For over two decades, political communication research has hailed the potentially reinvigorating effect of social media on democracy. Social media was expected to provide new opportunities for people to learn about politics and public affairs, and to participate politically. Building on two systematic literature reviews on social media, and its effects on political participation and knowledge (2000–2020), and introducing empirical evidence drawing on four original US survey data that expands for over a decade (2009–2020), this Element contends that social media has only partially fulfilled this tenet, producing a Social Media Democracy Mirage. That is, social media have led to a socio-political paradox in which people are more participatory than ever, yet not necessarily more informed.

Previous research has offered mixed results regarding whether federalism and other mechanisms of multilevel governance (MLG) present advantages or disadvantages for civil society and, in particular, impoverish ethnic minorities. Since self-determination is a key element of the political autonomy of Indigenous peoples (IPs), this paper explores under which circumstances different mechanisms of MLG foster the rights of IPs in the Federation of Malaysia from the perspective of Indigenous activists. This work relies on face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with Indigenous activists, advocates and stakeholders from different states of the federation, with different levels of self-government and quality of democracy. The main findings suggest that any attempt to evaluate the performance of MLG arrangements in the fulfilment of the rights of IPs should consider the relationship between Indigenous organizations and state and local governments – a relationship that depends on the distribution of Indigenous populations – and the degree of political accountability in specific territories.

With the rise of the internet and social media, many people find their news online, often only incidentally. Burgeoning research in this line of inquiry has explored the connection between incidental exposure to news (INE) and participatory political behaviors. However, certain peculiarities still need to be addressed in this area. Working with panel survey data from the United States, in this study, we uncover the relationship between incidental news exposure and political consumerism as well as nuances thereof. While there is a positive connection between overall INE and consumerism, our findings reveal that different effects emerge depending on the place of incidental exposure (on social media, traditional media, or online), thus highlighting that the focus on social media INE applied in many studies needs to be broadened. Furthermore, we find differences between those who boycott and buycott, challenging the traditional composition of the political consumerism measurement.

Research has shown positive attitudes toward journalists and their roles foster pro-democratic outcomes. With the rise of social media as news sources, algorithms operate as gatekeepers, which may alter linkages between public opinion, journalists, and media trust. However, results from a panel-survey conducted in the U.S. underline citizens’ preference for journalist gatekeeping in fueling trust in traditional and social media news. Conversely, preference for algorithmic news selection does not affect people’s levels of trust. Furthermore, traditional news use moderates this relationship as those who report higher traditional news use and a preference for professional news gatekeeping trust traditional news the most. This study contributes to current discussions on the effects of preference for journalists’ or algorithmic news selection, arguing that evaluations of journalists’ editorial work remain critical to explain media trust.