The document summarizes research on whether "filter bubbles" and "echo chambers" are real phenomena on social media and search engines. It finds that while some individual communities or pages can be ideological echo chambers, comprehensive studies show that users are generally exposed to a diversity of views. Polarization is driven more by a small number of ideological groups rejecting mainstream views than by technology fragmentation. The problem is political polarization in society, not communicative isolation due to algorithms or design. Further research is needed on understanding and combating polarization.
Beyond the Bubble: A Critical Review of the Evidence for Echo Chambers and Fi...Axel Bruns
This document provides a critical review of evidence for the existence of echo chambers and filter bubbles. It summarizes that while some case studies have found ideological clustering and selective exposure in social media, broader network mapping and large-scale studies show more complex and interconnected online information networks. It argues that concerns about echo chambers and filter bubbles tend to oversimplify online behavior and overestimate the power of algorithms, when in reality people encounter a diverse range of information online. The real problem, it concludes, is political polarization rather than communicative fragmentation.
It's Not the Technology, Stupid: How the ‘Echo Chamber’ and ‘Filter Bubble’ M...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes Axel Bruns' presentation arguing that concerns about online "echo chambers" and "filter bubbles" are overblown and based on limited evidence. The presentation notes that while some isolated communities may exist, studies have found people generally encounter a diversity of views on social media. It argues the real problem is political polarization, not communicative fragmentation, and that filters are more in people's minds than imposed by algorithms. In conclusion, the presentation states the issue is not the technology but polarized fringe groups that reject consensus, and the problem is political polarization rather than echo chambers.
The document discusses whether filter bubbles and echo chambers are real phenomena on social media and in search engines. It defines filter bubbles as preferentially communicating within a group to exclude outsiders, while echo chambers preferentially connect within a group to exclude outsiders. Studies show some ideological clustering online but most people encounter diverse views. The problems are political polarization and fringe groups rejecting consensus, not technology fragmentation. Understanding and combating polarization is more important than worrying about filter bubbles and echo chambers.
The document summarizes research on whether "filter bubbles" and "echo chambers" are real phenomena on social media and search engines. It finds that while some individual communities or pages can be ideological echo chambers, comprehensive studies show that users are generally exposed to a diversity of views. Polarization is driven more by a small number of ideological groups rejecting mainstream views than by technology fragmentation. The problem is political polarization in society, not communicative isolation due to algorithms or design. Further research is needed on understanding and combating polarization.
Beyond the Bubble: A Critical Review of the Evidence for Echo Chambers and Fi...Axel Bruns
This document provides a critical review of evidence for the existence of echo chambers and filter bubbles. It summarizes that while some case studies have found ideological clustering and selective exposure in social media, broader network mapping and large-scale studies show more complex and interconnected online information networks. It argues that concerns about echo chambers and filter bubbles tend to oversimplify online behavior and overestimate the power of algorithms, when in reality people encounter a diverse range of information online. The real problem, it concludes, is political polarization rather than communicative fragmentation.
It's Not the Technology, Stupid: How the ‘Echo Chamber’ and ‘Filter Bubble’ M...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes Axel Bruns' presentation arguing that concerns about online "echo chambers" and "filter bubbles" are overblown and based on limited evidence. The presentation notes that while some isolated communities may exist, studies have found people generally encounter a diversity of views on social media. It argues the real problem is political polarization, not communicative fragmentation, and that filters are more in people's minds than imposed by algorithms. In conclusion, the presentation states the issue is not the technology but polarized fringe groups that reject consensus, and the problem is political polarization rather than echo chambers.
The document discusses whether filter bubbles and echo chambers are real phenomena on social media and in search engines. It defines filter bubbles as preferentially communicating within a group to exclude outsiders, while echo chambers preferentially connect within a group to exclude outsiders. Studies show some ideological clustering online but most people encounter diverse views. The problems are political polarization and fringe groups rejecting consensus, not technology fragmentation. Understanding and combating polarization is more important than worrying about filter bubbles and echo chambers.
Echo Chamber? What Echo Chamber? Reviewing the EvidenceAxel Bruns
This document summarizes a study examining evidence for echo chambers and filter bubbles on Twitter in Australia. The study analyzed follower connections and engagement patterns between Twitter accounts with over 1,000 followers. It found limited evidence of highly exclusionary echo chambers or filter bubbles, except for some specialist clusters. Most accounts had more external than internal connections or balanced engagement. Retweets generally spread information more externally than @mentions. The study has limitations but provides little support for strong exclusionary information silos within the Australian Twittersphere.
Societies on the Brink: Understanding the Dynamics of Partisanship and Polari...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes a presentation about understanding the dynamics of partisanship and polarization. It begins by showing examples of polarized protests and divides in different countries. It then discusses how polarization and hyperpartisanship have increased, fueled by social media echo chambers and filter bubbles. However, it notes that social media also enables connection. The presentation explores measuring different dimensions of polarization, including in news coverage, audiences, engagement, and public discourse. It advocates multidisciplinary research on robust measures, trends over time, comparisons between systems, and distinguishing polarization on different issues. The presenter's future research on the dynamics of polarization using computational analysis of online debates is also mentioned.
Sharing, Spamming, Sockpuppeting: Comparing the Twitter Dissemination Careers...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes a study comparing the dissemination of news articles on Twitter from mainstream and suspect news outlets. The study found:
1) Misinformation does not necessarily spread faster than real news, and there are differences in speed of dissemination between different types of outlets.
2) Dissemination can be strongly affected by coordinated activities like co-retweeting and co-tweeting of URLs, which was evidence of artificial boosting for some outlets.
3) Future work is needed to extend the analysis to more sites, stories, and time periods to better understand patterns of news spread over time and during major events.
‘Fake News’ on Facebook: A Longitudinal Analysis of Link Sharing between 2016...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes research analyzing the sharing of links to "fake news" domains on Facebook from 2016 to 2021. The researchers collected data on over 40 million Facebook posts linking to over 1,500 questionable news domains. They analyzed the network of pages and groups sharing these links, finding clusters aligned with topics like progressives, conservatives, and conspiracy theories. They also analyzed how posts spread between pages, finding international communities focused on issues like climate change, vaccines, and politics. The research aims to understand the spread of problematic information on Facebook over time and across different communities.
Exposure to Diverse Information on FacebookJuli Whetstone
The document discusses research that contrasts concerns about "echo chambers" and "filter bubbles" on social media, finding that people are exposed to diverse political views through their Facebook friends, with around 25-30% of news content and clicks exposing people to opposing views. However, strong ties are more likely to share similar views, while weak ties expose people to more novel information from different perspectives.
This document discusses how social media platforms can function as echo chambers for news consumption. It notes that people are often exposed primarily to opinions and stories from friends with similar backgrounds, limiting diversity of views. The use of algorithms by platforms like Facebook to select content users have engaged with before reinforces this effect. While social media has increased access to news, it has also lowered barriers for misinformation to spread alongside reliable content without differentiation or oversight. However, some argue this also makes more people engaged with news who otherwise wouldn't be.
The document discusses two approaches to education - expanding communities and core knowledge. Expanding communities focuses on increasing the scope of knowledge by connecting learning to different communities from family to international levels. Core knowledge emphasizes teaching a common core of knowledge in specific subject areas to all students. The document provides examples of assignments comparing the two approaches and having students analyze their strengths and weaknesses through a jigsaw activity and Venn diagram. It concludes by asking which approach teachers would prefer.
To Comment Or Not To Comment - Marie K. ShanahanKatie Steiner
One of the most interesting topics in the journalism industry today is the discussion over what to do about comment sections. Almost every news site has one, but many still have questions about how to handle them. How do we keep them civil? Should we moderate them? Push the conversation over to social media? Prohibit comments on certain stories? Hear how some journalists wrangle online discussion around their content and use it to build audience and community, as well as why some news organizations have chosen to end commenting completely. We also will share research-based techniques for improving comment sections.
Kim Osman presented on scholars' perspectives on metrics and public engagement. Through interviews with 28 scholars, they found:
1) While traditional citations are still valued, scholars are increasingly trusting altmetrics from platforms like The Conversation as indicators of broader public impact and engagement beyond academia.
2) Altmetrics are shaping scholars' work practices as they strive to engage wider audiences, though formal recognition of public engagement from institutions is still developing.
3) Many scholars feel a moral duty to engage the public and increase the real-world impact of their research through digital platforms. Increased institutional support could help more scholars amplify their work for public benefit.
The growth of social media and the rapid adoption of internet-enabled mobile devices have changed the way Americans engage in the political process.
For Social Media Week 2013 in Washington, D.C., Pew Internet Researcher Aaron Smith presented the latest data from Pew Research Center national surveys to engage the politically savvy and tech-obsessed peole in DC who have noticed this shift in political life, taking a look at the raw data behind the new political process, and how it relates to our political infrastructure.
Design Matters! An Empirical Analysis of Online Deliberation on Different New...Katharina Esau
Ever since the internet has provided easy access to online debates, advocates of deliberative democracy have hoped for an improved public sphere. This paper investigates which particular platform features promote deliberative debate online. We assume that moderation, asynchronous discussion, a well-defined topic, and the availability of information enhance
the level of deliberative quality of user comments. A comparison between different types of news platforms that differ in terms of design (a news forum, news websites, and Facebook news pages) shows that deliberation (rationality, reciprocity, respect, and constructiveness) differs significantly between platforms. The news forum yields the most rational and respectful debate. While user comments on news websites are only slightly less
deliberative, Facebook comments perform poorly in terms of deliberative quality. However, comments left on news websites and on Facebook show particularly high levels of reciprocity among users.
Utilizing The Social Graph to Surface Relevant Conversations - Defrag09Todd Clayton
This document discusses how social networks can be leveraged to surface relevant conversations by taking advantage of relationships and connections between people. It notes that while social applications provide greater access to information, the overwhelming amount of content makes finding relevant conversations challenging. The document proposes using a person's social graph, which maps their relationships and interests, to filter conversations by degree of separation, topics of interest, and context. User feedback is also identified as important for systems to continue improving conversation recommendations.
A Year of Discursive Struggle on Twitter: What Can a Mixed-Methods Approach T...Ehsan Dehghan
This document summarizes a study analyzing discourse around freedom of speech on Twitter over the course of a year. It used mixed methods including network analysis, corpus analysis, and discourse analysis to examine intra- and inter-community dynamics between antagonistic groups. Results showed communities tended to reinforce their own ideologies more than interact productively with adversaries. However, Twitter features sometimes bridged divisions by allowing reaction and confrontation, or uniting against a common enemy. Overall, filter bubbles and echo chambers were found to some degree, but information also crossed community boundaries through Twitter interactions.
Cyber-enabled Information Operations 4-27-17 -- Senate Armed Service Commi...David Sweigert
This document summarizes Clint Watts' testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services regarding Russian cyber-enabled influence operations on social media. Watts discusses how Russian influence differs from other social media influence efforts in that it performs a full range of actions including creating propaganda, pushing synchronized messaging across outlets, and coordinating sharing among fake and real accounts to amplify narratives targeting various groups. Watts also notes lessons that can be learned from past Western counterterrorism programs to help fight information wars.
Mapping Movements: Social movement research and big data: critiques and alter...Tim Highfield
Paper presented by Sky Croeser and Tim Highfield at Compromised Data? colloquium, Toronto, Canada, 29 October 2013. http://www.infoscapelab.ca/news/oct-28-29-colloquium-compromised-data-new-paradigms-social-media-theory-and-methods
[Tim's additional note: This presentation is focused specifically on doing research around social movements and producing findings and contributing new knowledge about how activists use social media and online technologies – there is some very important and detailed quantitative analysis of Twitter discussions around social movements and uprisings which provide critical information about communication online and responses to international events, and my intent is not to discount this work just because it is quant-only – these studies do different things and have different aims, and so the scope of their findings is not the same by extension (I’m not sure that I made this point clearly in the presentation, though).]
These are my slides for a presentation to the CFUW Ontario Council for a workshop aimed at exploring political discourse in an age of misinformation/how to navigate information with a critical eye leading up to the Ontario election. More on the event available here http://cfuwontcouncil.org/standing-committees/
Ongoing Research on Politics & Twitter - CSS ColloquiumTalha OZ
This document discusses using social media data and network analysis to study politics and media. It summarizes several studies and tools, including:
1) Analyzing the political leaning and bias of US news media sources using similarity networks and multidimensional scaling.
2) Detecting communities and conglomerates in Turkish news media through weighted graphs and network analysis.
3) Introducing DD-CSS, a data-driven computational social science platform for collecting and analyzing social network data using tools like Gephi.
4) Analyzing curated commentary tweets from Turkish newsmakers and elites to understand attention to political events.
‘Big Social Data’ in Context: Connecting Social Media Data and Other SourcesAxel Bruns
This document discusses big social data research and outlines a research project on analyzing data from social media and other online sources to understand public opinion formation in Australia. It aims to develop new methods for integrating large datasets from Facebook, Twitter, news websites and search/browsing data. The project will examine how news and issues spread and change in prominence over time, and how online public discussion networks form and interact across platforms. Initial findings show identifiable networks and discussion trends for different news sources and topics on Twitter.
Filter Bubbles in the Australian Twittersphere?Axel Bruns
- The document discusses whether "filter bubbles" and "echo chambers" truly exist based on an analysis of Twitter data from Australia.
- It finds limited evidence of highly exclusionary networks except for some outliers like teen and porn clusters. Most groups had more external than internal connections and balanced engagement both within and outside their clusters.
- This suggests people are exposed to a diverse range of information on social media rather than being isolated in their own information bubbles. Evidence for filter bubbles and echo chambers is lacking.
Gatewatching 11: Echo Chambers? Filter Bubbles? Reviewing the EvidenceAxel Bruns
Lecture 11 in the course From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: News and Journalism in the Digital Age.
This lecture series addresses the continuing transformation of the production and consumption of journalism in the contemporary media environment. It provides a brief history of the impact of participatory online news production and engagement practices – from the first wave of citizen journalism to the social media platforms of today – on how news content is disseminated and experienced; examines reactive and proactive responses to these changes by news organisations and journalists; and explores the longer-term impact of these developments on the public sphere, touching on the power of social media platforms and their role in shaping their users’ information diets.
Readings are largely drawn from Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere (Bruns, 2018), with additional readings recommended for selected lectures.
Reading for this lecture:
Bruns, A. (2022). Echo Chambers? Filter Bubbles? The Misleading Metaphors That Obscure the Real Problem. In M. Pérez-Escolar & J. M. Noguera-Vivo (Eds.), Hate Speech and Polarization in Participatory Society (pp. 33–48). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003109891-4
Echo Chamber? What Echo Chamber? Reviewing the EvidenceAxel Bruns
This document summarizes a study examining evidence for echo chambers and filter bubbles on Twitter in Australia. The study analyzed follower connections and engagement patterns between Twitter accounts with over 1,000 followers. It found limited evidence of highly exclusionary echo chambers or filter bubbles, except for some specialist clusters. Most accounts had more external than internal connections or balanced engagement. Retweets generally spread information more externally than @mentions. The study has limitations but provides little support for strong exclusionary information silos within the Australian Twittersphere.
Societies on the Brink: Understanding the Dynamics of Partisanship and Polari...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes a presentation about understanding the dynamics of partisanship and polarization. It begins by showing examples of polarized protests and divides in different countries. It then discusses how polarization and hyperpartisanship have increased, fueled by social media echo chambers and filter bubbles. However, it notes that social media also enables connection. The presentation explores measuring different dimensions of polarization, including in news coverage, audiences, engagement, and public discourse. It advocates multidisciplinary research on robust measures, trends over time, comparisons between systems, and distinguishing polarization on different issues. The presenter's future research on the dynamics of polarization using computational analysis of online debates is also mentioned.
Sharing, Spamming, Sockpuppeting: Comparing the Twitter Dissemination Careers...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes a study comparing the dissemination of news articles on Twitter from mainstream and suspect news outlets. The study found:
1) Misinformation does not necessarily spread faster than real news, and there are differences in speed of dissemination between different types of outlets.
2) Dissemination can be strongly affected by coordinated activities like co-retweeting and co-tweeting of URLs, which was evidence of artificial boosting for some outlets.
3) Future work is needed to extend the analysis to more sites, stories, and time periods to better understand patterns of news spread over time and during major events.
‘Fake News’ on Facebook: A Longitudinal Analysis of Link Sharing between 2016...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes research analyzing the sharing of links to "fake news" domains on Facebook from 2016 to 2021. The researchers collected data on over 40 million Facebook posts linking to over 1,500 questionable news domains. They analyzed the network of pages and groups sharing these links, finding clusters aligned with topics like progressives, conservatives, and conspiracy theories. They also analyzed how posts spread between pages, finding international communities focused on issues like climate change, vaccines, and politics. The research aims to understand the spread of problematic information on Facebook over time and across different communities.
Exposure to Diverse Information on FacebookJuli Whetstone
The document discusses research that contrasts concerns about "echo chambers" and "filter bubbles" on social media, finding that people are exposed to diverse political views through their Facebook friends, with around 25-30% of news content and clicks exposing people to opposing views. However, strong ties are more likely to share similar views, while weak ties expose people to more novel information from different perspectives.
This document discusses how social media platforms can function as echo chambers for news consumption. It notes that people are often exposed primarily to opinions and stories from friends with similar backgrounds, limiting diversity of views. The use of algorithms by platforms like Facebook to select content users have engaged with before reinforces this effect. While social media has increased access to news, it has also lowered barriers for misinformation to spread alongside reliable content without differentiation or oversight. However, some argue this also makes more people engaged with news who otherwise wouldn't be.
The document discusses two approaches to education - expanding communities and core knowledge. Expanding communities focuses on increasing the scope of knowledge by connecting learning to different communities from family to international levels. Core knowledge emphasizes teaching a common core of knowledge in specific subject areas to all students. The document provides examples of assignments comparing the two approaches and having students analyze their strengths and weaknesses through a jigsaw activity and Venn diagram. It concludes by asking which approach teachers would prefer.
To Comment Or Not To Comment - Marie K. ShanahanKatie Steiner
One of the most interesting topics in the journalism industry today is the discussion over what to do about comment sections. Almost every news site has one, but many still have questions about how to handle them. How do we keep them civil? Should we moderate them? Push the conversation over to social media? Prohibit comments on certain stories? Hear how some journalists wrangle online discussion around their content and use it to build audience and community, as well as why some news organizations have chosen to end commenting completely. We also will share research-based techniques for improving comment sections.
Kim Osman presented on scholars' perspectives on metrics and public engagement. Through interviews with 28 scholars, they found:
1) While traditional citations are still valued, scholars are increasingly trusting altmetrics from platforms like The Conversation as indicators of broader public impact and engagement beyond academia.
2) Altmetrics are shaping scholars' work practices as they strive to engage wider audiences, though formal recognition of public engagement from institutions is still developing.
3) Many scholars feel a moral duty to engage the public and increase the real-world impact of their research through digital platforms. Increased institutional support could help more scholars amplify their work for public benefit.
The growth of social media and the rapid adoption of internet-enabled mobile devices have changed the way Americans engage in the political process.
For Social Media Week 2013 in Washington, D.C., Pew Internet Researcher Aaron Smith presented the latest data from Pew Research Center national surveys to engage the politically savvy and tech-obsessed peole in DC who have noticed this shift in political life, taking a look at the raw data behind the new political process, and how it relates to our political infrastructure.
Design Matters! An Empirical Analysis of Online Deliberation on Different New...Katharina Esau
Ever since the internet has provided easy access to online debates, advocates of deliberative democracy have hoped for an improved public sphere. This paper investigates which particular platform features promote deliberative debate online. We assume that moderation, asynchronous discussion, a well-defined topic, and the availability of information enhance
the level of deliberative quality of user comments. A comparison between different types of news platforms that differ in terms of design (a news forum, news websites, and Facebook news pages) shows that deliberation (rationality, reciprocity, respect, and constructiveness) differs significantly between platforms. The news forum yields the most rational and respectful debate. While user comments on news websites are only slightly less
deliberative, Facebook comments perform poorly in terms of deliberative quality. However, comments left on news websites and on Facebook show particularly high levels of reciprocity among users.
Utilizing The Social Graph to Surface Relevant Conversations - Defrag09Todd Clayton
This document discusses how social networks can be leveraged to surface relevant conversations by taking advantage of relationships and connections between people. It notes that while social applications provide greater access to information, the overwhelming amount of content makes finding relevant conversations challenging. The document proposes using a person's social graph, which maps their relationships and interests, to filter conversations by degree of separation, topics of interest, and context. User feedback is also identified as important for systems to continue improving conversation recommendations.
A Year of Discursive Struggle on Twitter: What Can a Mixed-Methods Approach T...Ehsan Dehghan
This document summarizes a study analyzing discourse around freedom of speech on Twitter over the course of a year. It used mixed methods including network analysis, corpus analysis, and discourse analysis to examine intra- and inter-community dynamics between antagonistic groups. Results showed communities tended to reinforce their own ideologies more than interact productively with adversaries. However, Twitter features sometimes bridged divisions by allowing reaction and confrontation, or uniting against a common enemy. Overall, filter bubbles and echo chambers were found to some degree, but information also crossed community boundaries through Twitter interactions.
Cyber-enabled Information Operations 4-27-17 -- Senate Armed Service Commi...David Sweigert
This document summarizes Clint Watts' testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services regarding Russian cyber-enabled influence operations on social media. Watts discusses how Russian influence differs from other social media influence efforts in that it performs a full range of actions including creating propaganda, pushing synchronized messaging across outlets, and coordinating sharing among fake and real accounts to amplify narratives targeting various groups. Watts also notes lessons that can be learned from past Western counterterrorism programs to help fight information wars.
Mapping Movements: Social movement research and big data: critiques and alter...Tim Highfield
Paper presented by Sky Croeser and Tim Highfield at Compromised Data? colloquium, Toronto, Canada, 29 October 2013. http://www.infoscapelab.ca/news/oct-28-29-colloquium-compromised-data-new-paradigms-social-media-theory-and-methods
[Tim's additional note: This presentation is focused specifically on doing research around social movements and producing findings and contributing new knowledge about how activists use social media and online technologies – there is some very important and detailed quantitative analysis of Twitter discussions around social movements and uprisings which provide critical information about communication online and responses to international events, and my intent is not to discount this work just because it is quant-only – these studies do different things and have different aims, and so the scope of their findings is not the same by extension (I’m not sure that I made this point clearly in the presentation, though).]
These are my slides for a presentation to the CFUW Ontario Council for a workshop aimed at exploring political discourse in an age of misinformation/how to navigate information with a critical eye leading up to the Ontario election. More on the event available here http://cfuwontcouncil.org/standing-committees/
Ongoing Research on Politics & Twitter - CSS ColloquiumTalha OZ
This document discusses using social media data and network analysis to study politics and media. It summarizes several studies and tools, including:
1) Analyzing the political leaning and bias of US news media sources using similarity networks and multidimensional scaling.
2) Detecting communities and conglomerates in Turkish news media through weighted graphs and network analysis.
3) Introducing DD-CSS, a data-driven computational social science platform for collecting and analyzing social network data using tools like Gephi.
4) Analyzing curated commentary tweets from Turkish newsmakers and elites to understand attention to political events.
‘Big Social Data’ in Context: Connecting Social Media Data and Other SourcesAxel Bruns
This document discusses big social data research and outlines a research project on analyzing data from social media and other online sources to understand public opinion formation in Australia. It aims to develop new methods for integrating large datasets from Facebook, Twitter, news websites and search/browsing data. The project will examine how news and issues spread and change in prominence over time, and how online public discussion networks form and interact across platforms. Initial findings show identifiable networks and discussion trends for different news sources and topics on Twitter.
Filter Bubbles in the Australian Twittersphere?Axel Bruns
- The document discusses whether "filter bubbles" and "echo chambers" truly exist based on an analysis of Twitter data from Australia.
- It finds limited evidence of highly exclusionary networks except for some outliers like teen and porn clusters. Most groups had more external than internal connections and balanced engagement both within and outside their clusters.
- This suggests people are exposed to a diverse range of information on social media rather than being isolated in their own information bubbles. Evidence for filter bubbles and echo chambers is lacking.
Gatewatching 11: Echo Chambers? Filter Bubbles? Reviewing the EvidenceAxel Bruns
Lecture 11 in the course From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: News and Journalism in the Digital Age.
This lecture series addresses the continuing transformation of the production and consumption of journalism in the contemporary media environment. It provides a brief history of the impact of participatory online news production and engagement practices – from the first wave of citizen journalism to the social media platforms of today – on how news content is disseminated and experienced; examines reactive and proactive responses to these changes by news organisations and journalists; and explores the longer-term impact of these developments on the public sphere, touching on the power of social media platforms and their role in shaping their users’ information diets.
Readings are largely drawn from Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere (Bruns, 2018), with additional readings recommended for selected lectures.
Reading for this lecture:
Bruns, A. (2022). Echo Chambers? Filter Bubbles? The Misleading Metaphors That Obscure the Real Problem. In M. Pérez-Escolar & J. M. Noguera-Vivo (Eds.), Hate Speech and Polarization in Participatory Society (pp. 33–48). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003109891-4
Gatewatching 10: New(s) Publics in the Public SphereAxel Bruns
Lecture 10 in the course From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: News and Journalism in the Digital Age.
This lecture series addresses the continuing transformation of the production and consumption of journalism in the contemporary media environment. It provides a brief history of the impact of participatory online news production and engagement practices – from the first wave of citizen journalism to the social media platforms of today – on how news content is disseminated and experienced; examines reactive and proactive responses to these changes by news organisations and journalists; and explores the longer-term impact of these developments on the public sphere, touching on the power of social media platforms and their role in shaping their users’ information diets.
Readings are largely drawn from Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere (Bruns, 2018), with additional readings recommended for selected lectures.
Reading for this lecture:
Bruns, A. (2018). New(s) Publics in the Public Sphere. Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere. Ch. 8. Peter Lang.
What do you really mean when you tweet? Challenges for opinion mining on soci...Diana Maynard
This talk, given at BRACIS 2013, introduces the topics of opinion mining and social media analytics, in particular looking at the challenges they impose for an NLP system. It investigates the impact of non-standard text in social media, use of sarcasm, swear words, non-words, short sentences, multiple languages and so on, which impede the success of current NLP tools to perform good analysis, and examines tools being developed in some current cutting-edge research projects, including not only text-based research but also multimedia analysis.
The document summarizes research on how social networks are used for news consumption and public debate. Focus groups found that audiences regularly access news through social networks but consider mainstream media the main news source. Audiences are motivated to share news and discuss issues with friends, but social networks are seen as limited for constructive debate due to lack of courtesy and polarization of opinions. The researchers suggest exploring differences between expressing opinions and debating, and where alternative news items originate.
The document summarizes the Global Go-To Think Tank Index report produced by the Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program. It provides an overview of the report, which ranks think tanks worldwide based on a survey of over 1,500 experts. It discusses the scope and methodology of the rankings. The top 5 think tanks in several global and regional categories are listed as examples, including Brookings Institution, Chatham House, and Carnegie Endowment as top ranked think tanks worldwide.
The Benefits and Barriers for Social Media for ScientistsCraig McClain
Social media provides both benefits and challenges for scientists. It allows for quick connection and collaboration with other researchers, but does not directly correlate with increased citations. While it can help with outreach, communicating science to the public remains challenging. Many scientists see communication as filling knowledge deficits in the public, but this "deficit model" may not be effective. Effective social media use for outreach requires understanding audience and goals.
Response slides for hybrid media panelNick Anstead
The document discusses integrating older and newer media in the study of political communication. It summarizes three papers on this topic and raises questions about how they address the changing nature of political communication, the relationship between social media and public opinion, and the role of ideology in hybrid media systems. It questions whether hybridity could lead to more stability over time or if offline powers may still dominate during conflicts, and asks if hybrid media is ultimately good for pluralistic democracy.
Conference presentation to ANZCA 2018 on the current ARC Linkage project "Amplifying Public Value", about scholars' engagement and impact through The Conversation.
The document discusses digital advocacy and community organizing. It defines community organizers as facilitators who help community members achieve social justice or other improvements. Community organizing is described as a process of building power by identifying shared problems and solutions, enlisting targets to make changes, and creating democratic institutions. The document also discusses systems theory and the different systems people operate within. It provides context on the Black Lives Matter movement, describing its origins and use of social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter to share information and stories.
This document presents a thesis proposal to conceptualize testimonial user-generated content (tUGC) on Twitter during protests against Dilma Rousseff's impeachment in Brazil. The proposal defines tUGC, identifies patterns in two datasets from the protests, and analyzes tUGC creation through interviews. If approved, the thesis would (1) define tUGC theoretically and empirically, (2) identify tUGC patterns and how they vary contextually, (3) assess tUGC's relative importance, and (4) understand users' experiences creating tUGC. Mixed methods including content analysis and interviews are proposed to analyze tUGC and understand its role in protest events and potential consequences for users
The document discusses the development of communication as an academic discipline. It argues that while communication research excels at describing communication processes, there is a lack of comprehensive explanatory theories. Some initial attempts to develop such theories are highlighted, such as evolutionary theories of news values and theories examining the role of cognitive biases and group decision-making in news production. However, more work is needed to integrate existing descriptive models and advance understanding of the underlying causal processes. This includes collecting longitudinal individual-level data that combines measures of media exposure, social networks, and political attitudes and behaviors. The overall goal is to develop dynamic models that explain how and why communication and its effects change over time.
The document discusses the development of communication as an academic discipline. It argues that while communication research excels at describing communication processes, there is a lack of comprehensive explanatory theories. Some initial attempts to develop such theories are highlighted, such as evolutionary theories of news values and theories examining the role of cognitive biases and group decision-making in news production. However, more work is needed to integrate existing descriptive models and advance understanding of the underlying causal processes. This includes obtaining more fine-grained longitudinal data combining individual variables with measures of specific media content and social networks. The overall goal is to help communication mature as a discipline through developing deep explanatory theories of communication phenomena.
How to Think in the Information Age: Finding Facts in a Post-Truth WorldSt. Petersburg College
With an ever-increasing daily torrent of information raining on people from almost every perceivable angle, it is impossible to process it all and, more importantly, to “separate the wheat from the chaff.” It is vital for everyone to be able to verify the accuracy and authority of information found on the Web while being able to detect bad data and lies to achieve the final goal of making intelligent decisions. As 21st Century library and information professionals, it is essential that we know how to think in the Information Age and to be able to pass this skill on to our users. In this webinar:
~ discover what misinformation is and explore ways to combat it.
~ learn to recognize misleading news, statistics, graphs, infographics, and more.
~ understand basic fallacies and how to detect bias.
~ appreciate how fast information spreads on social media and gather tools to help you become a stronger digital citizen.
~ utilize the scientific method to become a critical thinker in the Information Age.
This document discusses combating hate speech on the internet. It covers four main topics:
1) The concept of hate speech and how it is a social construct dependent on context.
2) Social media platforms and their role in disseminating content, including YouTube's recommender algorithms that may radicalize users and Twitter's trending topics.
3) The hybrid media environment where social media is integrated with traditional news production and dissemination, creating both opportunities and challenges.
4) The current populist political moment in Europe and the need for counter-narratives to challenge dominant stories that fuel resentment and claims of victimhood.
Input Presentation at the „Computational Communication Science: Towards a Strategic Roadmap” conference in Hannover (http://ccsconf.com/), 15th Feb 2018
The document discusses several topics related to humanizing the digital experience including leveraging opinion leaders on social media, addressing content architecture on news websites, and the relationship between technological determinism and social constructionism. It also provides examples of using search and voice technologies to improve digital experiences and access important information. Overall, the document explores ways to make digital content and technologies more helpful, usable and inclusive for all people.
Lee Rainie, Director of the Pew Internet Project, will discuss the Project’s research about how people use technology and the different ways they allocate their attention, connect with organizations, and act as citizens. He will explore how civic institutions can navigate this complicated, diversified environment.
Following, Mentioning, Sharing: A Search for Filter Bubbles in the Australian...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes a study analyzing Twitter data from Australia to look for evidence of filter bubbles and echo chambers. The study analyzed over 255,000 Australian Twitter accounts with more than 1,000 followers between February 2016 and March 2017. It measured how internally or externally focused the accounts' follower networks and communication patterns were. The results showed limited evidence of highly exclusionary echo chambers or filter bubbles. While some specialized clusters like teens and porn were more internally focused, most accounts had more external than internal connections and engagement. The study had some limitations but did not find strong evidence of polarized ideological filtering in the Australian Twittersphere.
Social Computing in the area of Big Data at the Know-Center Austria's leading...Christoph Trattner
Nowadays, social networks and media, such as Facebook, Twitter & Co, affect our communication and our exchange of knowledge more than ever. But which additional benefits can offer social media apart from easy interaction with friends and how can they be used to create additional value for companies and institutions? These are the questions that the area Social Computing at Know-Center addresses in detail.
In this talk we will give a brief overview of industry and non-industry related research projects which we have been involved in recently with my group, Social Computing at the Know-Center, in the context of Big Data and social media. In particular, the talk will highlight specific research project outcomes and work-in-progress that make use of social media data to help people to explore the vastly growing overloaded information space more efficiently.
Identifying the Symptoms of Destructive PolarisationAxel Bruns
This document discusses research into destructive political polarization. It presents a project studying polarization across multiple countries over time using various online data sources. Five symptoms of destructive polarization are identified: breakdown of communication, discrediting information, erasure of complexities, disproportionate attention to extremes, and exclusion through emotions. A referendum in Australia on an Indigenous Voice is used as a case study, and analysis of social media content around it reveals examples of several symptoms, including extreme views receiving attention and complex issues being oversimplified. Further research perspectives are discussed, such as more systematically diagnosing symptoms and evaluating polarization across different forms and platforms.
What Is Lost When Twitter Is Lost? Reflections on the Impending Death of a Pl...Axel Bruns
The document discusses the rise and fall of Twitter as a social media platform. It describes how Twitter started as a niche platform that gained widespread popularity for connecting communities and sharing news in real-time using hashtags. However, over time Twitter struggled with inconsistent management, a slow response to misinformation and harassment, and changes that disrupted the third-party development community. After Elon Musk's acquisition, he laid off much of Twitter's staff and promoted policies that led to increased confusion, chaos and the spread of disinformation, contributing to Twitter's decline.
What Is Lost When Twitter Is Lost? Reflections on the Impending Death of a Pl...Axel Bruns
This document summarizes the rise and fall of the Twitter platform. It describes how Twitter started as a niche site in 2006 but grew to be an important platform for news, communities, and public discourse. However, inconsistent management and slow responses to challenges like misinformation contributed to its decline. Elon Musk's chaotic leadership after acquiring Twitter in 2022 accelerated this, through mass layoffs, attacks on content moderation, and promotion of disinformation, further undermining the role Twitter once played.
Types of Polarisation and Their Operationalisation in Digital and Social Medi...Axel Bruns
This document discusses types of polarization that can be studied in digital media, including micro, meso, and macro levels as well as issue-based, ideological, affective, perceived, and interactional forms. It describes a research project studying drivers of partisanship and polarization across multiple countries over time using digital methods like topic modeling, sentiment analysis, and network analysis. Examples are given of analyzing polarization on topics like climate change on Twitter and political rhetoric on Facebook. Finally, it outlines perspectives on further defining symptoms of dysfunctional polarization and developing more systematic diagnostic approaches.
Determining the Drivers and Dynamics of Partisanship and Polarisation in Onli...Axel Bruns
Paper by Axel Bruns, Katharina Esau, Tariq Choucair, Sebastian Svegaard, and Samantha Vilkins, presented at the ECREA Political Communication conference in Berlin, 1 Sep. 2023.
Towards a New Empiricism: Polarisation across Four DimensionsAxel Bruns
Paper by Axel Bruns, Tariq Choucair, Katharina Esau, Sebastian Svegaard, and Samantha Vilkins, presented at the IAMCR 2023 conference, Lyon, 9-13 July 2023.
The Anatomy of Virality: How COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories Spread across Socia...Axel Bruns
Keynote by Axel Bruns, with Edward Hurcombe and Stephen Harrington, presented at the International Center for Journalists' Empowering the Truth Summit, 23 Feb. 2023.
A Platform Policy Implementation Audit of Actions against Russia’s State-Cont...Axel Bruns
Paper by Sofya Glazunova, Anna Ryzhova, Axel Bruns, Silvia Ximena Montaña-Niño, Arista Beseler, and Ehsan Dehghan, presented at the International Communication Association conference, Toronto, 29 May 2023.
The Filter in Our (?) Heads: Digital Media and PolarisationAxel Bruns
Invited presentation in a seminar series organised by the Centre for Deliberative Democracy & Global Governance at the University of Canberra, the QUT Digital Media Research Centre, and the News and Media Research Centre at the University of Canberra.
Gatewatching 5: Weaponising Newssharing: ‘Fake News’ and Other MalinformationAxel Bruns
This document summarizes a research project analyzing the dissemination of problematic information on Facebook from 2016 to 2021. The researchers compiled a list of over 2,300 "fake news" domains and collected Facebook posts sharing links to those domains. They analyzed the link-sharing network between public Facebook pages/groups and domains, identifying clusters that commonly share the same domains. They also analyzed the on-sharing network between public Facebook spaces to identify communities with common interests spreading this information. The goal is to better understand the dynamics, themes, and networks involved in spreading problematic information at scale on social media over time.
Gatewatching 4: Random Acts of Gatewatching: Everyday Newssharing PracticesAxel Bruns
Lecture 4 in the course From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: News and Journalism in the Digital Age.
This lecture series addresses the continuing transformation of the production and consumption of journalism in the contemporary media environment. It provides a brief history of the impact of participatory online news production and engagement practices – from the first wave of citizen journalism to the social media platforms of today – on how news content is disseminated and experienced; examines reactive and proactive responses to these changes by news organisations and journalists; and explores the longer-term impact of these developments on the public sphere, touching on the power of social media platforms and their role in shaping their users’ information diets.
Readings are largely drawn from Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere (Bruns, 2018), with additional readings recommended for selected lectures.
Reading for this lecture:
Bruns, A. (2018). Random Acts of Gatewatching: Everyday Newssharing Practices. Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere. Ch. 4. Peter Lang.
Gatewatching 1: Introduction: What’s So Different about Journalism Today?Axel Bruns
This document provides an introduction to a course on journalism in the digital age. It discusses how journalism has changed with new technologies and platforms, with both challenges and opportunities. The course will examine topics like citizen and social media, news curation, the spread of misinformation, and how journalists and news organizations are adapting. It will involve lectures, readings, and an final exam to assess students' understanding of the material presented throughout the semester.
Lecture 8 in the course From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: News and Journalism in the Digital Age.
This lecture series addresses the continuing transformation of the production and consumption of journalism in the contemporary media environment. It provides a brief history of the impact of participatory online news production and engagement practices – from the first wave of citizen journalism to the social media platforms of today – on how news content is disseminated and experienced; examines reactive and proactive responses to these changes by news organisations and journalists; and explores the longer-term impact of these developments on the public sphere, touching on the power of social media platforms and their role in shaping their users’ information diets.
Readings are largely drawn from Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere (Bruns, 2018), with additional readings recommended for selected lectures.
Reading for this lecture:
Bruns, A. (2018). Hybrid News Coverage: Liveblogs. Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere. Ch. 7. Peter Lang.
Gatewatching 2: From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: The First Wave of Citizen M...Axel Bruns
Lecture 2 in the course From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: News and Journalism in the Digital Age.
This lecture series addresses the continuing transformation of the production and consumption of journalism in the contemporary media environment. It provides a brief history of the impact of participatory online news production and engagement practices – from the first wave of citizen journalism to the social media platforms of today – on how news content is disseminated and experienced; examines reactive and proactive responses to these changes by news organisations and journalists; and explores the longer-term impact of these developments on the public sphere, touching on the power of social media platforms and their role in shaping their users’ information diets.
Readings are largely drawn from Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere (Bruns, 2018), with additional readings recommended for selected lectures.
Reading for this lecture:
Bruns, A. (2018). From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: The First Wave of Citizen Media. Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere. Ch. 2. Peter Lang.
Gatewatching 9: ‘Real’ News and ‘Fake’ News: Fact-Checking and Media LiteracyAxel Bruns
Lecture 9 in the course From Gatekeeping to Gatewatching: News and Journalism in the Digital Age.
This lecture series addresses the continuing transformation of the production and consumption of journalism in the contemporary media environment. It provides a brief history of the impact of participatory online news production and engagement practices – from the first wave of citizen journalism to the social media platforms of today – on how news content is disseminated and experienced; examines reactive and proactive responses to these changes by news organisations and journalists; and explores the longer-term impact of these developments on the public sphere, touching on the power of social media platforms and their role in shaping their users’ information diets.
Readings are largely drawn from Gatewatching and News Curation: Journalism, Social Media, and the Public Sphere (Bruns, 2018), with additional readings recommended for selected lectures.
Reading for this lecture:
Graves, L., & Cherubini, F. (2016). The Rise of Fact-Checking Sites in Europe. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:d55ef650-e351-4526-b942-6c9e00129ad7
STUDY ON THE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY OF HUZHOU TOURISMAJHSSR Journal
ABSTRACT: Huzhou has rich tourism resources, as early as a considerable development since the reform and
opening up, especially in recent years, Huzhou tourism has ushered in a new period of development
opportunities. At present, Huzhou tourism has become one of the most characteristic tourist cities on the East
China tourism line. With the development of Huzhou City, the tourism industry has been further improved, and
the tourism degree of the whole city has further increased the transformation and upgrading of the tourism
industry. However, the development of tourism in Huzhou City still lags far behind the tourism development of
major cities in East China. This round of research mainly analyzes the current development of tourism in
Huzhou City, on the basis of analyzing the specific situation, pointed out that the current development of
Huzhou tourism problems, and then analyzes these problems one by one, and put forward some specific
solutions, so as to promote the further rapid development of tourism in Huzhou City.
KEYWORDS:Huzhou; Travel; Development
UR BHatti Academy dedicated to providing the finest IT courses training in the world. Under the guidance of experienced trainer Usman Rasheed Bhatti, we have established ourselves as a professional online training firm offering unparalleled courses in Pakistan. Our academy is a trailblazer in Dijkot, being the first institute to officially provide training to all students at their preferred schedules, led by real-world industry professionals and Google certified staff.
4. @qutdmrc
Obama, B.H. (2017)
● Barack Obama’s farewell address:
● “For too many of us it’s become
safer to retreat into our own bubbles,
whether in our neighborhoods, or on
college campuses, or places of
worship, or especially our social
media feeds, surrounded by people
who look like us and share the same
political outlook and never challenge
our assumptions.”
● Nicholas Negroponte: Daily Me (1995)
● Cass Sunstein: echo chambers (2001,
2009, 2017, …)
● Eli Pariser: filter bubbles (2011)
(https://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/president-obama-farewell-
speech/index.html, 11 Jan. 2017)
5. @qutdmrc
Bubble Trouble
● Echo Chambers? Filter Bubbles?
● Where exactly?
● General search engines
● News search engines, portals, and recommender systems
● Social media (but where – profiles, pages, hashtags, groups …?)
● What exactly?
● Hermetically sealed information enclaves full of misinformation?
● Self-reinforcing ideological in-groups of hyperpartisans?
● Politically partisan communities of any kind?
● Why exactly?
● Ideological and societal polarisation amongst citizens?
● Algorithmic construction of distinct and separate publics?
● Feedback loop between the two?
● Defined how exactly?
● Argument from anecdote and ‘common sense’, rather than empirical evidence
● Promoted by non-experts (Sunstein: legal scholar; Pariser: activist and tech entrepreneur)
6. @qutdmrc
Echo Chambers? Filter Bubbles?
● What even are they?
● Both fundamentally related to underlying network structures
● Definitional uncertainty, despite (or because of) Sunstein and Pariser
● Vague uses especially in mainstream discourse, often used interchangeably
● Fundamental differences:
● Echo chambers: connectivity, i.e. closed groups vs. overlapping publics
● Filter bubbles: communication, i.e. deliberate exclusion vs. widespread sharing
echo chamber filter bubble
7. @qutdmrc
Working Definitions
● An echo chamber comes into being where a group of participants choose to
preferentially connect with each other, to the exclusion of outsiders. The more
fully formed this network is (that is, the more connections are created within
the group, and the more connections with outsiders are severed), the more
isolated from the introduction of outside views is the group, while the views of
its members are able to circulate widely within it.
● A filter bubble emerges when a group of participants, independent of the
underlying network structures of their connections with others, choose to
preferentially communicate with each other, to the exclusion of outsiders. The
more consistently they exercise this choice, the more likely it is that
participants’ own views and information will circulate amongst group
members, rather than any information introduced from the outside.
● Note that these patterns are determined by a mix of both algorithmic
curation and shaping and personal choice.
9. @qutdmrc
Echo Chambers and Filter Bubbles in Social Media
● Early blogosphere studies:
● Strong U.S. focus
● Polarisation and ‘mild echo chambers’
● E.g. Adamic & Glance (2005)
● Social media studies:
● Especially Twitter, less research
on Facebook or other platforms
● Hashtag / keyword datasets
● ‘Open forums and echo chambers’
● Significant distinctions between
@mention, retweet, follow networks
● And between lead users and more
casual participants
● E.g. Williams et al. (2015)
Adamic & Glance (2005)
Williams et al. (2015)
10. @qutdmrc
Pew Center (2016)
Süddeutsche Zeitung (2017)
Bruns et al. (2017)
And Yet…
● Social media surveys:
● Users do encounter counter-attitudinal
political views in their networks
● … to the point of exhaustion
● E.g. Pew Center (2016)
● Broader network mapping:
● Political partisans share similar interests
(except for the political fringe)
● E.g. Süddeutsche Zeitung (2017)
● Comprehensive national studies:
● Whole-of-platform networks show
thematic clustering, but few fundamental
disconnections
● E.g. Bruns et al. (2017)
US
11. @qutdmrc
New Evidence on Filter Bubbles in Search
● Mid-scale tests:
● No personalised filter bubbles in search
results for U.S. politicians
● 41 of 47 outlets recommended to
conservatives and liberals
● Five dominant news sources:
almost too much uniformity
● See Nechushtai & Lewis (2019)
● Also for Germany: Haim et al. (2018)
● Large-scale tests:
● No personalised filter bubble in searches
for German parties and politicians
● Largely identical search results
● In 5-10% of cases even in the same order
● See Algorithm Watch (2018)
Nechushtai & Lewis (2019)
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ3KHiqGmDE)
13. @qutdmrc
Case Studies Shouldn’t Be Generalised
● Need to see the big picture:
● Individual hashtags or pages may be ideologically pure, …
● … but they’re embedded in a complex platform structure (Dubois & Blank 2018)
● Serendipity is ubiquitous:
● Habitual newssharing in everyday, non-political contexts
● Selective exposure ≠ selective avoidance: we seek, but we don’t evade (Weeks et al. 2016)
● Homophily ≠ heterophobia: ‘echo chambers’ might just be communities of interest
● Cross-ideological connections almost impossible to avoid:
● Facebook pages may be engines of homophily, …
● … but Facebook profiles are engines of context collapse (Litt & Hargittai 2016)
● Because we don’t only connect with our ‘political compadres’, pace Pariser (2015)
● ‘Hard’ echo chambers / filter bubbles are possible, but very rare:
● Requires cultish levels of devotion to ideological purity (O’Hara and Stevens 2015)
● E.g. specialty platforms for hyperpartisan fringe groups (4chan, 8chan, Gab), …
● … but the hyperpartisans are also heavy users of mainstream news
● Even if only to develop new conspiracy theories and disinformation (Garrett et al. 2013)
15. @qutdmrc
Self-Serving Techno-Determinism
● Humans are complicated:
● Algorithms provide only limited personalisation
● Also because our interests and networks are complex and inconsistent
● Mainstream information sources + random serendipity = mixed information diet
● Moral panics based on simplistic arguments:
● Sunstein & Pariser mainly provide personal, anecdotal evidence
● Significant overestimation of the power of AI at least since Negroponte
● “A myth just waiting to concretize into common wisdom” (Weinberger 2004)
● But very handy for blame-shifting and attacking social media platforms
● “The dumbest metaphor on the Internet” (Meineck 2018):
● Not just dumb, but keeping us from seeing more important challenges
● People do encounter a diverse range of content, …
● … but the question is what they do with it
17. @qutdmrc
It’s the People, Stupid – Not the Technology
The problem with an extraterrestrial-conspiracy mailing list
isn’t that it’s an echo chamber; it’s that it thinks
there’s a conspiracy by extraterrestrials.
— Weinberger (2004)
● Fifteen years later:
● The problem isn’t that there are hyperpartisan echo chambers or
filter bubbles; it’s that there are hyperpartisan fringe groups that
fundamentally reject, and actively fight, any mainstream societal
and democratic consensus.
The problem is political polarisation, not communicative fragmentation.
There is no echo chamber or filter bubble – the filter is in our heads.
18. @qutdmrc
Further Outlook
● Understanding polarisation:
● How might we assess levels of polarisation – over time, across countries, between groups,
across platforms?
● How do individuals slide into hyperpartisanship, and how can this be reversed?
● How do hyperpartisan groups process information that challenges their worldviews?
● What processes drive their dissemination of mis/disinformation, conspiracy theories, trolling,
and abuse?
● Combatting polarisation:
● How can mainstream society be protected from hyperpartisanship?
● How can mis/disinformation be countered and neutralised?
● What role can digital media literacy play, and how can its abuse be prevented?
● Methodological frameworks:
● Media and communication studies work on opinion leadership and multi-step flows
● Cultural studies work on negotiated and oppositional readings
● Media psychology work on cognitive processing of media content
● Digital media studies work on population-scale processes of news engagement
● Education work on digital media literacies across all age groups
20. @qutdmrc
Digital Humanities Research Group, Western Sydney U, 22 May 2019
Axel Bruns | @snurb_dot_info
@socialmediaQUT – http://socialmedia.qut.edu.au/
@qutdmrc – https://www.qut.edu.au/research/dmrc
This research is supported by the ARC Future Fellowship project
“Understanding Intermedia Information Flows in the Australian
Online Public Sphere”, the ARC Discovery project “Journalism
beyond the Crisis: Emerging Forms, Practices, and Uses”, and the
ARC LIEF project “TrISMA: Tracking Infrastructure for Social
Media Analysis.”