Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/158941
|
| Title: | “ #WhatsHappeningInThailand ”: 泰國2020－2021年社會運動的社群媒體實踐
“ #WhatsHappeningInThailand ”: Social Media Practices in Thailand’s 2020-2021 Social Movement |
| Authors: | 蔡易珊
Tsai, Yi-Shan |
| Contributors: | 黃葳威
蔡易珊
Tsai, Yi-Shan |
| Keywords: | 社會運動
社群媒體
跨平臺使用
能供性理論
連結性行動理論
Social movement
social media
cross-platform use
affordance theory
connective action theory |
| Date: | 2025 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-09-01 14:25:40 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 綜觀全球各地社會運動經驗，社群媒體已然成為社運參與者資訊傳播、網絡串聯及組織動員之核心工具，引發學術界及實務界高度關注。自2020年起，泰國爆發社會運動浪潮，社運組織及參與者仰賴Facebook、X（前稱Twitter）、Instagram及Telegram等平臺，展現差異化使用行為及跨平臺整合特性。
本研究結合能供性理論及連結性行動理論，深度訪談14位泰國2020年至2021年社會運動參與者，旨在分析社會運動、社群媒體及個體社會運動參與者之間的動態互動關係及其影響。
研究結果發現，泰國社運參與者社群媒體跨平臺使用的主要動機及目的為資訊傳播、社交互動及歸屬感建構、用戶分群管理，以及隱私安全及風險分散。不同平臺呈現特定能供性及使用角色：Facebook作為資訊樞紐及知識建構場域；X用於即時動態聚合及標籤行動；Instagram發揮視覺展演及情感敘事功能；Telegram則作為加密溝通及替代性管道。社群媒體使用更對社會運動產生多層面影響，除了重塑社會運動組織形式與行動模式，促進政治議題生活化，強化情感動員及多元群體參與，同時更有助建構跨國網絡共同體「奶茶聯盟」（Milk Tea Alliance）。
Social media have emerged as pivotal tools for activists worldwide, facilitating information dissemination, networked communication, and mobilization, and have increasingly attracted scholarly and practical attention. Since 2020, Thailand has witnessed a significant wave of pro-democracy protests, during which movement organizations and participants have relied on platforms such as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, and Telegram to demonstrate distinct usage behaviors and cross-platform integration strategies.
This study integrates affordance theory and connective action theory to examine the dynamic interactions among social movements, social media, and individual participants. Based on in-depth interviews with 14 participants from Thailand’s 2020-2021 pro-democracy movement, the analysis explores how platform affordances shape activist practices and influence movement dynamics.
The study finds that activists’ primary motivations for cross-platform social media use include information dissemination, social interaction and belonging, user segmentation, and privacy protection and risk mitigation. Each platform offered distinct affordances and functional roles: Facebook served as an information hub and site of knowledge construction; X facilitated real-time aggregation and hashtag activism; Instagram enabled visual expression and affective storytelling; and Telegram functioned as an encrypted communication platform and alternative information channel. Furthermore, the strategic use of social media generated diverse effects on social movements, including reshaping organizational logics and mobilization patterns, integrating political discourse into everyday contexts, enhancing emotional mobilization and diversifying participation, and fostering the emergence of the transnational networked community known as the “Milk Tea Alliance.” |
| Reference: | 一、 中文文獻
王甫昌（1999）。〈第十五章：社會運動〉，王振寰、瞿海源編《社會學與台灣社會》，頁501-536。巨流。
何明修（2005）。《社會運動概論》。三民書局。
李立峯（2016）。〈網絡媒體和連結型行動的力量與挑戰: 以 2014 香港雨傘運動為例〉，《傳播研究與實踐》，6(1)，11-44。
李立峯（2020）。〈後真相時代的社會運動、媒體，和資訊政治：香港反修例運動的經驗〉，《中華傳播學刊》，37，3-41。https://doi.org/10.3966/172635812020060037001
林鶴玲、鄭陸霖（2001）。〈台灣社會運動網路經驗：一個探索性的分析〉，《台灣社會學刊》，25，111-156。
苗延威譯（2002）。《社會運動概論》。巨流。（原書 Porta, D. D., & Diani, M. [1997]. Social movements: An introduction. La Nuova Italia Scientifica.）
陳佩修（2009）。〈軍事政變與政治變遷〉，《東吳政治學報》，27(3)，65-116。
陳尚懋（2015） 。〈泰國政治安全的發展與困境〉，《問題與研究》，54(4)，79-121。
陳尚懋（2021）。〈泰國民主化的逆流：以2020-2021年的學生運動為例〉，《人文社會科學研究》，15(4)，1-23。
陳婉琪、張恒豪、黃樹仁（2016）。〈網絡社會運動時代的來臨？太陽花運動參與者的人際連帶與社群媒體因素初探〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》，28(4)，467-501。
陶振超（2017）。〈傳播個人性與動員：社交媒體比親身接觸、大眾媒體更有效？〉，《傳播與社會學刊》，41，41-80。
劉時君、蘇蘅（2017）。〈政治抗議事件中媒體的創新使用與實踐：以太陽花運動為例〉，《資訊社會研究》，33，147-188。https://doi.org/10.29843/JCCIS.201707_(33).0005
潘中道、胡龍騰、蘇文賢譯（2014）。《硏究方法 : 步驟化學習指南》。學富文化。（原書 Kumar, R. [2005]. Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners. Pearson Education Australia.）
羅世宏、徐福德譯（2017）。《社群媒體批判理論》。五南。（原書 Christian Fuchs. [2013]. Social media : A critical introduction. Sage Publications.）
二、 英文文獻
Abercrombie, N., & Longhurst, B. (1998). Audiences: A sociological theory of performance and imagination. Sage Publications.
Aiewsakun, P., Jamsai, B., Phumiphanjarphak, W., Sawaengdee, W., Palittapongarnpim, P., & Mahasirimongkol, S. (2023). Spatiotemporal evolution of SARS-CoV-2 in the Bangkok metropolitan region, Thailand, 2020-2022: implications for future outbreak preparedness. Microbial Genomics, 9(12). https://doi.org/10.1099/mgen.0.001170.
Alexander, S. (2021). Sticky rice in the blood: Isan people’s involvement in Thailand’s 2020 anti-government protests. Critical Asian Studies, 53(2), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2021.1882867.
Anamwathana, P. (2024). Generational divides in understanding Thailand’s history grow amid political polarization. Trends in Southeast Asia, 19. ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute Publishing.
Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso.
Andini, A., & Akhni, G. (2021). Exploring youth political participation: K-pop fan activism in Indonesia and Thailand. Global Focus, 1(1), 38-55. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.jgf.2021.001.01.3.
Anduiza, E., Cristancho, C., & Sabucedo, J. M. (2013). Mobilization through online social networks: the political protest of the indignados in Spain. Information, Communication & Society, 17(6), 750–764. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.808360.
At least 81 arrested during mass protests 13-18 Oct. (2020, October 19). Prachatai English. https://prachatai.com/journal/2020/08/88882.
Baym, N. K. (2015). Social media and the struggle for society. Social Media + Society, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115580477.
Baym, N.K., Zhang, Y.B., & Lin, M. (2004) Social interactions across media: Interpersonal communication on the internet, face-to-face, and the telephone. New Media & Society, 6(3), 299-318.
Bennett, W. (2003). Communicating global activism. Information, Communication & Society, 6(2), 143-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118032000093860a.
Bennett, W. L. (2007). Civic life online: Learning how digital media can engage youth. The MIT Press.
Bennett, W. L. (2012). The personalization of politics: Political identity, social media, and changing patterns of participation. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644(1), 20-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716212451428.
Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739-768.
Bimber, B., Flanagin A. J., Stohl C. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. Communication Theory, 15(4), 365-88.
Bimber, B., Flanagin, A., & Stohl, C. (2012). Collective action in organizations: Interaction and engagement in an era of technological change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boczkowski, P. J., Matassi, M., & Mitchelstein, E. (2018). How young users deal with Multiple platforms: The role of meaning-making in social media repertoires. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 23(5), 245-259. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmy012.
Boczkowski, P. J., Mitchelstein, E., & Matassi, M. (2018). “News comes across when I’m in a moment of leisure”: Understanding the practices of incidental news consumption on social media. New Media & Society, 20(10), 3523-3539. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817750396.
Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J. H. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489(7415), 295-298. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11421.
Bossetta, M. (2018). The digital architectures of social media: Comparing political campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(2), 471-496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018763307.
Boulianne, S. (2015). Social media use and participation: a meta-analysis of current research. Information. Communication & Society, 18(5), 524-538. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542.
Boulianne, S. (2019). Revolution in the making? Social media effects across the globe. Information, Communication & Society, 22(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2017.1353641.
Boyd, D. & Ellison, N. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history and scholarship, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.
Boyd, D. (2010). Social network sites as networked public. Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Eds.), A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39-58). Routledge.
Brym, R., Godbout, M., Hoffbauer, A., Menard, G., & Zhang, T. H. (2014). Social media in the 2011 Egyptian uprising. The British Journal of Sociology, 65(2), 266-292. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12080.
Buchanan, J. (2021). Thai youth movements and the monarchy: A new era of political activism. Asian Affairs, 52(3), 1-20.
Bucher, T., & Helmond, A. (2018). The affordances of social media platforms. In J. Burgess, A. Marwick, T. Poell (Eds.), The sage handbook of social media (pp. 233-253). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473984066.
Buechler, S. M. (1995). New social movement theories. The Sociological Quarterly, 36(3), 441–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1995.tb00447.x.
Cammaerts, B. (2015). Technologies of self-mediation: Affordances and constraints of social media for protest movements. In J. Uldam & A. Vestergaard (Eds.), Civic engagement and social media: Political participation beyond protest (pp. 87-110). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Canan, P., & Pring, G. W. (1988). Strategic lawsuits against public participation. Social Problems, 35(5), 506–519. https://doi.org/10.2307/800612.
Carney, N. (2016). All lives matter, but so does race: Black lives matter and the evolving role of social media. Humanity & Society, 40(2), 180-199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160597616643868.
Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford University Press.
Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the internet age. Polity Press.
Chadwick, A. (2017). The hybrid media system: Politics and power( 2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Chang, H.-C. H., Richardson, A., & Ferrara, E. (2022). #JusticeforGeorgeFloyd: How Instagram facilitated the 2020 black lives matter protests. PLOS ONE, 17(12), e0277864. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277864.
Charoenthansakul, T., & Natee, W. (2023). Twitter and the protest movement in Thailand: A thematic analysis of highly retweeted tweets during the pro-democracy protests. First Monday, 28(6). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v28i6.12666.
Cinelli, M., De Francisci Morales, G., Galeazzi, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Starnini, M. (2021). The echo chamber effect on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(9), e2023301118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023301118.
Conroy M, Feezell J. T., & Guerrero, M. (2012). Facebook and political engagement: a study of online political group membership and offline political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1535-1546.
Costa, E. (2018). Affordances-in-practice: An ethnographic critique of social media logic and context collapse. New Media & Society, 20(10), 3641-3656. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818756290.
Cotter, K. (2019). Playing the visibility game: How digital influencers and algorithms negotiate influence on Instagram. New Media & Society, 21(4), 895-913. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818815684.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Dahlberg-Grundberg, M. (2016). Technology as movement: On hybrid organizational types and the mutual constitution of movement identity and technological infrastructure in digital activism. Convergence, 22(5), 524-542. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856515577921.
Dahlgren, P. (2009). Media and political engagement: Citizens, communication, and democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Dalton R.J., Kuechler M., Burklin W. (1990). The challenge of new movements. In Dalton R. J., Kuechler M. (Eds.), Challenging the political order: New social and political movements in Western Democracies (pp. 167-187). Routledge.
DataReportal. (2021, Feburary 11). Digital 2021: Thailand. DataReportal. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2021-thailand
DataReportal. (2022, February 15). Digital 2022: Thailand. DataReportal. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2022-thailand
DataReportal. (2024, February 23). Digital 2024: Thailand. DataReportal. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2024-thailand
Deibert, R. (2015). Authoritarianism goes global: Cyberspace under siege. Journal of Democracy 26(3), 64-78. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.2015.0051.
Dolata, U. (2017). Social movements and the Internet: The sociotechnical constitution of collective action (No. 2017-02). SOI Discussion Paper.
Dolata, U. (2017). Social movements and the internet: The sociotechnical constitution of collective action (SOI Discussion Paper No. 2017-02). University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences.
Dolata, U., & Schrape, J. F. (2015). Masses, crowds, communities, movements: Collective action in the internet age. Social Movement Studies, 15(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2015.1055722.
Earl J., & Kimport, K. (2011). Digitally enabled social change: Activism in the internet age. The MIT Press.
Earl, J., Maher, T. V., & Pan, J. (2022). The digital repression of social movements, protest, and activism: A synthetic review. Science Advances, 8(10). https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abl8198
Eltantawy, N., & Wiest, J. B. (2011). Social media in the Egyptian revolution: Reconsidering resource mobilization theory. International Journal of Communication, 5, 1207-1224.
Evans, S. K., Pearce, K. E., Vitak, J., & Treem, J. W. (2017). Explicating affordances: A conceptual framework for understanding affordances in communication research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(1), 35-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12180.
Facebook blocks Thai access to group critical of monarchy. (2020, August 25). BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-53899816
Faraj, S., & Azad, B. (2012). The materiality of technology: An affordance perspective. In P. M. Leonardi, B. A. Nardi, & J. Kallinikos (Eds.), Materiality and organizing: Social interaction in a technological world (pp. 237-258). Oxford University Press.
Fiske, J. (2010). Understanding popular culture. Routledge.
Fox, K. & Diehm, J. (2017, November 9). #MeToo’s global moment: the anatomy of a viral campaign. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/09/world/metoo-hashtag-global-movement/index.html
Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/466240.
Freelon, D., McIlwain, C., & Clark, M. (2016). Beyond the hashtags: #Ferguson, #Blacklivesmatter, and the online struggle for offline justice (Research Report). Center for Media & Social Impact. http://cmsimpact.org/blmreport
Gamson, J. (1995). The social psychology of collective action. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framings (pp. 53-76). Cambridge University Press.
Gamson, W. A., & Wolfsfeld, G. (1993). Movements and media as interacting systems. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528, 114–125.
Ganjanakhundee, S. (2021). Thailand in 2020: A turbulent year. Southeast Asian Affairs, 335-355.
Gerbaudo, P. (2012). Tweets and the streets: Social media and contemporary activism. Pluto Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt183pdzs.
Gibbs, M., Meese, J., Arnold, M., Nansen, B., & Carter, M. (2014). #Funeral and Instagram: Death, social media, and platform vernacular. Information, Communication & Society, 18(3), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.987152.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception: Classic edition. Houghton Mifflin.
Gil de Zúñiga, H., & Valenzuela, S. (2011). The mediating path to a stronger citizenship: Online and offline networks, weak ties, and civic engagement. Communication Research, 38(3), 397-421.
Gil de Zúñiga, H., Jung, N., & Valenzuela, S. (2012). Social media use for news and individuals' social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 319-336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01574.x.
Gil de Zúñiga, H., Molyneux, L., & Zheng, P. (2014). Social media, political expression, and political participation: Panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 612-634. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12103.
Gillespie, T. (2010). The politics of ‘platforms’. New Media & Society, 12(3), 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809342738.
Gillespie, T. (2014). The relevance of algorithms. In T. Gillespie, P. J. Boczkowski, & K. A. Foot (Eds.), Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society (pp. 167-194). The MIT Press.
Global Government Affairs. [@GlobalAffairs]. (2021, April 8). Launching an emoji for the #MilkTeaAlliance. [Tweet]. X. https://x.com/GlobalAffairs/status/1379982365380911104
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday.
Good, K. D. (2013). From scrapbook to Facebook: A history of personal media assemblage and archives. New Media & Society, 15(4), 557-573. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812458432
Greijdanus, H., de Matos Fernandes, C. A., Turner-Zwinkels, F., Honari, A., Roos, C. A., Rosenbusch, H., & Postmes, T. (2020). The psychology of online activism and social movements: relations between online and offline collective action. Current Opinion in Psychology, 35, 49-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.03.003.
Gurr, T. R. (1970). Why men rebel. Princeton University Press.
Haberkorn, T. (2021). The 2020 student uprising in Thailand: A struggle for democracy and equality. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 51(5), 1-17.
Hannigan, J. A. (1985). Alain Touraine, Manuel Castells and social movement theory a critical appraisal. The Sociological Quarterly, 26(4), 435–454.
Hara, N., & Huang, B. Y. (2011). Online social movements. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 45, 489-522.
Hayes, R. A., Carr, C. T., & Wohn, D. Y. (2016). One click, many meanings: Interpreting paralinguistic digital affordances in social media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 60(1), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1127248.
Hewison, K. (2015). Thailand: Contestation over elections, sovereignty and representation. Representation, 51(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2015.1011459.
Highfield, T., & Leaver, T. (2016). Instagrammatics and digital methods: studying visual social media, from selfies and GIFs to memes and emoji. Communication Research and Practice, 2(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2016.1155332.
Horatanakun, A. (2023). The network origin of Thailand’s youth movement. Democratization, 31(3), 531–550.
Hosterman, A.R., Johnson, N.R., Stouffer, R., & Herring, S. (2018). Twitter, social support messages, and the #MeToo movement. The Journal of Social Media in Society, 7(2), 69-91.
Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2011). The role of digital media. Journal of Democracy, 22(3), 35-48.
Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2013). Digital media and the Arab Spring. In Democracy’s fourth wave?: Digital media and the Arab Spring. Oxford University Press.
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441-456. https://doi.org/10.1177/S0038038501000219.
Inglehart, R. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton University Press.
International Telecommunication Union. (2021). Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2021. https://www.itu.int/itu-d/reports/statistics/facts-figures-2021/
iLaw. (2018, August 28). Report on political cases in NCPO era. Internet Law Reform Dialogue. https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/9668
iLaw. (2022, July 16). Parasite that Smiles: Pegasus Spyware Targeting Dissidents in Thailand. Internet Law Reform Dialogue. https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/35057
Jasper, J. M. (2011). Emotions and social movements: Twenty years of theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 285-303. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150015
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. NYU Press.
Jenkins, H., Ford, S. and Green, J. (2013), Spreadable media: Creating value and meaning in a networked culture. NYU Press.
Justice for Wanchalearm: CSOs, students, public call for authorities to address activist’s disappearance. (2020, June 9). Prachatai English. https://prachatai.com/english/node/8571
Kahne, J., & Bowyer, B. (2018). The political significance of social media activity and social networks. Political Communication, 35(3), 470–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1426662.
Kamel, S. H. (2014). Egypt’s ongoing uprising and the role of social media: Is there development? Information Technology for Development, 20, 78-91.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003.
Kavada, A. (2020). Creating the collective: Social media, the occupy movement and its constitution as a collective actor. In A. Karatzogianni, M. Schandorf, & I. Ferra (Eds.), Protest technologies and media revolutions (pp. 107-125). Emerald Publishing Limited.
Killian, L. (1964). Social movements. In Robert E. L. Faris (ed.), Handbook of modern sociology (pp. 426-455). Rand-McNally.
Kitschelt, H. P. (1990). New social movements and the decline of party organization. In R. J. Dalton & M. Keuechler (Eds.), Challenging the political order (pp. 179–208). Oxford University Press.
Kornhauser, W. (1959). The politics of mass society. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315133980.
Kreutz, J., & Makrogianni, A. A. (2024). Online repression and transnational social movements: Thailand and the #MilkTeaAlliance. Political Research Exchange, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2474736X.2023.2299120.
Laohabut, T., & McCargo, D. (2024). Thailand’s Movement Party: The evolution of the Move Forward Party. Journal of East Asian Studies, 24(1), 25–47. https://doi.org/10.1017/jea.2024.1.
Le Bon, G. (1897). The crowd : A study of the popular mind. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315133980
Leaver, T., Highfield, T., & Abidin, C. (2020). Instagram: Visual social media cultures. John Wiley & Sons.
Lee, E., Lee, J. A., Moon, J. H., & Sung, Y. (2015). Pictures speak louder than words: Motivations for using Instagram. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 18(9), 552–556. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0157.
Lee, F. L. F., Liang, H., Cheng, E. W., Tang, G. K. Y., & Yuen, S. (2021). Affordances, movement dynamics, and a centralized digital communication platform in a networked movement. Information, Communication & Society, 25(12), 1699-1716. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1877772.
Lertchoosaku, K. (2021). The White Ribbon Movement: High school students in the 2020 Thai youth protests. Critical Asian Studies, 53(2), 206–218.
Lertchoosakul, K. (2022, February). The rise and dynamics of the 2020 youth movement in Thailand. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung European Union. https://www.boell.de/en/2022/02/07/rise-and-dynamics-2020-youth-movement-thailand
Lertchoosakul, K. (2024). The White Ribbon movement and its achievement in uprooting the conservative Thai state. In Handbook on youth activism (pp. 366-381). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Lippert, P. (2021, October 11). Thailand’s youth between protest and repression. Rosa Luxemburg Foundation. https://www.rosalux.de/en/news/id/45343/thailands-youth-between-protest-and-repression
Loader, B. D., Vromen, A., & Xenos, M. A. (2014). The networked young citizen: social media, political participation and civic engagement. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.871571.
Madianou, M. (2014). Smartphones as polymedia. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3), 667-680. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12069.
Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2013). Polymedia: towards a new theory of digital media in interpersonal communication. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 16(2), 169-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877912452486.
Manikonda, L., Beigi, G., Kambhampati, S., & Liu, H. (2018). #Metoo through the lens of social media. In H. Bisgin, R. Thomson, A. Hyder, & C. Dancy (Eds.), Social, cultural, and behavioral modeling - 11th International Conference, SBP-BRiMS 2018, Proceedings (pp. 104-110). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93372-6_13.
Martin, D., & Miller, B. (2006). Space and contentious politics. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 8(2), 143-156. https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.8.2.m886w54361j81261.
Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313.
Masina, P. (2018). Thailand 2018: a country suspended between an illiberal regime and the hope of a democratic transition. Asia Maior, 29, 193-209.
McAdam, D. (1982). Political process and the development of Black insurgency, 1930-1970. University of Chicago Press.
McCargo, D. (2005). Network monarchy and legitimacy crises in Thailand. The Pacific Review, 18(4), 499–519.
McCargo, D. (2017). New media, new partisanship: Divided virtual politics in and beyond Thailand. International Journal of Communication, 11, 4138–4157.
McCargo, D. (2017). Thailand’s urbanized villagers and political polarization. Critical Asian Studies, 49(3), 365–378.
McCargo, D. (2021). Disruptors’ dilemma? Thailand’s 2020 Gen Z protests. Critical Asian Studies, 53(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2021.1876522.
McCargo, D., Alexander, S. T., & Desatova, P. (2017). Ordering peace: Thailand’s 2016 constitutional referendum. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 39(1), 65–95.
McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. The American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212–1241. https://doi.org/10.1086/226464.
McQuail, D. (2010). McQuail’s mass communication theory(6th ed.). Sage Publications.
Meier, A., & Reinecke, L. (2022). Feeling authentic on social media: Subjective authenticity across Instagram stories and posts. Social Media+Society, 8(1).
https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221086235.
Melucci, A. (1989). Nomads of the present: Social movements and individual needs in contemporary society. Temple University Press.
Melucci, A. (1996). Challenging codes: Collective action in the information age. Cambridge University Press.
Mendelsohn, J., Vijan, M., Card, D., & Budak, C. (2024). Framing social movements on social media: Unpacking diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational strategies. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media, 4, 1-61.
Meyer, D. S., & Tarrow, S. G. (1998). The social movement society: Contentious politics for a new century. Rowman & Littlefield.
Morozov, E. (2009, May 19). The brave new world of slacktivism. Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/05/19/the-brave-new-world-of-slacktivism/
Morozov, E. (2011). The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom. Perseus Books.
Natalia, K., Agustya, S. V., & Irwansyah, I. (2023). Communication through hashtags in social movements: A systematic literature review. Journal La Sociale, 4(5), 319-328. https://doi.org/10.37899/journal-la-sociale.v4i5.908.
Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. Basic Books.
O'Reilly, T. (2007). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & Strategies, 65(1), 17-37.
Our writers weigh-in on Free Youth’s controversial new logo. (2020, December 8). Thai Enquirer. https://www.thaienquirer.com/21417/our-writers-weigh-in-on-free-youths-controversial-new-logo/
Papacharissi, Z. (2010). A private sphere: Democracy in a digital age. Polity Press.
Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective publics and structures of storytelling: sentiment, events and mediality. Information, Communication & Society, 19(3), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1109697.
Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble : what the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin Press.
Phoborisut, P. (2020). Reimagining dissent in Thailand’s 2020 uprising. SAIS Review of International Affairs, 40(2), 43–55.
Phoborisut, P. (2020). The 2020 student uprising in Thailand: A dynamic network of dissent. ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute. https://www.iseas.edu.sg/articles-commentaries/iseas-perspective/2020-129-the-2020-student-uprising-in-thailand-a-dynamic-network-of-dissent-by-penchan-phoborisut/
Pichardo, N. A. (1997). New social movements: A critical review. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 411–430.
Piven, F. F., & Cloward, R. A. (1977). Poor people's movements : why they succeed, how they fail. Pantheon Books.
Political TV talk show suspended for criticising Thailand’s judiciary and military. (2017, February 17). Southeast Asian Press Alliance. https://ifex.org/political-tv-talk-show-suspended-for-criticising-thailands-judiciary-and-military/
Polletta, F., & Jasper, J. M. (2001). Collective identity and social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 283–305.
Popovic, S., & Miller, M. (2015). Blueprint for revolution: How to use rice pudding, lego men, and other nonviolent techniques to galvanize communities, overthrow dictators, or simply change the world. Random House.
Pornsakulvanich, V., & Dumrongsiri, N. (2013). Internal and external influences on social networking site usage in Thailand. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2788-2795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.016.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon and Schuster.
Quan-Haase, A., Wellman, B., Witte, J., & Hampton, K. (2002). Capitalizing on the net: Social contact, civic engagement, and sense of community. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Internet in everyday life (pp. 291-324). Blackwell.
Ray, R., Brown, M., & Laybourn, W. (2017). The evolution of #BlackLivesMatter on Twitter: social movements, big data, and race. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(11), 1795–1796. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1335423.
Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Sage Publications.
Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M. N., & Ormston, R. (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Sage Publications.
Roberts, M. E. (2020). Censored: Distraction and diversion inside China’s great firewall. Princeton University Press.
Rohlinger, D. A. (2002). Framing the abortion debate: Organizational resources, media strategies, and movement-countermovement dynamics. Sociological Quarterly, 43, 479-507.
Ryan, C. (1991). Prime time activism: Media strategies for grassroots organizing. South End.
Sattayanurak, S. (2023). The Thai middle class and the dynamics and power of conservative ideology in Thai society and politics. Southeast Asian Studies, 12, 43-104.
Schaffar, W., & Praphakorn, W. (2021). The# MilkTeaAlliance: A new transnational pro-democracy movement against Chinese-centered globalization?. ASEAS-Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 14(1), 5-36.
Schreiber, M. (2017). Audiences, aesthetics and affordances analysing practices of visual communication on social media. Digital Culture & Society, 3(2), 143-164. https://doi.org/10.14361/dcs-2017-0209.
Siani, E. (2022). Thailand 2019-2021: Military, monarchy, protests. Asia Maior, 32, 237-257.
Sinpeng, A. (2021). Hashtag activism: social media and the #FreeYouth protests in Thailand. Critical Asian Studies, 53(2), 192-205. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2021.1882866.
Skoric, M. M., Zhu, Q., Goh, D., & Pang, N. (2016). Social media and citizen engagement: A meta-analytic review. New Media & Society, 18(9), 1817-1839. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815616221.
Snow, D. A. & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. In: Klandermans B, Kriesi H, Tarrow S (Eds.), From Structure to Action. Social Movement participation across cultures (pp.197–218). JAI Press.
Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2016). Carnivalesque humor, emotional paradoxes, and street protests in Thailand. Diogenes, 63(1–2), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0392192120970409.
Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2018). Conservative Civil Society in Thailand. In R. Youngs (Ed.), The mobilization of conservative civil society (pp. 27–32). Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2020). Two Thailands: Clashing political orders and entrenched polarization. In T. Carothers & A. O’Donohue (Eds.), Political polarization in south and southeast asia: Old divisions, new dangers (pp. 67–80). Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2021). From repression to revolt: Thailand’s 2020 protests and the regional implications. German Institute of Global and Area Studies, 2021.
Sombatpoonsiri, J. (2023). ‘A lot of people still love and worship the monarchy’: How polarizing frames trigger countermobilization in Thailand. Journal of Peace Research, 60(1), 88-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433221142932.
Sopranzetti, C. (2016). Thailand’s relapse: The implications of the May 2014 coup. The Journal of Asian Studies, 75(2), 299–316.
Spiliotopoulos, T. & Oakley, I. (2020). An exploration of motives and behavior across Facebook and Twitter. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 22(2), 201-222. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSIT-12-2019-0258.
Spohr, D. (2017). Fake news and ideological polarization: Filter bubbles and selective exposure on social media. Business Information Review, 34(3), 150-160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266382117722446.
St John, G. (2008). Protestival: Global days of action and carnivalized politics in the present. Social Movement Studies, 7(2), 167–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742830802283550.
Su, C., & Ting, T. Y. (2019). East asia in action: Activist media communication in new perspectives: Introduction. International Journal of Communication, 13, 3244-3250.
Suehiro, A. (2014). Technocracy and Thaksinocracy in Thailand: Reforms of the public sector and the budget system under the Thaksin government. Southeast Asian Studies, 3(2), 299-344.
Suwantawit, P. (2024). Fandom in action: Online mobilization of Thai Youth in the 2020-2021 anti-government [rotests. Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Social Media - ECSM 2024, 11(1), 342-349.
Tandoc, E. C., Jr., Lou, C., & Min, V. L. H. (2019). Platform-swinging in a poly-social-media context: How and why users navigate multiple social media platforms. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 24(1), 21-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmy022.
Tarrow, S. (1989). Democracy and disorder: Protest and politics in Italy, 1965-1975. Oxford University Press.
Teeratanabodee, W. (2023). Thailand’s 2020–2021 dro-Democracy protests: Diversity, conflict, and solidarity. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 55(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2023.2258131.
Tejapira, K. (2016). The irony of democratization and the decline of royal hegemony in Thailand. Southeast Asian Studies, 5(2), 219-237. https://doi.org/10.20495/seas.5.2_219.
Thabchumpon, N., & Duncan, M. (2011). Urbanized villagers in the 2010 Thai Redshirt protests. Asian Survey, 51(6), 993-1018. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2011.51.6.993.
Thailand Board of Investment. (2017, July 24). Thailand embarks on the journey to digitization [Announcement]. https://www.boi.go.th/upload/content/2017-07-24%20Thailand%204.0%20-%20Digital%20Economy%20(002)_35798.pdf
Thanapornsangsuth, S., & Anamwathana, P. (2022). Youth participation during Thailand’s 2020-2021 political turmoil. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 45(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2022.2037513.
Theocharis, Y., Boulianne, S., Koc-Michalska, K., & Bimber, B. (2022). Platform affordances and political participation: how social media reshape political engagement. West European Politics, 46(4), 788–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2022.2087410.
Thomas, E., Beattie, T., & Zhang, A. (2020). #WhatsHappeningInThailand: The power dynamics of Thailand’s digital activism. Australian Strategic Policy Institute. https://www.aspi.org.au/report/whatshappeninginthailand-power-dynamics-thailands-digital-activism/
Thorson, K., Driscoll, K., Ekdale, B., Edgerly, S., Thompson, L. G., Schrock, A., et al. (2013). YouTube, Twitter and the Occupy Movement: Connecting content and circulation practices. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 421-451.
Ting, T. Y. (2020). From ‘be water’ to ‘be fire’: nascent smart mob and networked protests in Hong Kong. Social Movement Studies, 19(3), 362–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2020.1727736
Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. McGraw-Hill.
Treem, J. W., & Leonardi, P. M. (2013). Social media use in organizations: Exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. Annals of the International Communication Association, 36(1), 143–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2013.11679130
Tremayne, M. (2013). Anatomy of protest in the digital era: A network analysis of Twitter and occupy Wall Street. Social Movement Studies, 13(1), 110–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2013.830969.
Treré, E. (2015). Reclaiming, proclaiming, and maintaining collective identity in the #YoSoy132 movement in Mexico: an examination of digital frontstage and backstage activism through social media and instant messaging platforms. Information, Communication & Society, 18(8), 901–915. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1043744.
Tudor, G. (2018, August 30). Can the media shed its polarised colours?. Bangkok Post. https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/1530858/can-the-media-shed-its-polarised-colours
Tufekci, Z. (2014). Social movement and governments in the digital age: Evaluating a complex landscape. Journal of International Affairs, 68(1), 1–18.
Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas. The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/14848.
Tufekci, Z., & Freelon, D. (2013). Introduction to the special issue on new media and social unrest. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(7), 843-847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479376.
Unno, A. (2021). “Thalu Gas”: The other version of the Thai youth movement. ISEAS Perspective, 146, 1-11.
Urman, A., Ho, J. C.-t., & Katz, S. (2021). Analyzing protest mobilization on Telegram: The case of 2019 anti-extradition bill movement in Hong Kong. PLOS ONE, 16(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256675.
Vaccari, C., & Valeriani, A. (2021). Outside the bubble: social media and political participation in western democracies. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190858476.001.0001.
Vaccari, C., Valeriani, A., Barberá, P., Bonneau, R., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. A. (2015). Political expression and action on social media: Exploring the relationship between lower and higher threshold political activities among Twitter users in Italy. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 221-239. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12108.
Valenzuela, S. (2013). Unpacking the use of social media for protest behavior: The roles of information, opinion expression, and activism. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(7), 920-942. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479375.
Valenzuela, S., Arriagada, A., & Scherman, A. (2014). Facebook, Twitter, and youth engagement: A quasi-experimental study of social media use and protest behavior using propensity score matching. International Journal of Communication, 8(1), 2046–2070.
Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site? Facebook use and college students' life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 875-901.
van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press.
Wang, X., Chen, M., & Jiang, W. (2024). Why Is one social media platform not enough? A typology of platform-swinging behavior and associated affordance preferences. Social Media+Society, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051241254373.
Wolfsfeld, G., Segev, E., & Sheafer, T. (2013). Social media and the Arab Spring: politics comes first. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18(2), 115-137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161212471716.
Yuen, S., & Tang, G. (2021). Instagram and social capital: youth activism in a networked movement. Social Movement Studies, 22(5–6), 706–727. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2021.2011189.
Zukin, C., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., & Carpini, M. X. D. (2006). A new engagement?: Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. Oxford University Press.
三、 泰文部分
BBCNewsไทย. (2018, January 2). เลือกตั้ง 2561: เราจะทำตามสัญญา?. BBCNewsไทย. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-42509500
BBCNewsไทย. (2020, July 18). ชุมนุม 18 ก.ค.: เยาวชนปลดแอกยุติชุมนุม 18.30 น. หลังตำรวจใช้แก๊สน้ำตา-กระสุนยางสกัด. BBCNewsไทย. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-57877709
BBCNewsไทย. (2020, August 10). “ธรรมศาสตร์จะไม่ทน” ยื่นข้อเรียกร้อง 10 ข้อแก้ปัญหาว่าด้วยสถาบันกษัตริย์ นัดชุมนุมอีกครั้ง 12 ส.ค. BBCNewsไทย. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-53727597
BBCNewsไทย. (2020, September 19). ชุมนุม 19 กันยา : มวลชนเสื้อแดงร่วมเยาวชนรวมตัวล้นสนามหลวง แกนนำย้ำประเด็นปฏิรูปสถาบันกษัตริย์. BBCNewsไทย. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-54217719
BBCNewsไทย. (2021, September 18). ทะลุแก๊ส : สุรชาติ บำรุงสุข ชวนพินิจ “ม็อบโควิด” ที่ดินแดง ไร้แกนนำ ไร้จุดจบ. BBCNewsไทย. https://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-58607673
ELECT (n.d.). Civil Movement 2020. ELECT. Retrieved February 25, 2025 from, https://elect.in.th/civil-movement-2020/
Free People. (2020, August 12). แถลงการณ์คณะประชาชนปลดแอก. [Facebook status update]. Facebook. https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid027gdkPaK1Pbn5RXMN4ubbNMgRTkv7xMtGWeZHbN4V4kq4GSvH4DsZMAhskvuSRjFDl&id=103314414814883
iLaw. (2018, December 10). เลือกตั้ง 62: ระบบนับที่นั่ง MMA ทำพรรคใหญ่แตกตัว พรรคเล็กเกิดไม่ได้. Internet Law Reform Dialogue. https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/3116
iLaw. (2019, July 9). หัวหน้าคสช. ใช้ “มาตรา 44” ยกเลิกกฎหมายพิเศษในยุคคสช. อย่างน้อย 61 ฉบับ ตามบัญชีแนบท้าย. Internet Law Reform Dialogue. https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/3610
iLaw. (2021, December 29). ปี 2564 ยิ่งชุมนุมยิ่งโดนคดี จนปริมาณพุ่งสูงเป็นประวัติการณ์. Internet Law Reform Dialogue. https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/35054
iLaw. (2022, May 19). การชุมนุมปี 2563 พริบตาแห่งความเปลี่ยนแปลง: พลังก่อตัวจากไหน มีพัฒนาการอย่างไร เราเจออะไรมาบ้าง. Internet Law Reform Dialogue. https://www.ilaw.or.th/articles/10090
Mob Data Thailand. (n.d.a). สถิติการชุมนุม ตั้งแต่ปี2563-ปี2566. Retrieved February 25, 2025 from, https://www.mobdatathailand.org/
Mob Data Thailand. (n.d.b). ประมวลสถานการณ์การชุมนุมเดือนกุมภาพันธ์ พ.ศ. 2564. Retrieved May 20, 2025 from, https://blog.mobdatathailand.org/2021-02
Prachatai. (2020, August 3). ชุมนุมธีมแฮรี่พอตเตอร์ ร้องยกเลิก-แก้กฎหมายขยายพระราชอำนาจฯ และฟังเสียงนักศึกษา-ประชาชน. Prachatai. https://prachatai.com/journal/2020/08/88882
Preechasilapakun, S. (2020, October 14). คณะราษฎร 2563. The101.World. https://www.the101.world/khana-ratsadon-2563/
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights [TLHR]. (2021, December 30). 2563: ปีแห่งการชุมนุม ทลายเพดาน และคดีความทางการเมือง. TLHR. https://tlhr2014.com/archives/24608
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights [TLHR]. (2022, January 5). คณะราษฎร 2563: ชวนทบทวน “ที่สุด” ของการชุมนุมและหมุดหมายใหม่ของการเปลี่ยนแปลง. TLHR. https://tlhr2014.com/archives/24803
ThaiPBS. (2020, July 19). ปชช.กังวลทหารอียิปต์-ครอบครัวซูดาน ทำ COVID-19 ระบาดใหม่. ThaiPBS. https://www.thaipbs.or.th/news/content/294711
ThaiPBS. (2021, November 12). สังคมไทยไปต่ออย่างไร? หลังคำวินิจฉัยศาลรัฐธรรมนูญ. ThaiPBS. https://theactive.thaipbs.or.th/read/constitutional-court-and-thai-protests
The101.World. (2021, November 3). ถอดบทเรียนความเคลื่อนไหว เข้าใจหลากมิติกลุ่ม ‘เยาวรุ่นทะลุแก๊ส’. The101.World. https://www.the101.world/thalugaz-summary/
The Matter. (2020, July 30). “ม็อบไม่มุ้งมิ้งแต่ตุ้งติ้งค่ะคุณรัฐบาล” อีกหนึ่งหมุดหมายการเคลื่อนไหวประชาธิปไตยไทย. The Matter. https://thematter.co/thinkers/lgbtq-protest-in-thailand/118920
Thairath. (2020, July 15). โซเชียลเดือด ดันแฮชแท็ก #ตํารวจระยองอุ้มประชาชน ปม 2 วัยรุ่นชูป้ายไล่นายกฯ. ไทยรัฐออนไลน์. https://www.thairath.co.th/news/society/1890191 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
傳播學院傳播碩士學位學程
110464018 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110464018 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [傳播學院傳播碩士學位學程] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 401801.pdf | | 1761Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
