Who Sets the Agenda on Social Media? Ideology and Polarization in Online Debates

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.05176v1
• Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2024 16:48:22 GMT
• Title: Who Sets the Agenda on Social Media? Ideology and Polarization in Online Debates
• Authors: Edoardo Loru, Alessandro Galeazzi, Anita Bonetti, Emanuele Sangiorgio, Niccolò Di Marco, Matteo Cinelli, Andrea Baronchelli, Walter Quattrociocchi,
• Abstract summary: This study analyzes large-scale Twitter data from three global debates -- Climate Change, COVID-19, and the Russo-Ukrainian War. Our findings reveal that discussions are not primarily shaped by specific categories of actors, such as media or activists, but by shared ideological alignment.
• Score: 34.82692226532414
• License:
• Abstract: The abundance of information on social media has reshaped public discussions, shifting attention to the mechanisms that drive online discourse. This study analyzes large-scale Twitter (now X) data from three global debates -- Climate Change, COVID-19, and the Russo-Ukrainian War -- to investigate the structural dynamics of engagement. Our findings reveal that discussions are not primarily shaped by specific categories of actors, such as media or activists, but by shared ideological alignment. Users consistently form polarized communities, where their ideological stance in one debate predicts their positions in others. This polarization transcends individual topics, reflecting a broader pattern of ideological divides. Furthermore, the influence of individual actors within these communities appears secondary to the reinforcing effects of selective exposure and shared narratives. Overall, our results underscore that ideological alignment, rather than actor prominence, plays a central role in structuring online discourse and shaping the spread of information in polarized environments.

Related papers

• From Public Square to Echo Chamber: The Fragmentation of Online Discourse [0.1227734309612871]
  The study explores how digital platforms amplify discrimination discourse including sexism, racism, xenophobia, ableism, homophobia, and religious intolerance. The findings reveal how social media structures exacerbate polarization, cross group dialogue, and erode the collective reasoning essential for a just society.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T15:53:58Z)
• Community Shaping in the Digital Age: A Temporal Fusion Framework for Analyzing Discourse Fragmentation in Online Social Networks [45.58331196717468]
  This research presents a framework for analyzing the dynamics of online communities in social media platforms. By combining text classification and dynamic social network analysis, we uncover mechanisms driving community formation and evolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-18T03:03:02Z)
• Ethos and Pathos in Online Group Discussions: Corpora for Polarisation Issues in Social Media [6.530320465510631]
  Growing polarisation in society caught the attention of the scientific community as well as news media. We propose to approach the problem by investigating rhetorical strategies employed by individuals in polarising discussions online. We develop multi-topic and multi-platform corpora with manual annotation of appeals to ethos and pathos, two modes of persuasion in Aristotelian rhetoric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-07T09:10:47Z)
• Rational Silence and False Polarization: How Viewpoint Organizations and Recommender Systems Distort the Expression of Public Opinion [4.419843514606336]
  We show how platforms impact what observers of online discourse come to believe about community views. We show that signals from ideological organizations encourage an increase in rhetorical intensity, leading to the 'rational silence' of moderate users. We identify practical strategies platforms can implement, such as reducing exposure to signals from ideological organizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-10T17:02:19Z)
• Understanding Divergent Framing of the Supreme Court Controversies: Social Media vs. News Outlets [56.67097829383139]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-18T06:40:21Z)
• Unpacking polarization: Antagonism and Alignment in Signed Networks of Online Interaction [0.3581083356941628]
  In the 20th century, major fault lines were formed by structural conflicts, like owners vs workers, center vs periphery, etc. We present the FAULTANA pipeline, a computational method to uncover major fault lines in data of signed online interactions. Our method makes it possible to quantify the degree of antagonism prevalent in different online debates, as well as how aligned each debate is to the major fault line.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-13T05:57:48Z)
• 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)
• Perspective-taking to Reduce Affective Polarization on Social Media [11.379010432760241]
  We deploy a randomized field experiment through a browser extension to 1,611 participants on Twitter. We find that simply exposing participants to "outgroup" feeds enhances engagement, but not an understanding of why others hold their political views. framing the experience in familiar, empathic terms by prompting participants to recall a disagreement does not affect engagement, but does increase their ability to understand opposing views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-11T20:25:10Z)
• 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)

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.