“Pardon me if I don't weep for your victimhood” : examining the aftermath of deplatformization through influential far-right activists’ framing and alliance-building on Telegram

Abstract: This thesis examines the social unfolding of the recent deplatformization of the far-right extremes on Telegram. Leaving prior approaches to moderation behind, this study asks questions around how moderation imprints itself on the complex terrain of meaning and practice, interacts with intensified reflexiveness of the social agents, and leaves affected collectivities changed in unanticipated ways. The theoretical framework bridges platform and moderation studies (Gillespie, 2018; Van Dijck, 2018) to Couldry & Hepp’s (2017) account of the interdependencies between media and social actors under deep mediatisation. The digital far-right networks are approached through the lens of cultural sociology of social movements, spotlighting influential far-right Telegram channels as core movement leaders and/or activists. The framing perspective based on Benford & Snow’s work (2000) is adopted as a comprehensive framework to identify symbolic responses, trajectory shifts, mobilisation attempts, and alliance-building practices in the context of deplatformization. The study conducts a qualitative multi-case frame analysis on four prominent far-right activists and their channels in the anglophone Telegram ecosystem. The empirical material represents four complete narratives on the issues of platforms, moderation, and deplatformization that unfolded in a critical period between actors’ mass migration to Telegram in 2019 and the end of 2022, defined by the aftermath of Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter. The analysis follows a two-step approach that first examines the diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational framing. Second, the analysis incorporates collective identity as a central analytical tenet to examine activists’ boundary work and alliance-building surrounding deplatformization. The analysis reveals ‘Big Tech’ as a potent empty signifier linking diverse grievances, deplatformization as a conflictual issue prompting fractured solutions, and novel micro-level individual actions redefined as a form of activism. Furthermore, the study provides evidence that through the reappropriation of the shared experience into a symbolic resource of victimhood, deplatformization further weaponizes conspiratorial far-right narratives, and strengthens their countercultural appeal. However, the findings also point to normatively positive implications, namely that (1) deplatformization serves as a contentious issue and (2) provokes competitive victimhood, inhibiting alliance-building between diverse far-right factions.