This article investigates how social media can enable and constrain civil society organizations’ (CSOs) discharge of accountability. Based on a comparative analysis of the Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter (X) posts of the Swedish Red Cross during 1 year ( N = 1014), we propose a framework of affordances that illustrate how platform features, practices, norms, and perceptions about audiences jointly shape the accountability potential of a platform. Accountability is overall more content- than process-oriented, emphasizing visibility of action rather than far-reaching social interactivity. Our study, however, reveals important differences between Instagram and Facebook, on the one hand, and Twitter, on the other. Whereas accountability is more short-term, scripted, and donor-oriented in the former, it is more abstract and ad hoc, with mainly indirect efforts at interactivity, in the latter. Our framework of affordances sheds light on the hitherto under-researched intersection between the literature on CSO accountability and the literature on CSO use of social media.

中文翻译：

---

通过（Inter）Action 进行问责？理解社交媒体平台上公民社会问责制的可供性框架

本文探讨了社交媒体如何促进和限制公民社会组织 （CSO） 履行问责制。基于对瑞典红十字会 1 年 （N = 1014） 期间的 Instagram、Facebook 和 Twitter （X） 帖子的比较分析，我们提出了一个可供性框架，以说明平台功能、实践、规范和对受众的看法如何共同塑造平台的问责潜力。总体而言，问责制更注重内容而不是过程导向，强调行动的可见性，而不是影响深远的社会互动。然而，我们的研究揭示了 Instagram 和 Facebook 与 Twitter 之间的重要差异。前者问责制更短期、照本宣科、以捐助者为导向，而后者则更抽象、更临时，主要是间接的互动性。我们的可供性框架阐明了迄今为止关于 CSO 问责制的文献与关于 CSO 使用社交媒体的文献之间研究不足的交叉点。