1. Гарбузов В. (2015) Движение чаепития в США // Российский совет по международным делам (http://russiancouncil.ru/analytics-and-comments/ analytics/dvizhenie-chaepitiya-v-ssha/).
2. Кузнецов Г.С., Соколова Е.Н. (2017) Современный технологический популизм. Стратегический доклад. М.: Экспертный институт социальных исследований (http://eisr.ru/upload/iblock/20c/20cb876129f9b9a84e68c9a20a 4ee9bf.pdf).
3. Олсон М. (1995) Логика коллективных действий. Общественные блага и теория групп. М.: Фонд Экономической Инициативы.
4. Сморгунов Л.В., Шерстобитов А.С. (2018) Политические сети. Теория и методы анализа. М.: Аспект Пресс.
5. Хенкин С.М. (2016) Феномен Подемос // Ибероамериканские тетради. №1(11). С. 15–28 (http://imi-mgimo.ru/images/pdf/Iberoamerikanskie_tetradi/_ 1_11_2016.pdf).
6. Bennett W.L. (1998) The Uncivic Culture: Communication, Identity, and the Rise of Lifestyle Politcs // PS: Political Science and Politics. Vol. 31. No 4. Pp. 741–761.
7. Bennett W.L., Segerberg A. (2012) The Logic of Connective Action // Information, Communication & Society. Vol. 15. No 5. Pp. 739–768. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661.
8. Bimber B. (2017) Three prompts for collective action in the context of digital media // Political Communication. Vol. 34. No 1. Pp. 6–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1223772
9. Bimber B., Flanagin A., Stohl C. (2012) Collective Action in Organizations: Interaction and Engagement in an Era of Technological Change. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
10. Chadwick A. (2007) Digital Network Repertoires and Organizational Hybridity // Political Communication. Vol. 2. No 3. Pp. 283–301. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600701471666
11. Chadwick A., Stromer-Galley J. (2016) Digital Media, Power, and Democracy in Parties and Election Campaings: Party Decline or Party Renewal? // The International Journal of Press/Politics. Vol. 21. No 3. Pp. 283–293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161216646731
12. Earl J., Copeland L., Bimber B. (2017) Routing around organizations: Self-directed political consumption // Mobilization: An International Quarterly. Vol. 22. No 2. Pp. 131–153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-22-2-131
13. Gibson R., Greffet F., Cantijoch M. (2017) Friend or Foe? Digital Technologies and the Changing Nature of Party Membership // Political Communication. Vol. 34. No 1. Pp. 89–111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10584609.2016.1221011
14. Granovetter M. (1973) The Strength of Weak Ties // American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 78. No 6. Pp. 1360–1380 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2776392).
15. Hasmath R., Hildebrandt T., Hsu J. (2016) Conceptualizing Government-Organized Non-Governmental Organizations. Paper Presented at Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action Annual Conference (Washington D.C., USA), November 17–19 (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3 /papers.cfm?abstract_id=2814215).
16. Levitin M. (2015) The Triumph of Occupy Wall Street // The Atlantic. 10 June (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/the-triumph-of-occupy-wall-street/395408/).
17. Lilleker D., Koc-Michalska K. (2017) What Drives Political Participation? Motivations and Mobilization in a Digital Age // Political Communication. Vol. 34. No 1. Pp. 21–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1225235
18. Loi M. (2016) The Uberization of Politics? Or: the Success of the Five Stars Movement explained by 10 analogies with the Sharing Economy (https://www.academia.edu/30280819/The_Uberization_of_Politics).
19. Morozov E. (2011) The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom. New York: Public Affairs.
20. Vaccari C. (2017) Online Mobilization in Comparative Perspective: Digital Appeals and Political Engagement in Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom // Political Communication. Vol. 34. No 1. Pp. 69–88.
Комментарии
Сообщения не найдены