Social movement actors can easily link to one another and form informal networks on social media. These informal networks consist out of a “multiplicity of actors, sharing a collective identity and engaged in a social and/or political conflict” (Diani & Bison, 2004: 281). Empirically, the boundaries between these different actors making up these informal networks are fuzzy (Kitschelt, 2006: 248). This distinction is arguably even harder online, where new and hybrid forms of political mobilization have emerged (Chadwick, 2007: 283). Political scientists have long drawn distinctions between actors along several dimensions such as the perceived variation in the level of institutionalization and action repertoires between these actors. However, the organizational features of these actors appear to be converging, and these dimensions seem to be less useful in making distinctions (Chadwick, 2007: 283). This paper offers a typology, mapping the diversity of actors making up these online informal networks. By carrying out a cross-national comparison of online far-right networks on Facebook, the study aims to gain insight in how organizational types influence the structure of networks and the relation between actors within the networks. The results relate variations in networks in variations in technological- and political opportunities. Referred works: Chadwick, A. (2007). Digital network repertoires and organizational hybridity. Political Communication, 24(3), 283-301. Diani, M., & Bison, I. (2004). Organizations, coalitions, and movements. Theory and society, 33(3-4), 281-309. Kitschelt, H. (2006). Movement parties. Handbook of party politics, 1, 278-290.
