A digital agora: Citizen participation in the 2008 presidential debates

American Behavioral Scientist

Volumn 55, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 325-347

  Kirk, Rita ^a   Schill, Dan ^a  

^a SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

civic engagement; civic participation; cybercitizen; debate effects; dial test; digital agora; focus group; information technology; political debates; political participation; presidential debates; social media; YouTube debates

Indexed keywords

EID: 79951820471     PISSN: 00027642     EISSN: 15523381     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0002764210392167     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Answering policy questions in context of voters' lives mandate that candidates talk to the voters rather than fellow policy advocates. (2007, 20 July). CNN.
2. Ariens, C. (29 November 2007). CNN/YouTube most-watched so far. TV Newser. Retrievedfromhttp://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnnyoutube-debate-most-watched-so-far_b17134.
3. Auxier, R., & Tyson, A. (24 July 2007). Uploading democracy: Candidates field YouTube questions. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved fromhttp://pewresearch.org/pubs/550/youtube-debate.
4. Bimber, B. (2000). The study of information technology and civic engagement. Political Communication, 17, 329-333.
5. Boyd, S. (2008). What are those squiggly lines on CNN telling you? American Prospect. Retrieved fromhttp://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=what_are_those_squiggly_lines_on_cnn_telling_you.
6. Bucy, E.P., & Gregson, K.S. (2001). Media participation: A legitimizing mechanism of mass democracy. New Media and Society, 3(3), 359-382.
7. CNN Debate Transcript. (29 November 2007). CNN/YouTube Presidential Debate. Retrieved fromhttp://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0711/29/ltm.02.html.
8. Carlin, D.B. (1992). Presidential debates as focal points in campaigns. Political Communication & Persuasion, 9(4): 251-265.
9. Cooper in McGookin, S. (24 July 2007). Debate format a small step for politics. Forbes. Retrieved fromhttp://www.forbes.com/2007/07/24/debate-youtube-politics-lead-cx_sm_0724debate.html.
10. Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22, 147-162.
11. Dalrymple, K.E., & Scheufele, D.A. (2007). Finally informing the electorate? How the Internet got people thinking about presidential politics in 2004. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12(3), 96-111.
12. Hannity. S. (2007). Post-debate Frank Luntz focus group [Transcript]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/12/postdebate_frank_luntz_focus_g.html.
13. Hotline. (2007a). CNN/YouTube debate: You can tell it's crunch time when Retrieved fromhttp://www.nationaljournal.com/hotline.
14. Hotline. (2007b). SC debate: What happened. A series of YouTubes. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nationaljournal.com/hotline.
15. Hwang, H., Schmierbach, M., Paek, M., Gil de Zuniga, J., & Shaw, D.V. (2006). Media dissociation, Internet use, and antiwar political participation: A case study of political dissent and action against the war in Iraq. Mass Communication and Society, 9(4), 461-483.
16. Jennings, M.K., & Zeitner, V. (2003). Internet use and civic engagement: A longitudinal analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 311-334.
17. Johnson, T.J., & Kaye, B.K. (2003). A boost or bust for democracy? How the Web influenced political attitude and behaviors in the 1996 and 2000 presidential elections. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 8(3), 9-34.
18. Kennedy, J. (29 November 2007). Sparks fly among GOP presidential candidates in Florida debate. Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved fromhttp://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2007-11-29/news/mdebate29_1_youtube-romney-illegal-immigrants.
19. Kobayashi, K., Ikeda, K., & Miyata, K. (2006). Social capital online: Collective use of the Internet and reciprocity as lubricants of democracy. Information, Communication and Society, 9(5), 582-611.
20. Koch, A. (2005). Cyber citizen or cyborg citizen: Baudrillard, political agency, and the commons in virtual politics. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 20, 159-175.
21. Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017-1031.
22. Kwak, N., Williams, A.E., Wang, X., & Lee, H. (2005). Talking politics and engaging politics: An examination of the interactive relationships between structural features of political talk and discussion engagement. Communication Research, 32(1), 87-111.
23. Lawson-Border, G., & Kirk, R. (2005). Blogs in campaign communication. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(4), 548-559.
24. Lydon, L. (18 December 2003). The day that made Larry Lessig an optimist. Christopher Lydon Interviews. Retrieved fromhttp://blogs.law.harvard.edu/lydondev/2003/12/18/.
25. MacAskill, E. (2007, July 23). Debate brings YouTube to centre of 2008 presidential campaign. Guardian. Retrieved fromhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/jul/23/broadcasting.digitalmedia.
26. McLeod, J.M., Scheufele, D.A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16, 315-336.
27. Moy, P. (2005). Linking dimensions of Internet use and civic engagement. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(3), 571-586.
28. Moy, P., Xenos, M.A., & Hess, V.K. (2005). Communication and citizenship: Mapping the political effects of infotainment. Mass Communication & Society, 8(1), 111-131.
29. Muse, J. (24 July 2007). The consensus on last night's debate format. The Huffington Post. Retrieved fromhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/jack-muse/the-consensus-on-last-nig_b_57608.html.
30. Mutz, D.C. (2002). Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice. American Political Science Review, 96(1), 111-126.
31. Mutz, D.C., & Martin, P.S. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. American Political Science Review, 95(1), 97-114.
32. Nisbet, M.C., & Scheufele, D.A. (2004). Political talk as a catalyst for online citizenship. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(4), 877-896.
33. Norris, P. (2001). A digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet in democratic societies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
34. Obama, B. (24 July 24, 2008). Barack dominates the debate. Barack Obama '08. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jaluo.com/wangwach/200707/David_Plouffe072407.html.
35. Polat, R.K. (2005). The Internet and political participation: Exploring the explanatory links. European Journal of Communication, 20(4), 435-459.
36. Price, V., & Cappella, J.N. (2002). Online deliberation and its influence: The electronic dialogue project in Campaign 2000. IT and Society, 1(1), 303-329.
37. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2008, January 11). Social networking and online videos take off: Internet's broader role in Campaign 2008. Retrieved fromhttp://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=384.
38. Raynes-Goldie, K., & Walker, L. (2008). Our space: Online civic engagement tools for youth. In W. L. Bennett (Ed.), Civic life online: Learning how digital media can engage youth (pp. 161-188). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
39. Scheufele, D.A., & Nisbet, M.C. (2002). Being a citizen online: New opportunities and dead ends. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 7(3), 55-75.
40. Shah, D.V., Cho, J., Eveland, W.P., Jr., & Kwak, N. (2005). Information and expression in a digital age: Model Internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research, 32(5), 531-565.
41. Shah, D.V., Kwak, N., & Holbert, R.L. (2001). Connecting and disconnecting with civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital. Political Communication, 18, 141-162.
42. Shah, D.V., McLeod, J., & Yoon, S. (2001). Communication, context, and community: An exploration of print, broadcast, and Internet influences. Communication Research, 28(4), 464-506.
43. Shah, D.V., & Scheufele, D.A. (2006). Explicating opinion leadership: Nonpolitical dispositions, information consumption, and civic participation. Political Communication, 23, 1-22.
44. Shepard, S. (24 July 2007). Old fashioned politics gets an Internet twist. Palm Beach Post. Retrieved fromhttp://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/palm-beach-post/mi_8163/is_20070724/fashioned-politics-internet-twist/ai_n51962869/.
45. Stanley, J.W., & Weare, C. (2004). The effects of Internet use on political participation: Evidence from an agency online discussion forum. Administration and Society, 36(5), 503-527.
46. Tewksbury, D. (2006). Exposure to the newer media in a presidential primary campaign. Political Communication, 23, 313-332.
47. Tian, Y. (2006). Political use and perceived effects of the Internet: A case study of the 2004 election. Communication Research Reports, 23(2), 129-137.
48. Uslaner, E.M. (2004). Trust, civic engagement, and the Internet. Political Communication, 21, 223-242.
49. Vargas, J.A. (19 July 2007). YouTube users will quiz candidates. The Washington Post. Retrieved fromhttp://www.personaldemocracy.com/rasiejpress/WashPost7-18-2007.pdf.
50. Vargas, J. (8 October 2008). A timeless debate format? Or a dated one? Washington Post. Retrieved fromhttp://www.opendebates.org/Timeless.html.
51. Wang, S. (2007). Political use of the Internet, political attitudes and political participation, 17(4), 381-395.
52. Xenos, M., & Moy, P. (2007). Direct and differential effects of the Internet on political and civic engagement. Journal of Communication, 57, 704-718.
53. Zhang, W., & Chia, S.C. (2006). The effects of mass media use and social capital on civic and political participation. Communication Studies, 57(3), 277-297.