An issue public’s confirmation-biased news feeding in changing political constellations: A quasi-experimental field study in the German conflict over genome editing

Senja Post, Nils Bienzeisler, Franziska Pannach
{"title":"An issue public’s confirmation-biased news feeding in changing political constellations: A quasi-experimental field study in the German conflict over genome editing","authors":"Senja Post, Nils Bienzeisler, Franziska Pannach","doi":"10.1177/14614448231185764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contributing to the study of curated news flows, we investigated how conflicting participants in an issue public fed mainstream news into their Twitter networks. In a quasi-experimental field study in the context of the 2018 European Court of Justice’s ruling on genome editing, we combined standardized manual content analyses of a universe of legacy media news items ( N = 165), users’ tweets (“feeds”) linking these news items ( N = 2014), and users’ profiles ( N = 1070). Confirming existing knowledge, opponents and proponents of genetically modified organisms largely fed news items confirming their issue attitudes. Extending existing knowledge, we show that counter-attitudinal news feeding became more likely when users had a political disadvantage rather than a political advantage in the controversy. However, this was only true for the more active but not for the more inactive news feeders.","PeriodicalId":443328,"journal":{"name":"New Media & Society","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Media & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231185764","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Contributing to the study of curated news flows, we investigated how conflicting participants in an issue public fed mainstream news into their Twitter networks. In a quasi-experimental field study in the context of the 2018 European Court of Justice’s ruling on genome editing, we combined standardized manual content analyses of a universe of legacy media news items ( N = 165), users’ tweets (“feeds”) linking these news items ( N = 2014), and users’ profiles ( N = 1070). Confirming existing knowledge, opponents and proponents of genetically modified organisms largely fed news items confirming their issue attitudes. Extending existing knowledge, we show that counter-attitudinal news feeding became more likely when users had a political disadvantage rather than a political advantage in the controversy. However, this was only true for the more active but not for the more inactive news feeders.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在不断变化的政治星座中,公众的确认偏向新闻喂养:德国基因组编辑冲突的准实验实地研究
为了研究策划新闻流,我们调查了一个问题公众中相互冲突的参与者如何将主流新闻输入他们的Twitter网络。在2018年欧洲法院(European Court of Justice)对基因组编辑做出裁决的背景下,我们进行了一项准实验实地研究,结合了对一系列传统媒体新闻(N = 165)、用户链接这些新闻(N = 2014)的推文(“feed”)和用户简介(N = 1070)的标准化手工内容分析。在证实现有知识的同时,转基因生物的反对者和支持者在很大程度上提供了证实他们对问题态度的新闻。扩展现有知识,我们表明,当用户在争议中具有政治劣势而不是政治优势时,反态度新闻馈送变得更有可能。然而,这只适用于更活跃的新闻订阅者,而不适用于更不活跃的新闻订阅者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Performing lowbrowness: How Chinese queer people negotiate visibility on short-video platforms When content moderation is not about content: How Chinese social media platforms moderate content and why it matters “Our advice is to break up”: Douban’s intimate public and the rise of girlfriend culture Unmasking coordinated hate: Analysing hate speech on Spanish digital news media Human–AI communication in initial encounters: How AI agency affects trust, liking, and chat quality evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1