Search results

Social media has made people better informed but also easier to manipulate. By using literature review and observing social media, the authors found a problem about echo chamber effect. The purpose of this paper is to know how the echo chamber affects the people who consume political news and the role of media diversity in it.

To conduct this study, the authors used a structured questionnaire on the Qualtrics platform to collect data from 183 participants. The authors collected data using a simple random technique. This study is based on the cross-sectional survey; the data collection period is from October to November 2023. The authors used the SPSS software to analyze the relationships between the variables and test the hypothesis.

This study found that, echo chamber is not affected by media diversity. Because of increased political interest, people will be less influenced by echo chambers. In addition, demographic factors affect political interest. People use search engines and social media sites instead of political websites when it comes to the consumption of political news online. People like to communicate with individuals who hold conflicting political views.

Researchers have not yet been able to gain a clear understanding of whether users are in an echo chamber or not and how they are interacting in that environment. Research on this topic is still going on from different perspectives. This study helped to clarify whether or not more media consumption will affect echo chambers. The possibility of being trapped in an echo chamber exists whether we use a single medium or a variety of media. The novelty of this study lies in the use of the echo chamber scale to investigate a thorough understanding of this word through the use of many factors.

The aim of the text is to reflect on the formation of the so-called digital echo chambers or filter bubbles, which are environments formed around particular topics whose objective is to promote a given political-ideological position. The argument the author puts forward is that echo chambers are social systems of interaction created to deal with the process of informational overload brought about by the consolidation of digital media in people’s daily lives.

The author used Niklas Luhmann’s theory of social systems to explain what the author is calling social systems of interaction. Furthermore, the author made clarifications about: (1) the current debate regarding echo chambers; (2) what is the concept of “information” that the author is using to formulate the proposition and (3) what is the specificity that digital media bring when the author talks about informational overload and about the formation of echo chambers.

The author concluded that echo chambers can be seen as digital interaction systems, but the concept of “interaction” must be adapted. The author also concluded that echo chambers help society to deal with the phenomenon of informational overload.

There are few works which try to make a detailed analysis of echo chambers from a Luhmannian perspective. With the propositions presented in this text, along with other writings of the own, the author gives an important step in that direction by introducing the topic in the social systems researchers community.

There is a growing worry about people possibly isolating themselves in online bubbles and avoiding contact with ideas that differ from their beliefs, creating a scenario of ideological polarization. To investigate into this matter, this work aims for a reflection about the contingency of communication in social media. Does social media make the experience of communication in the digital space more contingent (providing it with more possibilities, with people accessing different contents and ideas) or less contingent (reducing the available possibilities, making people isolate themselves)?

This is a theoretical work, constructed through bibliographical reviews. To reflect about the question that are posed, the author selected Niklas Luhmann's social systems theory to approach the concept of contingency. In addition to that, the author presented the main arguments of the debates about echo chambers and online bubbles. In the end, the author combined the two reviews together using elements of the Luhmannian theory and drew some conclusions about the initial question.

The study concluded that social media have an ambivalent potential regarding contingency in the digital space: it can both expand or reduce the available possibilities of communication, depending on criteria like topic, potential of diffusion and focus of attention. There is no one-side effect.

The approach at echo chambers does not reflect “the” form of contingency in social media, but “a” form. Therefore, the study cannot provide any general conclusions about the relation between contingency and social media. The digital space is a large one, and more studies are required to achieve more substantial propositions.

The research has an originality value both for systems theory and social media studies. First, because, as far as the author knows, no other system-theoretical argument has taken the connection between contingency and social media as a primary analysis object. Second, because of a theoretical interpretation effort, the studies of echo chambers indicate mixed results about the phenomenon of online isolation, but no attempt was made to make sense of these mixed results from a specific sociological theory. The author did that by using Luhmann's theoretical framework, which proved to be a good tool for explaining and unifying these different results on a more abstract level.

Social network platforms are considered today as a major communication mean. Their success leads to an unprecedented growth of user-generated content; therefore, finding interesting content for a given user has become a major issue. Recommender systems allow these platforms to personalize individual experience and increase user engagement by filtering messages according to user interest and/or neighborhood. Recent research results show, however, that this content personalization might increase the echo chamber effect and create filter bubbles that restrain the diversity of opinions regarding the recommended content.

The purpose of this paper is to present a thorough study of communities on a large Twitter data set that quantifies the effect of recommender systems on users’ behavior by creating filter bubbles. The authors further propose their community-aware model (CAM) that counters the impact of different recommender systems on information consumption.

The authors propose their CAM that counters the impact of different recommender systems on information consumption. The study results show that filter bubbles effects concern up to 10% of users and the proposed model based on the similarities between communities enhance recommendations.

The authors proposed the CAM approach, which relies on similarities between communities to re-rank lists of recommendations to weaken the filter bubble effect for these users.

The spread of rumors on social media has caused increasing concerns about an under-informed or even misinformed public when it comes to scientific issues. However, researchers have rarely investigated their diffusion in non-western contexts. This study aims to systematically examine the content and network structure of rumor-related discussions around genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on Chinese social media.

This study identified 21,837 rumor-related posts of GMOs on Weibo, one of China's most popular social media platforms. An approach combining social network analysis and content analysis was employed to classify user attitudes toward rumors, measure the level of homophily of their attitudes and examine the nature of their interactions.

Though a certain level of homophily existed in the interaction networks, referring to the observed echo chamber effect, Weibo also served as a public forum for GMO discussions in which cross-cutting ties between communities existed. A considerable amount of interactions emerged between the pro- and anti-GMO camps, and most of them involved providing or requesting information, which could mitigate the likelihood of opinion polarization. Moreover, this study revealed the declining role of traditional opinion leaders and pointed toward the need for alternative strategies for efficient fact-checking.

In general, the findings of this study suggested that microblogging platforms such as Weibo can function as public forums for discussing GMOs that expose users to ideologically cross-cutting viewpoints. This study stands to provide important insights into the viral processes of scientific rumors on social media.

Social media has played a pivotal role in polarizing views on Russia–Ukraine conflict. The effects of polarization in online interactions have been extensively studied in many contexts. This research aims to examine how multiple social media sources may act as an integrator of information and act as a platform for depolarizing behaviors.

This study analyzes the communications of 6,662 tweets related to the sanctions imposed on Russia by using textual analytics and predictive modeling.

The research findings reveal that the tweeting behavior of netizens was depolarized because of information from multiple social media sources. However, the influx of information from non-organizational sources such as trending topics and discussions has a depolarizing impact on the user’s pre-established attitude.

For policymakers, conflict mediators and observers, and members of society in general, there is a need for (1) continuous and consistent communication throughout the crisis, (2) transparency in the information being communicated and (3) public awareness of the polarized and conflicting information being provided from multiple actors that may be biased in the claims being made about the conflict crisis.

While previous research has examined Russia–Ukraine conflict from a variety of perspectives, this is the first study to examine how social media might be used to reduce attitude polarization during times of conflict.

Political polarization and incivility manifested itself online throughout the 2016 US presidential election. The purpose of this paper is to understand how features of social media platforms (e.g. reacting, sharing) impacted the online public sphere during the 2016 election.

After conducting in-depth interviews with politically interested young people and applying deductive coding procedures to transcripts of the interviews, Dahlberg’s (2004) six normative conditions for the public sphere were used to empirically examine this interview data.

While some participants described strategies for productive political discussion on Social Networking Sites (SNS) and a willingness to use them to discuss politics, many users’ experiences largely fall short of Dahlberg’s (2004) normative criteria for the public sphere.

The period in which these interviews were conducted in could have contributed to a more pessimistic view of political discussion in general.

Scholars and the public should recognize that the affordances of SNS for political discussion are not distributed evenly between different platforms, both for the sake of empirical studies of SNS moving forward and the state of democratic deliberation.

Although previous research has examined online and SNS-based political discussion as it relates to the public sphere, few attempts have been made understand how specific communicative practices or platform-specific features of SNS have contributed to or detracted from a healthy public sphere.

This paper aims to offer practical guidance on teaching about digital extremism – defined here as the intersection of digital disinformation campaigns with political extremism – by highlighting four pedagogical challenges: the danger of unintentionally “redpilling” students; the slippery slope to false equivalency and “bothsidesism” in turbulent partisan waters; the difficulty of separating empirical analyses from prescriptive debates circulating in popular media; and the trouble of getting students to understand digital extremism as a sociotechnical problem rather than as a social-or-technical problem. The conclusion proposes opportunities for educators to integrate practical approaches to confronting digital extremism with digital civics curricula.

This paper reviews pedagogical challenges and outlines a curricular program for teaching about digital extremism drawn from the author’s experience designing undergraduate courses and open teaching modules between 2016 and 2021.

Educators should shift focus from the substance of digital extremism to its tools – social media platforms’ surveillance and data-gathering methods, advertising technologies and monetized user-generated content, personalized recommendation algorithms and media manipulation strategies that amplify some narratives while suppressing others – and the media and political institutions that benefit most from it. Proposed lessons include: how digital extremists manipulate social media metadata; engagement with data creation and targeting practices; and analysis of information production, circulation and consumption exploring media manipulation tools and their effects.

This paper’s added values are the insights and practical recommendations for undergraduate educators teaching on a topic of urgent contemporary concern: digital extremism.