Network Agenda Setting, or Networked Framing? (Non)correspondence Between User and Right-Wing Media Semantic Networks on YouTube

IF 4.9 1区文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION

Communication Research Pub Date : 2024-12-11 DOI:10.1177/00936502241300803

Yuan Hsiao, Matthew Hindman

{"title":"Network Agenda Setting, or Networked Framing? (Non)correspondence Between User and Right-Wing Media Semantic Networks on YouTube","authors":"Yuan Hsiao, Matthew Hindman","doi":"10.1177/00936502241300803","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How does media shape and reflect right-wing rhetoric in the U.S.? Theories of media effects have moved towards networked approaches to agenda setting and framing, but it remains uncertain how issue attributes or frames emerge in the U.S. media ecosystem in which users themselves can shape political rhetoric through discussion on social media. We provide the largest test to date of the different predictions of networked agenda setting (NAS) theory and networked framing, through a semantic network analysis of all 19,112 video transcripts and 661,958,464 user comments posted on the YouTube channels of four major U.S. conservative media outlets between January 2019 and March 2021. Both overall, and within key topics like COVID-19 or Black Lives Matter, we find that user comments diverge strongly from video transcripts, with users repeatedly introducing associations, emotionally charged rhetoric, and conspiracy theories not originally present. Our results challenge claims by network agenda setting scholars that “objects and attributes can be transferred simultaneously in bundles” from the media agenda to the public agenda, but are more consistent with scholarship on networked framing. We argue that future work should strive to synthesize both approaches.","PeriodicalId":48323,"journal":{"name":"Communication Research","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502241300803","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

How does media shape and reflect right-wing rhetoric in the U.S.? Theories of media effects have moved towards networked approaches to agenda setting and framing, but it remains uncertain how issue attributes or frames emerge in the U.S. media ecosystem in which users themselves can shape political rhetoric through discussion on social media. We provide the largest test to date of the different predictions of networked agenda setting (NAS) theory and networked framing, through a semantic network analysis of all 19,112 video transcripts and 661,958,464 user comments posted on the YouTube channels of four major U.S. conservative media outlets between January 2019 and March 2021. Both overall, and within key topics like COVID-19 or Black Lives Matter, we find that user comments diverge strongly from video transcripts, with users repeatedly introducing associations, emotionally charged rhetoric, and conspiracy theories not originally present. Our results challenge claims by network agenda setting scholars that “objects and attributes can be transferred simultaneously in bundles” from the media agenda to the public agenda, but are more consistent with scholarship on networked framing. We argue that future work should strive to synthesize both approaches.

查看原文本刊更多论文

网络议程设置，还是网络框架？（非）YouTube上用户与右翼媒体语义网络的对应关系

媒体如何塑造和反映美国的右翼言论？媒体效应理论已经朝着议程设置和框架的网络化方法发展，但仍不确定问题属性或框架如何在美国媒体生态系统中出现，在美国媒体生态系统中，用户自己可以通过社交媒体上的讨论塑造政治言论。我们对网络议程设置（NAS）理论和网络框架的不同预测进行了迄今为止最大的测试，通过对2019年1月至2021年3月期间美国四大保守派媒体YouTube频道上发布的所有19,112个视频文本和661,958,464条用户评论进行语义网络分析。总体而言，在COVID-19或“黑人的命也重要”等关键话题中，我们发现用户评论与视频文本存在强烈分歧，用户反复介绍关联、情绪化的言论和最初不存在的阴谋论。我们的研究结果挑战了网络议程设置学者的主张，即“对象和属性可以同时捆绑地从媒体议程转移到公共议程”，但与网络框架的学术更一致。我们认为，未来的工作应努力综合这两种方法。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Communication Research COMMUNICATION-

CiteScore

17.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Empirical research in communication began in the 20th century, and there are more researchers pursuing answers to communication questions today than at any other time. The editorial goal of Communication Research is to offer a special opportunity for reflection and change in the new millennium. To qualify for publication, research should, first, be explicitly tied to some form of communication; second, be theoretically driven with results that inform theory; third, use the most rigorous empirical methods; and fourth, be directly linked to the most important problems and issues facing humankind. Critieria do not privilege any particular context; indeed, we believe that the key problems facing humankind occur in close relationships, groups, organiations, and cultures.