Links to news on Facebook
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


Links to news on Facebook



presented at the ECREA Conference in Istanbul, October 2012

presented at the ECREA Conference in Istanbul, October 2012



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



9 Embeds 508 203 88 67 54 52 22 15 5 2



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Links to news on Facebook Presentation Transcript

  • 1. #ECREA2012 27.10.2012 Katrin Jungnickel, TU Ilmenau Axel Maireder, Universität Wien Links to News on Facebook Is There a Multi-Step Flow of Communication?Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 1
  • 2. 30% of online Americans receive news via SNS, 6% via Twitter (Purcell et al., 2010) 71% of Canadian SNS users use it to keep up with the news (Hermida et al., 2012) 28% of German SNS users get informed about the news on SNS (BITKOM, 2011) 34% of German tweets with link connect to news sites (Maireder, 2011)Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 2
  • 3. Two Twitter user groups: Intermediaries receive from news media, others from intermediaries (Wu et al., 2011) 46% of media tweets reach users via intermediaries (Wu et al., 2011) Every media tweet gets retweeted 15 times (An et al., 2011)Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 3
  • 4. Two-Step-Flow online The Impact of Strong and Weak Ties on the communication process Discussion of politics often in homophilous groups of strong ties (Schenk, 1995) In SNS people are increasingly connected to weak ties (deZuniga & Valenzuela, 2011) Bridges important for diffusion of ideas (Granovetter, 1973)Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 4
  • 5. Is there a multi-step-flow of communication on Facebook? If yes, are weak or strong ties more relevant? Difference in interest dependent on content, producer, transmitter?Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 5
  • 6. Snowball sample for online survey: N=745 We asked respondents to copy the last 5 links received on Facebook, and answer questions connected (e.g interest in content)Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 6
  • 7. Respondent Sample 75% of respondents (total: 745) copied links n= 557 Facebook usage 67% several times daily Gender 52% women Country of origin 82% Germany 16% Austria Education 62% Abitur/Matura (Highschool degree) 36% University degree Students 78% Occupation related to media 42% Mean age (18-55) 25 Mean number of Facebook friends (8-2769) 249Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 7
  • 8. 2653 Links, 2 coders Variables: - Data type - Language - Producer - Content political? - Content public issue? Inter-coder-reliability (Holsti coefficient): >.70 for all variablesKatrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 8
  • 9. Link Sample Exclusion n percent Number of copied links 2635 100% Link was not external/ just text -186 -7% Link was dead -308 -12% Link destination was in a language -71 -2% other than German or English Total amount of analyzed links 2070 79%Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 9
  • 10. Link Sample Transmitters, Producers, ContentKatrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 10
  • 11. Multi-Step-Flow? Producers and transmitters of links Producers TransmittersKatrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 11
  • 12. Link Content Transmitters and content of links Transmitters ContentKatrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 12
  • 13. Interest in Links Main effects on interest in links Independent Variables F-Value Significance Political content *** Interest higher in 28.433 .000 poltical content Product information .721 .396 Public issue 1.553 .213 Producer 2.290 .058 Interest higher in Transmitter *** 41.054 .000 links from strong ties Language 1.496 .221 Additional information by transmitter 2.010 .156 Interest higher in text and pictures than in Data type ** video/audio/apps and homepages 5.366 .001 Multi-factorial ANOVA, Model significant (p<.001), corrected R²= .135Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 13
  • 14. Interest in Links Interest in links depends on transmitter and political content High interest Transmitters Low interest Significant interaction effect (p< .001) of content and transmittersKatrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 14
  • 15. Is there a multi-step-flow of communication on Facebook? Yes!Katrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 15
  • 16. Are weak or strong ties more relevant? Strong ties! at least in terms of interest in the content sharedKatrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 16
  • 17. Difference in interest dependent on content, producer, transmitter? Transmitter and political contentKatrin JungnickelAxel Maireder 17
  • 18. Thanks! JungnickelAxel Maireder 18
  • 19. References An, J., Cha, M., Gummadi, K. P., & Crowcroft, J. (2011). Media landscape in Twitter: A world of new conventions and political diversity. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. Retrieved from BITKOM (2011). Soziale Netzwerk werden zum Informationskanal. Bundesverband Informationswirtschaft, Telekommunikation und neue Medien e.V., November 28, 2011. de Zuniga, H. G., & Valenzuela, S. (2011). The Mediating Path to a Stronger Citizenship: Online and Offline Networks, Weak Ties, and Civic Engagement. Communication Research, 38(3), 397–421. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. Hermida, A., Fletcher, F., Korell, D. & Logan, D. (2012). Share, Like, Recommend: Decoding the Social Media News Consumer. Journalism Studies,13, 815-824. Maireder, A. (2011). Links auf Twitter - Wie verweisen deutschsprachige Tweets auf Medieninhalte? Retrieved from Purcell, K., Rainie, L., Mitchell, A., Rosenstiel, T., Olmstead, K. (2010). Understanding the participatory news consumer. How internet and cell phone users have turned news into social experience. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: Schenk, M. (1995). Soziale Netzwerke und Massenmedien. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. Wu, S., Hofman, J. M., Mason, W. A., & Watts, D. J. (2011). Who Says What to Whom on Twitter. WWW 11, Hyderabad, India. Retrieved from JungnickelAxel Maireder 19