Suchergebnisse

In the early years, researchers greeted the internet and digital data with almost wide-eyed wonder and excitement. The opportunities provided by digital media such as websites, bulletin boards, and blogs—and later by social media platforms and mobile apps—seemed nearly endless, and researchers were suddenly awash in data. The bounty was so great that it required new methods for processing, organizing, and analysis. Yet in all the excitement, it seems that the digital research community largely lost sight of something fundamental: a sense of what all these data actually represent. In this essay, I argue that moving forward, researchers need to take a critical look into, be more open about, and develop better approaches for drawing inferences and larger meaning from digital data. I suggest that we need to more closely interrogate what these data represent in at least two senses: statistical and contextual. In the former instance I call for much greater modesty in digital social research. In the latter, I call for heuristic models that permit bolder, more robust comparisons throughout our work.

Social media are frequently touted for their potential to strengthen democratic processes by bringing politicians and citizens into dialogue with one another. Social media may enrich the public sphere and improve democratic decision-making by allowing politicians and constituents to discuss matters of political import directly, free from intermediaries. But what factors impact whether this potential is realized? Previous research has focused on politicians' structural incentives for strategic communication online but neglected the impact of citizen demand for politicians' attention. I examine the role of citizen demand using an original dataset comprising the Twitter activity from and to members of the lower legislative houses in the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and United States during the latter half of October 2013. The data suggest that citizen demand plays a crucial role in determining the presence, as well as the extent, of politicians' reciprocal engagement with members of the public.

The 2005 Danish cartoon crisis has been the topic of much discussion among political science scholars. In September 2011 we ran a symposium on Jytte Klausen's The Cartoons That Shook the World that centered on the tensions between multiculturalism, civility, and freedom of expression disclosed by the controversy. Paul M. Sniderman, Michael Bang Petersen, Rune Slothuus, and Rune Stubager's Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy: Islam, Western Europe, and the Danish Cartoon Crisis (Princeton 2014) revisits the Danish crisis. Drawing on randomized experiments linked to broader survey research, the authors offer a nuanced account of Danish public opinion, and argue that the sensitivity of Danes to civil liberties concerns explains why the cartoon controversy did not result in an anti-Muslim backlash. The topic, the argument, and the methodology are important, and so we have invited a range of political science scholars to review the book. — Jeffrey C. Isaac

Since independence, Kyrgyzstani leaders have used Islamic identity as a tool for nation-building. While embracing Islam as a marker of Kyrgyz nationhood, however, they have simultaneously sought to limit its role in political life. The resulting discourse draws a sharp dichotomy between 'good', 'local' forms of Islam and 'bad', 'foreign' manifestations. Unfortunately, the latter, 'bad' forms are frequently linked to Kyrgyzstan's largest minority population: ethnic Uzbeks. Drawing on, and adding insights to, the theory of securitisation forwarded by the Copenhagen School of security studies, this article examines how and why religion and ethnicity have become intertwined in Kyrgyzstani discourse. Adapted from the source document.

Independent researchers' access to digital platform data is critical for our understanding of the online world; yet recent reflections have shown that data are not always readily available (Asbjørn Møller & Bechmann, 2019; Bruns, 2018; Tromble, 2021). In the face of platform power to determine data accessibility, academics can often feel powerless, but opportunities and openings can emerge for scholars to shape practice. In this article, we examine the potential for academics to engage with non-academic audiences in debates around increased data access. Adopting an autoethnographic approach, we draw on our personal experiences working with policymakers and digital platforms to offer advice for academics seeking to shape debates and advocate for change. Presenting vignettes that detail our experiences and drawing on existing scholarship on how to engage with non-academic audiences, we outline the opportunities and challenges in this kind of engagement with a view to guiding other scholars interested in engaging in this space.

Social media offer direct lines of communication to many democratic representatives, and, in some instances, they may provide policy-makers and journalists with a better sense of public views. But, are the voices expressed on social media worth heeding? Impersonal and anonymous communication often invites negativity and abuse, including racism and sexism. Indeed, evidence suggests that women face particularly high levels of abuse online. And yet we know relatively little about the role of sexism in citizens' digitally mediated interactions with their political representatives. Do people direct more criticism and hostility towards female politicians? Using Twitter data comparing political engagement in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States, we actually find reason for optimism. In the United Kingdom and the United States, there are no differences in the tone of messages sent to male and female politicians, and Dutch citizens direct more positive messages towards women. Across all three countries, gendered insults towards women are rare.