#Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media
... The rise of polarization is not merely a consequence of casual historical events, such as the significant development of certain technologies and the internet (Lynch 2016), which has expanded our possibilities regarding the information we consume and the people we engage with (Sunstein 2017). 1 Polarization can also be fueled by political action, strategically employed to advance certain agendas and obtain political gain. The strategic promotion of polarization can be carried out through different mechanisms, ranging from disinformation (Rid 2020) and exploiting the way our informational environment works by sending personalized messages to urge supporters to take action (Stromer-Galley 2019), to generating situations of crossed disagreement in public settings Osorio and Villanueva 2019), to mention a few. ...
... So one important aspect of harmful polarization is that it is characterized by an increase in the level of confidence deposited in the core ideas of the ideological group with which one identifies at a particular time. 3 Following some authors, I call this "radicalism" (Sunstein 2017;Almagro 2023). ...
... In other words, the opinions or contents that citizens hold determine the extent of their ideological polarization. Extremism-the tendency toward the poles of an ideological spectrum-is the most common form of this type of polarization (Sunstein 2017;Almagro 2023). ...
A population can be ideologically or affectively polarized. Ideological polarization relates to people's political beliefs, while affective polarization deals with people's feelings toward the ingroup and the outgroup. Both types of mental states, beliefs and feelings, are typically measured through direct self-report surveys. One philosophical assumption underlying this way of measuring polarization is a concrete version of the first-person authority thesis: the speaker's sincerity guarantees the truth of their mental self-ascriptions. Based on various empirical studies, the first part of this paper argues that we are particularly bad at spotting our own mental states regarding political issues. This, in turn, raises doubts about the accuracy of direct self-report surveys in measuring polarization. In the second part, I introduce Michael Lynch's notion of political meaning to argue that traditional surveys can still provide valuable information for detecting polarization. However, I suggest that this information pertains not to participants' beliefs and feelings, but rather to their level of commitment to the core beliefs of the political groups they identify with, which is a relevant aspect of pernicious polarization.
... Some experts fear detrimental consequences arising from information environments characterized by a high degree of homogeneity in which one is mostly (in extreme cases: exclusively) consuming information aligning with preexisting attitudes and beliefs: The adoption of more extreme attitudes and polarization is feared, especially when political information and views are at stake (Pariser, 2011;Sunstein, 2002Sunstein, , 2018. Despite theoretical assumptions supporting this apprehension, empirical research on the existence and effects of homogeneous and attitude-aligning (political) information environments is inconclusive at best (Ross-Arguedas et al., 2022). ...
... Theories underlying prominent metaphors like "filter bubble" and "echo chamber" share some common assumptions (see Electronic Supplementary Material, ESM 1, Part 1): They contrast information environments in which individuals are exclusively presented information aligning with their attitudes (i.e., a filter bubble or echo chamber) versus not absolutely homogeneous and attitude-aligning information environments. Often these theories focus on the existence of such environments in the online context and point toward detrimental effects of such environments, especially when political information or news and related views are at stake (Jamieson & Cappella, 2008;Pariser, 2011;Sunstein, 2018). ...
... As mentioned before, experts are concerned that being caught in a political information environment characterized by a low degree of heterogeneity, and consuming homogeneous and attitude-aligning information and news, accordingly, contributes to the extremization and polarization of political views (Pariser, 2011;Sunstein, 2004Sunstein, , 2018. The term "political views" is used as an umbrella term here subsuming any kind of attitude or opinion on politically relevant topics as well as ideology. ...
This work investigated the prevalence of filter bubble or echo chamber-related phenomena, psychological factors rendering individuals resilient or vulnerable to them, and their associations to political views focusing on extremity and polarization. For this, a cross-cultural replication of a study by Sindermann et al. (2021) was conducted. As an extension, multiple political views variables were assessed to examine whether the application of different conceptualizations of political views explains heterogeneous findings across previous studies. Two samples were recruited: 390 (n = 135 males) US college students and a quota sample of 489 (n = 243 males) US adults. Participants completed personality scales and measures on political news consumption homogeneity versus heterogeneity and political views. Consistent with previous research, results revealed few individuals consume political news absolutely homogeneously. Openness was negatively related to the degree of political news consumption homogeneity, and the relationship between political news consumption homogeneity and political views yielded inconsistent, often statistically nonsignificant, results. These findings challenge the prevailing notion of filter bubbles and echo chambers as widespread phenomena and indicate that relationships between political news consumption homogeneity and political views are not necessarily deleterious with respect to extremization and polarization. As such, the results suggest that these phenomena might not be as significant for the general population as previously thought. Nonetheless, certain individuals might still find themselves in filter bubbles or echo chambers and suffer from accompanying consequences. In this regard, the present work replicates findings underscoring that individuals with lower Openness exhibit greater political news consumption homogeneity.
... Sunstein's later reflections on "#Republic" also consider how algorithmic tailoring of information environments can be balanced with interventions that increase exposure to diverse viewpoints [27]. Similarly, the work of Prior [28] and Barberá [29], as well as Muthukrishna and Henrich's theoretical explorations [30], suggest that not all network structures or content distributions yield the same polarization outcomes. ...
... Thus, our extended discussion aligns with, and adds a mathematical scaffold to, a wide array of influential works that have examined polarization, echo chambers, and the implications of personalization. By linking these strands of scholarship, ranging from Pariser's filter bubble hypothesis [18] and Sunstein's deliberative ideals [19,27], to empirical findings by Flaxman et al. [21], Bakshy et al. [22], and theoretical frameworks by Dandekar et al. [20], we show that at the heart of advanced recommendation models lies a simple geometric rule that can encourage fragmentation. The realization that complexity does not negate this fundamental similarity-based structure invites further interdisciplinary inquiry and careful consideration as our media ecosystems continue to evolve and shape collective understanding. ...
The increasing reliance on digital platforms shapes how individuals understand the world, as recommendation systems direct users toward content "similar" to their existing preferences. While this process simplifies information retrieval, there is concern that it may foster insular communities, so-called echo chambers, reinforcing existing viewpoints and limiting exposure to alternatives. To investigate whether such polarization emerges from fundamental principles of recommendation systems, we propose a minimal model that represents users and content as points in a continuous space. Users iteratively move toward the median of locally recommended items, chosen by nearest-neighbor criteria, and we show mathematically that they naturally coalesce into distinct, stable clusters without any explicit ideological bias. Computational simulations confirm these findings and explore how population size, adaptation rates, content production probabilities, and noise levels modulate clustering speed and intensity. Our results suggest that similarity-based retrieval, even in simplified scenarios, drives fragmentation. While we do not claim all systems inevitably cause polarization, we highlight that such retrieval is not neutral. Recognizing the geometric underpinnings of recommendation spaces may inform interventions, policies, and critiques that address unintended cultural and ideological divisions.
... In addition, social identity theory suggests that individuals tend to gravitate towards others who share their views while showing bias against those with opposing opinions [6]. This tendency fuels the creation of partisan echo chambers on social media, where misinformation can spread unchecked among like-minded users and hamper meaningful democratic discourse across different viewpoints [7,8]. This identity-based fragmentation on social media is of particular concern in the context of the rising importance of identity politics in contemporary political discourse [9]. ...
... Group polarisation theory suggests that echo chambers can lead partisans to hold their existing views more strongly when they are exposed only to opinions from their own side, thus intensifying their political dispositions. Social media provide a platform for like-minded partisans to connect and create echo chambers [7]. These online echo chambers not only foster tribal mindsets and exacerbate attitude polarisation among the public [17], but also function as a communication space for hate speech [18]. ...
This study examines code-switching behaviours of cross-platform social media users specifically between Twitter and Parler during the 2020 US Presidential Election. Utilising social identity theory as a framework, we examine messages related to voter fraud by users who migrated from Twitter to Parler following Twitter bans. Our analysis covers 38,798 accounts active on both platforms, analysing 1.5 million tweets and more than 100,000 parleys. The key findings of the study are as follows: First, we discovered differing levels of network homophily between high degree centrality and low-degree centrality cross-platform users, illustrating how individuals with varying degrees of influence engage differently across platforms. Second, we observed higher toxicity levels in heterogeneous networks, which include both in-group and out-group members, compared with homogeneous networks that are primarily composed of in-group members. This suggests the level of toxicity in online spaces correlates with the level of group diversity. Third, we found that cross-platform users created distinctive discourse community with in-group and out-group members, indicating that content and discussions within these networks are influenced by the social identity dynamics of the users. Our study contributes to the current research in political communication and information science by proposing comparative user analyses across multiple social media platforms. Focusing on a critical period of platform transition during a contentious political event, our study offers insights into the dynamics of online communities and the shifting nature of political language used by social media users.
... A pivotal characteristic of social media platforms is their facilitation of tailored information consumption, allowing users to reinforce their existing political beliefs and preferences easily. Users selectively follow pages and accounts that mirror their political inclinations, receiving politically congruent information via social recommendations and connecting with like-minded individuals (Bakshy et al., 2015;Sunstein, 2018). In addition, as users interact with content from these sources and their online connections, social media algorithms refine their understanding of users' political preferences, delivering even more personalized news (Thorson & Wells, 2016). ...
... In addition, as users interact with content from these sources and their online connections, social media algorithms refine their understanding of users' political preferences, delivering even more personalized news (Thorson & Wells, 2016). Consequently, social media may limit users' exposure to diverse viewpoints, potentially amplifying negative sentiments toward political adversaries (Jung & Lee, 2024;Pariser, 2011;Sunstein, 2018). ...
To explain the participatory effects of news exposure, communication scholars have long relied upon the “virtuous circle” framework of media use and civic participation. That is, news consumption makes people more knowledgeable, and trustful toward institutions and political processes, making them active and responsible citizens, which then leads them to engage in various political activities. In a social media environment, however, the applicability of the “virtuous circle” is increasingly dubious. A mounting body of empirical research indicates that news consumption via social media does not necessarily yield actual information gains. Instead, it often fosters a false perception of being well-informed and politically competent, thereby stimulating political engagement. Furthermore, selective information consumption and interaction within like-minded networks on social media frequently exacerbate animosity toward opposing political factions, which can serve as a catalyst for political involvement. In light of these findings, we propose replacing the “virtuous circle” framework for a “self-righteous” one. In this new model, social media news users develop a heightened sense of confidence in their knowledge, regardless of its accuracy, and consequently become more inclined to engage in politics by reinforcing the perception that the opposing side is inherently wrong and that achieving victory is imperative.
... According to the hypothesis popularized by Eli Pariser's Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web is Changing What We Read and Think (2011), personalization algorithms sort users based on the surveillance of their online activity into groups of other like-minded users, or filter bubbles. Filter bubbles in turn induce what social psychologists refer to as belief (or group) polarization (Cho et al., 2020;Dandekar et al., 2013;Mäs & Flache, 2013;Sunstein, 2017). Belief polarization is the empirically-proven tendency for groups of individuals with similar beliefs to adopt more extreme versions of their beliefs after group interaction, such as discussion (Moscovici & Zavalloni, 1969;Sunstein, 2009). ...
... The discourse around social media radicalization has shifted in the past several years. Theorists initially drew on the notion of personalization-induced filter bubbles to account for social media radicalization (Pariser, 2011;Sunstein, 2017). This interpretation has, however, been complicated by empirical and theoretical research. ...
It is often claimed that social media accelerate political extremism by employing personalization algorithms that filter users into groups with homogenous beliefs. While an intuitive position, recent research has shown that social media users exhibit self-filtering tendencies. In this paper, I apply Hannah Arendt’s theory of political judgment to hypothesize a cause for self-filtering on social media. According to Arendt, a crucial step in political judgment is the imagination of a general standpoint of distinct yet equal perspectives, against which individuals compare their own judgments in order to test their defensibility. I argue that social media inhibit this step by gamifying the pursuit of social status, which encourages users to consider the perspectives of others not for the sake of a general standpoint but for the sake of improving their social status, resulting in self-filtering. Consequently, ameliorating political extremism on social media requires not just reforming the algorithms that deliver content to users, but the interfaces on which users present their social identities.
... The current findings have scholarly implications as well as practical implications for news organizations, social media platforms, and those interested in curbing affective polarization. A rich literature has investigated social media's potential role in exacerbating polarization (e.g., Allcott et al., 2020;Settle, 2018), in part because of their algorithms (Levy, 2021;Sunstein, 2018;Van Bavel et al., 2021; but see Guess et al., 2023), which may accelerate the spread of inflammatory content and foster ideological echo chambers (Sunstein, 2018; but see Barberá, 2020). The current experiment contributes by shedding light on how specific changes in content exposure might affect individual social media users' animosity toward their outparty members. ...
... The current findings have scholarly implications as well as practical implications for news organizations, social media platforms, and those interested in curbing affective polarization. A rich literature has investigated social media's potential role in exacerbating polarization (e.g., Allcott et al., 2020;Settle, 2018), in part because of their algorithms (Levy, 2021;Sunstein, 2018;Van Bavel et al., 2021; but see Guess et al., 2023), which may accelerate the spread of inflammatory content and foster ideological echo chambers (Sunstein, 2018; but see Barberá, 2020). The current experiment contributes by shedding light on how specific changes in content exposure might affect individual social media users' animosity toward their outparty members. ...
Affective polarization is on the rise, not least in the United States. Recent scholarship has identified meta-perceptions, concerning how much opposing partisans think they dislike each other, as a potential driver of actual interparty animosity. I theorize that social media content shapes people’s political meta-perceptions, which in turn influence affective polarization. I integrate prior work on meta-perceptions with research on intergroup conflict and social norms to distinguish perceptions about people’s ingroup from perceptions about their outgroup. A probability sample ( n = 825) shows outgroup meta-perceptions (i.e., perceptions about the outparty’s feelings toward the inparty) are linked to actual affective polarization. Ingroup meta-perceptions do not predict affective polarization above and beyond outgroup meta-perceptions. An original experiment ( n = 541) then examines the proposed causal pathway by exposing subjects to politically unifying, divisive, or neutral media content. In line with the proposed model, unifying content reduces affective polarization, and this effect is mediated by political meta-perceptions. Surprisingly, divisive content has no effects on meta-perceptions or affective polarization. These findings have theoretical implications for research on social media, perceptions, and intergroup relations. These, as well as practical implications, are discussed in light of mounting concerns about increasing affective polarization and the role social media may play in exacerbating it.
... On the other hand, there is evidence of polarising and divisive effects of digital media. These negative effects can be brought about through, for instance, the creation of insulated "echo chambers" with citizens being exposed largely to the news and perspectives that align with their own (Sunstein, 2018). They can also be brought about through digital media facilitating exposure to opposing views reduced to their caricature versions. ...
Do digital media support or undermine democracy and freedom? Building on recent scholarship that highlights the diversity of digital media’s effects, this article begins with the premise that digital media do not clearly shape political life in contemporary societies one way or another but are instead ambivalent. The article seeks to explicate how exactly the ambivalence of digital media emerges and to arrive at a suitable conceptualisation of their role. Empirically, to capture how digital media become embroiled in very different kinds of political action, I draw on a prolonged ethnographic engagement with two war‐time volunteer initiatives in Russia. Both initiatives participate in politics by assisting Ukrainian war refugees who fled in the direction of Russia, and both rely on the messaging app Telegram. However, the participation of one amounts to resisting the imperative of supporting the aggression foisted by the state on Russian citizens, while the participation of another heightens this very imperative. I engage with these two contrasting digitally mediated initiatives doing similar activities but acting on vastly different commitments to illuminate the digital media’s ambivalence. I show how digital media contribute to the creation of and cracking down on democratic openings by becoming actors in the collective action networks that strive to resist oppressive political strategies and, simultaneously, in the networks that strive to further strengthen the very same strategies.
... Research shows that 75% of Instagram users acknowledge that the algorithm has limited the diversity of information they receive. This phenomenon is known as the "filter bubble" or "echo chamber," where users are only exposed to content that reinforces their own perspectives and beliefs (Sunstein, 2018). In the context of revising the 2024 PILKADA Law, Instagram's algorithm can reinforce users' cognitive biases towards certain political issues. ...
Social media plays a crucial role in mobilizing support and disseminating
political messages. However, the use of social media also presents new
challenges, such as the echo chamber phenomenon, which can amplify
polarization and reduce openness to differing perspectives. This research
aims to analyze the echo chamber phenomenon on Instagram in relation
to the discourse surrounding the revision of the 2024 Pilkada Law. The
study explores how polarization and opinion formation develop in digital
spaces and their impact on Indonesia's democratic processes. The
research employs a qualitative approach, using content analysis. The
theoretical framework is based on the filter bubble theory within a critical
paradigm. The findings show that Instagram's algorithms actively shape
echo chambers by prioritizing content aligned with users' preferences.
This leads to users being frequently exposed to content that reinforces
their political beliefs while limiting access to alternative perspectives, as
the algorithm suppresses information deemed irrelevant. This results in
the reinforcement of biases against political opponents and a reduced
willingness to reevaluate political views due to limited exposure to diverse
information. Given these findings, digital literacy becomes essential to
mitigate the negative impacts of echo chambers. There is a need for
technological intervention by Instagram, including algorithm adjustments
to promote content fostering cross-group dialogue. Equally important are
public awareness campaigns to encourage inclusive discussions on social
media and educational initiatives to inform the public about the dangers
of digital polarization
... These range from improving public technical literacy to establishing just and transparent deliberative mechanisms. Efforts are required from government entities, civil organizations, and rational citizens themselves to make systemic changes (Sunstein, 2017). Only through these efforts can we ensure that the development and application of AI technology are fair and just, gaining the support and recognition of the rational public . ...
本文深入探討人工智慧(AI)於實現共同福祉與幸福、公平與非歧視、理性公共討論及自主與控制之倫理與正義重要性與挑戰。以中央研究院LLM事件及國家科學技術委員會(NSTC)AI技術研發指導方針為基礎,本文分析AI能否滿足人類共同利益與福祉。針對AI不公正,本文評估其於區域、產業及社會影響。並探討AI公平與非歧視挑戰,尤其偏差數據訓練問題,及後處理監管,強調理性公共討論之重要性。進而,本文探討理性公眾於公共討論中之挑戰及應對,如STEM科學素養與技術能力教育之重要性。最後,本文提出“以人為本”方法,非僅依賴AI技術效用最大化,以實現AI正義。
關鍵詞:AI倫理與正義、公平與非歧視、偏差數據訓練、公共討論、自主性、以人為本的方法
... Many of these issues can be framed as potential threats to democracy. One way of normatively evaluating current digital technologies such as ai and digital social media, therefore, then, is to ask whether and how they may support democracy (Sunstein 2017;Sudmann 2019;Risse 2023;Coeckelbergh 2024). For this purpose, it is important to make one's conception of democracy explicit. ...
Are current digital technologies supporting democracy? Answering that question depends, among other things, on what is meant by democracy. This article mobilizes a communicative conception of democracy. While it is generally accepted that communication is important for democracy, there are directions in democracy theory that understand communication as not merely instrumental but as central to what democracy is and should be. Inspired by Dewey, Habermas, and Young, this paper articulates a conception of democracy as communication. It is then argued that this "deep-communicative" ideal of democracy, together with the usual ethical and epistemic norms of communication as sketched by O'Neill, offer a tentative normative framework for evaluating digital technologies in relation to democracy.
... People who, by tradition, find legacy media trustworthy and important may continue to be loyal users, whereas others might migrate to more entertainment-oriented or 'soft news' media content offered on a variety of platforms and channels . The turmoil in and distrust of legacy media sources have given rise to the popularity of social media, which, operating on the principles of protective filter algorithms and echo chambers, gather like-minded individuals and screen out information and views that do not sit well with the group consensus (Sunstein, 2018). This is contributing to discursive divides, political gridlocks, and the atrophy of public spheres (Dahlgren, 2018, p. 6), all of which run counter to the idea of deliberative communication. ...
... Para Engesser et al. (2017), una de las problemáticas actuales de las sociedades democráticas es la conformación y capacidad organizativa de movimientos minoritarios que han logrado ser visibles y representados en instituciones públicas, donde exponencialmente se incide en el uso de algoritmos que permiten la creación de cámaras de eco ideológicas (Aguirre, 2023;Pariser, 2011;Soto, 2017;Sunstein, 2018;Völker, 2019). Lo preocupante es que los ciudadanos se vean expuestos a información que refuerza sus propias opiniones, lo que trae como consecuencia la radicalización política. ...
Las redes sociales de internet han influido en la política y concretamente en la democracia. Asimismo, pueden cambiar muchos aspectos de manera que contribuyan a una democracia más plena y efectiva. En este estudio comprobamos si la existencia y optimización de las redes sociales de internet influye en la efectividad democrática en los países latinoamericanos. Realizamos un estudio estadístico, cuantitativo e inferencial con datos de 2023, utilizando encuestas representativas, para demostrar que el internet y las redes sociales inciden en la democratización de los países antes mencionados. Partimos de la hipótesis propuesta por Lipset: la prosperidad económica de una nación contribuye a fortalecer la democracia.
... Esse contexto fomenta debates sobre os limites éticos e legais da vigilância digital, os direitos à autonomia informacional e as implicações sociais das decisões algorítmicas. Assim, a busca pelo equilíbrio entre inovação tecnológica e valores fundamentais, como liberdade e dignidade humana, coloca os desafios de privacidade e ética no cerne das discussões que moldam a sociedade contemporânea(Dijck et al., 2018;Floridi, 2014;Rafiq, 2018;Sunstein, 2018;Zuboff, 2020). Na área da saúde e da previdência social, a sociedade contemporânea está sendo moldada por uma série de tendências e avanços significativos e preocupações prementes. ...
A presente tese mergulha nas complexidades da interseção entre avanços tecnológicos e a dinâmica democrática na União Europeia, com um foco particular nos eurodeputados(as) e cidadãos portugueses. A pesquisa investiga o impacto das iniciativas e programas de modernização política da UE implementadas nas últimas três décadas, com o objetivo de promover o acesso e a participação dos cidadãos na criação, implementação e avaliação de políticas públicas. Com base no conceito de democracia como uma característica única humana, que abrange a discussão e a gestão em constante mudança de demandas coletivas, este estudo procura compreender como o uso das Novas Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação (NTICs) nos processos democráticos da UE pode ajudar a organização a enfrentar os desafios atuais, como mudanças climáticas, revolução tecnológica e biotecnológica. Adotando uma metodologia mista, que combina aspectos qualitativos e quantitativos, a análise explora a percepção e participação dos representantes políticos e cidadãos portugueses, bem como as políticas públicas implementadas pela UE até o momento em relação à modernização política. O estudo também explora a potencial desconexão entre cidadãos e representantes, mediada por estruturas complexas, e como isso pode impactar a agilidade necessária na regulamentação das NTICs. As conclusões destacam desafios significativos, incluindo a superação de obstáculos burocráticos e o aumento da vontade política para efetivar mudanças no atual modelo democrático representativo da UE. Além disso, o surgimento do "capitalismo de vigilância" por grandes empresas tecnológicas levantam questões cruciais sobre a orientação do poder econômico e político.
This thesis delves into the complexities of the intersection between technological advances and democratic dynamics in the European Union, with a particular focus on MEPs and Portuguese citizens. The research investigates the impact of EU political modernization initiatives and programs implemented over the last three decades, with the aim of promoting citizens' access and participation in the creation, implementation, and evaluation of public policies. Based on the concept of democracy as a unique human characteristic, which encompasses the discussion and management of ever-changing collective demands, this study seeks to understand how the use of New Information and Communication Technologies (NTICs) in the EU's democratic processes can help the organization to face current challenges, such as climate change, technological and biotechnological revolution. Adopting a mixed methodology, which combines qualitative and quantitative aspects, the analysis explores the perception and participation of Portuguese political representatives and citizens, as well as the public policies implemented by the EU to date in relation to political modernization. The study also explores the potential disconnection between citizens and representatives, mediated by complex structures, and how this can impact the agility required in the regulation of NICTs. The findings highlight significant challenges, including overcoming bureaucratic obstacles and increasing political will to effect changes to the EU's current representative democratic model. Furthermore, the emergence of “surveillance capitalism” by large technology companies raises crucial questions about the orientation of economic and political power.
... La utilización del odio por parte de líderes y grupos políticos para solidificar su base y marginalizar a oponentes y minorías socava los fundamentos del respeto mutuo y la tolerancia, pilares esenciales de la democracia. Igualmente, la proliferación del discurso de odio limita el debate público saludable, erosionando así la confianza en las instituciones democráticas y en los procesos políticos (Alcacer Guirao, 2012).Müller (2019) discute cómo la polarización, alimentada por estrategias populistas, contribuye a la degradación de la calidad democrática, mientras queSunstein (2018) advierte sobre los peligros de las cámaras de eco y la polarización 71 en el discurso público, que pueden ser exacerbados por el uso estratégico del odio.Por otro lado, Levitsky y Ziblatt (2018) analizan cómo la erosión de las normas democráticas fundamentales puede llevar a la consolidación de regímenes autoritarios, en los que el odio y la división se utilizan como herramientas para mantener el poder. Además, Ben-Ghiat (2020) explora cómo los líderes autoritarios históricamente han explotado el odio y el miedo para manipular la opinión pública y reforzar su régimen. ...
Con el objetivo general de facilitar un conocimiento pormenorizado de la percepción que los jóvenes españoles tienen sobre los delitos de odio en el panorama nacional, pero teniendo en cuenta la territorialidad de las comunidades autónomas, se llevó a cabo desde Columbares el presente estudio en colaboración con la Universidad de Murcia. Más específicamente se trata de un estudio que se propone conocer la percepción que tienen, analizar los motivos por los piensan que se producen, estudiar la importancia que dan a estos delitos, evaluar si son capaces de detectarlos, los lugares donde más ocurren y cómo actúan ante ellos. Este libro representa un esfuerzo conjunto de investigación, en el que hemos reunido datos, estadísticas y testimonios para ofrecer una visión panorámica de un problema que sigue siendo preocupante en nuestra sociedad. A través de los hallazgos obtenidos, se pretende, así, comprender la realidad actual de los delitos de odio y sentar las bases para la acción y la prevención.
... Surprisingly, exposure to content with higher levels of third-party attacks and vulgarity increases members' likelihood to stay at 2.8% and 1.4%, respectively. One possible explanation is that the participants were surrounded by like-minded members in echo chambers (Sunstein 2018). Although the received comments leveraged vulgar language and third-party attacks, they aligned with the readers' views and enabled them to feel validated and thus stay longer in the community. ...
Growing concerns have been raised about the detrimental effects of uncivil comments on the web towards democracy. However, there is still a lack of understanding about online incivility's nuanced and complicated nature and its impact on conversation development and user behaviors. This work aims to fill that research gap by modeling incivility and its relationship to political discussions. We develop a comprehensive and fine-grained taxonomy that characterizes incivility with vulgarity, name-calling (inter-personal and third-party attacks), aspersion, and stereotypes, and then apply the framework to quantify the level of each incivility category in over 40 million comments from Reddit. Using large-scale quantitative analysis, we investigate the types of interactions and contexts in which incivility is more likely to occur, model how incivility shapes subsequent conversations, and examine user engagement patterns and behavioral changes after exposure to incivility. Our findings show that conversations that start out uncivil tend to become more uncivil in responses, and exposure to different incivility categories has differing effects on community members' engagement. We conclude with the implications of our research in assisting the design and moderation of online political communities.
... While political content on social media occasionally present conflicting viewpoints, its consumption can catalyze exposure to political content. While exposure to social media may exacerbate polarization, mechanisms exist whereby individuals opt to consume content with differing views, potentially mitigating polarization (Sunstein, 2017). It is critical to research social media as a political information source because the diverse information it conveys, which may lead to political disputes, especially for those leveraging social platforms for political messages. ...
In contemporary society, social media has emerged as the predominant platform
for the dissemination of political information, with a primary goal of influencing
user perspectives. Despite its prevalence, scant research has scrutinized the
cognitive mechanisms underlying the reception of political messages via social
media and their consequent impact on attitude transformation. This study
endeavors to investigate the nexus between political information consumption on
social media and the efficacy of political persuasion, while also probing the roles
of political interest and cognitive elaboration in this persuasive process.
Employing a survey methodology distributed through social media networks, the
study amassed responses from 470 participants residing in Jakarta and its
environs. Findings elucidate the discernible influence of social media usage for
political information consumption and cognitive elaboration on the dynamics of
political persuasion, whereas political interest exhibited negligible impact.
Consequently, this study underscores the potential for political information
purveyors to leverage social media platforms to foster cognitive engagement
among users, thereby enhancing receptivity to political messaging.
... Resultantes do treinamento de algoritmos baseados em dados como "curtidas", comentários, compartilhamentos e tempo gasto em cada postagem no Facebook, os "filtros-bolha", segundo Pariser (2011), são curadorias de informações realizadas por algoritmos e inteligência artificial (Pariser , 2011) que se tornaram um problema para o debate público e a circulação de informações relevantes para a cidadania global. Filtros bolhas estão relacionados também às "câmaras de eco" (Sunstein, 2001), enclaves de informação que tornam os grupos mais confiantes, extremistas e menos inclinados ao diálogo (Sunstein, 2017). Para esse autor, o isolamento e personalização impostos pelas tecnologias vê tornando o debate público mais vulnerável a manobras de homofilia conduzidas por grupos não comprometidos com a democracia, portanto, gerando condições indesejáveis para o desenvolvimento de consensos sociais. ...
A discussão em torno da Inteligência Artificial (IA) surge habitualmente polarizada na relação entre humanos e máquinas. O debate público sobre o tema foi fortemente impulsionado pelo sucesso do ChatGPT (OpenAI) e pelas suas capacidades amplamente mediatizadas. Entre o deslumbramento e o receio perante a contínua e acelerada evolução da IA, analisam-se as suas implicações em áreas tão diversas como o ensino, a política, a saúde ou a arte. No campo dos media e do jornalismo muitas são as expetativas, mas também as interrogações que se colocam no âmbito das múltiplas aplicações da Inteligência Artificial.
... Sin embargo, en el actual ecosistema comunicativo las redes sociales también tienen un papel protagónico, actuando como fuente de información para la sociedad civil, pero también como vehículo de transmisión y filtrado de dicha información. Esta segunda función es especialmente polémica ya que algunos autores (Barbera et al. 2015, Sunstein 2017, Suhay et al. 2018) apuntan a que el funcionamiento de las propias plataformas favorecería que las personas usuarias se relacionen solo con determinados contenidos, lo que estimularía un clima polarizado en el que el debate entre posturas alejadas tendría más carácter de enfrentamiento que de intercambio de ideas (Tucker et al. 2018). ...
La digitalización y el auge de las redes sociales han transformado el panorama comunicativo actual, generando preocupación por la desinformación y la polarización. Este estudio se enfoca en cómo los medios y Twitter abordan la propuesta de abolición de la prostitución, revelando que las noticias se centran en el debate político sin profundizar en detalles específicos o consecuencias. En Twitter, los comentarios, mayormente de actores políticos, se centran en posturas políticas más que en aspectos técnicos o legales. El análisis sugiere que, en esta plataforma, el derecho penal se utiliza como pretexto para la discusión política, limitando la comprensión del fenómeno ante la ciudadanía. Aunque la digitalización puede democratizar el debate público, la falta de enfoque en detalles técnicos puede reducir la comprensión de temas complejos como la abolición de la prostitución.
... Knowledge resistance, fake news, science denial, post truths, populism, pseudoscience, echo chambers, information cocoons, and conspiracies are but a few terms and concepts used to capture the matter (cf. Farkas & Schou 2020;Klintman 2019;McIntyre 2018McIntyre , 2020McIntyre , 2021Mohammed 2012;Oreskes 2021;Oreskes & Conway 2012;Sunstein 2007Sunstein , 2014aSunstein , 2014bSunstein , 2017. In research about vaccination hesitancy, the interpretations and analyses of it are often made in terms of these and related concepts. ...
... When studying the bipartisan American system (Mason, 2018), we are particularly interested in the Republican/conservative versus Democrat/ liberal dichotomy. Our definition is not limited to explicit expressions of electoral preferences (Riedl et al., 2023), but rather to any communication that interprets events, people, or social phenomena in ways that project one's association with or disdain toward one of the two political parties and its followers (Sunstein, 2018). ...
Drawing on theories of identity politics and partisan polarization, we explored the politicization of Google Play’s news app reviews—an explicitly non-political domain. Using a mixed-methods approach, Analysis of Topic Model Networks (ANTMNs), combining topic modeling, network analysis, community detection, and theory-driven qualitative reading, we analyzed 759,143 reviews from 2009 to 2022 across 46 news apps. Three themes emerged: Technical, Content Quality, and Political. The political discourse in reviews has intensified over the years, with notable spikes around election periods. Accusations of bias were found to correlate most strongly with lower app ratings. The findings provide alarming empirical evidence for the politicization of non-political spaces, such as the app reviews section on app stores. With identity politics on the rise, this study sheds light on the importance of considering non-political online spaces for the study of political discourse.
... Consider next enlightened understanding (C4). From the literature, we know that both affective polarization and group polarization can have negative epistemic effects (Iyengar, Sood, and Lelkes 2012;Iyengar et al. 2019;Sunstein 2017). However, it has also been argued that there can be epistemic advantages to people clustering in groups of likeminded others (Mansbridge et al. 2012, 24;Sunstein 2017, 85-97). ...
It is widely agreed that the increased polarization that many countries experience is bad for democracy. However, existing assessments of how polarization affects democracy operate with too unified understandings of both polarization and democracy. Bringing empirical studies and democratic theory into dialogue, this article argues that polarization cannot be understood as one phenomenon that can be evaluated in one way. Moreover, its different kinds affect different parts of the democratic system in distinct ways. First, we must distinguish between the question of the degree of polarization in a given context and the question of the different kinds of polarization at play. Second, we must consider whether people have good reasons for their polarizing behavior or whether it is entirely irrational. If people have good reasons for their polarizing behavior, the problem lies elsewhere than in polarization itself. Third, we must distinguish between the content of polarized opinions and the process of opinion formation. Both can be assessed with democratic criteria, but they raise different questions. Finally, it matters for democratic evaluation where polarization occurs and thus, we must differentiate between different sites of polarization: civil society, election campaigns, and legislatures. The article recommends a systemic approach to assessing the democratic implication of polarization, which analyzes both the effects of polarization at different sites and on democracy as a composite whole.
... Is it the capacities of the public that are so limited or is it the nature of its opportunities within the current design of our democratic institutions and social practices? Perhaps voters are just not effectively motivated by the social context of being a citizen in mass society, subject to manipulative messages, incentives for rational ignorance, and a public sphere that seems to be decomposing into "filter bubbles" of like-minded "enclaves," especially on contested issues (Chitra and Musco 2020;Dilko et al. 2017;Pariser 2011;Sunstein 2017;Spohr 2017; but see Zuiderveen et al. 2016 for skepticism). Under other possible conditions, could they perform a bit more like ideal citizens? ...
Does deliberation produce any lasting effects? “America in One Room” was a national field experiment in which more than 500 randomly selected registered voters were brought from all over the country to deliberate on five major issues facing the country. A pre-post control group was also surveyed on the same questions after the weekend and about a year later. There were significant differences in voting intention and in actual voting behavior a year later among the deliberators compared to the control group. This article accounts for these differences by showing how deliberation stimulated a latent variable of political engagement. If deliberation has lasting effects on political engagement, then it provides a rationale for attempts to scale the deliberative process to much larger numbers. The article considers methods for doing so in the context of the broader debate about mini-publics, isolated spheres of deliberation situated within a largely non-deliberative society.
... Where the homogeneity of a community potentiated heightened local exchange, this appeared to produce an enhanced capacity to drive discursive toxicity within the greater network. In practical terms, this suggests that homogeneous communities (so called 'echo-chambers' [35]) might pose a greater toxic risk to online spaces if they act as generative toxic centers that then spillover into the broader discursive network. Since NTA is equipped to appreciate multiscale reinforcement dynamics, it can be used to locate communities of concern that are synergistically implicated in network-level toxicity flows. ...
The rise of social media has corresponded with an increase in the prevalence and severity of online toxicity. While much work has gone into understanding its nature, we still lack knowledge of its emergent structural dynamics. This work presents a novel method—network toxicity analysis—for the inductive analysis of the dynamics of discursive toxicity within social media. Using an information-theoretic approach, this method estimates toxicity transfer relationships between communicating agents, yielding an effective network describing how those entities influence one another, over time, in terms of their produced discursive toxicity. This method is applied to Telegram messaging data to demonstrate its capacity to induce meaningful, interpretable toxicity networks that provide valuable insight into the social dynamics of toxicity within social media.
This article analyses the trajectory of the conception of citizenship from the classical tradition to the modern version, in light of fiscal roles in Western liberal States. The discussion reveals how, in the post-War period, taxation has become the key factor of the modern State’s economic platform, changing the perception of citizens’ duties. Such a change goes beyond conventional voting and other forms of political engagement to new civic responsibility known as fiscal citizenship. Within this conceptual framework, citizens relinquish rights, such as access to public services, in return for duties – the most significant being the obligation to pay taxes, thus creating a new type of association between the individual and the State. The article also analyses the consequences of digitization on this emergent form of citizenship. Since governance and citizen activities are increasingly shifting towards digital space, tax payments and fiscal compliance are simultaneously moving to the online domain. This shift has led to the appearance of the ‘netizen’ taxpayer, defined as a digital citizen who mainly interacts with the State in the digital environment. In this context, we aim to understand how digitization affects citizens’ understanding of their rights and obligations as regards an integrated and globalized digital economy. Problems and prospects of this process are considered, especially in relation to governance and economic equity. Big Tech and the digital economy have led to substantial generation of wealth, giving rise to questions concerning equitable redistribution. The concept of ‘digital redistribution’ is thus identified as a key area of governance requiring formulation of policies that guarantee that the advantages of the digital economy are not monopolized. The article concludes by examining the extent to which traditional assumptions about civic identity, rights and responsibilities are impacted by the interplay between fiscal and digital citizenship.
The world can be divided into a digital sphere and a physical sphere. Within the realm of the physical sphere, Michael Walzer’s Just War Theory stands as a prominent framework for understanding the ethics of warfare. Is his theoretical framework also applicable to the digital sphere? This article studies whether elements of Walzer’s theory can be adapted to the context of digital conflict. Walzer divides countries into zones of peace, zones of war, and in-between zones. A country could then, for example, be a physical zone of peace but a digital zone of war. This article explores in which ways the defining characteristics of the different zones can be found in the digital sphere. It concludes that the digital sphere should mostly be seen as an in-between zone, with the problem of very unclear borders. Regarding Walzer’s theory, while it offers valuable insights when applied to the digital sphere, difficulties arise, underscoring the necessity for further research to refine the principles of just war within the digital sphere.
Free access for the first 100 eprints:
https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/CXQQZS3T2JKX2E8DHYYQ/full?target=10.1080/08898480.2024.2412337
A közösségi média a fogyasztó társadalom terméke. Lélektani okok és következmények. Prof. dr. Németh Erzsébet, kézirat Absztrakt A közösségi média platformok piaci szerelőként az időnkért, a figyelmünkért és az adatainkért versenyeznek, tulajdonképpen ezzel fizetünk. Ennek azonban nagy ára van. A tanulmány arra keresi a választ, hogy milyen lélektani jelenségeket, hogyan használ (ki) a közösségi média üzleti céljai eléréséhez, és ennek, a nemzetközi kutatások tükrében milyen lélektani következményei vannak. Az írás célja, hogy segítsen megérteni, a közösségi média miközben támogatja az énvédő mechanizmusokat, túlzott használata miért és hogyan okoz függőséget, szorongást és énkép zavart. Mi az oka a közösségi médiahasználatot kísérő agresszív tendenciáknak, illetve a felületes és gyors információ-befogadás, hogyan alakítja át a kognitív feldolgozórendszer, a figyelem, memória és döntéshozatal folyamatait. A tanulmány emellett áttekinti azokat kommunikációs jelenségeket és társaslélektani hatásokat, amelyek a közösségi média túlzott használatát kísérik, úgymint társas összehasonlítás, a társas viselkedés mintáinak változása, internetes zaklatás, visszhang szoba és a véleménybuborék jelensége, az empátia hiánya és az eltörlés kultúrája, valamint mindezek hatása a felhasználók mentális és fizikai egészségére. 1 BEVEZETÉS A közösségi média platformok, mint a Facebook, Instagram, X (korábban Twitter) és TikTok, az utóbbi években meghatározó szereplőkké váltak a digitális világban. Ezek a platformok nem csupán kommunikációs eszközökként szolgálnak, hanem jelentős hatást gyakorolnak a társadalmi és gazdasági életre is. A közösségi média használatának elemzése során egyértelművé válik, hogy ezek a platformok a fogyasztói társadalom termékei, amelyek figyelmünkre, lájkjainkra és adatainkra "pályáznak". Az emberek gyakran nincsenek tisztában azzal, hogy a közösségi média használata milyen költségekkel jár, mind egyéni, mind társadalmi szinten.
This chapter aims to clarify the discursive dynamics of hate speech (hereafter HS) and its conflict dynamics when mediated by the media. This analysis is based on the dual assumption that online HS is no different from analogous forms of expression in the real world, and that legitimacy, not legality, is the space that the media shape per excellence. The first section attempts to chart a course through the interdisciplinary thicket of HS research and debate. After focusing on the link between language and passions in Aristotle, his notion of ‘civic emotions’ is used as a methodological guide to discuss the linguistic, legal and political aspects of the contemporary debate. Since this framework cannot simply be applied to the conditions of communication in today’s globalised world, the second section introduces HS as a question of public communication, before analysing the production and distribution of contentious issues in and by the media.
En el presente artículo, el autor desarrolla las diversas estrategias de control de los medios de comunicación utilizadas durante el segundo gobierno del expresidente del Perú Alberto Fujimori. Dichas estrategias estuvieron enfocadas en manipular a la opinión pública y, con ello, asegurarse el ejercicio del poder mediante una segunda reelección presidencial. Para ello, se desarrollará el derecho a la libertad de información y su importancia en el mantenimiento del sistema democrático. Posteriormente, se caracterizará al segundo gobierno fujimorista y se situará la importancia de los medios de comunicación en dicho sistema. Finalmente, se presentarán una serie de sucesos acontecidos en las cuales se demuestra el manejo constante que hizo el régimen fujimorista de los medios de comunicación.
EXCERPT ONLY - REQUEST FULL TEXT
Comprehensive Synthesis of the aforementioned phenomena, all perceived from a globalized and integrated perspective of digital and social media.
During moments of hegemonic crisis, it is crucial to understand the dynamics of media power. This article identifies key structural forces and disruptive tendencies that are factors in a current crisis of the neoliberal hegemonic order. This intellectual background underpins an empirical analysis of Twitter data collected during the UN climate summit in Glasgow, Scotland (COP26). We identify large attention clusters around established political actors and their counter-hegemonic challengers; concluding that during these intense global political events a hegemonic crisis produces spaces where systemically marginalized actors can harness relational attention power and mobilize it toward distinct political purposes.
Assistant Professor 1 Student of Law 2 (BA LLB) Sem-3 rd. Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies (NMIMS), Chandigarh Campus, Chandigarh, India. Abstract: In an age characterized by the rapid evolution of information dissemination and consumption, this research paper explores the profound impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on shaping media narratives. This study delves into the symbiotic relationship between AI algorithms and media content, examining how these advanced technologies are catalysing transformative changes in the way stories are created, curated, and consumed.AI-driven algorithms have revolutionized the media landscape, enabling the automation of content generation, personalization of news feeds, and the optimization of storytelling techniques. This paper investigates the various facets of AI's role in media narratives, with a focus on its capacity to influence public opinion, foster echo chambers, and exacerbate issues of misinformation and bias. Furthermore, the research examines the ethical and societal implications of AI's involvement in media narratives, such as concerns related to privacy, accountability, and the erosion of human agency in information consumption. The study also highlights the potential for algorithmic transparency and oversight to mitigate these concerns and ensure responsible AI deployment in media. Through a comprehensive literature review, case studies, and analysis, this research paper offers insights into the dynamic interplay between AI and media narratives. It showcases the potential for algorithmic alchemy, wherein AI technologies can transmute data into compelling narratives, enlightening the public, fostering informed debates, and empowering individuals to navigate the ever-expanding digital media landscape. By shedding light on both the promises and challenges posed by AI in shaping media narratives, this paper seeks to inform policymakers, media professionals, and the general public about the transformative power of algorithmic alchemy, ultimately advocating for a responsible and thoughtful integration of AI into the realm of journalism and storytelling. Introduction:
Este artigo aborda a relevância de uma política pública de acesso à justiça aos mais vulneráveis, com ênfase no procedimento de alteração de nome e de sexo diretamente no Registro Civil de Pessoas Naturais (RCPN). Tal processo foi facilitado a partir do Provimento nº 73/2018 do Conselho Nacional de Justiça (CNJ), em que tal procedimento passou a ser feito integralmente no Cartório de RCPN, sem intervenção judicial, o que facilitou muito o acesso. Ademais, o direto à liberdade de expressão passa a ser contraposto aos direitos de personalidade, visto que os transexuais desejam ter o direito ao esquecimento aos fatos anteriores à alteração do nome, o que pode gerar um aparente conflito com o direito à informação.
It is often argued that the internet has immensely transformed political communication and increased democratic culture through dismantling, so to speak, traditional barriers to access to information and due to its affordances that allow for direct and open participation. However, enabling computational propaganda, creating an increasingly polarized public, and rampant online toxicity and hate speech as opposed to civil and democratic discourses are some of the widely discussed detriments of the internet. The emergence and characteristics of networked public spheres hold an important place in this debate. Divergent views characterize the online public sphere either as more open and democratic than traditional public spheres or as fraught with fragmentation and polarization, thereby immensely undermining democracy. These debates make it palpable that one can neither cheaply romanticize nor easily dismiss the role of the internet in political communication. In view of that, it is imperative to examine online political
spaces considering the political, social, economic, and socio-technical contexts in which they exist. Situated in this debate, this study sought to examine the characteristics of Ethiopian online spaces through the lens of contesting nationalisms on Facebook. The main research questions are: (1) What are the relationship dynamics between different discourse communities in the Ethiopian Facebook spaces? (2) Which discourse community is the hegemonic voice? (3)
What are the characteristics of the political discourse on Facebook among different
nationalisms? To answer these questions, the study employed contemporary conceptions of the public sphere theory and discourse theory. Particularly, concepts of discourse, discursive struggle, antagonism, agonism and contingency informed the analysis. A total of 190 key search terms in Amharic, English and Afaan Oromoo languages containing political terms, political party names, and names of political figures were employed to map and gather the discourse on nationalisms in Ethiopia. 327,630 Facebook posts were gathered using CrowdTangle between April 01 and June 20, 2021, the lead-up to the Ethiopian general elections. The study was conducted in a three-phased cyclical process involving quantitative social media analytics, a social network analysis, and qualitative textual analysis based on the newly proposed mixed method discourse analytical approach to studying social media political discourse. The study found that the Ethiopian Facebook spaces involving contested nationalisms are divided mainly into separate (but not isolated) and fragmented discourse communities, namely Ambivalent nationalism (Prosperity Party), Amhara nationalism, Oromo nationalism, and Tigrayan nationalism. Ambivalent nationalism (prosperity party) is the most dominant cluster that has
succeeded in its hegemonic intervention in the discursive struggle, whereas Ethiopian nationalism is contingent. Although the most prevalent relationship between these nationalisms is antagonism, social media affordance has allowed for temporary alliances in the fight against another common target. Oromo nationalism and Tigrayan nationalism formed agonistic relationship in their antagonistic engagement with ambivalent nationalism and Amhara nationalism on specific issues. These temporary alliances may promise a less antagonistic discourse; however, the deep-rooted division in the broader Ethiopian political landscape could thwart this possibility. Moreover, social media affordances that are proved to be integral parts of the discursive struggle are amenable to commercial and political manipulation, as the Ethiopian case elucidates, and could perpetuate the dominance of certain discourse communities over the others. This, in turn, hugely undermines democracy.
Political polarization has become a significant concern in contemporary democratic societies, deception potential risks to the stability and functionality of democratic institutions. In modern democracies, political polarisation has grown to be a severe problem that could jeopardise the stability and efficacy of democratic institutions. Furthermore, this abstract investigates the concept of political polarisation and its impact on democratic systems. It explores how divergent political ideologies, deepening partisan divisions, and the rise of extremist movements contribute to the erosion or destruction of democratic norms and institutions. Additionally, the abstract begins by defining political polarisation as the process of ideological difference within a society, leading to increased hostility and decreased cooperation between political factions. It is dangerouson how polarisation demonstrates in various forms, such as ideological extremism, regime change, ethnic division, the abstract then investigates the detrimental effects of political polarisation on democratic institutions. Additionally, the abstract explores how polarization can undermine public trust in democratic institutions, eroding their legitimacy and weakening the social fabric or the basic structure and belief of society togetherness.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.