In this brief book review, I discuss what I learned reading Hugo Mercier‘s “Not Born Yesterday: The Science of Who We Trust and What We Believe” and why you should read it, too.
Andreas Jungherr. 2020. Review of Hugo Mercier (2020). Not Born Yesterday: The Science of Who We Trust and What We Believe. The International Journal of Press/ Politics. (Online First). doi:10.1177/1940161220983777
For “Comunicación & Política” the podcast of the Spanish Asociación de Comunicación Política (ACOP) Gonzalo Rivero and Daniel Gayo-Avello speak with by Paco Seoane Pérez about our book “Retooling Politics“. If you speak Spanish, make sure to have a listen.
Show Notes: Gonzalo Rivero (Westat) y Daniel Gayo-Avello (Universidad de Oviedo) son dos de los tres co-autores del libro ‘Retooling politics: How digital media are shaping democracy’ (Cambridge University Press, 2020). En esta entrevista reflexionan en voz alta sobre cómo ha cambiado la política desde el advenimiento de la era digital. La co-directora de la revista de ACOP, Verónica Crespo, repasa los contenidos de la publicación en su edición del mes de noviembre, que se abre con un artículo sobre política pop.
Dieses Wintersemester unterrichte ich an der Universität Jena ein Master-Seminar zu den Effekten digitaler Medien in Kommunikation und Öffentlichkeiten.
Kursbeschreibung: Das Modul gibt einen vertieften Einblick in die Geschichte, Begriffe, Theorien und Methoden an der Schnittstelle zwischen digitaler Kommunikation gesellschaftlicher Kommunikation und Öffentlichkeit. Hierbei werden technisches Design, menschliche Nutzungsmuster und wechselseitiger Einfluss von digitaler Kommunikation, Öffentlichkeiten und Gesellschaft in Hinblick auf ihre Auswirkung auf Politik und gesellschaftliche Kommunikation diskutiert. Entsprechende Themen werden vor dem Hintergrund aktueller, internationaler Fallbeispiele verdeutlicht.
Mit Brigitte Baetz vom Deutschlandfunk sprach ich heute über aktuelle Maßnahmen von Social Media Plattformen zur Einschränkung von Falschinformationen.
Brigitte Baetz: Maßnahmen v. Twitter & Co. gegen Desinformation – Interview mit Andreas Jungherr. @mediasres. 2020/10/22.
New journal article in Political Communication with Yannis Theocharis. In the introduction to our upcoming special issue on the use of computational methods in communication science, we discuss the underlying conceptual, methodological, and institutional challenges to their integration in the field.
If you are wondering what exactly Computational Social Science or Computational Communication Science are supposed to be, we provide this definition:
We define computational social science as an interdisciplinary scientific field in which contributions develop and test theories or provide systematic descriptions of human, organizational, and institutional behavior through the use of computational methods and practices. On the most basic level, this can mean the use of standardized computational methods on well-structured datasets (e.g., applying an off-the-shelf dictionary to calculate how often specific words are used in hundreds of political speeches), or at more advanced levels the development or extensive modification of specific software solutions dedicated to solving analytically intensive problems (e.g., from developing dedicated software solutions for the automated collection and preparation of large unstructured datasets to writing code for performing simulations). Accordingly, CCS, and by extension Computational Political Communication, lie at the intersection of CSS and (political) communication, with a topical focus on theories and phenomena associated with communicative channels, objects, behavior, and effects.
More specifically:
It might be helpful to focus more on studies and research projects in which computational methods and practices are not used as plug-and-play solutions but instead demand for varying degrees of customization with regard to data collection, preparation, analysis, or presentation. Again, this is best thought of as a distinction in degree. On one end of the scale, we find projects that require some coding with regard to the sequential calling of preexisting or slightly modified functions or data management. On the other end of the scale we find research projects that demand the development of dedicated software solutions, for example, in automated and continuous data collection, preparation and structuring of large unstructured raw data, or the development of dedicated non-standardized analysis procedures. Projects at different ends of this scale share issues arising from their focus on social behavior, systems, or phenomena but they vary significantly with regard to their computational demands. Projects that use standardized computational methods might thus be basically indistinguishable from other areas in empirical social science research. On the other hand, projects at the other end of the scale are likely to face challenges indistinguishable from software development in computer science.
Now, if this feels like it could be of interest to you, have a look at the abstract or move directly to the article.
Abstract: The challenge of disentangling political communication processes and their effects has grown with the complexity of the new political information environment. But so have scientists’ toolsets and capacities to better study and understand them. We map the challenges and opportunities of developing, synthesizing, and applying data collection and analysis techniques relying primarily on computational methods and tools to answer substantive theory-driven questions in the field of political communication. We foreground the theoretical, empirical, and institutional opportunities and challenges of Computational Communication Science (CCS) that are relevant to the political communication community. We also assess understandings of CCS and highlight challenges associated with data and resource requirements, as well as those connected with the theory and semantics of digital signals. With an eye to existing practices, we elaborate on the key role of infrastructures, academic institutions, ethics, and training in computational methods. Finally, we present the six full articles and two forum contributions of this special issue illustrating methodological innovation, as well as the theoretical, practical, and institutional relevance and challenges for realizing the potential of computational methods in political communication.
Yannis Theocharis and Andreas Jungherr. 2020. Computational Social Science and the Study of Political Communication. Political Communication. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2020.1833121 (Online First).
Finally, “Retooling Politics: How Digital Media Are Shaping Democracy” is also available internationally!
In Retooling Politics Gonzalo Rivero, Daniel Gayo-Avello, and I examine how digital media impact politics. We offer alternatives to accounts that claim digital media fundamentally transform political power and those that consider politics completely untouched by digital media
We do not focus on digital media’s supposed effects – transformation, revolution, ineffectiveness, or democratic decline. Instead, we present the impact of digital media on six areas and tasks.
Digital media are changing the structure of information spaces. Gatekeepers are weakened and established business models for news media are damaged. This changes availability and flows of political information as well as the possibilities for and actions of political actors.
Digital media are changing the ways in which political actors reach people. Indirect reach via traditional media and partners is weakened but supplemented by new intermediaries – such as digital platforms – and direct reach by political actors.
Digital media have effects on recipients. However, these are rather small and depend on usage motives and contexts. Yet, only by taking these into account we can develop a broader understanding of contemporary media effects.
Digital media make it easier for people to coordinate. This explains their important role in protests, social movements and newly formed parties. However, this presupposes an already existing willingness to cooperate. In this, the contribution of digital media is limited.
Success for outsiders in coordination and communication via digital media has weakened traditional organizations. Organizations, however, remain important for articulating and realizing political interests. Not least since digital alternatives show a high degree of fragility.
Data help political actors in the pursuit of their goals. Be it in campaigning or controlling populations, data is important and helpful. But is everything that counts actually measured and does everything that is measured actually count?
In all these fields, digital media are changing everyday politics decisively. However, this does not mean that all political power structures are suddenly turned upside down or that everyone suddenly becomes politically involved.
Filling democracy with live and opening it to new voices is just as difficult today as it was in the past. Digital media do not change the way politics is done. As a result, extreme expectations of both optimists and pessimists will not materialize.
While optimists expect democracy to be strengthened through greater participation, pessimists assume that it is weakened through manipulation and social division. Here, some seem to expect too much from citizens and others too little.
We discuss all of this and much more in our book. This goes for echo chambers, filter bubbles, microtargeting, Cambridge Analytica, Obama, Trump, and Brexit.
Anyone interested but not quite ready to commit to a book, have a listen to the Social Media and Politics Podcast where Michael Bossetta and I discuss the book, digital campaigning, data-driven politics, and do our best to bust some myths.
Given the current Covid-situation, we unfortunately won’t be able to personally present the book at a venue near you. But we are of course happy to join you for remote talks or in courses with topical relevance.
Michael Bossetta was kind enough to invite me on this podcast Social Media and Politics to chat about Retooling Politics: How Digital Media are Shaping Democracy. We cover the book, Gonzalo’s, Daniel’s and my motivations for writing it, and bust some favorite myths on the role of digital media in politics. So if this sounds like your thing, why not give it a listen.
And once you are at it, make sure to check out previous episodes. Michael has been at it for a while and collected a set of veritable treasures for anyone interested in digital media in politics.
Seit heute ist “Retooling Politics: How Digital Media Are Shaping Democracy” in Deutschland verfügbar!
In Retooling Politics zeigen Gonzalo Rivero, Daniel Gayo-Avello und ich wie digitale Medien Politik verändern. Dabei bieten wir Alternativen zu Darstellungen, die digitalen Medien zwangsläufig transformativen Einfluss auf Politik und politische Macht zuschreiben und solchen, die digitale Medien für wirkungslos halten.
Wir diskutieren die Rolle von digitalen Medien in Politik nicht von ihrem vermuteten Effekt her – Transformation, Revolution, Niedergang oder Wirkungslosigkeit – sondern von Veränderungen in 6 Arten wie Politik praktisch gelebt wird.
Digitale Medien verändern die Struktur von Informationsräumen. Gatekeeper sind geschwächt und etablierte Geschäftsmodelle für Nachrichtenmedien beschädigt. Dies verändert die Verfügbarkeit und den Fluss pol Informationen sowie Möglichkeiten und Handeln von politischen Akteuren.
Digitale Medien verändern Wege auf denen politische Akteure Menschen erreichen. Indirekter Reach über traditionelle Medien und Partner wird geschwächt aber ergänzt durch neue Vermittler – wie z.B. digitale Plattformen – und direkten Reach über eigene Angebote.
Digitale Medien haben Effekte auf Empfänger. Diese sind jedoch eher klein und abhängig von Voreinstellungen und Nutzungskontexten. Dennoch müssen spezifische Kommunikationsbedingungen berücksichtigt werden. Dies kann zu einem erweiterten Verständnis von Medienwirkung führen.
Digitale Medien erleichtern die Koordination von Menschen. Das erklärt ihre wichtige Rolle in Protesten, sozialen Bewegungen und neugegründeten Parteien. Allerding setzt dies bereits bestehenden Willen zur Kooperation voraus. Hier ist die Rolle digitaler Medien begrenzt.
Erfolge in Koordination und Kommunikation über digitale Medien haben traditionelle Organisationen geschwächt. Organisationen bleiben jedoch weiterhin wichtig für die Artikulation und Realisierung politischer Interessen. Gleichzeitig zeigen digitale Alternativen hohe Fragilität.
Datenbasierte Verfahren helfen pol Akteuren in der Verfolgung Ihrer Ziele. Sei es in der Kampagnenführung oder der Kontrolle von Bevölkerungen, Daten sind wichtig und hilfreich. Aber wird alles was zählt tatsächlich gemessen bzw. zählt alles was gemessen wird tatsächlich?
Mit all diesen Entwicklungen verändern digitale Medien den alltäglichen Politikbetrieb entscheidend. Das heiß jedoch nicht, dass plötzlich alle politischen Machtstrukturen auf den Kopf gestellt werden oder dass sich jede und jeder plötzlich politisch einbringt.
Demokratie lebendig und offen zu gestalten, ist heute genauso schwierig wie früher. Digitale Medien verändern die Ausübung von Politik nicht ihre Grundbedingungen. Dies führt dazu, dass extreme Erwartungen sowohl von Optimisten als auch Pessimisten nicht eintreffen werden.
Während Optimisten eine Stärkung von Demokratie durch mehr Beteiligung erwarteten, gehen Pessimisten von einer Schwächung durch Manipulation und gesellschaftlicher Spaltung aus. Die einen erwarten scheinbar zu viel von Bürgerinnen und Bürgern und die anderen zu wenig.
Das alles und noch viel mehr diskutieren wir in unserem Buch. Das gilt z.B. auch für Echo-Kammern, Filterblasen, Microtargeting, Cambridge Analytica, Obama, Trump und Brexit.
This summer, I will teach a course on “Discursive Power”. The course takes an article that I published last year with Oliver Posegga and Jisun An as a starting point to have students think broadly and systematically about discursive power in society in the context of the changes introduced by digital media.
Course Description:
Contemporary societies are in transition. The constellation of organizations, groups, and individuals contributing to national or international information flows has changed as a result of the digital transformation. The “hybrid media system” has proven to be one of the most instructive concepts addressing this change. Its focus on the mutually dependent interconnections between various types of media organizations, actors, and publics has inspired prolific research. Yet the concept can tempt researchers to sidestep systematic analyses of information flows and actors’ differing degrees of influence by treating media systems as a black box. To enable large-scale, empirical comparative studies aimed at identifying interdependencies and power relationships in contemporary information spaces, the concept of discursive power has proven helpful. This describes the ability of contributors to communication spaces to introduce, amplify, and maintain topics, frames, and speakers, thus shaping public discourses and controversies that unfold in interconnected communication spaces. This impacts political competition and provides inputs to the policy process. In the course, we discuss a series of theories to map this process and empirical approaches to analyze its dynamics and determinants.
Next week, I will start teaching this semester’s edition of the introductory course “Digital Media in Politics”.
The course examines the impact of digital media on politics in international comparison. Digital media play an increasingly important role in politics. Be it political communication, the coverage of politics in the news, campaigning, public discourse, or collective action, various political fields are changing due to digital media. This makes it paramount to identify, assess, and understand the role of digital media in politics. Over the course, students will be introduced to important approaches in conceptualizing and measuring the effects of digital media on politics. In this, we will focus on the role of digital media in helping political actors fulfill specific tasks in their work, such as gaining representation in the political information space, reaching people, convincing and mobilizing people, coordination, organizing, and measuring and evaluating the impact of their actions.