In Transnational Advocacy in the Digital Era, Nina Hall explores how digital advocacy organizations challenge conventional international relations (IR) theories of advocacy and how these organizations campaign transnationally. She addresses a gap in IR scholarship today, which fails to adequately recognize the role of organizations such as MoveOn, Campact, and GetUp in international relations.

Digital advocacy organizations use of digital technology is not the only, or even the defining, feature of digital advocacy organizations. Hall elaborates on four other attributes differentiating digital advocacy organizations from traditional non-governmental organizations (NGOs), such as Oxfam, Greenpeace and Amnesty International. Firstly, digital advocacy groups campaign for progressive candidates during elections, while NGOs do not partake in election campaigning. If NGOs do, it is around an issue, rather than a candidate. Secondly, digital advocacy organizations leverage their technological and analytical capabilities to rapidly respond to issues based on shifting member preferences. NGOs, however, typically utilize a long-time commitment approach to the issues they focus on through their work. Digital advocacy organizations can quickly start or end new campaigns and change campaign focus. In fact, a third defining attribute is that digital advocacy organizations are also multi-issue in their scope, not experts in one issue area as many NGOs are. Fourthly, digital advocacy organizations react to member preferences, and use digital analytics to listen to, and respond to, their members' preferences. This further differentiates them from staff-driven NGOs.

Although this rapid response, multi-issue, and member-driven model has some strengths, it also has weaknesses and limitations. Hall notes that starting or switching petitions quickly in response to members gaining or losing interest can constrain the organization's commitment to meaningfully addressing certain issues or following through on achieving tangible outcomes. She gave the example of 38 Degrees, a British digital advocacy organization, which rapidly launched a nation-wide campaign to welcome refugees in 2015, and mobilized thousands of members, but then weeks later swapped its focus to saving the bees.

Hall invited Alice Mattoni and Mark Hanis to share their reflections on the book and their view towards digital advocacy organizations. Mattoni questions exactly how digital advocacy organizations interact and partner with other actors, such as grassroots networks and NGOs, and points that Hall's argument goes against the logic of connective action. As Mattoni explained some scholars assume formal organizations are less relevant because the internet, particularly social media, means anyone, anywhere can connect without the need for a formal organization individual to the forefront. Hall, meanwhile, places central importance on formal political organizations as enabling collective action. Mattoni seeks to further understand how the tension that now exists between different types of actors—the individual and collective; as well as digital advocacy organizations and social movements —can be resolved through digital advocacy organizations. Hanis, meanwhile, highlights the tension that exists between their activities and outcomes. Specifically, he questions how conducive the tactics, expertise, and coordination of digital advocacy organizations are in achieving tangible outcomes.

Nevertheless, by deviating from traditional methods of advocacy, digital advocacy organizations challenge the conventional theories of IR scholarship. These organizations mobilize citizens to put pressure on national governments and operate transnationally – sharing campaigning ideas, tactics, tech and diffusing their model globally.

---

Full Audio: