Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Natalia Raimondo Anselmino 128 the manifestation of affection, understood, as Dahlgren (2018) puts it, as the “collective side of emotionality” (p. 33). As the author states, “we can understand the importance of affect if we consider that what shapes participation is something more powerful than just the ideas in the minds of individuals; the so- cial experience” (DAHLGREN, 2018, p. 33). It was precisely that shared affection, put into discourse, around which commitment was initially encouraged and motivated the consequent partici- pation. This favored, at least momentarily, a certain identifica - tion with the opaque request for “security and justice” not only among the family collective but also thousands of other citizens who participated in the protest. Here, we can clearly observe that as Valdettaro (2012) warns in her reflections on the phe - nomenon of the “Arab Spring”, the relationship between media platforms and the streets is one of inter-dependency, because both environments function as “ conectores-de-afecto-en-vivo ”(p. 161; highlighted by the author). If we examine, for instance, the temporal distribution of the cluster of tweets published on the days of the first and second marches (Image 6), on their occasion, we can see that the moment of greatest concentration coincides with the period of the effective mobilization in the street. They are, predominantly, discourses through which those who were marching published and shared, in turn, live and through the Twitter platform, their lived experience.