Two Different Debates? Investigating the Relationship Between a Political Debate on TV and Simultaneous Comments on Twitter

Social Science Computer Review

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 259-276

  Trilling, Damian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

tvduell; election campaign; German elections; political debate; second screen; twitter

Indexed keywords

EID: 84930157108     PISSN: 08944393     EISSN: 15528286     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0894439314537886     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Ausserhofer J.,Maireder A.National politics on Twitter.Information, Communication & Society. 2013;16:291-314
2. BakkerT. P. (2013). Citizens as political participants: The myth of the active online audience?(PhD dissertation). University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Retrieved fromhttp://dare.uva.nl/record/439508
3. Bird S.,Klein E.,Loper E.Natural language processing with Python. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly; 2009:
4. Bishop B. H.,Hillygus D. S.The Oxford handbook of American public opinion and the media. Jacobs L. R.Shapiro R. Z., ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2011:204-219.
5. Brants K.,Van Praag P.Signs of media logic: Half a century of political communication in the Netherlands.Javnost—The Public. 2006;13:25-40
6. BrunsA. (2011). Switching from Twapperkeeper to yourTwapperkeeper. Mapping online publics. Retrieved October 23, 2013, fromhttp://mappingonlinepublics.net/2011/06/21/switching-from-twapperkeeper-to-yourtwapperkeeper/
7. Conover M. D.,Gonçalves B.,Flammini A.,Menczer F.Partisan asymmetries in online political activity.EPJ Data Science. 2012;1 (6): 1-19
8. Courtois C.,d’Heer E.Second screen applications and tablet users.Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Interactive TV and Video—EuroiTV’12. 2012;:153-156
9. Dahlberg L.The Internet and democratic discourse: Exploring the prospects of online deliberative forums extending the public sphere.Information, Communication & Society. 2001;4:615-633
10. De Nooy W.,Maier J.Wageningen, the Netherlands: Paper presented at the Etmaal van de Communicatiewetenschap; 2014, February:
11. Der Tagesspiegel. 2013, September 2;:2
12. Diakopoulos N. A.,Shamma D. AProceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—CHI’10. New York, NY: ACM; 2010:1195-1198.
13. Doughty M.,Rowland D.,Lawson S.Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Interactive TV and Video—EuroiTV’12. New York, NY: ACM; 2012:79-86.
14. Entman R. M.Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm.Journal of Communication. 1993;43:51-58
15. Ferree M. M.,Gamson W. A.,Gerhards R.,Rucht D.Four models of the public sphere in modern democracies.Theory and Society. 2002;31:289-324
16. Gayo-Avello D.A meta-analysis of state-of-the-art electoral prediction from Twitter data.Social Science Computer Review. 2013;31:649-679
17. Habermas J.Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft. Neuwied, Germany: Luchterhand; 1962:
18. Hänggli R.,Kriesi H.Frame construction and frame promotion (strategic framing choices).American Behavioral Scientist. 2012;56:260-278
19. Hellsten I.,Dawson J.,Leydesdorff L.Implicit media frames: Automated analysis of public debate on artificial sweeteners.Public Understanding of Science. 2010;19:590-608
20. Jungherr A.Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on politics, elections and data—PLEAD’13. New York, NY: ACM; 2013:5-14.
21. JungherrA. (2014). Twitter in politics: A comprehensive literature review. Social Science Research Network. Retrieved fromhttp://ssrn.com/abstract=2402443
22. Jungherr A.,Jürgens P.,Schoen H.Why the Pirate Party won the German election of 2009 or The trouble with predictions: A response to Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T. O., Sander, P. G., & Welpe, I. M. “Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment.”.Social Science Computer Review. 2011;30:229-234
23. Larsson A. O.,Moe H.Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign.New Media & Society. 2011;14:729-747
24. McCombs M.,Reynolds AMedia effects: Advances in theory and research. Bryant J.Oliver M. B., ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2009:1-16.
25. McKinney M. S.,Warner B. R.Do presidential debates matter? Examining a decade of campaign debate effects.Argumentation and Advocacy. 2013;49:238-258
26. Morgan J. S.,Shafiq M. Z.,Lampe C.Proceedings of the 2013 conference on computer supported cooperative work. New York, NY: ACM; 2013:887-897.
27. MorstatterF.PfefferJ.LiuH.CarleyK. M. (2013). Is the sample good enough? Comparing data from Twitter’s streaming API with Twitter’s firehose. In International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media—ICWSM. Boston, MA. Retrieved fromhttp://www.public.asu.edu/˜fmorstat/paperpdfs/icwsm2013.pdf
28. Nagel F.,Maurer M.,Reinemann C.Is there a visual dominance in political communication? How verbal, visual, and vocal communication shape viewers’ impressions of political candidates.Journal of Communication. 2012;62:833-850
29. Pariser E.The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. New York, NY: Penguin; 2011:
30. PeerReach. (2013, November 7). 4 Ways how Twitter can keep growing. [Blogpost]. Retrieved fromhttp://blog.peerreach.com/2013/11/4-ways-how-twitter-can-keep-growing/
31. Plotkowiak T.,Stanoevska-Slabeva K.German politicians and their Twitter networks in the Bundestag Election 2009.First Monday. 2013;18 (5):
32. RaysonP.GarsideR. (2000). Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. NAACL-ANLP 2000 Workshop: Syntactic and Semantic Complexity in Natural Language Processing Systems. Retrieved fromhttp://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/W/W00/W00-0901.pdf
33. Sayed N.Towards the Egyptian revolution: Activists’ perceptions of social media for mobilization.Journal of Arab & Muslim Media Research. 2011;4:273-298
34. Shamma D. A.,Churchill E. F.,Kennedy L.New York, NY: ACM; 2010:589-593.
35. Shamma D. A.,Kennedy L.,Churchill E. F.New York, NY: ACM; 2009:3-10.
36. Sunstein C. R.Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2007:
37. Trent J. S.,Friedenberg R. V.Political campaign communication: Principles and practices. (2008). Political campaign communication: Principles and practices (6th ed.). Plymouth, England: Rowman & Littlefield.Plymouth, England: Rowman & Littlefield; 2008:
38. Tumasjan A.,Sprenger T. O.,Sandner P. G.,Welpe I. M.Election forecasts with Twitter: How 140 characters reflect the political landscape.Social Science Computer Review. 2010;29:402-418
39. Van de LindeK. (2012, August). Samsom gaat het Roemer nog moeilijk maken [Samson will give Roemer a hard time]. HP/De Tijd. Retrieved fromhttp://www.hpdetijd.nl/2012-08-27/samsom-gaat-het-roemer-nog-moeilijk-maken
40. Van den DoolP. (2012, September). ‘Nationale programma rond verkiezingen’ begint met debat tussen Rutte en Roemer [‘National program around elections’ starts with debate between Rutte and Roemer]. NRC Handelsblad. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nrc.nl/verkiezingen/2012/09/03/nationale-programma-rond-verkiezingen-begint-met-debat-tussen-rutte-en-roemer
41. WohnD. Y.NaE.-K. (2011). Tweeting about TV: Sharing television viewing experiences via social media message streams. First Monday, 16. Retrieved fromhttp://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3368/2779