Casey MeadowsAugust 31, 2018
WHY WE PROTEST
by
Casey Meadows
Research Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the MA Sociology Program, DePaul University
August 2018
Readers: Greg Scott and Roberta Garner
“A sober analysis is needed of what the protest movement is and can do and what it is not and
cannot do.”1
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research is to analyze protest signage to better understand the nature and
function of protests. Insight is obtained via participant observation of seven separate protest
events organized by three different activist organizations operating in Chicago. While
participating in these protests, data in the form of 112 photographs of different protest signs to
be used for a content analysis were collected. This paper invokes social identity theory in
conjunction with the statistical analysis of the first-hand data and General Social Survey (GSS)
data in determining that protest signs are used to denigrate their target. This supports the
hypothesis that a latent function of protesting is to increase the status of one’s own ingroup.
KEY WORDS: Protest Event Analysis, Protest Signs, Social Identity Theory, Visual Rhetoric
Habermas, Jürgen. 1971. Toward a rational society: Student protest, science, and politics. Vol.
404. Beacon Press.
1
2
1. INTRODUCTION
The intent of this paper is to contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the nature,
function, and study of social movements and protests in terms of affecting societal change. The
first recorded protest in history was a sit-down labor strike by skilled workers who had not been
paid their rations for almost three weeks (Israelit-Groll 1990). The protesters were scribes, the
empire in which they lived was ancient Egypt, and their ruler was Pharaoh Rameses III. It was the
12th century BC, nearly four millennia ago. Protests have occurred throughout human history in
societies with all types of governments, from democratic to fascist to monarchical. Given this
knowledge, one might reasonably conclude that protests are an inherent aspect of any complex
society.
Protests have played a pivotal role in the development of human history. It is argued that it was
a protest that marked the beginning of the modern era when Martin Luther posted his Ninetyfive Theses on the doors of churches in Wittenburg in 1517 (Culp and Kuswa 2016). Martin Luther
was upset by the practices of the Catholic Church and made a sign to mark the beginning of his
protest. Signs are important in protesting because they provide context for the protest itself and
because they help persuade people to think in certain ways. Advertisers know this (Duncan 2002),
politicians know this (Dumitrescu 2010), and seemingly protesters know this. Yet, even though
signs play an important role in protests, they are not often studied (Wildermuth et al. 2014). This
is because much of the history of protests (including the signs) has gone undocumented (Bailey
and McAtee 2003).
3
When Donald Trump won the U.S. presidential election, people around the country immediately
began to voice their discontent. On the day of Trump’s inauguration, thousands gathered around
the country to protest, making clear their feelings that Trump does not represent them and is not
their president. Since then, those feelings of discontent have remained strong across large
segments of the population and continue to be expressed through protest. The anti-Trump social
movement and protests were chosen for study because of their novelty, possible longevity,
breadth of the population involved, degree of topical polarization, accessibility, and the potential
magnitude of their impact on society if the goals were to be achieved.
Although most of the data for this study comes from following the anti-Trump social movement,
it is hoped that what is learned can be applied to other social movements and protests. To reach
this goal, a variety of data types is used to answer the following three research questions:
1. How are protest signs used to enhance one’s group image?
2. How do the main arguments and emotional tones of protest signs in this research
compare to main arguments and emotional tones found in analysis of protest signs
by Wildermuth et al. (2014)?
3. Is there a link between attending college and participating in protests?
The first research question is addressed through a quantitative examination of a content analysis
of signs from local protests to determine the rhetorical uses and meaning behind the discourse.
Social identity theory is used to explain the findings of the content analysis. The second research
4
question compares the findings of this content analysis with those of Wildermuth et al. (2014),
whose content analysis of signs from a protest in Wisconsin add weight to the similar findings in
this research. The third research question is answered using participant observation of protests
and General Social Survey (GSS) data.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 consists of a review of the literature
on social movements, protests, social identity theory, and protest rhetoric. Section 3 details the
methods and includes a description of experiences with the three activist groups, which provides
insight into how this project emerged and what motivated the research questions. Section 4
comprises the results and a discussion of the content analysis. Section 5 consists of the
conclusion.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
There is no universal definition of social movements (Opp 2009). Tilly and Wood (2015) view
social movements as a major mechanism for ordinary people to participate in public politics and
define them as a series of contentious events in the campaigns of ordinary people making claims
on others. Tarrow (2011) defines a social movement as “collective challenges, based on common
purposes and social solidarities, in sustained interaction with elites, opponents, and authorities”.
What these definitions have in common is what Diani (1992) describes as three shared
characteristics consisting of “a network of informal interactions between a plurality of
individuals, groups and/or organizations engaged in a political or cultural conflict, on the basis of
5
a shared collective identity”. The protest events in this paper constitute social movements that
can be defined as organized gatherings of individuals and groups who share values and beliefs
(the rejection of Trump’s legitimacy and a shared goal of seeing him removed from office) that
are expressed through a series of separate protest events.
Just as with social movements, there is no universal definition of what a protest event is (Opp
2009; Della Porta and Diani 2009; Hutter 2014). Most people favor broad definitions suitable for
the questions being asked and the data being collected, with situational factors such as size or
disruptiveness as variables (Oliver, Cadena-Roa, and Strawn 2003). Tilly and Schweitzer (1977:14)
use the phrase “contentious gathering”, defined as “occasions in which ten or more persons
outside the government gather in the same place and make a visible claim which, if realized,
would affect the interests of some specific person(s) or group(s) outside their own number”. In
their description of the main objectives, purpose, and activities of PRODAT (protest dataset), an
event data collection project, Rucht, Hocke, and Ohlemacher (1992:4) describe a protest as “a
collective, public action by a non-governmental actor who expresses criticism or dissent and
articulates a societal or political demand.” Kriesi et al. (1995) focus on listing different types of
action. In this research, we use the definition given by Opp (2009; 38): “[p]rotest is defined as
joint (i.e., collective) action of individuals aimed at achieving their goal or goals by influencing
decisions of a target.”
6
Considering that the bulk of this research focuses on the content of protest signs, an obvious
question is “What constitutes a protest sign?” Barthes (1968) states that every image in society
is a sign. Although I focused on placards, posters, and banners, I also collected buttons, pins, flags,
stickers, hats, t-shirts, and other items for potential use. What constituted a sign for this research
was any item that someone intentionally chose to display in order to convey a message during a
protest. Therefore, the first research question is:
How are protest signs used to enhance one’s group image?
Protest event analysis is a relatively new aspect of social movement studies (Hutter 2014), and
the research concerning the methodology to analyze protest signs is sparse. Therefore, the
analysis of signs herein builds upon the methodology developed by Wildermuth et al. (2014) in
their content analysis of signs observed at the Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill/Act protests of 2011.
Wildermuth et al. (2014) developed a methodology based on Irwin (2007)’s research on the role
of visual rhetoric used in protest images. Irwin (2007) recognized the growing use of visual
rhetoric in the 21st century and sought to help bring rhetorical studies up to date through the
evaluation of images on posters. Irwin (2007) noted a need for a particular methodology to
evaluate the rhetoric used in protests and to that end developed a “generic methodology” to
analyze four posters created to protest the War on Terror.
Focusing on how people construct and communicate their political messages in attempting to
persuade others, Irwin (2007) established three primary elements used to create rhetoric in
visual protest—the primary enthymeme (main argument), emotional appeals, and iconic images.
7
Enthymemes refer to the particular rhetorical strategies used in the contents of signs.
Wildermuth et al. (2014) identified eight categories of enthymemes/arguments used in the signs
at the Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill/Act 10 protests of 2011, the most common of which was the
denigration of personal qualities in order to polarize. Protesters demonize the “other” (or
conversely claim to be the victim) while attempting to force their audience to choose a side to
be either with them or against them (Wildermuth et al. 2014).
Emotions such as love and hate are often referenced on signs for the reaction they elicit in order
to spur people to action (Irwin 2007). Brader (2005) shows how enthusiasm can affect existing
loyalties by motivating people to participate or vote. Brader (2005) also shows how the use of
fear can persuade by encouraging vigilance and increasing people’s reliance on existing
opinions. Based on this second element, Wildermuth et al. (2014) established seven categories
of emotional tones used in their study of protest signs. The most common emotional tone was
anger, followed closely by humor.
Iconic imagery is easily and instantaneously recognized by almost everyone belonging to a culture
(Hariman and Lucaites 2001). Cultural icons are often used as visual protest images to convey
messages because they grab attention and metaphorically illicit strong emotional responses very
efficiently (Messaris 1997). Iconic imagery can come in many forms. Wildermuth et al. (2014)
developed 10 categories of types of imagery, with the most commonly used being patriotic
images.
8
Although Wildermuth et al. (2014) have a different focus in their research, their content analysis
of signs used at one particular protest event overlaps with the research in the current study. Their
findings both add and subtract from my research; therefore, the second research question is:
How do the main arguments and emotional tones found on the protest signs in this
research compare to the main arguments and emotional tones found in the analysis of
protest signs by Wildermuth et al. (2014)?
All the activist organizations I participated in are also social clubs that hold periodic group
meetings and throw occasional parties, and all seemed to protest in similar ways with similar
rhetorical styles. Throughout my research, I found that people who are inclined to protest and
who find enough importance in protesting to continue doing so throughout their lives began to
do so in college. An observation I made regarding the college student activists is that they found
a group to which they felt they truly belonged and therefore felt a sort of comradery in
participating in the organization’s events and protests. I hypothesize that this also happened to
the members of other activist groups early on in their protesting journey. If this is so, perhaps
other activist groups are protesting not just because of contentious issues but for other less
obvious social group reasons.
Although there are several theories that seek to explain why people protest, it is Tajfel (1979)’s
social identity theory that best explains the nuances found in this research. Social identity is a
person’s sense of who they are based on their group membership(s). Social identity theory states
that a person’s sense of who they are is based on their group memberships and that the groups
9
(e.g., social class, race, religion, baseball team, political affiliation, etc.) they belong to are
important sources of pride and self-esteem.
The “ingroup” is the idea that a group of people will be perceived as part of each other when
they identify as part of the group as a whole. The social identity approach (Tajfel and Turner 1979)
takes the stance that group memberships influence the psychological state of individual
members and therefore influence the thoughts, behaviors, and feelings of individuals to be in
line with those of the group. Individuals will acquire and internalize the values of the group, and
when they perceive harm to other members of their ingroup, anger is expected. Conversely, if
one observes that a member of an outgroup is harmed, anger is not expected. More specifically,
the exact opposite—pleasure—may result when the observer perceives the victims as members
of an outgroup (Gordijn, Wigboldus, and Yzerbyt 2001).
Groups give us a sense of social identity, a sense of belonging to the social world. It was made
clear that many members of the activists groups I participated in found a sense of belonging
within their organization. Many of the activists in the college student group often stated that
“this is the first time I have ever felt like I belong”, and many of the protesters from the other
groups I spoke with stated that they had begun protesting in college. If social identity theory is
indeed a valid way of explaining protests, then the central tenets of this theory should be
apparent in my research data. To link the observations made while participating with student
activists to those made while participating with older activists and to extend the hypothesis that
activists protest to increase their ingroups’ value, the third research question asks:
10
Is there is a link between attending college and participating in protests?
Establishing this relationship helps connect my observations of the college student group activists
to the other activist organizations. If social identity explains what was happening with the student
protests, then there should be elements of the theory in the data collected to explain the
behavior of other protesters. An important idea in social identity theory is that in order to
improve our self-image, we enhance the status of the group to which we belong. We can also
improve our self-image by discriminating against the outgroup (the group to which we do not
belong). Social identity goes further, so that members of an ingroup will seek to highlight the
negative aspects of an outgroup and thus enhance their own self-image (Hogg 2016).
What really highlights the relevance of this theory in my research is that “[s]ocial identity theory
is an interactionist social psychological theory of the role of self-conception and associated
cognitive processes and social beliefs in group processes and intergroup relations” (Hogg 2013).
This means that social identity theory is the meeting ground of psychology and sociology in the
same way that a protest sign is the manifestation of the psychology of society at large.
2. METHODS
Background
This research uses an inductive Grounded Theory approach, which involves finding patterns that
emerge in the data that lead to explanations that are (as the name implies) grounded in theory
(Walsh et al. 2015). I went into the study of protests with curiosity and the basic idea of taking
photographs of signs and recording as much data as possible. The choice to participate in and
11
observe the DePaul Socialists was based on convenience. I walked by a table where several
members were handing out pamphlets and after a brief conversation decided to investigate
further. I attended the local DePaul International Socialist Organization (ISO) meetings for three
months and participated in two protest events with them. Over the course of these months, I
began to notice that protesting was not only about the issue at hand but also served to build
group cohesion, although I did not quite understand the relevance at the time. This would later
be reinforced through participation with two other local branches of national activist
organizations, Refuse Fascism and the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) Coalition.
At the weekly DePaul ISO meetings, people would stand up and talk about when they first
became radicalized (their political awakening) and how they had never felt like they fit in (prior
to finding the ISO). I heard similar stories over and over again, and it became obvious there was
definitely something else going on besides simple discontent with current political issues and a
dedication to socialism. From their descriptions, I had the impression that many of these students
were cast into the category of “other” at their previous schools simply due to not fitting the
cookie cutter mold of their high school social groups. Upon entering college, they found people
who had faced similar circumstances and through the shared experience of their previous
exclusion found commonality and became members of this particular group, which happens to
be involved in protesting.
12
The first protest I attended with the DePaul Socialists was a counter protest. They had been
informed that there was a pro-life group protesting at the All Women’s Medical Center in
Chicago, and plans were made to gather signs and a bullhorn. I arrived early on October 18 2017
just to observe as a bystander before the counter protesters arrived. In doing so, I was able to
talk with protesters and take pictures of their signs to gain a better perspective of what was being
protested. Shortly thereafter, the DePaul Socialist counter protesters, most of whom had
carpooled to the medical center, began to arrive. The chants soon began.
It was a rainy day, and many of the protestors wore ponchos and carried umbrellas. There were
five pro-life protesters, most of whom appeared to be over 40, with several appearing to be over
60. English was not their first language, and one was wearing the collar of a priest. The DePaul
Socialists and a few others gathered on the opposite side (see Figure 1). The previous day the
DePaul Socialists had sent out emails with the chants they would be saying and ideas for
signs. Some of the most used chants from their emails are as follows:
•
“When women’s rights/abortion rights are under attack, what do we do? STAND UP
FIGHT BACK”.
•
“Our bodies, our lives, our right to decide”
•
“Racist, sexist, anti-gay right wing bigots go away”
Some of the chants were on topic and some appeared to be less so. Being pro-life does not make
one racist or anti-gay—perhaps sexist, but the majority of protesters were women. With this in
mind, I noticed how some of the signs and chants were a bit off topic, which to some extent is
13
due to the DePaul Socialists having a bank of chants to pull from with little inspection in terms of
aligning the chant with the particular issue being protested. The counter protesters passed
around a bullhorn with which individuals would be able to give short prepared speeches. The
speeches contained much of the same content as the signs used for analysis in this research. They
show a mix of anger and humor used to denigrate and/or address the issue in dispute, in this case
women’s reproductive rights. The way in which the pro-choice counter protesters addressed the
pro-life protesters had enough vitriol that it made me feel uncomfortable. What stuck out about
the chants and speeches was not so much the message or tone but the odd way one would say
something denigrating and then turn with a smile towards the rest of the counter protesters who
were cheering. On the surface, this event was a counter protest, yet underneath the surface it
related much more closely to a pep rally in that it seemed like an exercise in building group
solidarity.
Another aspect of this counter protest that stood out to me as peculiar was that during the
chanting and yelling, a few people showed up at the clinic and hurriedly made their way inside
with their heads down. Everyone, protesters and counter protesters alike, appeared to totally
ignore them. The rest of the counter protest continued in the same vein and was followed by an
after party. Personally, I was baffled as to what had really happened. The only thing I could tell
for sure was that there was more surrounding the counter protest than a contested issue. The
comradery amongst the counter protesters rang louder than the discontent with the issue they
were protesting, which ignited my quest to determine the underlying meaning and nature of
organized protests.
14
The next protest I attended with the DePaul Socialists was Charles Murray’s speaking event at
DePaul University on November 1 2017. For this protest, the DePaul Socialists arrived early not
only to protest but also to occupy as many seats as possible. The original plan was just to occupy
space and to disrupt Murray’s talk. But as things like this tend to go, one person shouted and
others followed. The result was that the DePaul Socialists were escorted out of the hall, where
they started chanting again. The majority of the signs used at this protest simply said racist or
bigoted things; one mentioned eugenics, but they all consisted of very general accusations. While
the protesters passed around the bullhorn, they told their personal stories or proclaimed that
they would not tolerate bigotry. I made my way through the crowd asking people who Murray
was. I had only known Murray as “the Bell Curve guy”, so before the protest I researched who he
is and what work he had recently completed (he was promoting his latest book). Very few of the
DePaul Socialists had any idea at all who Murray is, and they only knew he is a racist bigot. Most
of the students had not heard of the book The Bell Curve and were not aware of the book’s
content. This experience further reinforced my suspicions about potential latent reasons why
people might protest. But it was not until after speaking with the organizers of larger activist
groups that I learned that the majority of them had begun protesting when they were in college,
which further substantiated my thoughts about veiled motivations for joining a protest group. It
was while being with the DePaul Socialists that I read a Facebook news article discussing the
mysterious protest on November 4 2017 organized by the group Refuse Fascism that vowed to
remove Trump from office.
15
Refuse Fascism
The second organization that I observed in protest was Refuse Fascism. RefuseFascism.org was
established immediately following the election of Donald Trump. Refuse Fascism has organized
numerous protests against Trump and/or his administration since its inception and continues to
do so at the time of this writing. I first heard of Refuse Fascism in a Facebook news article
discussing an ad in the New York Times calling the Trump and Pence regime a nightmare, and
they declared that Nov 4 2017 was the day they would begin the fight to end it (see Figure 4).
Refuse Fascism describe themselves as a “movement of people coming from diverse
perspectives, united in our recognition that the Trump/Pence Regime poses a catastrophic
danger to humanity and the planet”, and they feel it is their obligation to organize a resistance
that will drive the fascists from power (Refuse Fascism 2018).
Refuse Fascism was formed by members of the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), among
others, and operates partially out of the RCP’s Revolution bookshop in Harlem. Refuse Fascism
has stated that they do not support violence as a means to resist, and in a Politico article they
identified as anti-fascists but differentiated themselves from Antifa (Garcia 2017). However, my
observations contradict their disavowal of Antifa in that on multiple occasions people dressed in
Antifa attire (all black with their faces covered) were interacting deferentially with the Refuse
Fascism organizers and took orders from the Refuse Fascism lead organizer that were
immediately followed at the protest. Although Refuse Fascism does operate with Antifa in
Chicago, their numbers seem rather small, as I observed fewer than 20 members in total. Refuse
16
Fascism has repeatedly stated they intend to use constitutional means only to remove Trump
and Pence. They highlight the Arab Spring and the protests leading to the impeachment of Park
Geun-hye, the former President of South Korea, in March 2017 as evidence of the effectiveness
of protests.
In preparation for the nationwide event on November 4 , protesters advertised by carrying signs
reading “NOV 4 IT BEGINS” and blocked traffic on U.S. Route 101 in Los Angeles on September
26, 2017 (McGahan 2017). On November 4, 2017, Refuse Fascism held peaceful demonstrations
in Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and other cities. Curiosity at full pique, I made
plans to attend the protest here in Chicago, which began at the Federal Plaza in the Loop and
ended, fittingly, after a march to Trump Tower.
I decided to borrow a video recorder from DePaul University to record the protest and to use my
phone to take pictures of signs. The idea was that I would get to the protest early and take
pictures with my phone and then record whatever else happened. If I missed any signs with my
phone camera, I could review the video for screenshots. Upon arriving, I immediately began to
take pictures of anything I found pertinent or even mildly interesting. I took pictures of protest
signs as people arrived with them. If they were paying attention to me, I politely asked if I could
take a picture of their sign. Most people were happy to oblige, and the ones who did not appear
happy seemed only indifferent.
17
Organizers arrived early to set up a stage for the band to play on and for speakers to address the
crowd. They came equipped with a cache of a hundred or so protest signs of just a few different
varieties to be passed out to those who did not bring their own signs. People began to arrive in
small groups or by themselves and congregated in Federal Plaza while the band set up. Once the
protest began, I started recording the speeches as they were given with the video camera. When
new signs caught my attention, I would pull out my phone and snap a picture. I did a lot of
wandering through the crowd, which I later learned makes for bad video. The main spokesman
for this event also happened to be the drummer for the band, which played catchy protest
songs. Many groups, such as Freedom First International, attended this protest and spoke to the
crowd.
Altogether, I estimated 160–200 people gathered to protest Trump. There were a handful of
counter protesters with American flags and “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) signs.
Furthermore, at this protest and at every subsequent event, the MAGA counter protesters
showed up and set up camp on the opposite side of the road. The police made it a point to
position themselves between the two groups. After several speeches and a few songs, the protest
formed into a march and headed towards Trump Tower.
Once the protest moved into the march phase, I made my way to the front of the procession and
walked backwards while recording. I quickly learned that this took more effort than it was worth
and ran ahead to find an elevated position from which to wait and record the march as it passed.
18
This proved to be a very useful and efficient tactic because it brought the protesters and their
signs to me. This method of recording the march provides a way to capture almost every
individual and every sign being used in a protest and in a short amount of time. It also saves the
trouble of wandering haphazardly through a crowd and asking people if they minded if I took a
picture of their sign. At later protests, I still wandered through crowds taking pictures of all the
signs, but recording from an elevated position was the more efficient method. I used both in the
attempt to be as exhaustive as possible.
Upon reaching Trump Tower, a few more speeches were given before the event ended. The
format for all the subsequent protests was similar: show up, chant, speech, chant, march, chant
while marching, more speeches, go home.
The November 4 protest attracted the most people of all the Refuse Fascism events I attended. I
attended three additional Refuse Fascism protests on Wednesday November 8, Thursday
November 16, and Saturday December 2. Although they began at different locations, they
followed the same format as the November 4 event. In addition to the actual protests, Refuse
Fascism held open meetings at coffee shops to discuss matters and to facilitate networking. Other
events they organized were more socially oriented, such as a potluck held at the Safari Lounge.
19
The protests that occurred on weekdays did not have much of a turn out. Most of the people
who showed up to protest appeared to be organizers or close friends of the organizers. For the
weekday events, less than 10 people arrived with the intent to protest, although a few passersby
joined in. Some of these impromptu protesters stayed for only a few minutes, while others stayed
much longer. One thing I noticed about the march aspect of protests is that it creates the illusion
of having a much larger group, as people walk in a line and are joined by others who happen to
be walking by the protest. In addition, by marching the visibility of the protest is magnified. When
the protesters are standing still holding signs and chanting, a spectator has to be passing by their
general vicinity to notice them. However, if the protest goes mobile, as in the case of a march,
they pass street corners, stores, and restaurants where their chants can be heard and the long
line of people—some holding signs—can be seen.
ANSWER Coalition
The January 21 2018 protest I attended was organized by the Chicago chapter of the ANSWER
Coalition. The coalition was established just days after the September 11 attacks in New York,
and began an anti-war movement opposing the U.S. invasion of Iraq. ANSWER, as well as several
other U.S.-based anti-war and civil rights organizations, are encompassed in the ANSWER
Coalition. ANSWER considers itself to stand for anti-imperialism and is comprised of socialists,
communists, civil rights advocates, and left-wing or progressive organizations from diverse
communities. ANSWER’s founding members were linked to the International Action Center and
the Workers World Party (Albert and Shalom 2002).
20
On the one-year anniversary of Trump’s inauguration, ANSWER organized a protest event that
was co-sponsored by over 25 other activist organizations. The protest itself began at Trump
Tower and ended at The Chicago Board of Trade. I arrived early and saw the many organizations
assembling their banners, signs, and portable sound systems on the sidewalks across the Chicago
river from Trump Tower. I was immediately reminded of parades I had been a part of years ago.
This protest differed from the Refuse Fascism protests in that many other activist groups actively
participated, whereas the Refuse Fascism protests only had guests speaking at their event.
People began to show up with their signs as the various groups were organizing, and the crowd
grew. Chants began to ring through the air. A few speeches were made over bullhorns, and
directions were given for the march. While we marched towards the Chicago Board of Trade, I
made my way up and down the parade and listened to the different chants of each organization.
More speeches were made at the end of the parade, and people slowly began to disperse.
For all the protests at which I photographed signs to use as data, the November 4 2017,
November 8 2017, November 16 2017, December 2 2017, and January 21 2018 events organized
by ANSWER in Chicago, I utilized basically the same method of data collection. The only difference
is that I stopped using the video camera borrowed from the university and used only my phone.
The video camera proved to be more troublesome than it was worth for my purposes. The only
downside I encountered using my phone instead of the video camera was the lack of appearing
21
professional and the occasional sideways glances that lack garnered (see Figures 7 and 8). For the
most part, however, the sideways glances were few and far between.
It should be noted that in protest event analysis, a common limitation is the reliance on
secondary sources, such as newspapers (Hutter 2014; Wildermuth et al. 2014). Although the
sampling in this research was at first of convenience, the decision to attend the January 21 2018
ANSWER anti-Trump protest instead of the January 20 Women’s March was based on the idea
that the ANSWER protest was more clearly a protest (in that the Women’s March goals were less
obvious) and part of a social movement that I had already begun to research.
Measurement
To answer the first research question “How are protest signs used to enhance one’s group
image?”, a content analysis of the images of protest signs collected during the participatory phase
of this research was conducted by a single coder. Using the main argument and emotional tone
categories established by Wildermuth et al. (2014) as a guiding format, the coder approached
the data exploratorily to determine how Wildermuth et al.’s (2014) categories fit the data. The
initial phase of familiarization with the data was carried out with an open mind to identify broad
themes and incongruencies with Wildermuth et al.’s categories (Rose 2012). A few of Wildermuth
et al.’s categories were dropped in this summative coding process, and a few categories were
added as the data revealed the necessity.
22
Regarding the variable of main argument, I found that the category of counter attacks was
unnecessary for this research. The counter attack category was used by Wildermuth et al. (2014)
based on Burridge (2005) regarding a hunting issue in England that drew protest. That particular
category was more relevant to those protests because they involved one particular issue that
was heavily contested, so it makes sense that protesters would make signs countering specific
arguments. In the anti-Trump protests, however, there was no single issue in the same sense as
in Burridge (2005) or Wildermuth et al. (2014). The second of Wildermuth et al.’s main argument
categories that was dropped was that of ad populum or bandwagon arguments. This category
was dropped because it did not seem to fit this particular research, perhaps for reasons that are
specific to the contexts of the protests in question. Therefore, the following six categories of main
arguments found on protest signs in this research are: 1) credibility of view based on being
neutral, 2) logical requests, 3) attacking opposition policies or the effects of policies, 4) broad
requests or equating one’s opinion as a broad social positive, 5) denigration, and 6) call for
action2. The last category of call for action was added after finding several signs that were direct
in their demands for Trump to be removed from office.
The second variable in the content analysis of protest signs for this paper is that of emotional
tone. Following the same procedure for emotional tone as for main argument, no categories used
by Wildermuth et al. (2014) were dropped, but two categories of emotional tone were added—
denial and love/peace/equality. The categories of emotional tone are as follows: 1)
2 See Figures 9–19 in the appendix for illustrations of how signs were coded.
23
perseverance/pride/loyalty, 2) shock factor, 3) appeal to humor, 4) appeal to guilt, 5) appeal to
fear, 6) anger, 7) sadness, 8) denial, and 9) love/peace/equality. These last two categories were
added after the “summative” coding process revealed a pattern of their presence (Rose 2007).
The presence of the emotional tone of denial is likely due to the nature of the protests
themselves, being that they centered on refusing to accept Trump as a legitimate president. The
addition of love/peace/equality as a category was necessary considering some of the signs.
For all the Refuse Fascism and ANSWER protests, the organizers came equipped with a supply of
ready-made, mass-produced protest signs (see Figure 20). When conducting the content analysis,
no sign was used twice; thus, even though a sign may appear 50 times carried by 50 different
individuals, it was only included once. Regarding the actual coding, every picture and video was
uploaded to either OneDrive or YouTube for temporary storage under labels identifying at which
protest event they were found. Videos were used in the content analysis by taking screenshots
of signs that were not in still images taken using the phone camera. All the images of signs that
were to be used were printed out, numbered, coded, recorded in a notebook, and then
transferred to Excel for quantitative analysis using STATA 15.
In addition to the two variables of main argument and emotional tone used in this paper, there
were five other variables not used in this paper for which the data were coded. Those variables
were constituent elements of the sign content (text, text and image, or image only), mentions or
refers to Trump, organizational presence, media discourse (retweets, quotes, and original
24
message), and ideological content (this turned into a very large variable including 28 categories
of ideological content present on signs). The reason for dropping all the variables besides main
argument and emotional tone was that these were the only two variables that revealed a
statistical significance—not that a statistical significance indicates significance in general, but it
was a starting point in trying to make sense of my participatory experiences.
One of the primary limitations of the content analysis is that it was conducted by a single coder
and therefore more likely to be susceptible to unreliability (Rose 2012). It is for this reason that
the second research question of “How do the findings from this study compare to Wildermuth et
al.’s (2014)?” was asked. To answer this question, I will compare the results of Wildermuth et
al.’s (2014) content analysis to the findings of this study.
To answer the third research question of “Is there a link between attending college and
participating in protests?”, GSS data from 2002 (the most recent year) relating to the question
“Have you participated in a protest in the past five years?” is used. More recent surveys only ask
questions with the hypothetical would. The dependent variable of protested was derived from
the question “Have you protested in the past five years?” and was coded dichotomously. The
first independent variable college was derived from the GSS variable educ, which asks
respondents how many years of education they have. College was coded dichotomously where
0–12 was made equal to 0, and 13–20 was made equal to 1. The rest of the independent
25
variables—income (rincome), race, sex, and age—were left as the GSS coded, except that the few
missing values were dropped.
3. RESULTS
Table 1 is a logistic regression of the emotional tones of anger and humor where the main
arguments are attacks policy or the effects of policy and denigration. In model 1a, signs that use
anger are 3.6 times more likely to be used to attack policy or the effects of policy. When humor
is added to the regression, in model 1b, the odds of a sign using anger to attack policy decreases
from 3.6 times to 2.9 times. In model 2a, signs that use humor are 6.875 times more likely to be
used for denigration. However, in model 2b, by adding anger to the regression, the odds a sign
will use humor for denigration increase to 8.861 times. These results indicate an overlap between
the relationships in explaining how emotions are used in signs.
It is of little surprise that anger over policy or the effects of policy is so apparent in the content
of signs considering that anger and contempt are the two primary emotional routes to protest
(Van Stekelenburg and Klandermans 2013). The relationship between anger and policy seems
obvious enough; someone is angry about a policy so they make a sign and go to a protest. The
presence of denigration and its relationship to humor require more explanation.
26
Following the hypothesis of this paper that some people get involved in protests for group-based
reasons, it is group-based reasoning that helps to explain how and why denigration is present in
protests.
As ingroups become larger and more depersonalized, the institutions, rules, and
customs that maintain ingroup loyalty and cooperation take on the character of moral
authority. When the moral order is seen as absolute rather than relative, moral
superiority is incompatible with tolerance for difference. To the extent that outgroups
do not subscribe to the same moral rules, indifference is replaced by denigration and
contempt (Brewer 1999:435).
Regarding the use of humor to denigrate, the explanation is more speculative. Perhaps some
humor used for this purpose is sardonic and is actually motivated by anger. This would help to
explain the relationship between humor and anger in the regressions, where the likelihood of
them being used to attack policy or denigrate is intertwined. Or perhaps when some people use
humor to denigrate, they are expressing their contempt for the outgroup in a way that will be
less likely to start a physical altercation. The reason humor is used for denigration remains
unclear.
Whatever the relationship between humor and denigration may be, it is also present in
Wildermuth et al. (2014). In their content analysis, the three most used emotional tones were
anger (30.3%), humor (21.7%), and perseverance/pride/loyalty (17.8%), while the two most used
main arguments were denigration (40.8%) and attacks policy (19.7%). Although Wildermuth et
al. (2014) did not employ a statistical analysis of emotional tone and main argument, their results
are fairly consistent with the results of this study, which boosts confidence in the reliability of the
content analysis performed here. The difference in outcomes of variables and categories
27
between Wildermuth et al. and this research is that perseverance was the second most used
emotional tone for this study at 18.75%, followed by humor at 15.18%. Additionally, Wildermuth
et al. (2014)’s most used main argument was denigration at 40.8%, followed by attacks policy at
19.7%. The reverse is true for this study, with attacks policy at 29.4% and denigration at 27.7%
(see Table 2).
Table 3 presents a logistic regression of the dependent variable protested with the independent
variables of college, income, race, sex, and age. Participating in a protest is significantly related
to having attended college. In all the models for Table 1, a person is 2.7 (rounded to the nearest
tenth) times more likely to have attended a protest in the past five years if they have attended
college. While this information is not new, it is central to building the argument for the hypothesis
in this paper that one of the primary reasons people protest is to increase the value of their
group. The findings in this table support the hypothesis by adding weight to the observations I
made while engaging with members of the DePaul Socialists when they underwent the process
of transforming from “I” to “we”. It was this process that guided this research to examine protest
signs in a way that would eventually lead to social identity theory as an explanation for the
findings of the participant observations.
4. DISCUSSION
This study finds that colleges and universities play a significant role in developing and maintaining
the tradition and practice of protests. Some people who attend higher education institutions
28
have not yet fully socialized into groups whose beliefs and values they feel truly fit them. Upon
arriving at college, these students meet others of like mind from similar situations as themselves
who have integrated into groups (in this case an activist group). The primary function of the
student activist group is to build social bonds, while the secondary function is to be an activist
through protesting. As the individuals become members of the group, the “I” transitions into
“we”, and the group’s ideology becomes their own.
Some of these groups are long-standing activist organizations dedicated to improving the
conditions of the oppressed. The experiences shared by the individuals help in building
knowledge, beliefs, and practices about how and why to protest, and many carry on with these
practices long after they leave college.
Although people may protest for a variety of reasons, the two relevant to this study are to express
anger at policy and to denigrate others. As social identity theory posits, denigrating messages on
protest signs are used to increase the value of one’s ingroup by devaluing the outgroup. Protests
have taken many forms throughout history. The recent past in the US has seen protests that
focused on civil rights, unionized workers, and unjust foreign wars. Although today we still see
protests about specific issues—like when a police officer goes unpunished for an unjustified
shooting or when a law has been passed that threatens to evict certain immigrants from the
country—the context for some protests is changing. Many of the signs used in the protests in this
study do not focus on any specific issue that can be nailed down but instead target sweeping
29
concepts, such as fascism, racism, and sexism. Considering this, a type of polarizing ideological
rhetoric is appearing on signs at protests organized by groups that consist of either proud
socialists or that have strong ties to socialist groups. In a social movement dedicated to the
removal of a president following a very close election, protests can be considered in the
Gramscian sense as a struggle for hegemony in civil society.
5. CONCLUSION
Although this study looked at activist groups and protests in Chicago with left-wing political
ideals, it is hoped that the acquired knowledge will facilitate a greater understanding of the
nature and functions of social movements and protests in general. This study adds to the
developing methodology in the fields of protest event analysis and visual rhetoric and expands
the application of social identity theory using quantitative and qualitative methods.
30
REFERENCES
Albert, Michael and Stephen Shalom. 2002. “Ten Q&A on Antiwar Organizing.” Library of
Congress Web Archives. Retrieved June 5, 2018
(http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20021114153741/www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cf
m?sectionid=15&itemid=2527).
Bailey, Janis and Di McAtee. 2003. “The Politics and Poetics of Union Transgression: The Role of
Visual Methods in Analyzing Union Protest Strategy.” Social Analysis 47(3): 27-45.
Barthes, Roland. 1968. Elements of Semiology. New York: Hill and Wang.
Brader, Ted. 2005. Striking a Responsive Chord: How Political Ads Motivate and Persuade Voters
by Appealing to Emotions. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 388-405.
Brewer, Marilynn B. 1999. “The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?”
Journal of Social Issues 55(3): 429-444.
Burridge, Joseph. 2008. “Hunting is Not Just for Blood-thirsty Toffs: The Countryside Alliance
and the Visual Rhetoric of a Poster Campaign. Text and Talk 28, 31-53. doi:
10.1515/TEXT.2008.002
Culp, Andrew and Kevin Kuswa. 2016. “Signs of Protest Rhetoric: From Logos to Logistics in
Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 102(2): 150-165.
Della Porta, Donatella and Mario Diani. 2009. Social Movements: An Introduction. John Wiley &
Sons.
Diani, Mario. 1992. “The Concept of Social Movement.” The Sociological Review 40(1): 1-25.
31
Dumitrescu, Delia. 2010. “Know Me, Love Me, Fear Me: The Anatomy of Candidate Poster Designs
in the 2007 French Legislative Elections.” Political Communication 27(1): 20-43.
Duncan, Thomas. 2002. IMC: Using Advertising and Promotion to Build Brands. McGraw-Hill
Companies.
Garcia, Jay. 2017. “Refusing Fascism: Q&A with an Anti-fascist Organizer”. El Tecolote, July 13.
Retrieved June 7, 2018. http://eltecolote.org/content/en/news/refusing-fascism-qawith-an-anti-fascist-organizer/
Gordijn, Ernestine H., Daniel Wigboldus, and Vincent Yzerbyt. 2001. “Emotional Consequences of
Categorizing Victims of Negative Outgroup Behavior as Ingroup or Outgroup.” Group
Processes & Intergroup Relations 4(4) : 317-326.
Habermas, Jürgen. Toward a Rational Society: Student Protest, Science, and Politics. 1971. Beacon
Press.
Hariman, Robert and John Louis Lucaites. 2001. “Dissent and Emotional Management in a Liberal‐
Democratic Society: The Kent State Iconic Photograph.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 31(3):
5-31.
Hogg, Michael A. 2013. “Intergroup Relations.” Pp. 533-561 in Handbook of Social Psychology.
Dordrecht: Springer.
Hogg, Michael A., Dominic Abrams, and Marilynn B. Brewer. 2017. “Social Identity: The Role of
Self in Group Processes and Intergroup Relations.” Group Processes & Intergroup
Relations 20(5): 570-581.
32
Hutter, Sven. 2014. “Protest Event Analysis and Its Offspring.” Pp. 335-367 in Methodological
Practices in Social Movement Research, edited by D. Della Porta. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Irwin, J. A. 2007. The Guilt in Mom, We’re Home: The Content, Control, and Critique of Modern
War Protest Posters. Paper presented at the International Communication Association
conference, San Francisco, CA.
Israelit-Groll, Sarah. 1990. Studies in Egyptology. Magnes Press, the Hebrew University.
Kriesi, Hanspeter, Ruud Koopmans, Jan Willem Duyvendak, and Marco Giugni. 1995. “New Social
Movements in Western Europe.” A Comparative Analysis. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
McGahan, Jason. 2017. “Why Did Protesters Block Traffic on the 101 This Week?”. LA Weekly,
September 29. Retrieved June 4, 2018. https://www.laweekly.com/news/why-didprotesters-block-the-101-and-what-does-nov-4-mean-8694296
Messaris, Paul. 1997. Visual Persuasion: The Role of Images in Advertising. Sage.
Oliver, Pamela E., Jorge Cadena-Roa, and Kelley D. Strawn. 2003. “Emerging Trends in the Study
of Protest and Social Movements.” Research in Political Sociology 12(1): 213-244.
Opp, Karl-Dieter. 2009. Theories of Political Protest and Social Movements: A Multidisciplinary
Introduction, Critique, and Synthesis. Routledge.
Refuse
Fascism.
2018.
What
Is
Refuse
(https://refusefascism.org/about-contact/).
33
Fascism?
Retrieved
June
4,
2018
Rose, Gillian. 2012. Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Material.
Sage.
Rucht, Dieter, Peter Hocke, and Thomas Ohlemacher. 1992. Dokumentation und Analyse von
Protestereignissen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Prodat) Codebuch. Berlin:
Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin.
Tajfel, Henri. 1979. “Individuals and Groups in Social Psychology.” British Journal of Clinical
Psychology 18(2): 183-190.
Tajfel, Henri and John C. Turner. 1979. “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict.” In The
Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, edited by S. Worchel and W.G. Austin.
Monterey: Brooks/Cole.
Tarrow, Sidney G. 2011. Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics.
Cambridge University Press.
Tilly, Charles and R.A. Schweitzer. 1977. “Contentious Gatherings in Great Britain, 1828-1834:
Provisional Plans for Enumeration and Coding.”
Tilly, Charles and Lesley J. Wood. 2015. Social Movements 1768-2012. Routledge.
Van Stekelenburg, Jacquelien and Bert Klandermans. 2013. “The Social Psychology of Protest.”
Current Sociology 61(5-6): 886-905.
Van Stekelenburg, Jacquelien and Bert Klandermans. 2017. “Individuals in Movements: A Social
Psychology of Contention.” Pp. 103-139 in Handbook of Social Movements Across
Disciplines. Springer, Cham.
34
Walsh, Isabelle, Judith A. Holton, Lotte Bailyn, Walter Fernandez, Natalia Levina, and Barney
Glaser. 2015. “What Grounded Theory is … A Critically Reflective Conversation Among
Scholars.” Organizational Research Methods 18(4): 581-599.
Wildermuth, Susan, Corey B. Davis, Edward Frederick, and Josh Bolton. 2014. “Sign, Sign,
Everywhere a Sign: An Analysis of the Argument, Target and Content of Protest Signs
Displayed During the Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill/Act 10 Protests of 2011.” American
Communication Journal 16(1): p15-35.
35
TABLES
Table 1. Logistic regression of the main arguments used on signs with emotional tones
Anger
Attacks policy
Denigration
1a
1b
2a
3.629*
2.908*
(2.72)
Humor
N
pseudo R-sq
112
0.054
2b
2.275
(2.21)
(1.54)
0.168
6.875*
8.861*
(-1.68)
(3.4)
(3.65)
112
112
112
0.086
0.093
0.11
Note: Exponentiated coefficients; t statistics in parentheses * p