: Çizgi Kitabevi.
Öztürk, M. C., & Şardağı, E. (2018). Kurumsal kimlik aracı olarak Facebook: Türkiye’de sivil toplum kuruluşları (STK) üzerine bir değerlendirme. Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi, 28, 115-141.
Paxton, P. (2002). Social capital and democracy: An interdependent relationship. American Sociological Review, 62(2), 254-277. doi: 10.2307/3088895
Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Saatçioğlu, E. (2017). Sivil toplum örgütlerinin sosyal medya kullanımları: Greenpeace Türkiye Facebook sayfası örneği [Social media usage of non-governmental organizations: Example of Greenpeace Turkey Facebook page]. Selçuk Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Akademik Dergisi, 10(1), 158-187.
Sahin, O., & Akboga, S. (2019). Ethnic identity and perceptions of the police in Turkey: The case of Kurds and Turks. Policing and Society, 29(8), 985-1000.
Seoa, H., Kim, J. Y., & Yanga, S. (2009). Global activism and new media: A study of transnational NGOs’ online public relations. Public Relations Review, 35(2), 123–126. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.02.002
Somer, M. (2019). Turkey: The slippery slope from reformist to revolutionary polarization and democratic breakdown. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 681(1), 42-61. doi: 10.1177/0002716218818056
Sunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Şardağı, E. (2017). Sosyal medyada kurumsal kimlik: Türkiye’deki vakıf ve derneklerin Twitter kullanımının değerlendirmesi [Corporate identity in social media: The evaluation of Twitter usage of foundations and associations in Turkey]. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(3), 337-362.
Şener, G., Ogün Emre, P., & Akyıldız, F. (2015).Türkiye’de sosyal medyanın siyasi katılıma etkileri [Effects of social media on political participation in Turkey]. Folklor, 21(81), 75-98.
Thornton, J. (2006). Nonprofit fund-raising in competitive donor markets. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(2), 204–224. doi: 10.1177/0899764005285951
Tucker, J. A., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., Stukal, D., & Nyhan, B. (2018). Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. Hewlett Foundation. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3144139
Türkiye Üçüncü Sektör Vakfı (TÜSEV). (2013). Sivil toplum izleme raporu 2012 [Civil society monitoring report]. İstanbul: TÜSEV Yayınları.Waisbord, S. (2011). Can NGOs change the news? International Journal of Communication, 5, 142–165.
Walker, M., Kent, A., & Vincent, J. (2010). Communicating socially responsible initiatives: An analysis of US professional teams. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 19(4), 187–195.
Waters, R. D., & Jamal, J. Y. (2011). Tweet, tweet, tweet: A content analysis of nonprofit organizations’ Twitter updates. Public Relations Review, 37(3), 321–324. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.03.002
Waters, R. D., & Tindall, N. T. J. (2011). Exploring the impact of American news coverage on crisis fundraising: Using media theory to explicate a new model of fundraising communication. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 23(1), 20–40. doi: 10.1080/10495142.2010.494875
Waters, R. D., & Williams, J. M. (2011). Squawking, tweeting, cooing, and hooting: Analyzing the communication patterns of government agencies on Twitter. Journal of Public Affairs, 11(4), 353–363. doi: 10.1002/pa.385
Yardımcı-Geyikçi, Ş. (2014). Gezi-Park protests in Turkey: A party view politics. The Political Quarterly,85(4), 445-453.
Yardi, S., & Boyd, D. (2010). Dynamic debates: An analysis of group polarization over time on Twitter. Bulletin of Science Technology & Society, 30(5), 316-327. doi: 10.1177/0270467610380011
YADA. (2014). Sivil toplum kuruluşlarına yönelik algı ve yaklaşımlar [Perceptions and approaches to civil society organizations]. İstanbul, Turkey: Taze Baskı.
Young, J. A. (2017). Facebook, Twitter, and Blogs: The adoption and utilization of social media in nonprofit human service organizations. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 41(1), 44-57. doi: 10.1080/23303131.2016.1192574
Zhou, H., & Pan, Q. (2016). Information, community, and action on Sina-Weibo: How Chinese philanthropic NGOs use social media. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(5), 2433–2457. doi: 10.1007/s11266-016-9685-4