Communication Variables

be a consistent and strong indicator of political information consumption (Cho et al., 2009;

Shah, Cho, et al., 2007; Shah, McLeod, et al., 2007), being an indicator of the likelihood of an audience to participate in political activities. A stronger political ideology would then arguable lead to a stronger consumption of political information on social media.

S: Communication Variables

The second part of the O-S-O-R model deals with those mediums that are used to access political information leading up to political participation. This research investigates online political information use, Facebook political information use, and mobile phones political information use, while controlling for traditional media. Since these mediums have secondary orientations, in accordance with the O-S-O-R-model, this section tests for their indirect effects through the mediator variables that will be identified below.

At present the two most used and fastest growing social media in the United States are Facebook and Twitter (Lenhart, 2010; Smith, 2011a). While both are labelled as social media, they are distinguishable by several technical factors. The popularity of social media², as the most used web2.0 application-type, gains its strength from its interactive and

immediacy features (Kluver & Soon, 2005; Soon & Kluver, 2007), where interaction can be instantaneous or delayed, private or public, or available to a selection of specified people (O'Brien, 2009). Similarly, mobile phones bring its own unique nature as medium being able to support both offline and online realms of information seeking (Haspels, 2007; Nisbet &

Scheufele, 2004; Wattal, Schuff, Mandviwalla, & Williams, 2010).

Online political information use. Online information use is a more general variable that includes such sources as the use of search engines, political advertising, and online news sites. Smith (2011b) finds this form of information use has also increased during the 2010

2 Social media are also referred to as social networking sites in the literature (Zube, Lampe, & Lin, 2009.

•‧

國

立立 政 治 大

㈻㊫學

•‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

elections. With access to this information achieved, other forms of participation become more likely (Haspels, 2007; Heiberger & Harper, 2008) such as sharing information, which in turn inspires meaningful online political discussion, as Nisbet and Scheufele (2004) found that people are participated if they are being listened to, so the information sharer becomes the mobilised. Such information exposure thus depends on deliberate searching or through chance exposure through ads or through a friend network other than that established through social media (Cho et al., 2009; Shah, Cho, et al., 2007; Shah, McLeod, et al., 2007). How the information is then accessed, differs significantly from that of social media.

Such political information use then inevitably includes main stream sources online.

Cho et al. (2009) points out that a lot of controversy exists with certain mediums such as television eroding political engagement, also supported by Putnam (2000). Furthermore, Ansolabehere and Iyengar (1995) add political advertising and the internet to this list.

Traditional print mediums have then been listed as the exception to this rule. However, contradicting results are found in the literature, which leads Cho et al. (2009) to argue that this assumption is not true and perhaps the result of crude research methods by previous authors, and the limitation of existing research to being contextualised to direct effects, giving little regard to potential mediators. They themselves also find support for political advertising and the internet as being a prime provider of political knowledge leading up to political participation (Cho et al., 2009).

Facebook. Of the two most used social media in the United States, Facebook has thus far been the most successful in serving a growing online community through the provision of rich media content, and has also shown remarkable success in satisfying information needs. 2010 statistics indicate that social media usage for political information use has reached 22.5% (Meyers, 2011), with Facebook also having the most loyal client base,

•‧

with 93% being highly unlikely to switch to another social media platform (Lenhart, 2010, Shah, McLeod, et al., 2007).

In general, social media originates from a large and growing family of web2.0 applications, which are defined as a body of online applications that provide media rich content and high interactivity (Christopher, 2007; De Hertogh, Viaene, & Dedene, 2011;

Donston, 2008). Heiberger and Harper (2008), provide a more precise definition of Facebook, highlighting its interactive capabilities:

Previously an individual would have to design and host a Web site, join a chat group, upload pictures to a separate site, form an online group, use instant messaging and email services, join listservs, and create a blog just to rival all of the features Facebook offers. (p: 20).

It is precisely this media rich nature that adds to the simplification and quick dissemination of complicated messages, potentially increasing not just the reach, but the involvement of a previously neglected audience (Daft & Lengel, 1983, Ellison et al., 2007).

This dissemination occurs through a complex friend network, where information diffuses through a list of friends identified in the literature as a ‘weak’ and a ‘strong’ friend network.

A weak friend network are those friend with whom one rarely interacts and is seen as being more facilitative to information dissemination (Ellison et al., 2007; Gaines & Mondak, 2009). Posting a comment on Facebook will thus not just reach these ‘friends’, but also their friends, leading to a diversification of information available to an audience who otherwise not actively search for this information.

By contrast, the strong friend network are those friends with whom one more frequently interacts, and may also be those friends with whom relations extend offline, and that is more facilitative to political participation itself (Ellison et al., 2007; Gaines & Mondak, 2009). These friends are thus the ones likely to reply to a comment, further diversifying the

•‧

views by potentially disagreeing or adding to the discussion and establishing a sense of credibility for the information.

The exact size of this friend network varies and depends on the different user. Such a

‘friend’ may also be an institution, a non-governmental organisation, a political candidate, a political party, or even a government organisation or department (Haspels, 2007; Zube et al., 2009). Thus, such a friend may eventually have the potential to play the role of an opinion leader and increase credibility, however Zube et al., (2009) found that social media did not show during his research. Counter evidence does exist outside the United States, as is seen in the example of the Arab Spring discussed in the background chapter above (Abouzeid, 2011;

Cottle, 2011; Hounshell, 2011) where at least one researcher makes a clear argument that an opinion leader role is visible to some extent, where it was used as a “command and control platform” (Van Niekerk, Pillay, & Maharaj, 2011, p. 1).

Mobile devices. During the pew 2010 post-election survey, Smith (2010) found that 83% of Americans have a mobile phone. From that population, 36% of American adults have a smartphone, 39% use them to access the internet, and 26% used them to participate in political activities during the 2010 election campaign, mostly information seeking and dissemination activities.

Furthermore, mobile phones were found to have surpassed all other mobile devices in ownership, being present across demographics with 82% of white people owning a mobile phone, 84% of black people, and 84% of Hispanics. Access also largely overcomes age and income barriers with more than 80% of the middle class and 75% of the lower class owning mobile phones (Lenhart, 2010), making it a strong supporter for providing necessary

information across ethnic and demographic boundaries.

Internet access has decidedly gone mobile and wireless, as mobile phones even overcame personal computers and laptops in terms of access (Lenhart, 2010). However,

•‧

internet access is not the only contribution. Mobile phones have been identified as mobile newsrooms capable of making anyone a provider of up to date events filmed on a mobile phones and directly uploaded to the internet and social media (Vaccari, 2010, 2011) with an immediate, potentially global, audience that disseminates information even further through reposts. A recent example comes from the Arab Spring discussed above (Abouzeid, 2011, Cottle, 2011, Harb, 2011).

A mobile phone platform then has the technical ability to be a sharer of information to a friend network both on and offline. In other words, such a friend network can be

interpersonal or by extension through a web2.0 application, located the mobile phone and that can link email contacts as well as social media contacts together (Lenhart, 2010). It can therefore be argued that the spread of information using a mobile phone would show similar characteristics than does Facebook concerning a weak and a strong friend network. It other words, where a weaker friend network dominates there will be a wide view exposure, while a stronger friend network will lead to political participation.

O2: Potential Mediators

Previous research using the O-S-O-R model hypothesises potential secondary

orientations include political efficacy, and political knowledge, as well as political discussion (McLeod & Scheufele, 1999). This research takes the position of identifying two new

possible mediators that derive from online mediums use, namely wider view exposure and credibility.

First, is the view of being exposed to a wider set of views online, and can be argued to derive from such features as a variety of news sources, and different opinions flowing

through a social media friend network. The second the perception of credibility of the information source, both potentially originating from the information dissemination process as identified above (Ellison et al., 2007; Steinfield et al., 2008). The important of testing

•‧

indirect effects, is because of the need to establish whether participation occurs based on more than just exposure to an information source and a mass of information.

Wider range of views. For traditional media, wider view exposure is dependent on variety of factors, including the choice of the user, the ideological orientation of the

newspaper or television station, its news editor, and the advertising sources that causes the paper to focus on a particular audience in the first place (Fourie, 2008; Fourie, 2010). A traditional news source then goes through a process of news identification by listing such elements identified as ‘newsworthiness’, which guides the views that are eventually

displayed (Fourie, 2010). Such a process is often accused of being biased, or framing news in a particular light, thus limiting wider view exposure (Entman, 2007; Gross & D'Ambrosio, 2004). In the offline arena, the audience can overcome this by changing to another source, thus diversifying their exposure. However, they often find such news sources are

conglomerated with a single organisation owning large shares of the market (Caparini, 2004), which extends to the online version of mainstream media (Brundidge, 2009).

An alternative then seems to be to seek information and news online. Those who go online find it easier to obtain a news source that is different from the one they usually use, but in the same light, this also makes it easier to find an information source that suits their exact needs (Kim, 2007, Lee & Leung, 2008) and so limit their view exposure instead of widening it. The internet dimension thus brings forth a conflicting alternative, the existence of wider views, but only if the audience wishes to do so. Nevertheless a vast number of online news sources now includes comment sections, creation of avatars or user profiles, and by extension the creation of a ‘friend’ network other than that of Facebook. This encourages a diversity of views on what would traditionally have been a platform with a limited ideological exposure (Bente, Roggenberg, Kromer, & Eschenburg, 2008, Pena & Hancock, 2008, Yee, Bailenson,

& Ducheneaut, 2009).

•‧

Social media provides another specific alternative to general online information seeking, often acting as a disseminator for news, opinions, and general information in a supplementary nature to online news media (Vaccari, 2010; Vaccari, 2011). Exposure to information using social media platforms also mean that people no longer have to actively search for news or information online, as one is provided due to chance encounter of a friend posting a link on his social media profile (Ellison et al., 2007). The reach of the friend network then extends access to a weak network of friends that are unlikely to share the same political views, which Ellison et al. (2007) finds is a convenient environment to spread information and encourage online political discussion. Social media then provides a very high potential to encourage a wider view exposure, even to those disinterested in the process of political participation.

Mobile phones also become supplementary in nature, which combines the above functions into a single mobile device with a wireless internet connection (Lenhart, 2010;

Smith, 2010; Smith, 2011b; Smith, 2011c). In addition, it also retains its original function of working in an offline capacity, which essentially means that it provides access to a strong friend network, and a weaker online friend network. Its role becomes diverse and intricate (Lenhart, 2010). Such a friend network would then be quite diverse, extending diverse view points across the online and offline friend network.

Credibility. While diversity of an information source is a subtle event that the respondent may not even notice, the credibility of an information source is essential to the audience in their decision making process on whether or not to act. If they do not trust the information source, it is unlikely to inspire any form of political participation. Traditional mediums have learned this lesson repeatedly, losing audiences and trust, as audiences perceive them to be sympathetic and biased to one cause or another (Caparini, 2004). War-time reporting versus post-war War-time reporting has provided the best examples of the

•‧

importance of mainstream media credibility (Pfau et al., 2005; Spencer, 2006; Waller, 2003), which naturally extends to online ‘official’ information sources, while non-official sources would likely be subject to credibility perception of the gatekeeper or opinion leader. An online information source will therefore have a significant number of checks through which it has to pass to be credible, which will be largely depended on the source. As an example, a government website and mainstream media website will be perceived as more credible than an anonymous website. The gatekeeper or opinion leader will be seen to play a large role in the assessment of credibility.

For the case of social media, the Howard Dean campaign showed the mobilisation effect that occurs when the information source is considered credible (Wolf, 2004). In the same breath, it can also be argued that potentially the Howard Dean campaign was ultimately unsuccessful, not just because of inadequate use of immediacy features as critics argue (Hindman, 2005), but because too much freedom was granted to the audience to organize activities by themselves. Taking this into consideration, and the looking more specifically at Dean Campaign’s use of social media, it is noted that the responsible party did not exercise enough direct authority over to maintain the needed physical presence that the audience ultimately needed to be convinced enough to vote. It was seen as enough to give the power to the people to organise themselves in support of the party, but being asked to vote by Howard Dean is not the same as being asked to so by John Doe, who is doing what he can to support his chosen candidate. A central flaw seems to be the lack of a central opinion leader to sustain credibility over the long term (Zube et al., 2009). Here diversity of views becomes a problem for credibility as too many unknown sources become a part of the equation. A weak friend network was allowed to form, which was great for disseminating information, but was ultimately too dispersed to have the needed credibility and to lead to political participation.

•‧

This then warrants a look at the mobile phone, which has already been identified above as having the ability to combine online and offline friend networks. An obvious argument can be extended here, in that the source of the information would be the mobile phone owner, as opposed to the profile owner on Facebook (Lenhart, 2010). Credibility in such a source would be necessarily higher as there is an increased likelihood that the mobile phone owner is known to the audience in most cases, except for example through text message advertising. Again, this platform can also extend into both mediums identified above, which increases the likelihood that this platform is perceived as a credible source.