It’s Social Media, Stupid! Opportunities and Constraints in the Representation of Corruption in and Through Social Media

IF 2.3 2区 文学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL American Behavioral Scientist Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1177/00027642241268530
Rita Marchetti, Anna Stanziano, Roberto Mincigrucci, Simone Del Sarto, Susanna Pagiotti
{"title":"It’s Social Media, Stupid! Opportunities and Constraints in the Representation of Corruption in and Through Social Media","authors":"Rita Marchetti, Anna Stanziano, Roberto Mincigrucci, Simone Del Sarto, Susanna Pagiotti","doi":"10.1177/00027642241268530","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent years have seen a growing interest in the role of the media in relation to corruption. This interest, however, has particularly concerned legacy media, leaving the role played by social media in relation to corruption largely unexplored. This study attempts to understand how social media contributes to the public representation of corruption through an analysis of the actors who discuss it and the topics they introduce into the debate. Despite social media’s ability to diversify both the actors able to intervene in the public debate and the sub-topics being discussed, some aspects of it, such as the affordances of the platforms that fuel polarization, favor political instrumentalization of corruptive phenomena. By investigating how social media deals with corruption based on a content analysis of the posts and an analysis of the actors who intervene in the discussions, this study fills a gap in the literature.","PeriodicalId":48360,"journal":{"name":"American Behavioral Scientist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Behavioral Scientist","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642241268530","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent years have seen a growing interest in the role of the media in relation to corruption. This interest, however, has particularly concerned legacy media, leaving the role played by social media in relation to corruption largely unexplored. This study attempts to understand how social media contributes to the public representation of corruption through an analysis of the actors who discuss it and the topics they introduce into the debate. Despite social media’s ability to diversify both the actors able to intervene in the public debate and the sub-topics being discussed, some aspects of it, such as the affordances of the platforms that fuel polarization, favor political instrumentalization of corruptive phenomena. By investigating how social media deals with corruption based on a content analysis of the posts and an analysis of the actors who intervene in the discussions, this study fills a gap in the literature.
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
这是社交媒体,笨蛋!在社交媒体上以及通过社交媒体表现腐败的机遇与限制
近年来,人们越来越关注媒体在腐败问题上的作用。然而,这种关注主要集中在传统媒体上,社交媒体在腐败问题上所扮演的角色在很大程度上尚未被探讨。本研究试图通过分析讨论腐败问题的参与者以及他们在辩论中引入的话题,了解社交媒体如何促进公众对腐败问题的表述。尽管社交媒体能够使介入公共辩论的参与者和讨论的子话题多样化,但它的某些方面,如助长两极分化的平台能力,有利于腐败现象的政治工具化。本研究通过对帖子内容的分析和对参与讨论的参与者的分析,探讨了社交媒体如何处理腐败问题,填补了文献空白。
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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
190
期刊介绍: American Behavioral Scientist has been a valuable source of information for scholars, researchers, professionals, and students, providing in-depth perspectives on intriguing contemporary topics throughout the social and behavioral sciences. Each issue offers comprehensive analysis of a single topic, examining such important and diverse arenas as sociology, international and U.S. politics, behavioral sciences, communication and media, economics, education, ethnic and racial studies, terrorism, and public service. The journal"s interdisciplinary approach stimulates creativity and occasionally, controversy within the emerging frontiers of the social sciences, exploring the critical issues that affect our world and challenge our thinking.
期刊最新文献
Satellite Political Movements: How Grassroots Activists Bolster Trump and Bolsonaro in the United States and Brazil Reading the Tea Leaves: Question Wording and Public Support for the Tea Party Movement Articulations of StrongMen: A Knowledge Cultural Sociology of Recognizing Autocratic Practices in Russian, Turkish, and Global Regimes Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing: The Autocratic Subversion of Brazil’s Fourth Estate Transforming the Legacy of Colonial and Racialized Inequities in Childcare Systems in the United States: (Re)Framing Futures Through Black Feminist Thought
×
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