You are here

Social Media

Making Sense of the Intersections between Alternative News and Conspiracy Theories

The afternoon at the Indicators of Social Cohesion symposium in Hamburg starts with the excellent Lena Frischlich, who shifts our focus to the question of conspiracy theories as they circulate in transnational counterpublic spheres. The digital environment provides many opportunities for new political movements, and many of them are positive in nature, but there are also many opportunities for what Thorsten Quandt has described as ‘dark participation’.

Polarised Debates about Climate Protests in German News and Social Media

The next session at the Indicators of Social Cohesion symposium starts with a presentation by Hendrik Meyer, whose focus is on polarised debates around climate protests by groups like Letzte Generation or Extinction Rebellion. Such debates do not take place in a vacuum, however, but are informed and framed by media reporting. Is such reporting polarising these debates? What might this polarisation lead to?

Destructive Polarisation in the Voice to Parliament Referendum: A Preliminary Assessment

It is an unseasonably cold Thursday morning in Hamburg, and after a great opening session last night with Aleksandra Urman, Mykola Makhortykh, and Jing Zeng we are now starting the first full day of the Indicators of Social Cohesion symposium. I’m presenting the morning keynote, on our current work assessing the news and social media debate around Australia’s failed Voice to Parliament referendum as a possible case of destructive polarisation.More on this as the research develops, but for now my slides are here:

Are We Heading for Another Facebook News Ban?

Over the past month, Meta has been in the news again for its troubled relationship with news and news publishers in Australia and elsewhere, and several media outlets have asked me to provide some commentary on recent developments. Two major new announcements from Meta prompted this: first, the news that it would not renew its agreements with some Australian news publishers to voluntarily share a small amount of its advertising revenue with them; and second, the announcement that it would progressively downrank news content on Instagram.

This follows on, of course, from the brief ban of all news content on the Australian Facebook in February 2021, after the federal government introduced a law, the News Media Bargaining Code (NMBC), intended to compel Meta and other search and social media platforms to share some of their advertising revenue with news publishers; and from a similar, still ongoing news blackout on Facebook that has been in place in Canada since August 2023 after its parliament passed a bill that was strongly influenced by the Australian NMBC.

I had an opportunity to discuss the Australian news ban and its implications in a foreword I contributed to my friend Jonathon Hutchinson’s new book Digital Intermediation: Unseen Infrastructure for Cultural Production, which I’ve now made available separately here as well. Drawing on Jonathon’s terms, the news ban clearly demonstrates Meta’s power, as a key digital intermediary, over the flow of news and information, and its ability to materially affect this flow within hours; however, the News Media Bargaining Code also provides a cautionary example of how not to go about curtailing that power – for various reasons that have much more to do with politics than policy, it is, in the end, a very poorly designed mechanism, as Australia and Canada have by now found out. The foreword article is available here:

Axel Bruns. “Digital Intermediation, for Better or Worse.” Foreword to Digital Intermediation: Unseen Infrastructure for Cultural Production, by Jonathon Hutchinson. London: Routledge. xv-xxiii.

In the following, I’m going to share some responses I’ve provided to one of the journalists who approached me about the ongoing NMBC saga. There was too much here to use in a news article, but the query was useful in prompting me to outline my views on Meta’s actions in response to the NMBC.

What caused the Australian Facebook news ban?

Patterns in Commenting on the YouTube Videos of Alexey Navalny

The final speaker in this I-POLHYS 2024 session, and indeed the symposium overall, is Aidar Zinnatullin, who shifts our focus to Russia. This will examine the period in Russia before the full-scale invasion of Ukraine (from 2015 to 2021), when it was already a depoliticised society under authoritarian leadership and political stability was the central mantra of Putin’s rule.

Politicians and Media as Influencers of Social Media Polarisation during the Qatargate Scandal

The next speaker in this I-POLHYS 2024 session is Rita Marchetti, who shifts our attention to another scandal: the Qatargate case. She notes the limited attention of media scholars to corruption issues, even in spite of growing funding for anticorruption studies of legacy media – the potential role of social media in anticorruption activism has received very limited attention, in particular.

Reviewing the Performance of Automated Incivility Classifiers

The next speaker in this I-POLHYS 2024 session is Patrícia Rossini, who is also focussing on incivility. She begins by noting that this is a feature, and not a bug, of social media, and that conventional empirical research into incivility on social media tends to examine blatant forms (name-calling, profanity) rather than implementing more sophisticated perspectives.

Drivers of Engagement with Mis- and Disinformation and Their Impact on Polarisation

The second day at I-POLHYS 2024 starts with a paper by the great Laura Ianelli and Giada Marino, who will recap I-POLHYS research activities on the connections between polarisation and problematic information. These concepts have been increasingly connected in the literature, and Laura and Giada conducted a systematic literature review of such research – yet only a small handful of the articles referencing both phenomena actually address them in any meaningful way; elsewhere the terms are more often used as buzzwords.

Diagnosing Destructive Polarisation in the Voice to Parliament Referendum

And we’ll finish the day at I-POLHYS 2024 with my keynote, which builds on the work of my Australian Laureate Fellowship team to review the types of polarisation that have been identified in the literature and develop the concept of destructive polarisation as a particularly concerning stage of polarisation dynamics. Our research proposes five distinct symptoms of destructive polarisation – and in the keynote I reflect on the recent Australian referendum on an Indigenous Voice to Parliament to explore to what extent these five symptoms of destructive polarisation were present in the news and digital media debates in the lead-up to the referendum.

Here are the slides for the presentation:

Intersectional Misrepresentations of ‘Noncompliant’ Women as a Driver of Polarisation

The next speakers at I-POLHYS 2024 are Elena Pavan and Antonio Martella, whose interest is in polarised intersectionality in online debates, where exclusion is often weaponised. This shifts our understanding of political polarisation beyond (party-) political actors, and instead centres on the interlocking dimensions of oppression and discrimination along multiple aspects of identity that are operationalised in polarised debate.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Social Media