Turf wars: Using social media network analysis to examine the suspected astroturfing campaign for the Adani Carmichael Coal mine on Twitter

Hobbs, Mitchell; Bosca, Hannah Della; Schlosberg, David; Sun, Chao

doi:10.1002/pa.2057

Cited by 18 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A network analysis of citizen science information shared to understand community structures using an Opensource network visualisation tool, Gephi [53]. We use findings from this study to answer our RQ2 and RQ3.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizen Science on Twitter: Using Data Analytics to Understand Conversations and Networks

Mazumdar

Thakker

2020

Future Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a long-term study on how the public engage with discussions around citizen science and crowdsourcing topics. With progress in sensor technologies and IoT, our cities and neighbourhoods are increasingly sensed, measured and observed. While such data are often used to inform citizen science projects, it is still difficult to understand how citizens and communities discuss citizen science activities and engage with citizen science projects. Understanding these engagements in greater depth will provide citizen scientists, project owners, practitioners and the generic public with insights around how social media can be used to share citizen science related topics, particularly to help increase visibility, influence change and in general and raise awareness on topics. To the knowledge of the authors, this is the first large-scale study on understanding how such information is discussed on Twitter, particularly outside the scope of individual projects. The paper reports on the wide variety of topics (e.g., politics, news, ecological observations) being discussed on social media and a wide variety of network types and the varied roles played by users in sharing information in Twitter. Based on these findings, the paper highlights recommendations for stakeholders for engaging with citizen science topics.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizen Science on Twitter: Using Data Analytics to Understand Conversations and Networks

Mazumdar

Thakker

2020

Future Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is not clear if social media data yet offers a useful or reliable form of data to understand EU level lobbying dynamics. It is being used by scholars to try to map public affairs networks and discourses (Hobbs, Della Bosca, Schlosberg, & Sun, 2020).…”

Section: A European Public Sphere or A Brussels Bubble? The Case Of Lmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lobbying Transparency: The Limits of EU Monitory Democracy

Dinan

2021

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the origins and current operation of the EU’s lobbying transparency register and offers a critical review of the drivers and politics associated with lobbying reform in Brussels. The analysis considers the dynamics of political communication in EU institutions and draws on concepts of the fourth estate, the public sphere and monitory democracy to illustrate the particular challenges around lobbying transparency and opening up governance processes to wider scrutiny, and wider participation, at the EU level. This article draws upon interviews, official data and participant observation of some of the deliberations on lobbying transparency dating back to the 2005 ETI. The analysis is brought up to date by examining the data within the Transparency Register itself, both substantively in terms of the kinds of information disclosed and in relation to trends around disclosures and registration, since the register was launched over a decade ago. The article concludes with a critical appraisal of the evolving issue culture relating to lobbying transparency in Brussels as well as recommendations for the development of the Transparency Register itself.

show abstract

“…Empirical research has also provided concrete cases in which astroturfing campaigns have had different levels of success due to the importance of context (Alallaq; Al-khiza'ay; Han, 2019; Keller et al, 2020;Lits, 2021;Hobbs et al, 2020; Francois; Barash; Kelly, 2021).…”

Section: Astroturfing and Botsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disinformation, social media, bots, and astroturfing: the fourth wave of digital democracy

Orosa

2021

EPI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reflects on the conceptualization and the salient features of the ecology of e-democracy. The authors identify four distinct waves marked by technological innovations and studied under the control–participation dichotomy. In the first wave, during the 1990s, political actors begin to establish their online presence but without any other notable changes in communication. The second wave takes place from 2004 to 2008 and features the consolidation of social networks and the increasing commodification of audience engagement. The third wave begins to take shape during Obama’s 2008 election campaign, which featured micro-segmentation and the use of big data. The fourth wave, starting in 2016 with the Brexit campaign and the Cambridge Analytica scandal, has been defined by the front and center use of Artificial Intelligence. Some recent phenomena that challenge or buttress the make-up of critical public opinion are the following: a) digital platforms as political actors; b) the marked use of Artificial Intelligence and big data; c) the use of falsehoods as a political strategy, as well as other fake news and deep fake phenomena; d) the combination of hyperlocal and supranational issues; e) technological determinism; f) the search for audience engagement and co-production processes; and g) trends that threaten democracy, to wit, the polarization of opinions, astroturfing, echo chambers and bubble filters. Finally, the authors identify several challenges in research, pedagogy and politics that could strengthen democratic values, and conclude that democracy needs to be reimagined both under new research and political action frameworks, as well as through the creation of a social imaginary on democracy.

show abstract

Turf wars: Using social media network analysis to examine the suspected astroturfing campaign for the Adani Carmichael Coal mine on Twitter

Cited by 18 publications

References 42 publications

Citizen Science on Twitter: Using Data Analytics to Understand Conversations and Networks

Citizen Science on Twitter: Using Data Analytics to Understand Conversations and Networks

Lobbying Transparency: The Limits of EU Monitory Democracy

Disinformation, social media, bots, and astroturfing: the fourth wave of digital democracy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About