Understanding Divergent Framing of the Supreme Court Controversies: Social Media vs. News Outlets

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.09508v1
• Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 06:40:21 GMT
• Title: Understanding Divergent Framing of the Supreme Court Controversies: Social Media vs. News Outlets
• Authors: Jinsheng Pan, Zichen Wang, Weihong Qi, Hanjia Lyu, Jiebo Luo
• Abstract summary: We focus on the nuanced distinctions in framing of social media and traditional media outlets concerning a series of U.S. Supreme Court rulings. We observe significant polarization in the news media's treatment of affirmative action and abortion rights, whereas the topic of student loans tends to exhibit a greater degree of consensus.
• Score: 56.67097829383139
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Understanding the framing of political issues is of paramount importance as it significantly shapes how individuals perceive, interpret, and engage with these matters. While prior research has independently explored framing within news media and by social media users, there remains a notable gap in our comprehension of the disparities in framing political issues between these two distinct groups. To address this gap, we conduct a comprehensive investigation, focusing on the nuanced distinctions both qualitatively and quantitatively in the framing of social media and traditional media outlets concerning a series of American Supreme Court rulings on affirmative action, student loans, and abortion rights. Our findings reveal that, while some overlap in framing exists between social media and traditional media outlets, substantial differences emerge both across various topics and within specific framing categories. Compared to traditional news media, social media platforms tend to present more polarized stances across all framing categories. Further, we observe significant polarization in the news media's treatment (i.e., Left vs. Right leaning media) of affirmative action and abortion rights, whereas the topic of student loans tends to exhibit a greater degree of consensus. The disparities in framing between traditional and social media platforms carry significant implications for the formation of public opinion, policy decision-making, and the broader political landscape.

Related papers

• Intertwined Biases Across Social Media Spheres: Unpacking Correlations in Media Bias Dimensions [12.588239777597847]
  Media bias significantly shapes public perception by reinforcing stereotypes and exacerbating societal divisions. We introduce a novel dataset collected from YouTube and Reddit over the past five years. Our dataset includes automated annotations for YouTube content across a broad spectrum of bias dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-27T21:03:42Z)
• Modeling Political Orientation of Social Media Posts: An Extended Analysis [0.0]
  Developing machine learning models to characterize political polarization on online social media presents significant challenges. These challenges mainly stem from various factors such as the lack of annotated data, presence of noise in social media datasets, and the sheer volume of data. We introduce two methods that leverage on news media bias and post content to label social media posts. We demonstrate that current machine learning models can exhibit improved performance in predicting political orientation of social media posts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-21T03:34:20Z)
• Bias or Diversity? Unraveling Fine-Grained Thematic Discrepancy in U.S. News Headlines [63.52264764099532]
  We use a large dataset of 1.8 million news headlines from major U.S. media outlets spanning from 2014 to 2022. We quantify the fine-grained thematic discrepancy related to four prominent topics - domestic politics, economic issues, social issues, and foreign affairs. Our findings indicate that on domestic politics and social issues, the discrepancy can be attributed to a certain degree of media bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-28T03:31:37Z)
• Same Words, Different Meanings: Interpretable Predictions of Polarization Trends in Broadcast Media Language and Granger Causal Effects on Public Discourse [7.0525662747824365]
  We investigate the relationship between broadcast news media language and social media discourse. By analyzing a decade's worth of closed captions from CNN and Fox News along with topically corresponding discourse from Twitter, we show how semantic polarization between these outlets has evolved. Our results demonstrate a sharp increase in polarization in how topically important keywords are discussed between the two channels, especially after 2016, with overall highest peaks occurring in 2020.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-20T23:59:26Z)
• Unveiling the Hidden Agenda: Biases in News Reporting and Consumption [59.55900146668931]
  We build a six-year dataset on the Italian vaccine debate and adopt a Bayesian latent space model to identify narrative and selection biases. We found a nonlinear relationship between biases and engagement, with higher engagement for extreme positions. Analysis of news consumption on Twitter reveals common audiences among news outlets with similar ideological positions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-14T18:58:42Z)
• Reaching the bubble may not be enough: news media role in online political polarization [58.720142291102135]
  A way of reducing polarization would be by distributing cross-partisan news among individuals with distinct political orientations. This study investigates whether this holds in the context of nationwide elections in Brazil and Canada.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-18T11:34:04Z)
• News consumption and social media regulations policy [70.31753171707005]
  We analyze two social media that enforced opposite moderation methods, Twitter and Gab, to assess the interplay between news consumption and content regulation. Our results show that the presence of moderation pursued by Twitter produces a significant reduction of questionable content. The lack of clear regulation on Gab results in the tendency of the user to engage with both types of content, showing a slight preference for the questionable ones which may account for a dissing/endorsement behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-07T19:26:32Z)
• Enabling News Consumers to View and Understand Biased News Coverage: A Study on the Perception and Visualization of Media Bias [7.092487352312782]
  We create three manually annotated datasets and test varying visualization strategies. Results show no strong effects of becoming aware of the bias of the treatment groups compared to the control group. Using a multilevel model, we find that perceived journalist bias is significantly related to perceived political extremeness and impartiality of the article.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-20T10:16:54Z)
• Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur: Visual Communication of Uncertainty in Election Polls [56.8172499765118]
  We discuss potential sources of bias in nowcasting and forecasting. Concepts are presented to attenuate the issue of falsely perceived accuracy. One key idea is the use of Probabilities of Events instead of party shares.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-28T07:02:24Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.