The role of algorithms in social media activism
A case study of LGBTQ+ in Lithuania
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12795/IROCAMM.2026.v09.i01.09Parole chiave:
Social Media Algorithms, LGBTQ Activism, Filter Bubbles, Civil Partnerships, Public PerceptionAbstract
activism actions for the representation of LGBTQ+ civil partnerships. Social media platforms, particularly Facebook, categorize users in ways that expose them primarily to targeted content, what represents social media bubbles and echo chambers, which can distort public perception and amplify extreme viewpoints. Methodology: By utilizing a combination of qualitative and quantitative content analysis, alongside a review of relevant academic literature, this research identifies the predominant themes within these digital environments. Results: The findings reveal the existence of distinct filter bubbles surrounding the topic of same-sex civil partnerships, characterized by a lack of neutrality and a polarization of opinions. Six key themes emerged from the content analysis: a populist framing of legislation, Lithuania's position within a global context, perceptions of family, legal and social implications, the discourse on equal rights and protections, and external views of the LGBTQ+ community. Discussion: The analysis demonstrates that while clear divisions exist between supporters and opponents of civil partnership legislation, neutral perspectives are largely absent, with media sources remaining passive and ineffective in facilitating a balanced dialogue. This study highlights the crucial role of algorithms in shaping social discourse and the implications for LGBTQ+ activism in Lithuania.
Downloads
Riferimenti bibliografici
Anjum, A. & Katarya, R. (2024). Hate speech, toxicity detection in online social media: a recent survey of state of the art and opportunities. International Journal of Information Security, 23(1), 577-608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10207-023-00755-2
Bom, I., Coffey-Glover, L., Jones, L., Mills, S. and Paterson, L. (2015). Implicit homophobic argument structure: Equal-marriage discourse in The Moral Maze. Journal of Language and Sexuality, 4(1), 102–137. https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.4.1.04mil
Chandra, Y. and Shang, L. (2019). Inductive Coding. In: Qualitative Research Using R: A Systematic Approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3170-1_8
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education. London and New York: Taylor & Francis Group, Routledge Falmer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203224342
Diakopoulos, N. (2019). Automating the News: How Algorithms Are Rewriting the Media. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674239302
Domingos, P. (2018). The Master Algorithm: How the Quest for the Ultimate Learning Machine Will Remake Our World. First paperback edition. Basic Books.
Edelson, L., Nguyen, M.-K., Goldstein, I., Goga, O., Lauinger, T. and McCoy, D. (2021). Far-Right News Sources on Facebook More Engaging. Medium. bit.ly/3CZucY4
Erlingsson, C. and Brysiewicz, P. (2017). A Hands-On Guide to Doing Content Analysis. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 7(3), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2017.08.001
Everett, C.M. (2019). Free speech on privately-owned fora: A discussion on speech freedoms and policy for social media. Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy 28. https://bit.ly/3OO5JIh
Flick, U. (2018). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Franz, D., Marsh, H. E., Chen, J. I. and Teo, A. R. (2019). Using Facebook for Qualitative Research: A Brief Primer. Journal of medical Internet research, 21(8), e13544. https://doi.org/10.2196/13544
Geschke, D., Lorenz, J. and Holtz, P. (2019). The triple-filter bubble: Using agent-based modelling to test a meta-theoretical framework for the emergence of filter bubbles and echo chambers. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(1), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12286
Hoffmann, S., Taylor, E. and Bradshaw, S. (2019). The Market of Disinformation. OxTEC: Oxford Technology & Elections Commission. https://bit.ly/3CPq0uc
Hull, K. E. (2006). Same-Sex Marriage: The Cultural Politics of Love and Law. University Press.
Jiménez-Marín, G., Elías-Zambrano, R., & García Medina, I. (2018). Publicidad digital, storytelling y transmedia narrative: Educomunicación del consumidor. Razón y palabra, 101, 467-478. https://goo.su/lPtB
Johnson, C. (2012) Denmark: Same-Sex Marriage to Be Approved. The Library of Congress. https://bit.ly/497tggx
Khiri Z. (2022). Why is social media activism is important https://www.onlineoptimism.com/blog/social-media-activism/
Kitchens, B., Johnson, S.L. and Gray, P. (2020). Understanding Echo Chambers and Filter Bubbles: The Impact of Social Media on Diversification and Partisan Shifts in News Consumption. MIS Q., 44. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2020/16371
Krippendorff, K. (2019). Content analysis. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878781
Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B. and Gaudet, H. (2021). The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign. Columbia University Press.
Lorenz-Spreen, P., Oswald, L., Lewandowsky, S. and Hertwig, R. (2023). A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy. Nature Human Behaviour 7, 74–101. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01460-1
Margery Carvajal, M., & Bonilla López, M. (2025). Pride Marketing: LGBTQ+ Student Attitudes in Costa Rica. IROCAMM - International Review Of Communication And Marketing Mix, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.12795/IROCAMM.2025.v08.i01.04
Myles, D., Duguay, S., & Echaiz, L. F. (2023). Mapping the social implications of platform algorithms for LGBTQ+ communities. Journal of Digital Social Research, 5(4), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.33621/jdsr.v5i4.162
Olivares-García, F. J. (2022). The communication of sexual diversity in social media:: TikTok and Trans Community. IROCAMM - International Review Of Communication And Marketing Mix, 5(1), 83–97. https://dx.doi.org/10.12795/IROCAMM.2021.v05.i01.07
Palomo-Domínguez, I., Pivorienė, J., & Merfeldaitė, O. (2024). Social Inclusion of Gen Z Ukrainian in Lithuania: The Role of Online Social Networks. Social Sciences, 13(7), 361. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13070361
Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web Is Changing What We Read and How We Think. The Penguin Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage Publications.
Pearson, G. D. and Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2018). Perusing pages and skimming screens: Exploring differing patterns of selective exposure to hard news and professional sources in online and print news. New Media & Society, 20(10), 3580–3596. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818755565
Pew Research Center. (2022). Public Trust in Government: 1958-2022. Retrieved January 27, 2023, from https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/06/24/public-trust-in-government-1958-2024/
Riemer, K. and Peter, S. (2021). Algorithmic audiencing: Why we need to rethink free speech on social media. Journal of Information Technology, 36(4), 409–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/02683962211013358
Riggle, E. D., Ellis, A. L., and Crawford, A. M. (1996). The impact of “media contact” on attitudes toward gay men. Journal of homosexuality, 31(3), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v31n03_04
Sanz-Marcos, P., Jiménez-Marín, G., & Elías-Zambrano, R. (2020). The influencer’s power in strategic brand decisions. adComunica , 63-86. https://doi.org/10.6035/2174-0992.2019.18.5
Schiappa, E., Gregg, P. B. and Hewes, D. E. (2006). Can one TV show make a difference? Will & Grace and the Parasocial Contact Hypothesis. Journal of homosexuality, 51(4), 15–37. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v51n04_02
Segado-Boj, F. and Díaz-Campo, J. (2020). Social media and its intersections with free speech, freedom of information and privacy. An analysis. Icono 14, 18(1), 231-255. https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v18i1.1379
Shahid, M. (2023). Equal marriage rights and the European Courts. ERA Forum 23, 397–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-023-00729-w
Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform Capitalism. Cambridge; Malden: Polity Press.
Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Talamanca, T.G. and Arfini, S. (2022). Through the Newsfeed Glass: Rethinking Filter Bubbles and Echo Chambers. Philos. Technol. 35, 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00494-z
Torrecilla G., J.A.; Landa-Blanco, M.; Poleo Gutiérrez, F.J.; Castilla Mesa, M.T. (2021) Activism and Social Media: Youth Participation and Communication. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10485. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su131810485
Thorson, K., Cotter, K., Medeiros, M. and Pak, C. (2021). Algorithmic inference, political interest, and exposure to news and politics on Facebook. Information Communication and Society, 24(2), 183-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1642934
Trandafir, M. (2014). The Effect of Same-Sex Marriage Laws on Different-Sex Marriage: Evidence from the Netherlands. Demography, 51(1), 317-340. DOI:10.1007/s13524-013-0248-7
Turner, G., Mills, S., van der Bom, I., Coffey-Glover, L, Paterson, L. L. and Jones, L. (2018). Opposition as victimhood in newspaper debates about same-sex marriage. Discourse & Society, 29(2), 180–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926517734422
Ventriglio, A., Castaldelli-Maia, J. M., Torales, J., De Berardis, D. and Bhugra, D. (2021). Homophobia and mental health: a scourge of modern era. Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 30, e52. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796021000391
Wollebæk, D., Karlsen, R., Steen-Johnsen, K. and Enjolras, B. (2019). Anger, Fear, and Echo Chambers: The Emotional Basis for Online Behavior. Social Media + Society, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119829859
Woods K. (2022) Social media activism: This is how you start a movement. https://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-activism/
Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs.
Zuiderveen Borgesius, F., Möller J., Kruikemeier, S., Ó Fathaigh, R., Irion, K., Dobber, T., Bodó, B. and de Vreese, C. H. (2018). Online Political Microtargeting: Promises and Threats for Democracy. Utrecht Law Review, 14(1), p. 82-96. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3128787
Zuiderveen Borgesius, F., Trilling, D., Möller, J., Bodó, B., de Vreese, C. H. and Helberger, N. (2016). Should we worry about filter bubbles? Internet Policy Review, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.14763/2016.1.401
##submission.downloads##
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2026 IROCAMM - International Review Of Communication And Marketing Mix
Questo lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Condividi allo stesso modo 4.0 Internazionale.
International Review Of Communication And Marketing Mix proporciona un acceso sin restricciones a su contenido desde el momento de su publicación en esta edición electrónica, y por lo tanto es una revista de acceso abierto. Los originales publicados en esta revista son propiedad de la Universidad de Sevilla y es obligatorio citar su origen en cualquier reproducción total o parcial. Todos los contenidos se distribuyen bajo una licencia Creative Commons - No comercial - Attribution Share Alike 4.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). Esto debe indicarse expresamente de esta manera cuando sea necesario. Puede consultar la versión informativa y el texto legal de la licencia.
Los autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos:
- La cesión de derechos se hace bajo la licencia Creative Commons.
- Los autores pueden hacer por separado arreglos adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión de la obra publicada en la revista (por ejemplo, colocándola en un depósito institucional o publicándola en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y alienta a los autores a difundir su trabajo electrónicamente (por ejemplo, en repositorios institucionales o en su propio sitio web) antes y durante el proceso de presentación, ya que ello puede dar lugar a intercambios productivos, así como a una citación más temprana y amplia de los trabajos publicados.
- La difusión de los artículos se llevará a cabo en las redes sociales generales, ResearchGate, Mendeley, Academia.edu, Cosis, e-lis y otras bases de datos o repositorios de textos completos en Internet con los que la revista establece un acuerdo para su difusión y visibilidad.
- El derecho de autor es de dos tipos: los derechos morales y los derechos patrimoniales. Los derechos morales son prerrogativas perpetuas, irrenunciables, intransferibles, inalienables, inembargables e imprescriptibles. Los derechos patrimoniales se refieren a los beneficios obtenidos por el uso o la divulgación de las obras. La IROCAMM - Revista Internacional de Comunicación y Marketing Mix está autorizada exclusivamente a realizar o autorizar por cualquier medio la utilización, distribución, difusión, reproducción, adaptación, traducción o transformación de la obra...
International Review Of Communication And Marketing Mix does no cobra honorarios por la presentación de trabajos, ni tampoco por la publicación de sus artículos.
