News platform preference as a predictor of political and civic participation

Convergence

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 496-512

  Bachmann, Ingrid ^a   De Zúñiga, Homero Gil ^b  

^a PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Civic participation; Offline news; Online news; Political participation; Survey

Indexed keywords

EID: 84886924686     PISSN: 13548565     EISSN: 17487382     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1354856513493699     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Anderson C (2004) The long tail. Wired Magazine, 12(10), October, 2004. Available at: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html (accessed April 1 2009).
2. Bachmann I, Kaufhold K, Lewis S and Gil de Zúñiga (2010) News platform preference: Advancing the effects of age and media consumption on political participation. International Journal of Internet Science 5(1): 34-47.
3. Bennett WL and Iyengar S (2008) A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication 58(4): 707-731.
4. Bichard SL (2006) Building blogs: a multi-dimensional analysis of the distribution of frames on the 2004 presidential candidate web sites. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 83(2): 329-345.
5. Bimber B (2000) The study of information technology and civic engagement. Political Communication, 17: 329-333.
6. Bimber B (2001) Information and political engagement in America: the search for effects of information technology at the individual level. Political Research Quarterly 54(1): 53-67.
7. Calenda D and Meijer A (2009) Young people, the Internet and political participation. Findings of a web survey in Italy, Spain and the Netherlands. Information, Communication and Society 12(6): 879-898.
8. Castells M(2007) Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication 1: 238-266.
9. Charles A (2009) The electronic state: Estonia's new media revolution. Journal of Contemporary European Research 5(1): 97-113.
10. ComScore (2012) ComScore reports January 2012 U.S. mobile subscriber market share. Available at: http://www.comscore.com/Press-Events/Press-Releases/ 2012/3/comScore-Reports-January-2012-U.S.-Mobi le-Subscriber-Market-Share (accessed 7 March 2012).
11. Dalrymple KE and Scheufele DA (2007) Finally informing the electorate? How the Internet got people thinking about presidential politics in 2004. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 12(3): 96-111.
12. Deuze M (2003) The Web and its journalisms: considering the consequences of different types of newsmedia online. New Media and Society 5(2): 203-230.
13. de Vreese CH (2007) Digital renaissance: young consumer and citizen? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 611: 207-216.
14. Evans C, Gibbons NJ, Shah K and Griffin DK (2004) Virtual learning in the biological sciences: pitfalls of simply 'putting notes on the web'. Computers and Education 43: 49-61.
15. Eveland WP (2003) A 'mix of attributes' approach to the study of media effects and new communication technologies. Journal of Communication 53(3): 395-410.
16. Eveland WP and Dunwoody S (2002) An investigation of elaboration and selective scanning as mediators of learning from the web versus print. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 46(1): 34-53.
17. Eveland WP Jr., Marton K and SeoM (2004) Moving beyond 'just the facts': the influence of online news on the content and structure of public affairs knowledge. Communication Research 31(1): 82-108.
18. Gennaro CD and DuttonW(2006) The Internet and the public: online and offline political participation in the United Kingdom. Parliamentary Affairs 59: 299-313.
19. Gil de Zúñiga H (2006) Reshaping the digital inequality in the European Union: How psychological variables affect Internet adoption rates.Webology Parliamentary Affairs 3(4). Available at:http://www.webology.org/ 2006/v3n4/a32.html (accessed April 1 2012).
20. Gil de Zúñiga H, Puig-i-Abril E and Rojas H (2009) Weblogs, traditional sources online and political participation: An assessment of how the Internet is changing the political environment. New Media & Society 11(4): 553-574.
21. Gil de Zúñiga H and Rojas H (2009) Análisis de los efectos de los blogs en la sociedad de la informacioen. Comunicación y Ciudadanía 2(3): 60-71.
22. Gil de Zúñiga H, Jung N and Valenzuela S (2012) Social media use for news and individuals social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 17(3): 319-336.
23. Gö ritz AS, Reinhold N and Batinic B (2002) Online panels. In: Batinic B, Reips U and Bosnjak M (eds) Online Social Sciences. Seattle, DC: Hogrefe and Huber Publishers, pp. 27-47.
24. Granovetter M (1973) The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360-1380.
25. Granovetter M (1983) The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited. Sociological Theory 1: 201-233.
26. Green JC and Coffey DJ (2006) The State of the Parties in a Polarized Nation. New York, NY: Rowman and Littlefield.
27. Gunther A (1991) What we think others think: cause and consequence in the third-person effect. Communication Research 18(2): 355-372.
28. Hargittai E (2002) Second-level digital divide: differences in people's online skills. In: First Monday 7(4). Available at: http://firstmonday.org/ htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/942/864 (accessed 10 October 2010).
29. Hargittai E and Hinnant A (2008) Digital inequality: differences in young adults' use of the Internet. Communication Research 35(5): 602-621.
30. Hermida A and Thurman N (2008) A clash of cultures: the integration of user-generated content within professional journalistic frameworks at British newspaper websites. Journalism Practice 2(3): 343-356.
31. Howard PN, Rainie L and Jones S (2001) Days and nights on the Internet: the impact of diffusing technology. American Behavioral Scientist 45(3): 383-404.
32. Jung N, Kim Y and Gil de Zúñiga H (2011) The mediating role of knowledge and efficacy in the effects of communication on political participation. Mass Communication & Society 14(4): 407-430.
33. Kahn R and Kellner D (2004) New media and Internet activism: from the 'battle of seattle' to blogging. New Media and Society 6(1): 87-95.
34. Kaid LL and Postelnicu M (2005) Political advertising in the 2004 election: comparison of traditional television and Internet messages. American Behavioral Scientist 49(2): 265-278.
35. Katz E and Lazarsfeld PF (1955) Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
36. Kim YM (2008) Where is my issue? The influence of news coverage and personal issue importance on subsequent information selection on the Web. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 52: 600-621.
37. Kiousis S (2002) Interactivity: a concept explication. New Media and Society 4(3): 355-383.
38. Kobayashi T, Ikeda K and 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.
39. Liu YP (2003) Developing a scale to measure the interactivity of websites. Journal of Advertising Research 43(2): 207-216.
40. Marmura S (2008) A net advantage? The Internet, grassroots activism and American middle-eastern policy. New Media and Society 10(2): 247-271.
41. McKenna KYA and Bargh JA (2000) Plan 9 from cyberspace: the implication of the Internet for personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review 4: 57-75.
42. McLuhan M (1959) Myth and mass media. Daedalus 88(2): 339-348.
43. McLuhan M (1964) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
44. McMillan SJ and Hwang JS (2002) Measures of perceived interactivity: an exploration of the role of direction of communication, user control, and time in shaping perceptions of interactivity. Journal of Advertising 31(3): 29-42.
45. Morozov E (2009) Texting toward utopia: does the Internet spread democracy? In: Boston Review. Available at: http://bostonreview.net/BR34.2/ morozov.php (accessed 20 January 2012).
46. Morozov E (2011) The Net Delusion. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
47. Newhagen JE and Rafaeli S (1996) Why communication researchers should study the Internet: a dialog. Journal of Communication 46(1): 4-13.
48. Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism (2012) The state of the news media 2012. Available at: http://stateofthemedia.org/?src=prc- headline (accessed 19 March 2012).
49. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2011) Americans spending more time following the news. Available at: http://www.people-press. org/2010/09/12/americans-spending-more-time-following-the-news/(accessed 10 January 2012).
50. Prior M (2005) News vs. entertainment: how increasing media choice widens gaps in political knowledge and turnout. American Journal of Political Science 49(2): 577-592.
51. Pryor L (2002) The third wave of online journalism. In: Online Journalism Review, 18. Available at: http://www.ojr.org/future/1919174689.php. (accessed 1 April 2009).
52. Rafaeli S (1988) Interactivity: from new media to communication. In: Hawkins RP, Weimann JM and Pingree S (eds) Advancing Communication Science: Merging Mass and Personal Processes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 110-134.
53. Rojas H (2008) Strategy versus understanding. Communication Research 35(4): 452-480.
54. Rojas H and Puig-i-Abril E (2009) Mobilizers mobilized: information, expression, mobilization and participation in the digital age. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14(4): 902-927.
55. Rojas H, Shah DH and Faber RJ (1996) For the good of others: censorship and the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 8(2): 163-186.
56. Russell MG (2009) A call for creativity in new metrics for liquid media. In: Journal of Interactive Advertising, 9(2), Available at: http://www.jiad.org/ article117. (accessed 1 April 2012)
57. Sax LJ, Gilmartin SK and Bryant AN (2003) Assessing response rates and non response bias in web and paper surveys. Research in Higher Education 44(4): 409-432.
58. Shah DV, Cho J, Eveland WP and Kwak N (2005) Information and expression in a digital age: modeling internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research 32(5): 531-565.
59. Shah DV, Cho J, Nah S, Gotlieb MR, Hwang H, Lee NJ, et al. (2007) Campaign ads, online messaging, and participation: extending the communication and mediation model. Journal of Communication 57(4): 676-703.
60. Shah DV, Kwak N and Holbert RL (2001) 'Connecting' and 'disconnecting' with civic life: patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital. Political Communication 18(2): 141-162.
61. Shah DV, Schmierbach M, Hawkins J, Espino R and Donovan J (2002) Nonrecursive models of Internet use and community engagement: questioning whether time spent online erodes social capital. Jounalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 79(4): 964-987.
62. Shanahan J, Morgan M and Stenbjerre M (1997) Green or brown-television and the cultivation of environmental concern. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 41(2): 305-323.
63. Shao G (2009) Understanding the appeal of user-generated media: a uses and gratifications perspective. Internet Research 19(1): 7-25.
64. Sheehan KB (2001) E-mail survey response rates: a review. In: Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(2), Available at: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/ vol6/issue2/sheehan.html (accessed 1 April 2012).
65. Smith CB (1997) Casting the net: surveying an internet population. In: Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(1), Available at: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue1/smith.html (accessed 1 April 2012).
66. Smith A (2009) The Internet's role in campaign 2008. In: Pew Internet and American Life Project. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/6- The-Internets-Role-in-Campaign-2008.aspx (accessed 10 December 2011).
67. Smith A, Lehmann Scholzman K, Verba S and BradyH(2009) The Internet and Civic Engagement.Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
68. Stanley JW and 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.
69. Stanton JM (1998) An empirical assessment of data collection using the Internet. Personnel Psychology 51(3): 709-725.
70. Tewksbury D (2003) What do Americans really want to know? Tracking the behavior of news readers on the Internet. Journal of Communication 53(4): 694-710.
71. Tewksbury D (2006) Exposure to the newer media in a presidential primary campaign. Political Communication 23(3): 313-332.
72. Thompson LF, Surface EA, Martin DL and Sanders MG (2003) From paper to pixels: moving personnel surveys to the web. Personnel Psychology 56(1): 197-227.
73. Tolbert CJ and McNeal RS (2003) Unraveling the effects of the Internet on political participation? Political Research Quarterly 56(2): 175-185.
74. Valentino NA, Hutchings VL and Williams D (2004) The impact of political advertising on knowledge, Internet information seeking, and candidate preference. Journal of Communication 54(2): 337-354.
75. Valenzuela S, Kim Y and Gil de Zúñiga H (2012) Social networks that matter:Exploring the role of political discussion for online political participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 24(2): 163-184.
76. Vavreck L (2007) The exaggerated effects of advertising on turnout: the dangers of self-reports. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 2(4): 325-343.
77. van de Donk W, Loader BD, Nixon PG and Rucht D (2004) Cyberprotest: New Media, Citizens and Social Movements. London, UK: Routledge.
78. van Dijk J (2004) Divides in succession: possession, skills, and use of new media for societal participation. In: Newhagen JN and Bucy E (eds) Media Access: Social and Psychological Dimensions of New Technology Use. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 233-254.
79. van Dijk J (2006) Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics 34(4-5): 221-235.
80. Williams A, Wardle C and Wahl-Jorgensen K (2011) Have they got news for us? Audience revolution or business as usual at the BBC? Journalism Practice 5(1): 85-99.
81. Wise K, Bolls PD and Shaefer SR (2008) Choosing and reading online news: how available choice affects cognitive processing. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 52(1): 69-85.
82. Xenos M and Moy P (2007) Direct and differential effects of the Internet on political and civic engagement. Journal of Communication 57(4): 704-718.