Introduction

In January 2016, the toy company Lego unveiled its first ever wheelchairusing figure. Lego’s decision to include this new figure in its product range followed repeated requests from disability rights advocates that toys should represent disabled children better. In particular, a U.K.-based grassroots campaign called ‘Toy Like Me’ was a key driver behind Lego’s decision. Toy Like Me communicated mainly through its Facebook page and did not have a website. To demonstrate public support for its Lego campaign, it launched an online petition using the popular platform Change.org. Eventually, about 20,000 people worldwide signed the petition. The Lego campaign may look fairly straightforward, but it certainly shows that disability rights e-advocacy has potential. Despite being relative latecomers to the digital arena compared to advocacy organisations in other areas, a growing number of grassroots disability groups have employed new media technologies to influence public decision-making in recent years, sometimes successfully and others less so. This book explores the interaction between disability rights advocacy and Internet-based media, considering its implications for the levels of citizenship of disabled people in the United Kingdom and the United States. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabil-

ities (CRPD) states that disabled people have a right to participate fully in political and public life (art. 29). However, several barriers remain that prevent disabled citizens from having the opportunity to exercise their political rights fully, including in advanced democratic nations such as the U.K. and the U.S. (Equality and Human Rights Commission 2010; Schur et al. 2013). This is a particularly important issue at a time when the financial instability that followed the global economic crisis of 2008 and the austerity measures that were devised in response to it threaten to cut the support that many disabled people need in order to be able to lead an independent life. Given these circumstances, it is extremely important that disabled citizens have access to opportunities to influence public decisionmaking effectively. Policy measures such as drastic government budget cuts, the downsizing of welfare programmes and reductions in public services appear to have touched a special chord with citizens in several

countries. This has led to the emergence of resistance networks that in recent years have made extensive use of online media to mobilise supporters, organise them and spread theirmessages across different social groups and beyond national borders. Prime examples of this ‘activist revival’ have included the Spanish Indignados and the transnational Occupy movement, both of which rose to prominence in 2011 (Castells 2012; Gerbaudo 2012). Although each of these phenomena took place in different contexts, their

emergence raises the issue of whether new media technologies and the ways in which citizens use them have entered a new phase of maturity in which mass mobilisation and sweeping political change are reflected and accelerated – if not ignited – by online platforms. This could be interpreted as a consequence of the growing tendency for citizens not only to benefit from augmented and facilitated access to information online (Howard & Chadwick 2009), but also to be capable and expectant of an especially active role in both established and emergent political organisations (Bimber et al. 2012). Undoubtedly, these are very broad issues that reach beyond the agenda of any individual scholar and are likely to dominate Internet/politics research for several years to come. However, at this time of activist ferment, it is particularly important to ask what the growing centrality of Internet-based media to the dynamics of grassroots organising means for those who traditionally have been excluded from the civic arena. As the politics of austerity carries on and a protracted period of uncertainty looms following Britain’s decision to leave the European Union in June 2016, the rights of marginalised social groups are at a severe risk of being eroded even further due to the lack of equal opportunities and effective ways for them to express dissent. Are traditionally disadvantaged groups also going to benefit from the digitalisation of advocacy and protest in these times of crisis, or will online organising constitute a source of additional inequality and exclusion instead? Most of the studies that investigated the relationship between dis-

advantaged groups and the Internet so far reported negative conclusions, suggesting a rather bleak outlook for those who are already politically marginalised. Typically, this work has associated people experiencing disadvantage with the raw end of digital divide theories, emphasising the tendency for those on low incomes and/or with modest educational attainments to benefit less than others from online media or be completely unconnected (Norris 2001; Warschauer 2003). Among these groups, disabled people have occupied an especially prominent position. In particular, the existing literature on disability and new media focuses overwhelmingly on access and accessibility issues, stressing how socially constructed technology is bound to reproduce exclusionary barriers and generate disability discrimination in the online sphere (see, for instance, Goggin&Newell 2003; Ellis&Kent 2011). Intuitively, these issues should worry both researchers and activists as they highlight some important

barriers that could prevent disabled citizens from becoming fully involved in the changing landscape of grassroots politics at a time in which welfare reforms and other austerity measures threaten some of their most fundamental socio-economic rights. Nevertheless, one also has to ask whether such a strong focus on the digital divide can truly nurture a comprehensive understanding of the complex relationship between disability and the Internet. Scratching beneath the surface of accessibility literature offers a different picture. This is one in which new media technologies may afford disabled Internet users opportunities to re-negotiate some disabling barriers (Roulstone 1998, p. 129), but where alternative research strands have been side-lined in favour of a dominant narrative that fits with both the digital divide paradigm and the barrier-centred social model of disability. Recent work in Internet studies has defied common wisdom by showing

that online media can indeed foster social cohesion and civic engagement among those experiencing socio-economic disadvantage (Gad et al. 2012). In addition, the last few years have been characterised by some substantial advancements in Internet accessibility (Ellcessor 2016) and the cost of connection has been falling at a staggeringly fast pace (International Telecommunication Union 2012), making access not only more affordable but at the same time also more relevant to disabled people. As a result, a majority of disabled respondents in recent survey studies on Internet use in both the U.K. (Dutton & Blank 2013) and the U.S. (Fox 2011) defined themselves as regular users. This, coupled with on-going political and economic uncertainty, makes widening the scope of disability and new media research both timely and worthwhile. This is not an attempt to underplay the importance of access and accessibility issues, which ought to remain top priorities for researchers, technology developers and policymakers alike. Instead, it is intended as a contribution towards a fuller and more nuanced understanding of the complex relationship between disability and the Internet, as well as a way of determining the position of disabled people in today’s fast-changing techno-political environment. In other words, this book responds to the need to illuminate underresearched aspects of the relationship between disability and online media by shifting the investigative focus from that sizeable proportion of disabled people who are unconnected to the majority that, despite accessibility issues, regularly uses the Internet. Moving from the idea that disruptive events can push otherwise disen-

gaged and disenfranchised citizens towards political action (Woliver 1993), this bookmaps and discusses the online opposition to the disability welfare reform introduced by the U.K. Conservative-led government between 2010 and 2012. By pursuing this approach and adopting the idea of inclusive citizenship (Lister 2007) as the overarching framework, the arguments presented in this book avoid the trap of technological determinism and are shaped consistently by empirical evidence. Inevitably, this also means that opportunities to generalise findings are somewhat restricted by the

limitations usually associated with case study research. Undoubtedly, this book represents but a starting point in the complex task of reaching beyond the restrictive access/accessibility framework applied so far in disability and new media studies. Nevertheless, as the first extensive contribution in this area, the fieldwork carried out for this study revealed some unexpected elements that it is hoped would spur further research and reflection among both scholars and activists. In particular, several empirical findings are discussed that actively contravened theory-based assumptions, highlighting both positive and negative aspects of the digitalisation of disability rights advocacy that surrounded theU.K.welfare reform controversy. In addition, the British experience is contextualised by comparing it to parallel developments in digital disability rights advocacy in the U.S. This provides innovative insights on the intersection of online campaigning, democratic political systems and circumstantial crisis factors more broadly. The first two chapters trace the contours of the issues explored in this

book by reviewing existing work in the fields of disability and citizenship, and online political participation respectively. In particular, Chapter 1 explores the origins of disabled people’s political exclusion. After discussing the relationship between socio-economic and political rights in citizenship theory, this chapter exposes the reasons for the enduring confinement of disabled people to a condition of ‘second class’ citizenship, reflecting on relevant policy measures and the recent history of British disability activism, its organisational forms and key players. The chapter then reviews the work on disability and the Internet that has been carried out to date and argues in favour of a substantial expansion in this area, askingwhether onlinemedia can help re-configure democratic politics into a more inclusive environment for disabled Internet users. Chapter 2 builds on this by discussing key trends in the study of

e-democracy and the conceptualisation of collective action in the twentyfirst century. Most importantly, this chapter identifies online non-political ‘third spaces’, the practice of sharing personal narratives on social media, and digital interaction more generally as enablers of political participation for users otherwise unfamiliarwith public debate anddisenfranchised from representative democracy.While these channels and practices are explored as potential opportunities to overcome the organisational barriers that led to stagnation in disability activism in recent years, the role of disruptive events as triggers of participation is discussed also. This chapter then concludes by identifying the radical reform of disabilitywelfare introduced by the U.K. government between 2010-12 and the contested plans for drastic reductions in federal Medicaid funding presented by the American Republican Party in 2011 as suitable catalysts for mobilisation among disabled citizens in Britain and America respectively. Chapters 3 through to 6 present and discuss empirical data including the

analysis of Facebook conversation threads, a detailed inventory of the onlinemedia used by high-profile disability rights groups in both countries,

in-depth interviews with their core organisers and Web link analysis. In particular, Chapter 3 focuses on the role of the U.K. welfare reform controversy as a catalyst for digital renewal in British disability advocacy. Three main group types are uncovered that relied heavily on online media to oppose government plans for an overhaul of disability welfare provisions. These include: pre-existing, formal disability organisations (both ‘professionalised’ non-profits and member-led self-advocacy groups); groups of experienced self-advocates that embraced e-advocacy for the first time; and emerging digital networks born out of the efforts of young disabled bloggers-cum-activists that operated exclusively online. Three emblematic case studies (The Hardest Hit; Disabled People Against Cuts; andThe Broken of Britain) are then selected for in-depth analysis. This first stage of the analysis uncovers a very vibrant e-advocacy scene, capable of providing disabled Internet users with a range of opportunities for participation. However, it also raises some important questions with regard to the structure of these groups and their inclination to promoting truly meaningful participation for their online supporters. These questions are then tackled through the analysis of discussion threads drawn from each group’s Facebook page in Chapters 4 and 5. In particular, Chapter 4 provides a detailed analysis of the general trends

that span the use of Facebook in all three case studies. These include: the role played by core organisers in nurturing – or at times hindering – the transition of their supporters frommere observers to active participants in online conversations; the tendency for discussion to cluster around specific policy issues rather than quintessentially political or ideological topics; and the use of personal narratives as vehicles for users unfamiliar with political discussion to understand and articulate complex policy issues.While it would be premature to claim that a sense of communitywas ‘manufactured’ in these groups, this chapter discusses why the most innovative among them succeeded in creating vibrant – but not self-sustaining – collectives, while the others found it more challenging to integrate Facebook with their broader advocacy plans. In particular, this chapter draws on the tendency for each case study to (not) use Facebook as a vehicle to promote both online and inperson collective action. Overall, three different perspectives on the role of social media in disability rights advocacy emerged, which in turn underpinned different action repertoires and user-experiences, ranging from ‘contentious politics as usual’ to seemingly participatory campaigning. Following on from the previous chapter and drawing on both the

analysis of Facebook conversations between group leaders and online supporters, and on interviews with a range of core organisers, Chapter 5 exposes the ‘hidden’ structure of emerging disability rights groups. In doing so, this chapter focuses particularly on the most innovative case study discussed in this book: The Broken of Britain. At a close examination, the tension between the participatory nature of this digital action network and its founders’ preference for centralised ‘brand management’

contravened commonwisdom in relation to ‘horizontal’ activist networks. While this can be explained at least in part as an attempt by the young bloggers-cum-activists at the centre of this group to address some of the traditional flaws of online grassroots networks (Bennett 2003), their emergence as disabled leaders and ability to use online media to relay the grievances of other disabled people can be seen as the cornerstone of a new type of ‘peer-mediated citizenship’. This system lacks the type of internal accountability that wouldmake it more representative. Yet, it undoubtedly constitutes an improvement on both the indirect representation provided by ‘professionalised’ charitable organisations and the marginalisation experienced by fringe protest groups that rely on disruptive tactics and contentious repertoires more generally. Chapter 6 explores the influence of context on the digitalisation of British

disability rights advocacy by comparing it to the use of new media technologies among American disability organisations. To do so, the traditional notion of context in Internet politics is expanded to account not only for predictable systemic factors, but also for time-sensitive circumstantial ones. The results of this comparison are surprisingly counter-intuitive. Despite America’s reputation as a particularly fertile ground for innovative e-advocacy initiatives, British disability organisations were found to be the trendsetters in this case. Their U.S. counterparts emerged instead as a rather ‘conservative’ exception in a national context that is otherwise particularly inclined towards experimentation with online politics. Such unexpected results provided an important opportunity to reflect on the relationship between e-advocacy and the surrounding context, ultimately calling for a re-evaluation and better conceptualisation of the idea of crisis. This last point is explored in detail in the book’s conclusive chapter. In

addition to the relationship between crisis and e-advocacy,Chapter 7 focuses on the new ecology of British disability activism uncovered in this book and discusses its effects on the citizenship levels of disabled Internet users. Furthermore, this chapter also advances reasonable hypotheses as to why such a vibrant campaigning environment ultimately failed to influence the U.K. government’s agenda and achieve tangible policy goals. The book concludes by sketching an agenda for future work on disability, politics and new media. This builds directly on this study’s findings and also proposes a range of other issues for researchers in disability and Internet studies to consider. Overall, this book challenges established paradigms in both disability

studies and Internet politics research, calling for a more nuanced approach to the relationship between disability and newmedia on one side, as well as a broader re-evaluation of the political significance of the Internet for disadvantaged groups on the other. Social science scholarship is at a crossroads. Not only are onlinemedia becoming increasingly integral to all aspects of social, economic and political life in democratic countries, but Internet use also leaves behind useful footprints that provide new ways of

identifying and investigating emerging socio-political trends. This book seeks to make the most of these opportunities while at the same time avoiding losing sight of the broader context of advocacy, activism and policy-making. It is hoped that some of this project’s findings will be relevant to grassroots advocates and campaign organisers wishing to harness the potential of new media in order to build more engaging, effective and empowering forms of citizen mobilisation.