Bystanders, protesters, journalists: A qualitative examination of different stakeholders’ motivations to participate in collective action

Abstract

Both bystanders and journalists can play important roles in mobilizing and supporting social movements. However, there are few empirical studies examining and contrasting their violent and nonviolent collective-action motivations or perspectives on social movement goals. This study presents a comparative analysis of motivations to engage or stand aside from social unrest comparing bystanders ( n = 9) and journalists ( n = 7) motivations against those of protesters ( n = 35). Thematic qualitative analysis of interview data using a Social Identity Model of Collective Action framework examined differences in motivations and goals across each group, as well as the influence of violent protest repertoires on participation behaviors. Identified barriers to participation include bystanders’ lack of issue consensus, low efficacy perceptions, and negative views of violent action. Our results also lend support to the predictive validity of collective identification, anger, and injustice in motivating participation in collective action. Journalists’ collective identity precluded overt protest participation. However, their emotional responses to injustice or violent actions generated tensions between their role obligations and desire to intervene. Implications for future research on collective-action responses to injustice are discussed.