Affective publics and structures of storytelling: sentiment, events and mediality

Information Communication and Society

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 307-324

  Papacharissi, Zizi ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

affective publics; Big data; social media; social movements

Indexed keywords

EID: 84953639712     PISSN: 1369118X     EISSN: 14684462     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1109697     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. C.L.Armstrong, C. l., & F.Gao, (2010). Now tweet this: How news organizations use twitter. Electronic News, 4(4), 218–235. doi: 10.1177/1931243110389457
2. C.L.Armstrong, C. l., & F.Gao, (2011). Gender, twitter and news content: An examination across platforms and coverage areas. Journalism Studies, 12(4), 490–505. doi: 10.1080/1461670X.2010.527548
3. D.Boyd, (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z.Papacharissi (Ed.), Networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39–58). London: Routledge.
4. D.Boyd,, S.Golder,, & G.Lotan, (2010). Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter. Paper presented at HicSS-43 (Hawaii international conference on System Sciences), Ieee, Kauai, Hi. doi:10.1109/HicSS.2010.412.
5. W.L.Bennett, W. l., & A.Segerberg, (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. W.L.Bennett,, A.Segerberg,, & S.Walker, (2014). Organization in the crowd: Peer production in large-scale networked protests. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 232–260. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.870379
7. A.Chadwick, (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. London: Oxford University Press.
8. E.Colleoni, (2013, May). Beyond the differences: The use of empty signifiers as organizing device in the #occupy movement. Paper presented at the workshop Material Participation: Technology, the Environment and Everyday Publics, University of Milan.
9. K.Crawford, (2009). Following you: Disciplines of listening in social media. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 23(4), 525–535. doi: 10.1080/10304310903003270
10. A.Damasio, (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, rationality and the human brain. New York, NY: Putnam.
11. J.Dean, (2010). Affective networks. Media Tropes eJournal, 2(2), 19–44.
12. I.Erickson, (2010). Geography and community: New forms of interaction among people and places. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(8), 1194–1207. doi: 10.1177/0002764209356250
13. L.Grossberg, (1997). Bringing it all back home. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
14. R.Grusin, (2010). Premediation: Affect and mediality after 9/11. New York, NY: Palgrave.
15. L.K.Hansen, l. K., A.Arvidsson,, F.A.Nielsen,, E.Colleoni,, & M.Etter, (2011). Good friends, bad news – affect and virality in Twitter. In Future Information Technology: Proceedings of 6th international conference (pp. 34–43), Futuretech 2011, Loutraki, Greece.
16. S.Henneburg,, M.Scammell,, & N.O'Shaughnessy, (2009). Political marketing management and theories of democracy. Marketing Theory, 9(2), 165–188. doi: 10.1177/1470593109103060
17. A.Hermida, (2010). Twittering the news. Journalism Practice, 4(3), 297–308. doi: 10.1080/17512781003640703
18. M.Hohl, (2009). Beyond the screen: Visualizing visits to a website as an experience in physical space. Visual Communication, 8(3), 273–284. doi: 10.1177/1470357209106469
19. C.Honeycutt,, & S.C.Herring, (2009). Beyond microblogging: Conversation and collaboration via Twitter. Proceedings of the Forty-Second Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS–42), (pp. 1–10). Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~ herring/honeycutt.herring.2009.pdf
20. P.N.Howard,, & M.Hussain, (2013). Democracy's fourth wave? Digital media and the Arab Spring. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
21. B.J.Jansen,, M.Zhang,, K.Sobel,, & A.Chowdury, (2009). Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(11), 2169–2188. doi: 10.1002/asi.21149
22. A.Karatzogianni,, & A.Kuntsman, (2012). Digital cultures and the politics of emotion: Feelings, affect and technological change. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
23. K.Lacey, (2013). Listening publics. Cambridge: Polity.
24. K.Lang,, & G.E.Lang, (1953). The unique perspective of television and its effect: A pilot study. American Sociological Review, 18(1), 3–12. doi: 10.2307/2087842
25. B.Massumi, (2002). Parables for the virtual: Movement, affect, sensation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
26. S.Meraz,, & Z.Papacharissi, (2013). Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #egypt. International Journal of Press and Politics, 18(2), 139–166. doi:10.1177/1940161212474472
27. S.Meraz,, & Z.Papacharissi, (in press). Networked framing, gatekeeping, and the fluid news ecology. In T.Witschge, C.W.Anderson, D.Domingo, & A.Hermida (Eds.), The Sage handbook of digital journalism (pp. 1–29). London: Sage.
28. Z.Papacharissi, (2012). Without you, I'm nothing: Performances of the self on Twitter. International Journal of Communication, 6. Retrieved from http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1484
29. Z.Papacharissi, (2014). Affective publics. New York: Oxford University Press.
30. Z.Papacharissi,, & S.Blasiola, (in press). Structures of feeling, storytelling, and social media: The case of #Egypt. In A.Bruns, E.Skogerbø, C.Christiansen, A.O.Larsson, & G.S.Enli (Eds.), Routledge companion to social media and poiltics. London: Routledge.
31. Z.Papacharissi,, & M.de Fatima Oliveira, (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 266–282. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01630.x
32. J.Protevi, (2009). Political affect: Connecting the social and the somatic. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
33. S.Robinson, (2009). ‘Searching for my own unique place in the story’: A comparison of journalistic and citizen-produced coverage of Hurricane Katrina's anniversary. In Z.Papacharissi (Ed.), Journalism and citizenship: New agendas in communication (pp. 166–188). New York, NY: Routledge.
34. A.Russell, (2011). Networked. Cambridge: Polity.
35. G.Seigworth,, & M.Gregg, (2010). An inventory of shimmers. In M.Gregg & G.Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader (pp. 138–57). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
36. H.Steiner, (2009). Reference utility of social networking sites: Options and functionality. Library Hi Tech News, 26(5–6), 4–6. doi: 10.1108/07419050910985246
37. S.Tomkins, (1995). Exploring affect: The selected writings of Silvan S. Tomkins. V. E. Demos (Ed.). New York, NY: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
38. V.W.Turner, (1974). Dramas, fields, and metaphors: Symbolic action in human society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
39. J.Van Dijck, (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
40. K.Weller,, A.Bruns,, J.Burgess,, M.Mahrt,, & C.Puschmann, (2013). Twitter and society. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
41. R.Williams, (1961). The long revolution. London: Chatto and Windus.
42. R.Williams, (1977). Marxism and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43. S.Wu,, J.M.Hofman,, W.A.Mason,, & D.J.Watts, (2011). Who says what to whom on Twitter. Proceedings of the International World Wide Web Conference Committee (pp. 705–714). Danvers, MA: Association for Computing Machinery.
44. S.Yardi,, & D.Baoyd, (2010a). Tweeting from the town square: Measuring geographic local networks. ICWSM ‘10: Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 194–201). New York, NY: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.
45. S.Yardi,, & D.Boyd, (2010b). Dynamic debates: An analysis of group polarization over time on twitter. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 30(5), 316–327. doi: 10.1177/0270467610380011