2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

13
370
3
30

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 509 publications
(416 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
13
370
3
30
Order By: Relevance
“…the deliberativeness of such talk) has received much attention in previous research, focusing on, for example, Usenet newsgroups (Schneider, 1996), news media-sponsored forums (Graham, 2011), forums hosted by governments (Wright, 2007), online deliberative initiatives (Dahlberg, 2001), other political platforms such as blogs (Koop and Jansen, 2009) and readers' comments (Ruiz et al, 2011) and social media network sites such as Facebook and YouTube (Halpern and Gibbs, 2013). However, outside of a handful of small-scale studies (Graham, 2010(Graham, , 2012Graham and Harju, 2011;Graham and Wright, 2014;Jackson et al, 2013;Van Zoonen, 2007), we know very little about the way political talk is performed in non-political third spaces.…”
Section: Research Focus and Questionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the deliberativeness of such talk) has received much attention in previous research, focusing on, for example, Usenet newsgroups (Schneider, 1996), news media-sponsored forums (Graham, 2011), forums hosted by governments (Wright, 2007), online deliberative initiatives (Dahlberg, 2001), other political platforms such as blogs (Koop and Jansen, 2009) and readers' comments (Ruiz et al, 2011) and social media network sites such as Facebook and YouTube (Halpern and Gibbs, 2013). However, outside of a handful of small-scale studies (Graham, 2010(Graham, , 2012Graham and Harju, 2011;Graham and Wright, 2014;Jackson et al, 2013;Van Zoonen, 2007), we know very little about the way political talk is performed in non-political third spaces.…”
Section: Research Focus and Questionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, [25] showed that anonymous textual comments in Washington Post website contained twice more interpersonal attacks than in its counterpart Facebook page where comments are explicitly linked to commenters' real identities. Another comparative study between Facebook page (i.e., low anonymity) and YouTube channel (i.e., high anonymity) of the White House [26] showed a similar result: YouTube comments contained more impolite messages than Facebook. The study's [26] operationalization of impoliteness was inclusive of swearing: "Curses and insults" that indicate "pejorative speak" (p.1163).…”
Section: Interpersonal Swearingmentioning
confidence: 61%
“…Another comparative study between Facebook page (i.e., low anonymity) and YouTube channel (i.e., high anonymity) of the White House [26] showed a similar result: YouTube comments contained more impolite messages than Facebook. The study's [26] operationalization of impoliteness was inclusive of swearing: "Curses and insults" that indicate "pejorative speak" (p.1163).…”
Section: Interpersonal Swearingmentioning
confidence: 61%
“…While ESM is also a computer-mediated platform, there are a few key differences compared to traditional systems. Due to its broader reach to the whole organization and the likelihood that users are identifiable, ESM tools such as social network sites may afford greater and more egalitarian participation [18] that supports idea contribution, evaluation, and prioritization. ESM may also afford new connections (e.g.…”
Section: Ideation In Enterprise Social Mediamentioning
confidence: 99%