Pub Date : 2023-09-30DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2264224
Željko Poljak, Henrik Bech Seeberg
Various studies have been devoted to explaining the conditions under which parties engage in attack behavior. However, the existing literature has overlooked the issues on which parties attack. Thi...
各种各样的研究都致力于解释各方参与攻击行为的条件。然而，现有文献忽略了各方攻击的问题。这……
{"title":"Attacks and Issue Competition: Do Parties Attack Based on Issue Salience or Issue Ownership?","authors":"Željko Poljak, Henrik Bech Seeberg","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2264224","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2264224","url":null,"abstract":"Various studies have been devoted to explaining the conditions under which parties engage in attack behavior. However, the existing literature has overlooked the issues on which parties attack. Thi...","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":"10 25","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164617","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-27DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2261876
Josephine Lukito
The goal of this reflective essay is to highlight challenges that junior and minority political communication researchers face and to advocate for scholarly solidarity practices, defined as actions...
{"title":"Scholarly Solidarity: Building an Inclusive Field for Junior and Minority Researchers","authors":"Josephine Lukito","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2261876","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2261876","url":null,"abstract":"The goal of this reflective essay is to highlight challenges that junior and minority political communication researchers face and to advocate for scholarly solidarity practices, defined as actions...","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":"10 23","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50164619","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2257618
Anton Shirikov
ABSTRACTResearch on autocracies often posits that propaganda can manipulate citizens’ beliefs, but existing work does not systematically investigate how well individuals recognize misinformation in authoritarian environments and whether susceptibility to propaganda is related to vulnerability to false news. I present the results of four surveys in Russia, in which more than 60,000 participants evaluated 74 true and false news headlines. I find that Russians’ capacity to discern falsehoods is comparable to discernment found in other political contexts, and they could often detect false news stories. However, consumers of state media gave less accurate evaluations than consumers of independent media, and government supporters were substantially more susceptible to pro-regime misinformation than opposition-minded citizens. Supporters also strongly rejected true messages inconsistent with their political dispositions. These results help understand why in environments dominated by propaganda individuals can be quite vulnerable to information manipulation. At the same time, regime critics in my study often fell for propaganda-inconsistent falsehoods. These results highlight the broader challenge of fighting misinformation and propaganda in a situation when many citizens exhibit political biases.KEYWORDS: MisinformationpropagandaautocracyRussia AcknowledgementI am grateful to Scott Gehlbach, Yoshiko Herrera, Rikhil Bhavnani, Jessica Weeks, Adeline Lo, Quintin Beazer, Holger Kern, Bryn Rosenfeld, Andrew Little, Jon Green, Noah Buckley, Georgiy Syunyaev, Mingcong Pan, to the participants at the ASEEES annual meeting (2020) and various colloquia and conferences at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, as well as two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Data Availability StatementThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, A.S., upon reasonable request.Supplementary MaterialSupplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher’s website at https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2257618Notes1. I use the terms “state media’’ and “propaganda outlets’’ interchangeably.2. https://www.facebook.com/help/1881188083573793. This study uses a dichotomized (true/false) measure of perceived news veracity because its premise, discussed below, implied that there would be true and false messages, and the stories were selected in such a way that their central claim was clearly true or false. This measurement approach was employed in several recent studies of vulnerability to misinformation (see e.g., Bago et al., Citation2020; Pennycook et al., Citation2021), and it makes comparisons with other work straightforward. Moreover, as Pennycook and Rand (Citation2019a) show, dichotomized measures produce results similar to more fine-grained scales.4. See, e.g., a recurring BuzzFeed quiz on fake news: https://ww
他的研究主要集中在俄罗斯和其他专制政权的宣传、虚假信息和媒体，以及后共产主义的政治。
{"title":"Fake News for All: How Citizens Discern Disinformation in Autocracies","authors":"Anton Shirikov","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2257618","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2257618","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTResearch on autocracies often posits that propaganda can manipulate citizens’ beliefs, but existing work does not systematically investigate how well individuals recognize misinformation in authoritarian environments and whether susceptibility to propaganda is related to vulnerability to false news. I present the results of four surveys in Russia, in which more than 60,000 participants evaluated 74 true and false news headlines. I find that Russians’ capacity to discern falsehoods is comparable to discernment found in other political contexts, and they could often detect false news stories. However, consumers of state media gave less accurate evaluations than consumers of independent media, and government supporters were substantially more susceptible to pro-regime misinformation than opposition-minded citizens. Supporters also strongly rejected true messages inconsistent with their political dispositions. These results help understand why in environments dominated by propaganda individuals can be quite vulnerable to information manipulation. At the same time, regime critics in my study often fell for propaganda-inconsistent falsehoods. These results highlight the broader challenge of fighting misinformation and propaganda in a situation when many citizens exhibit political biases.KEYWORDS: MisinformationpropagandaautocracyRussia AcknowledgementI am grateful to Scott Gehlbach, Yoshiko Herrera, Rikhil Bhavnani, Jessica Weeks, Adeline Lo, Quintin Beazer, Holger Kern, Bryn Rosenfeld, Andrew Little, Jon Green, Noah Buckley, Georgiy Syunyaev, Mingcong Pan, to the participants at the ASEEES annual meeting (2020) and various colloquia and conferences at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, as well as two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Data Availability StatementThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, A.S., upon reasonable request.Supplementary MaterialSupplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher’s website at https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2257618Notes1. I use the terms “state media’’ and “propaganda outlets’’ interchangeably.2. https://www.facebook.com/help/1881188083573793. This study uses a dichotomized (true/false) measure of perceived news veracity because its premise, discussed below, implied that there would be true and false messages, and the stories were selected in such a way that their central claim was clearly true or false. This measurement approach was employed in several recent studies of vulnerability to misinformation (see e.g., Bago et al., Citation2020; Pennycook et al., Citation2021), and it makes comparisons with other work straightforward. Moreover, as Pennycook and Rand (Citation2019a) show, dichotomized measures produce results similar to more fine-grained scales.4. See, e.g., a recurring BuzzFeed quiz on fake news: https://ww","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135206079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-12DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2257624
Annette Malapally, Andreas Blombach, Philipp Heinrich, Julia Schnepf, Susanne Bruckmüller
ABSTRACT Disadvantage and privilege work together to uphold systems of inequality. Nevertheless, racial inequality is often described as Black disadvantage, while White privilege remains less visible. This one-sided framing in public discourse may result in equally one-sided understandings of and policies aimed at reducing inequality. In the present research, we examined the use of and the reactions to Black disadvantage and White privilege frames in tweets. Twitter stands out as a public sphere inspiring both online and offline political discussions and protests around racial inequality (e.g. #BlackLivesMatter). We analyzed the framing of tweets using a combination of a rule-based and a machine-learning approach, resulting in two corpora of 11,292 (Study 1) and 31,984 tweets (Study 2, a direct replication of Study 1) using comparative frames of racial inequality. Users overall more often framed inequality as Black disadvantage than as White privilege. Moreover, tweets with a disadvantage frame were more often retweeted, but less often quoted and replied to than tweets with a privilege frame. These results show that racial inequality is often one-sidedly framed in real online conversations and that this pattern may be reinforced by other users because they preferably pass on disadvantage frames. However, focusing on White privilege may provoke more discussion about racial inequality. Although effect sizes were small, these effects can impact content and perspectives in mainstream media, public opinion, and political agendas by guiding attention to certain aspects of racial inequality, but not others.
{"title":"Unequal Tweets: Black Disadvantage is (Re)tweeted More but Discussed Less Than White Privilege","authors":"Annette Malapally, Andreas Blombach, Philipp Heinrich, Julia Schnepf, Susanne Bruckmüller","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2257624","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2257624","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Disadvantage and privilege work together to uphold systems of inequality. Nevertheless, racial inequality is often described as Black disadvantage, while White privilege remains less visible. This one-sided framing in public discourse may result in equally one-sided understandings of and policies aimed at reducing inequality. In the present research, we examined the use of and the reactions to Black disadvantage and White privilege frames in tweets. Twitter stands out as a public sphere inspiring both online and offline political discussions and protests around racial inequality (e.g. #BlackLivesMatter). We analyzed the framing of tweets using a combination of a rule-based and a machine-learning approach, resulting in two corpora of 11,292 (Study 1) and 31,984 tweets (Study 2, a direct replication of Study 1) using comparative frames of racial inequality. Users overall more often framed inequality as Black disadvantage than as White privilege. Moreover, tweets with a disadvantage frame were more often retweeted, but less often quoted and replied to than tweets with a privilege frame. These results show that racial inequality is often one-sidedly framed in real online conversations and that this pattern may be reinforced by other users because they preferably pass on disadvantage frames. However, focusing on White privilege may provoke more discussion about racial inequality. Although effect sizes were small, these effects can impact content and perspectives in mainstream media, public opinion, and political agendas by guiding attention to certain aspects of racial inequality, but not others.","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135826574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-15DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2239181
M. Neumann, Steven T. Moore, Laura M. Baum, P. Oleinikov, Yiwei Xu, J. Niederdeppe, N. Lewis, Sarah E. Gollust, E. Fowler
ABSTRACT The COVID-19 pandemic quickly became a political and health communication crisis whose impact varied by geographic location in the United States. Although local television is known to be an important source of public information, little is known about how it covered the pandemic. We analyze the volume and content of local TV coverage of masks from 758 stations across all 210 U.S. media markets in the first 22 months of the pandemic to assess how often news mentions masks and the extent to which mask wearing is framed as a contentious issue by highlighting controversy and partisan cues. Overall, we find widespread but variable attention to masks throughout the pandemic at levels frequently matching or exceeding the initial coverage of the CDC recommendation to wear face coverings. Controversial coverage of face masks peaks in late summer 2021 at roughly 23%, amid the rise of the new Delta variant, although partisan controversy comprises a relatively small portion of mask-related television news. Case rates, population size and density of the market, and partisanship of the local area are associated with volume and content of mask coverage, but these relationships vary over time. We also find evidence that stations owned by the Sinclair Broadcasting Group air fewer stories about masks and more controversy including partisan conflict in their mask coverage. The results add further support to the notion that the messaging surrounding COVID-19 on television varies in part based on geographic location and corresponding demographics but may also vary based upon ideological commitments of station owners.
{"title":"Politicizing Masks? Examining the Volume and Content of Local News Coverage of Face Coverings in the U.S. Through the COVID-19 Pandemic","authors":"M. Neumann, Steven T. Moore, Laura M. Baum, P. Oleinikov, Yiwei Xu, J. Niederdeppe, N. Lewis, Sarah E. Gollust, E. Fowler","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2239181","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2239181","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The COVID-19 pandemic quickly became a political and health communication crisis whose impact varied by geographic location in the United States. Although local television is known to be an important source of public information, little is known about how it covered the pandemic. We analyze the volume and content of local TV coverage of masks from 758 stations across all 210 U.S. media markets in the first 22 months of the pandemic to assess how often news mentions masks and the extent to which mask wearing is framed as a contentious issue by highlighting controversy and partisan cues. Overall, we find widespread but variable attention to masks throughout the pandemic at levels frequently matching or exceeding the initial coverage of the CDC recommendation to wear face coverings. Controversial coverage of face masks peaks in late summer 2021 at roughly 23%, amid the rise of the new Delta variant, although partisan controversy comprises a relatively small portion of mask-related television news. Case rates, population size and density of the market, and partisanship of the local area are associated with volume and content of mask coverage, but these relationships vary over time. We also find evidence that stations owned by the Sinclair Broadcasting Group air fewer stories about masks and more controversy including partisan conflict in their mask coverage. The results add further support to the notion that the messaging surrounding COVID-19 on television varies in part based on geographic location and corresponding demographics but may also vary based upon ideological commitments of station owners.","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5,"publicationDate":"2023-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42346624","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-09DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2243852
Sang Jung Kim, Isabel I. Villanueva, Kaiping Chen
{"title":"Going Beyond Affective Polarization: How Emotions and Identities are Used in Anti-Vaccination TikTok Videos","authors":"Sang Jung Kim, Isabel I. Villanueva, Kaiping Chen","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2243852","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2243852","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5,"publicationDate":"2023-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48000701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-21DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2238652
F. Arendt
ABSTRACT The media are assumed to play a key role in democratization. Much of the available evidence on the media’s role in democratic transitions is based on a comparative and global perspective, focusing on rather recent key political events. Although democratization is conceptualized as a process that occurs over a long time, there is limited longitudinal evidence. Focusing on Austria, we used a long-term macro-level perspective ranging from 1816 to 1932, including the transition from authoritarian rule (monarchy) to democracy (republic). Grounded in previous research on the demonstration effect, we investigated whether the press contributed to democratization processes. Content-analytic data on the Vienna-based press were used to assess the salience of the idea of democracy in the press for each year of the observation period: How much did the press report on democratic ideals, such as freedom or equality? The level of democratization was assessed using three available longitudinal measures of democratization. Using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) modeling to account for autocorrelation and the trend in the time series, we show that there was a covariation between increases in the salience of the idea of democracy in the press and increases in the level of democratization. Furthermore, we found that a higher salience of the idea of democracy in the press in a given year “Granger-caused” (i.e. prospectively predicted) future increases in the level of democratization. Although we acknowledge the limitations in terms of causal interpretations, these findings are consistent with the idea of a long-term macro-level media effect.
{"title":"The Media and Democratization: A Long-Term Macro-Level Perspective on the Role of the Press During a Democratic Transition","authors":"F. Arendt","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2238652","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2238652","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The media are assumed to play a key role in democratization. Much of the available evidence on the media’s role in democratic transitions is based on a comparative and global perspective, focusing on rather recent key political events. Although democratization is conceptualized as a process that occurs over a long time, there is limited longitudinal evidence. Focusing on Austria, we used a long-term macro-level perspective ranging from 1816 to 1932, including the transition from authoritarian rule (monarchy) to democracy (republic). Grounded in previous research on the demonstration effect, we investigated whether the press contributed to democratization processes. Content-analytic data on the Vienna-based press were used to assess the salience of the idea of democracy in the press for each year of the observation period: How much did the press report on democratic ideals, such as freedom or equality? The level of democratization was assessed using three available longitudinal measures of democratization. Using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) modeling to account for autocorrelation and the trend in the time series, we show that there was a covariation between increases in the salience of the idea of democracy in the press and increases in the level of democratization. Furthermore, we found that a higher salience of the idea of democracy in the press in a given year “Granger-caused” (i.e. prospectively predicted) future increases in the level of democratization. Although we acknowledge the limitations in terms of causal interpretations, these findings are consistent with the idea of a long-term macro-level media effect.","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43508756","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-11DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2233911
Yingjie Fan, Jennifer Pan, Jaymee Sheng
How do state-controlled broadcasters reach foreign publics to engage in public diplomacy in the era of social media? Previous research suggests that features unique to social media, such as the ability to engage in two-way communication with audiences, provide state-controlled broadcasters new opportunities for online public diplo-macy. In this paper, we examine what strategies were used by four Chinese state-controlled media outlets on Twitter to reach foreign publics as the Chinese Communist Party worked to expand its public diplomacy and international media outreach e ff orts. We fi nd that all outlets increased the volume and diversity of content while none engaged in interactive, two-way communication with audiences, and none appeared to arti fi cially in fl ate their follower count. One outlet, China Global Television Network, made outsized gains in followership, and it di ff ers from the other Chinese outlets in that it was rebranded, it disseminated a relatively lower share of government-mandated narratives pertaining to China, and the tone of its reporting was more negative. These results show that during a period when Chinese state-controlled broadcasters gained followers on Twitter, outlets made limited use of features unique to social media and instead primarily used social media as a broadcast channel.
在社交媒体时代，国家控制的广播公司如何接触外国公众参与公共外交？先前的研究表明，社交媒体特有的功能，如与观众进行双向沟通的能力，为国家控制的广播公司提供了在线公共外交的新机会。在这篇论文中，我们研究了四家中国国有媒体在推特上使用了什么策略来接触外国公众，因为中国共产党正在努力扩大其公共外交和国际媒体外联活动。我们发现，所有媒体都增加了内容的数量和多样性，而没有一家媒体与观众进行互动、双向交流，也没有一家似乎在提高其追随者数量。中国环球电视网（China Global Television Network）是一家收视率极高的电视台，它与其他中国电视台的不同之处在于，它被重新命名，传播的政府授权的与中国有关的叙事比例相对较低，报道的基调更为负面。这些结果表明，在中国国家控制的广播公司在推特上获得粉丝的时期，媒体有限地使用社交媒体特有的功能，而主要将社交媒体作为广播渠道。
{"title":"Strategies of Chinese State Media on Twitter","authors":"Yingjie Fan, Jennifer Pan, Jaymee Sheng","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2233911","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2233911","url":null,"abstract":"How do state-controlled broadcasters reach foreign publics to engage in public diplomacy in the era of social media? Previous research suggests that features unique to social media, such as the ability to engage in two-way communication with audiences, provide state-controlled broadcasters new opportunities for online public diplo-macy. In this paper, we examine what strategies were used by four Chinese state-controlled media outlets on Twitter to reach foreign publics as the Chinese Communist Party worked to expand its public diplomacy and international media outreach e ff orts. We fi nd that all outlets increased the volume and diversity of content while none engaged in interactive, two-way communication with audiences, and none appeared to arti fi cially in fl ate their follower count. One outlet, China Global Television Network, made outsized gains in followership, and it di ff ers from the other Chinese outlets in that it was rebranded, it disseminated a relatively lower share of government-mandated narratives pertaining to China, and the tone of its reporting was more negative. These results show that during a period when Chinese state-controlled broadcasters gained followers on Twitter, outlets made limited use of features unique to social media and instead primarily used social media as a broadcast channel.","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46152120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-11DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2232752
Jorge M. Fernandes, Miguel Won
ABSTRACT The emergence of the radical right signals that social norms and values are changing. Existing literature suggests that citizens choose to voice their concerns when faced with the erosion of democracy. In this paper, we look at the consequences of citizens using quoted tweets to express negative sentiments to denounce and discredit the radical right. Using Twitter data from Portugal, we use node embeddings to map out interactions on social media. Subsequently, we estimate a deep-learning automated sentiment analysis of quoted tweets and use a vector auto-regression model to forecast who contributes the most to the growth of the radical right on Twitter. Our findings show that users amplify the radical right’s original message via weak ties and cascade effects in making negative quoted tweets. Ultimately, denouncing the radical right backfires and helps nascent illiberal parties to reach out to more users in the network and gain more users.
{"title":"The Unintended Consequences of Amplifying the Radical Right on Twitter","authors":"Jorge M. Fernandes, Miguel Won","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2232752","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2232752","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The emergence of the radical right signals that social norms and values are changing. Existing literature suggests that citizens choose to voice their concerns when faced with the erosion of democracy. In this paper, we look at the consequences of citizens using quoted tweets to express negative sentiments to denounce and discredit the radical right. Using Twitter data from Portugal, we use node embeddings to map out interactions on social media. Subsequently, we estimate a deep-learning automated sentiment analysis of quoted tweets and use a vector auto-regression model to forecast who contributes the most to the growth of the radical right on Twitter. Our findings show that users amplify the radical right’s original message via weak ties and cascade effects in making negative quoted tweets. Ultimately, denouncing the radical right backfires and helps nascent illiberal parties to reach out to more users in the network and gain more users.","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":"40 1","pages":"742 - 767"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43201948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-08DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2023.2233444
D. Kuznetsova
{"title":"Broadcasting Messages via Telegram: Pro-Government Social Media Control During the 2020 Protests in Belarus and 2022 Anti-War Protests in Russia","authors":"D. Kuznetsova","doi":"10.1080/10584609.2023.2233444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2233444","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20264,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44945995","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：