Suchergebnisse

This article argues that our view of citizens as miserably failing to maintain their role in democracy is problematic, and that the problems stem from the "informed citizen" ideal: it is too demanding, but also misses the target. The article proposes an alternative normative concept for citizens' public connection: distributed readiness citizenship. The concept highlights how the state of being prepared to act is more important than levels of measurable political knowledge. Readiness is crucial to finding enough information and relevant cues, and it cannot be assessed based on individual citizens in isolation, but should be considered as distributed, and embodied in citizens' social networks, with a division of labor. With such a conceptualization, we are better equipped to evaluate existing conditions, judge the impact of populism and propaganda, and figure out how to improve the chances for those less well-off to participate in democracy. ; publishedVersion

This article is concerned with how different agencies play out in shaping public debate online and, for this purpose, employs an approach that acknowledges the role not just of algorithms seen in isolation, but in context with users. The empirical case is YouTube video search results related to Islam in Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish. As such, the article makes a contribution by adding a comparative layer to the discussion of "ranking cultures," which has so far focused on individual cases or English-language searches. The analysis is based on a mapping of the highest-ranking videos, as well as a qualitative exploration of these videos' content and context. Findings illustrate how intricate practices of re-posting and re-framing of videos is key to understand the ways YouTube's search function contributes to shape the public image of an issue differently in different language areas and social settings. Findings are related to previous studies of immigration coverage in mainstream news media in the case countries. The discussion highlights the merits of the approach, not only for bringing out nuances in how YouTube shape political issues in different contexts but also for pointing to questions of the broader public debate. ; publishedVersion

Deliberative systems theory is a promising candidate for a normative theory of democracy that combines ideal requirements with feasibility. Yet, recent theoretical elaborations and studies of citizens' online media use inspired by the theory suffer from an incomplete account of the public sphere's epistemic function, too rough interpretations of participatory levels, shortcomings in the understanding of online media, and a context-insensitive notion of policy reform. Addressing these weaknesses, the article argues for a refined version of deliberative systems theory. Particular attention is given to feasibility considerations. Reviewing studies of online democracy in Norway, the article shows that the theoretical critique has practical significance. It is also argued that the amended version of the deliberative systems approach produces a diagnosis of Norwegian online democracy more in line with reasonable expectations to a high achiever. This is taken as a prima facie indicator of feasibility.

Social media are often discussed in terms of online novelties. However, especially within the broader field of political communication, the uses of such services, as Twitter, at the hands of political actors such as politicians and the parties to which they belong, have become something of a fixture of research in recent years. Although the study of political Twitter use has provided a series of insightful case studies, often focused on one single election or country, this article presents a comparative study looking at Twitter use at the hands of political actors during two Norwegian elections, 2011 and 2013. We are interested in what overarching tendencies can be discerned from these uses—specifically, if differing usages can be found between the two elections, suggesting developments pertaining to the normalization and equalization hypotheses respectively. This is examined by focusing on two main analytical areas: The level and type of activity undertaken by those up for election, and the repercussions that this activity appears to have in terms of popularity on the studied platform. In short, the results suggest that although Twitter largely remains an "elite" medium in the Norwegian context, smaller political and other actors are making use of the platform at hand to higher degrees than their more well-known peers. Tendencies of both hypotheses are traced in the data, and although the findings could signal an opening for "outsiders" in this regard, the sheer amount of traffic driving the tweets sent by high-end politicians suggest otherwise. ; publishedVersion

AbstractOnline news sites have become an internet 'staple', but we know little of the forces driving the popularity of such sites in relation to what could be understood as the latest iteration of the web – social media services. This research in brief article discusses empirical results regarding the uses of Twitter for news sharing. Specifically, we present a comparative analysis of links emanating from the service at hand to a series of media outlets over a six-month period in two countries; Sweden and Norway. Focusing on linking practices among highly active Twitter accounts, we problematize the assumption that online communication involves two or more humans by directing attention to more or less automated 'bot' accounts. In sum, it is suggested that such automated accounts need to be dealt with more explicitly by researchers as well as practitioners interested in the popularity of online news as expressed through social media activity.

Social media are often discussed in terms of online novelties. However, especially within the broader field of political communication, the uses of such services, as Twitter, at the hands of political actors such as politicians and the parties to which they belong, have become something of a fixture of research in recent years. Although the study of political Twitter use has provided a series of insightful case studies, often focused on one single election or country, this article presents a comparative study looking at Twitter use at the hands of political actors during two Norwegian elections, 2011 and 2013. We are interested in what overarching tendencies can be discerned from these uses—specifically, if differing usages can be found between the two elections, suggesting developments pertaining to the normalization and equalization hypotheses respectively. This is examined by focusing on two main analytical areas: The level and type of activity undertaken by those up for election, and the repercussions that this activity appears to have in terms of popularity on the studied platform. In short, the results suggest that although Twitter largely remains an "elite" medium in the Norwegian context, smaller political and other actors are making use of the platform at hand to higher degrees than their more well-known peers. Tendencies of both hypotheses are traced in the data, and although the findings could signal an opening for "outsiders" in this regard, the sheer amount of traffic driving the tweets sent by high-end politicians suggest otherwise.

Abstract
How would media policy discourse benefit from more precise use of the ambiguous term "the market"? The term's economic and metaphorical constructions are often conflated, say the authors. For example, the metaphor can be used ideologically to obscure private political and economic interests. While there is no single uncontroversial definition of the term, greater clarity about the difference between its empirical and normative uses, according to the authors, will produce a more fruitful debate on both in the realm of media policy.

Abstract
How would media policy discourse benefit from more precise use of the ambiguous term "the market"? The term's economic and metaphorical constructions are often conflated, say the authors. For example, the metaphor can be used ideologically to obscure private political and economic interests. While there is no single uncontroversial definition of the term, greater clarity about the difference between its empirical and normative uses, according to the authors, will produce a more fruitful debate on both in the realm of media policy.