Quantifying Political Partisanship for Cross-Platform Analyses

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.21842v1
• Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 22:12:17 GMT
• Title: Quantifying Political Partisanship for Cross-Platform Analyses
• Abstract summary: We propose a text-based, platform-portable methodology for measuring political partisanship in social media posts.<n>A partisanship axis is constructed in the embedding space as the difference between centroids of oppositely labeled clusters.<n>We apply the method to a corpus of approximately 1.3 million posts collected from Bluesky and Truth Social during the six months preceding the 2024 U.S. presidential election.
• Score: 0.8594140167290097
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Research on political polarization on social media depends on the ability to reliably measure partisanship in user-generated content. However, existing approaches are typically tailored to platform-specific properties, such as structural affordances or linguistic conventions, which hurts generalizability across platforms. This limitation is increasingly consequential as the social media ecosystem fragments and fringe, alt-tech platforms emerge alongside mainstream ones. We propose a text-based, platform-portable methodology for measuring political partisanship in social media posts, anchored by an external news-credibility signal. Posts are embedded using a transformer-based sentence encoder and clustered into topic groups, which are labeled using the aggregated AllSides media bias scores of cited news outlets. A partisanship axis is then constructed in the embedding space as the difference between centroids of oppositely labeled clusters, and individual posts are scored by projection onto this axis. We apply the method to a corpus of approximately 1.3 million posts collected from Bluesky and Truth Social during the six months preceding the 2024 U.S. presidential election, providing the first cross-platform comparison of partisanship distributions on these two ideologically asymmetric platforms. The resulting partisanship scores correlate significantly with held-out AllSides media bias scores both in-distribution and out-of-distribution on an independent Twitter corpus, and recover within-platform partisan dynamics that platform identity alone cannot explain.

Related papers

• Elite Proxies, Algorithmic Bottlenecks, and Multi-Platform Information Cascades in the 2026 Iran War [0.0]
  This study tracks the transformation of President Trump's statements during the 2026 Iran War as they move from Truth Social into X-Twitter and Bluesky.<n>The results reveal pronounced behavioral divergence driven by socio-technical affordances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-09T16:55:50Z)
• Platform Sorting Drives Ideological Fragmentation in the Social Media Ecosystem [38.151143956051705]
  Ideological asymmetries in online political communication are often studied as localized phenomena emerging within communities.<n>Here, we show that fragmentation operates at the level of entire platforms, consistent with a process of platform sorting.<n>We analyze political information dynamics across Bluesky, Facebook, Reddit, Truth Social, Twitter/X, and YouTube during the 2020 and 2024 US presidential elections.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-09T08:41:17Z)
• Latent Topic Synthesis: Leveraging LLMs for Electoral Ad Analysis [51.95395936342771]
  We introduce an end-to-end framework for automatically generating an interpretable topic taxonomy from an unlabeled corpus.<n>We apply this framework to a large corpus of Meta political ads from the month ahead of the 2024 U.S. Presidential election.<n>Our approach uncovers latent discourse structures, synthesizes semantically rich topic labels, and annotates topics with moral framing dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T20:30:20Z)
• Ideological Fragmentation of the Social Media Ecosystem: From echo chambers to echo platforms [39.58317527488534]
  We analyze 117 million posts related to the 2020 US Presidential elections from nine social media platforms.<n>Our findings reveal significant differences among platforms in their centrality within the ecosystem.<n>These results highlight the key dimensions shaping the fragmentation and polarization of the social media landscape.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T18:45:03Z)
• All Things Considered: Detecting Partisan Events from News Media with Cross-Article Comparison [19.328425822355378]
  We develop a latent variable-based framework to predict the ideology of news articles. Our results reveal the high-level form of media bias, which is present even among mainstream media with strong norms of objectivity and nonpartisanship.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T21:53:23Z)
• 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)
• Computational Assessment of Hyperpartisanship in News Titles [55.92100606666497]
  We first adopt a human-guided machine learning framework to develop a new dataset for hyperpartisan news title detection. Overall the Right media tends to use proportionally more hyperpartisan titles. We identify three major topics including foreign issues, political systems, and societal issues that are suggestive of hyperpartisanship in news titles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-16T05:56:58Z)
• 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)
• Publishing patterns reflect political polarization in news media [1.5039745292757671]
  We show how contributors' publishing trajectories tend to align with outlet political leanings. We also show how contributors who cross partisan divides tend to focus on less explicitly political topics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-13T13:26:18Z)
• Right and left, partisanship predicts (asymmetric) vulnerability to misinformation [71.46564239895892]
  We analyze the relationship between partisanship, echo chambers, and vulnerability to online misinformation by studying news sharing behavior on Twitter. We find that vulnerability to misinformation is most strongly influenced by partisanship for both left- and right-leaning users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-04T01:36:14Z)
• Echo Chambers on Social Media: A comparative analysis [64.2256216637683]
  We introduce an operational definition of echo chambers and perform a massive comparative analysis on 1B pieces of contents produced by 1M users on four social media platforms. We infer the leaning of users about controversial topics and reconstruct their interaction networks by analyzing different features. We find support for the hypothesis that platforms implementing news feed algorithms like Facebook may elicit the emergence of echo-chambers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-20T20:00:27Z)

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.