The circulation of misinformation, lies, propaganda, and other kinds of falsehood has, to varying degrees, become a challenge to democratic publics. We are interested in the question of what publics believe about their own exposure to falsehoods in news, and about what contributes to similarities and differences in these beliefs across countries. We are also interested in the question of whether publics report attempting to verify news that is suspect to them. Here we report on a comparative election survey in the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. We find three key predictors of publics' beliefs that they have been exposed to falsehoods: discussion of news, use of social media for political purposes, and exposure to counter-attitudinal information. The nexus between these three predictors and beliefs about falsehoods exists in all three countries, as we anticipate that it likely exists elsewhere. We do not find voters on the right to be different from those on the left in the United Kingdom and France, but do find a substantial difference in the United States, which is likely due to the 2016 Trump campaign. We conclude with concerns about the imbalance in beliefs about exposure to falsehoods in the United States and the apparent capacity of a single leader, in the right context, to shape public beliefs about what is to be believed.

No abstract

What effect do natural disasters have on political participation? Some argue that natural disasters decrease political participation because of the way they reduce individual and group resources. Others argue that they stimulate political participation by creating new social norms. Previous studies have been limited both by their focus on a specific disaster type and a lack of regional variation. This article advances the literature by assessing the effect of the 2011 triple disaster in Japan on political participation at both the individual and district level. Drawing on multiple sources of data, I use a difference-in-differences identification strategy to show that the 2011 triple disaster in Japan resulted in a 6 percent increase in participation in political groups in regions heavily affected by the disaster, and a 2.5 percent increase in voter turnout in districts in prefectures that were significantly affected by the disaster. The results also show that the effect at the individual level is largely confined to individuals with large social networks, suggesting that the effect of natural disasters on political participation is a combination of their direct and indirect impact on variables that operate through different subpopulations. Directions for future studies are suggested.

Classical collective action theories assume that successful political movements must have an organization and the ability to mobilize supporters in support of a common goal. Yet the unprecedented achievements of networked political movements have led scholars to reconsider these assumptions. South Korea’s Nosamo and the Tea Party Movement are unique among networked political movements in that they were aimed at electing specific political candidates. The ability of these two movements successfully to bypass party orthodoxy without a traditional organizational apparatus has bolstered optimism about participatory democracy. However, while both of these movements began as free-flowing horizontal networks, each developed a hierarchical organizational structure. We examine how the development of an organizational structure affected each group’s dominant frame, comparing structures and outcomes in the two cases. In particular, we find out whether there are differences in each group’s ability to affect a unified presence by examining group documents and news coverage. Our results suggest that a cohesive collective action frame is possible without formal organizations, though there may be other requirements that might obtain only under certain circumstances, somewhat weakening prospects for participatory democracy.

Contemporary collective action theories put large horizontal digitally connected networks at the center of mass political action. They posit that information sharing among ordinary social media users makes possible new forms of rapid mass political action. However, recent research has shown that influential individuals can play a number of key roles in facilitating networked political action in seemingly leaderless movements. Still, the role of influential individuals in stimulating protest information sharing on social media is an important aspect of networked collective action that remains understudied. This study seeks to address this. Specifically, it investigates the following question: does exposure to appeals to engage in protest increase individuals’ motivation to share protest information? Drawing on evidence from an original survey experiment, this study shows that digital appeals to engage in collective action posted by influential individuals do elicit an increase in motivation to share the appeal. However, this result obtains only for Korean respondents, whereas influential appeals appear to have no effect on Japanese respondents. I argue that this difference is in part a function of different citizenship norms in the two countries, and the corresponding effects on social network dynamics. Preliminary analysis supports this interpretation, but further investigation is warranted.