Media agenda setting in a competitive and hostile environment: The role of sources in setting versus supporting topical discussant agendas in the tea party patriots’ facebook group

Agenda Setting in a 2.0 World: New Agendas in Communication

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 1-27

  Meraz, Sharon ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84911914764     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203735879     Document Type: Chapter

References (103)

1. ABC News. (2007). ABC news joins forces with Facebook. ABC News. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Politics/story?id=3899006&page=1
2. Adamic, L., & Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: divided they blog. HP Labs. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.blogpulse.com/papers/2005/AdamicGlanceBlogWWW.pdf
3. Adamic, L. A., & Huberman, B. A. (2001). Power-law distribution of the world wide web. Science, 287.
4. Ancu, M., & Cozma, R. (2009). MySpace politics: uses and gratifications of befriending candidates. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53, 576-583.
5. Anderson, C. (2006). The long tail: why the future of business is selling more of less. New York: Hyperion.
6. Anderson, C. (2010). Free: how today’s small businesses profit by giving something for nothing. New York: Hyperion.
7. Armey, D., & Kibbe, M. (2010). Give us liberty: a tea party manifesto. New York: William Morrow.
8. Bai, M. (2012). The tea party’s not-so-civil war. The New York Times. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/magazine/tea-par-ty-south-carolina.html?_r=2&hp
9. Barabasi, A-L., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286.
10. Barabasi, A-L., & Albert, R., & Jeong, J. (2000). Scale-free characteristics of random networks: the topology of the World Wide Web. Physics A, 281, 69-77.
11. Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12. Berelson, B. R., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & McPhee, W. N. (1954). Voting: a study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13. Boerma, L. (2011). Candidates vie to star in the social network 2012 edition. The National Journal. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/candidates-vie-to-star-in-the-social-network-2012-edition-20110419
14. Boyd, d. m. & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1). Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html
15. Brundidge, J. (2006, June). The contribution of the internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks: Does the medium matter?” Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the International Communication Association, Dresden, Germany.
16. Bryant, J. & Miron, D. 2004. Theory and Research in Mass Communication. Journal of Communication, 54(4), 662-704.
17. Brynjolfsson, E., Hu, Yu, & Simester, D. (2007). From niches to riches: the anatomy of the long tail. Sloan Management Review, 47(4), 67-71.
18. Brynjolfsson, E., Hu, Yu, & Simester, D. (2011). Goodbye pareto principle, hello long tail: the effect of search costs on the concentration of product sales. Management Science, 57(8), 1373-1386.
19. Budak, A. (2010). Facebook, twitter, and Barack Obama: new media and the 2008 presidential election. Published thesis. Kindle Edition.
20. Choi, J., Park, H. S. & Chang, J. C. (2011). Hostile media perception, involvement types, and advocacy behaviors. Journalism & Mass Communication, 88, 23-39.
21. Christen, C. T., Kannaovakun, P., & Gunther, A. C. (2002). Hostile media perception: partisan assessments of press and public during the 1997 United Parcel service strike. Political Communication, 19, 423-436.
22. Cohen, R. (2010). The starfish and the tea party. The NonProfit Quarterly. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3866:the-cohen-report— the-starfish-and-the-tea-party&catid=149:rick-cohen&Itemid=117
23. Coleman, J. S., Katz, E. & Menzel, H. (1966). Medical innovation: A diffusion study. New York: Bobbs-Merrill
24. Coleman, J. S., Katz, E., & Menzel, H. (1957). The diffusion of an innovation among physicians. Sociometry, 20, 253-270.
25. Coleman, R. & McCombs, M. (2007). The young and the agenda-less? Exploring age-related differences in agenda setting on the youngest generation, baby boomers and the civic generation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(3), 495-508.
26. Dalton, R. J., Beck, P. A., & Huckfeldt, R. (1998). Partisan cues and the media: information flows in the 1992 presidential election. American Political Science Review, 92, 111-26.
27. Davis, R. (1999). The Web of politics: The Internet's impact on the American political system. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Eggen, D., & Bacon, Jr., P. (2009). Tea Party conservatives gear up to affect 2010 elections with fundraising. The Washington Post. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/09/AR2009120904637.html
29. Elberse, A., & Oberholzer-Gee, F. (2008). Superstar and underdogs: An examination of long tail phenomenon in video sales. Harvard Business School Working Paper No. 07-015.
30. Fitzgibbons, M. J. (2010). The tea party and the spider’s Web. The American Thinker. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/the_tea_party_and_the_spiders.html
31. Fraser, M., & Dutta, S. (2008, November 19). Barack Obama and the Facebook election. US News and World Report, Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.us-news.com/opinion/articles/2008/11/19/barack-obama-and-the-facebook-election
32. Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chaiken, S. (1994). The causes of the hostile media judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 165-180.
33. Good, C. (2009). The tea party movement: who is in charge? The Atlantic. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/04/the-tea-party-movement-whos-in-charge/13041/
34. Gunther, A. C. & Chai, C. S. (2001). Predicting pluralistic ignorance: the hostile media perception and its consequences. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 688-701.
35. Gunther, A. C., & Christen, C. T. (2002). Projection or persuasive press? Contrary effects of personal opinion and perceived news coverage on estimates of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 52, 177.
36. Gunther, A. C., Christen, C. T., Liebhart, J. L., & Chai, C. S. (2001). Congenial public, contrary press, and biased estimates of the climate of opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 295-320.
37. Gunther, A. C., & Liebhart, J. L. (2006). Broad reach or biased source? Decomposing the hostile media effect. Journal of Communication, 56(3), 449-466.
38. Gunther, A., & Schmitt, K. (2004). Mapping boundaries of the hostile media effect. Journal of Communication, 54, 55-70.
39. Hansen, G. J., & Kim, H. (2011). Is the media biased against me? A meta-analysis of the hostile media effect research. Communication Research Reports, 28, 169-179
40. Hohmann, J. (2011). George Allen apologizes for ‘macaca’ moment. Politico. Retrieved June 22, 2012, from http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56212.html
41. Holt, R. (2004). Dialogue on the Internet: Language, civic identity, and computermediated communication. Westport, CT: Praeger.
42. Huge, M., & Glynn, C. (2010). Hostile media and the campaign trail: perceived media bias in the race for governor. Journal of Communication, 60, 165-181.
43. Jee Oh, H., Park, J., & Wanta, W. (2011). Exploring factors in the hostile media perception: partisanship, electoral engagement, and media use patterns. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88, 40-54.
44. Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: the part played by people in the flow of mass communications. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
45. Kaye, B. K. (2010). Between Barack and a net place: users and uses of social network sites and blogs for political information. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), The networked self: Identity, community and culture on social network sites (pp., 208-231). New York: Routledge.
46. Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. (2012). Net gain? selective exposure and selective avoidance of social network sites. In Francesca Comunello (Ed.), Networked sociability and individualism: technology for personal and professional relationships. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
47. Kaye, K. (2009). Google grabbed most of Obama’s 16 million in 2008. Tech-President. Retrieved June 10, 2012, fromhttp://techpresident.com/blog-entry/google-grabbed-most-obamas-16-million-2008
48. Kim, Y. M., & Geidner, N. (2008, May). Politics as friendship: The impact of online social networks on young voters political behavior. Paper presented at the annual convention of the International Communication Association, Montreal, Canada.
49. Kuhn, D. P. (2010). RIP political establishment. Real Clear Politics. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/21/rip_political_establishment_and_tea_party_netroots_107238.html
50. Kushin, M. J., & Kitchener, K. (2009). Getting political on social network sites: exploring online political discourse on Facebook. First Monday, 14(11). Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/in-dex.php/fm/article/view/2645/2350
51. Lang, K., & Lang, G. E. (2006). Personal influence and the new paradigm: some inadvertent consequences. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 608, 157-178.
52. Lepore, J. (2010). The whites of their eyes: the tea party's revolution and the battle over American history. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
53. Livne, A., Simmons, M. P., Adar, E., & Adamic, L. A. (2011). The party is over here: structure and content in the 2010 election. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.cond.org/partyat.pdf.
54. McCombs, M. (2004). Setting the agenda: the mass media and public opinion. Cambridge, UK: Policy Press.
55. McCombs, M., & Weaver, D. (1973). Voters’ need for orientation and use of mass communication. Unpublished paper presented to the 1973 International Communication Association (Montreal, Canada).
56. Mehta, S. (2011). The rise of the internet electorate. The LA Times. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/18/nation/la-na-social-media-20110418
57. Meraz, S. (2008a). The blogosphere’s gender gap: differences in visibility, popularity, and authority. In Paula Poindexter, Sharon Meraz, and Amy Schmitz Weiss (Eds.), Women, men, and news. New York: Routledge.
58. Meraz, S. (2008b). The many faced ‘you’ of social media. In Zizi Papacharissi (Ed.), Journalism and citizenship: New Agendas. New York: Routledge/
59. Meraz, S. (2009). Is there an elite hold: traditional media to social media agenda setting influence in blog networks. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 14, 682-707.
60. Meraz, S. (2011a). Using time series analysis to measure intermedia agenda setting influence in traditional media and blog networks. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(1), 176-194.
61. Meraz, S. (2011b). The fight for how to think: traditional media, social networks, and issue interpretation. Journalism: Theory, Practice, and Criticism, 12(1), 107-127.
62. Meraz, S. (2012). The sociality of news sociology: examining user participation and news selection practices in social media news sites. In Burton Saint John III and Kirsten Johnson (Eds.), News with a View: Essays on the Eclipse of Objectivity in Modern Journalism. Jefferson: McFarland & Company.
63. Merton, R. (1949). Patterns of influence: A study of interpersonal influence and communications behavior in a local community. In P. F. Lazarsfeld and F. N. Stanton (Eds.), Communications research. New York: Harper and Brothers.
64. Monge, P., & Contractor, N. (2003). Theories of communication networks. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.
65. Neuman, M. E. J. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM, 45(2).
66. Nocera, J. (2011). The tea party’s war on America. The New York Times. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/02/opinion/the-tea-partys-war-on-america.html?_r=1&src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB
67. Page, B. (1996). Who deliberates? Mass media in modern democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
68. Paul, R. (2011). The tea party goes to Washington. Nashville: Center Street.
69. Perloff, R. M. (1989). Ego-involvement and the third person effect of televised news coverage. Communication Research, 16, 236.
70. Postelnicu, M., & Cozma, R. (2008, November). Befriending the candidate: uses and gratifictions of candidate profiles on MySpace. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, San Diego, CA.
71. Preston, J. (2011). Republicans sharpening online tools for 2012. The New York Times. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/20/us/politics/20social.html?_r=3
72. Purcell, K., Rainie, L., Mitchell, A., Rosenstiel, T., & Olmstead, K. (2010). Understanding the participatory news consumer. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved June 22, 2012, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Online-News.aspx
73. Rainie, L., & Smith, A. (2008). The Internet and the 2008 election. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.pewm-ternet.org/Reports/2008/The-Internet-and-the-2008-Election.aspx
74. Rasmussen, S., & Schoen, D. (2010). Mad as hell: how the Tea Party movement is fundamentally remaking our Two-Party system. New York: Harper.
75. Roberts, M., & McCombs, M. (1994). Agenda setting and political advertising: origins of the news media. Political Communication, 11, 249-262.
76. Saad, L. (2010). Tea partiers are fairly mainstream in their demographics. Gallup. Retrieved June 10, 2011, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/127181/tea-partiers-fairly-mainstream-demographics.aspx
77. Schmitt, K., Gunther, A. C., & Liebhart, J. L. (2004). Why partisans see mass media as biased. Communication Research, 31, 623-641.
78. Schudson, M. (1995). The power of news. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
79. Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: the power of organizing without organizations. New York: Penguin Press.
80. Shoemaker, P., & Reese, S. D. (1996). Mediating the message: theories of influence on mass media content (2nded.). New York: Longman.
81. Sigal, L. V. (1973). Reporters and officials: the organization and politics of news-making. Lexington, MA: DC Heath and Company.
82. Siu, W. (2010). Source agenda setting: intermedia influence in the food safety scandal. Journal of Communications Research, 1(4), 355-381.
83. Smith, A. (2011a). The Internet and campaign 2010. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/The-Internet-and-Campaign-2010.aspx
84. Smith, A. (2011b). 22% of online Americans used social networking or Twitter for politics in the 2010 campaign. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Politics-and-social-media.aspx
85. Stromer-Galley, J. (2007). Measuring deliberation’s content: a coding scheme. Journal of Public Deliberation, 3(1) Article 12.
86. Stroud, N. J. (2011). Niche news: the politics of news choice. New York: Oxford University Press.
87. Sunstein, C. (2000). Deliberative trouble? Why groups go to extremes. Yale Law Journal, 110 (1): 71-119.
88. Sunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
89. Sunstein, C. (2002). The law of group polarization. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 10(2): 175-195.
90. Sunstein, C. (2009). Going to extremes: how like minds unite and divide. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2009.
91. Sweetser, K., Golan, G. J., & Wanta, W. (2008). Intermedia agenda setting in television, advertising, and blogs during the 2004 election. Mass Communication & Society, 11, 197-216.
92. Tanenhaus, S. (2011). Jefferson’s tea party moment. The New York Times. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/sunday-re-view/us-has-lovehate-relationship-with-debt.html?ref=opinion
93. Tremayne, M., Zheng, N., Lee, J., & J. Jeong. (2006). Issue publics on the web: applying network theory to the war blogosphere. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12(1). Available at http://jcmc.indiana.edu/.
94. Tsfati, Y. (2007). Hostile media perception, presumed media influence, and minority alienation:the case of Arabs in Israel. Journal of Communication, 57, 632-651.
95. Tsfati, Y. & Cohen, J. (2005). The influence of presumed media influence on democratic legitimacy: The case of Gaza settlers. Communication Research, 32(6), 794-821.
96. Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: biased perception and the perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 577-589.
97. Vitak, J., Zube, P., Smock, A., Carr, C., Ellison, N. & Lampe, C. (2010). It’s complicated: Facebook users’ political participation in the 2008 election. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking.
98. Williams, C. B., & Gulati, G. J. (2008, August 28-31). What is a social network worth? Facebook and vote share in the 2008 presidential primaries. Presented at the 2008 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA
99. Williams, C. B., & Gulati, G. J. (2009, April 2-5). Facebook grows up: an empirical assessment of its role in the 2008 congressional elections. Presented at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
100. Woolley, J. K., Limperos, A. M., & Oliver, M. B. (2010). The 2008 presidential election, 2.0: a content analysis of user-generated political Facebook groups. Mass Communication & Society, 13, 631-652.
101. Zernike, K. (2010). Boiling mad: inside tea party America. New York: Times Books/Henry Holt and Co.
102. Zernike, K., & Thee-Brenen, M. (2010). Poll finds tea party backers wealthier and more educated. The New York Times. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html
103. Zhang, W., Johnson, T., Seltzer, T., & Bichard, S. (2010). The revolution will be networked: the influence of social network sites on political attitudes and behaviors. Social Science Computer Review, 28(1), 75-92.