1 - 4 of 4
ItemThe Impact of Twitter Features on Credibility Ratings - An Explorative Examination Combining Psychological Measurements and Feature Based Selection Methods( 2019-01-08)In a post-truth age determined by Social Media channels providing large amounts of information of questionable credibility while at the same time people increasingly tend to rely on online information, the ability to detect whether content is believable is developing into an important challenge. Most of the work in that field suggested automated approaches to perform binary classification to determine information veracity. Recipients´ perspectives and multidimensional psychological credibility measurements have rarely been considered. To fill this gap and gain more insights into the impact of a tweet´s features on perceived credibility, we conducted a survey asking participants (N=2626) to rate the credibility of crises related tweets. The resulting 24.823 ratings were used for an explorative feature selection analysis revealing that mostly meta-related features like the number of followers of the author, the count of tweets produced and the ratio of tweet number and days since account creation affect credibility judgements.
ItemCharacterizing Political Talk on Twitter: A Comparison Between Public Agenda, Media Agendas, and the Twitter Agenda with Regard to Topics and Dynamics( 2019-01-08)Social media platforms, especially Twitter, have become a ubiquitous element in political campaigns. Although politicians, journalists, and the public increasingly take to the service, we know little about the determinants and dynamics of political talk on Twitter. We examine Twitter’s issue agenda based on popular hashtags used in messages referring to politics. We compare this Twitter agenda with the public agenda measured by a representative survey and the agendas of newspapers and television news programs captured by content analysis. We show that the Twitter agenda had little, if any, relationship with the public agenda. Political talk on Twitter was somewhat stronger connected with mass media coverage, albeit following channel-specific patterns most likely determined by the attention, interests, and motivations of Twitter users.
ItemSocial Media and Journalism: 10 Years Later, Untangling Key Assumptions( 2019-01-08)Amid a broader reckoning about the role of social media in public life, this article argues that the same scrutiny can be applied to the journalism studies field and its approaches to examining social media. A decade later, what hath such research wrought? We need a more particular accounting of the assumptions, biases, and blind spots that have crept into this line of research as well as the study of mediated conversations broadly. Our purpose is to provoke reflection and chart a path for future research by critiquing themes of what has come before. In particular, we seek to untangle three faulty assumptions—often implicit but no less influential—that have been overlooked in the rapid take-up of social media as a key phenomenon for journalism studies particularly and digital media studies generally: (1) that social media would be a net positive; (2) that social media reflects reality; and (3) that social media matters over and above other factors.
ItemIntroduction to the Minitrack on Mediated Conversation( 2019-01-08)