[PDF] [PDF] Blurred lines: Defining social, news, and political posts on Facebook

[PDF] Dimensions of Self-Expression in Facebook Status Updates

ABSTRACT We describe the dimensions along which Facebook users tend to as mom, (mum is used in British English), laundry (as opposed to day, time) and positive emotion words (e g , good, like, love) Science, 21, 372-374 3 Blei 

[PDF] Facebook and Privacy - Victor Sampedro

25 août 2008 · It explains how Facebook users socialize on the site, why they “social network analysis” in social science) 86 See Abby Ellin, Yoo-Hoo, First Love, Remember Me?, N Y TIMES, Feb 208 See boyd, None of This is Real, supra note __ (“Expressing social judgments publicly is akin to airing dirty laundry

[PDF] Nappy Science Gang evaluation report

“When I'm not changing and washing nappies I work as a citizen science “I would love to take part in any future experiments you do and thank you so much for all several days, I started asking my nappy-related Facebook groups for advice 

[PDF] Feb 18 Flagshippages - Directory

3 mar 2018 · Science Degree in Kevin and Garland are the volunteer coordinators of Laundry Love Laundry Love: Knoxville is also on Facebook at

[PDF] Need Fulfillment and Experiences on Social Media A - DigitUMa

enquanto que o Facebook é caracterizado essencialmente por uma utilização não social Por sua vez And I love to spy on my colleague on a daily basis to find out what's new in their life so I can tell I have a In System Sciences (HICSS ), 2011 44th Hawaii When two of my friends aired their dirty laundry for all to read

[PDF] I regretted the minute I pressed share - CyLab Usable Privacy and

22 juil 2011 · to understand how Facebook users think about regret, we used the word “regret” said that I hated someone I used to love very much in the past It said word he saw it and was offended that I was airing our 'dirty laundry' for everyone to There is a large body of social science literature on regrets in the

[PDF] Blurred lines: Defining social, news, and political posts on Facebook

government, science, and international news lagging a large number of simulated Facebook posts and ask- ing them to categorize Apparently the roomie is really good at laundry 94 9 Love seeing the wildlife just outside DC 85 4

[PDF] laure le poittevin

[PDF] laver le verre avant recyclage

[PDF] law of the sea

[PDF] law of unintended consequences

[PDF] lay mang rung tay bac youtube

[PDF] layla abdel latif 7/6/2015

[PDF] lcen

[PDF] lds encampment 2015 washington

[PDF] lds general conference october 2015 notes

[PDF] le 14 octobre 2012 felix baumgartner exercice corrigé

[PDF] le 17ème siècle résumé

[PDF] le 1er septembre 2015 un ensemble scolaire compte 3000 eleves correction

[PDF] le 28 septembre 2009

[PDF] le 8 mai 1945 en algérie résumé

[PDF] le bac 2014 est un bon cru

Blurred lines: Defining social, news, and political posts on Facebook Emily K. Vraga, Leticia Bode, Anne-Bennett Smithson, and Sonya Troller-Renfree

ABSTRACT

Although a growing body of literature examines exposure to social, news, and political information

via social media, we have little understanding of how users delineate these categories. In this study,

we develop over 100 discrete Facebook stimuli varying these topics, and then test to what extent and which users match our definition of those posts. Our results suggest that users and researchers

often agree on defining social and political content, but are more likely to disagree on categorizing

news content. Therefore, researchers should carefully define all concepts - especially news - when considering prevalence and effects on social media users.

KEYWORDS

Measurement; news use;

political information; social media; uses and gratifications An increasing body of literature considers the impli- cations of exposure to news and politics within the realm of social media, and the vast majority of this work relies on self-reports from survey research. This research suggests that self-reported exposure to news and political information via social media can have democratically valuable consequences, such as encouraging civic and political participation off-line (Bode, Vraga, Borah, & Shah,2014;GildeZúñiga, Jung, & Valenzuela,2012; Vitak et al.,2011; Xenos,

Vromen, & Loader,2014).

However,thereisreasontobeskepticalofdata

based on self-reports, which are notoriously flawed. to news, political information (Prior,2009;

Tewksbury,2003), and social media (Junco,2013).

Self-report data may be inaccurate for a number of reasons, for example, people may misremember their media habits or misreport them due to social desir- ability biases (Prior,2009). In this paper, we focus on one source of inaccuracy: respondents'understanding the question and recalling relevant behavior (Schwarz &Oyserman,2001). Specifically, we argue it may be unclear to respondents what is meant by"news"or "political"information. If the public and researchers are not thinking of the same types of content when they report exposure or consider its effects, results based on these measures may not be reliable across studies. For example, of the 47% of Facebook users who say they get news on Facebook, most view enter- tainment news, with hard news topics such as politics, government, science, and international news lagging behind (Mitchell & Page,2013).

In this work, we question the extent to which

researchers and respondents agree on the purpose types of social media posts (news, political, and social) and asking them the primary purpose of the post. We also test the individual characteristics that contentin linewithresearchers'expectations, as well as whether the topic and style of post (status, link, or picture) influences categorization agreement. a large number of simulated Facebook posts and ask- ing them to categorize and rate each post. Therefore, the current study lends insight to the question, what does it mean when young adults report exposure to different types of content via social media? The answers have significant implications for how we understand research reliant upon self-reports of social media exposure.

Literature review

To understand why some types of Facebook content

maybe more difficult to define than others, we first

CONTACTEmily Vragaevraga@gmu.eduDepartment of Communication, George Mason University, 329A Robinson Hall A, MS 3D6, 4400 University

Dr., Fairfax, VA 22030 USA.

Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online atwww.tandfonline.com/WITP.

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & POLITICS

2016, VOL. 13, NO. 3, 272-294

© 2016 Taylor & FrancisDownloaded by [Leticia Bode] at 14:45 07 August 2016 examine the diversity of reasons that people may use social media. According to the uses and gratifications approach, people use media to fulfill specific needs or goals, and often use the same media to meet differing needs (Raacke & Bonds-Raacke,2008;Rubin,2002). For social media, this variety in motivations for use, combined with the customizability of the medium, can lead to a diversity of content occupying the same space (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe,2011;Thorson&

Wells,2016). Further, although people maygoto

social media with particular goals in mind, once there they have little control over the types of content that will appear in their Facebook News Feed, shared ties (Marwick & boyd,2010;Vraga,Thorson,Kligler-

Vilenchik, & Gee,2015).

Importantly, the majority of existing work on

uses and gratifications for social media use and its effects depends on self-reports of content exposure and frequency. However, self-reported measures are limited by people's ability to accurately report content exposure (Prior,2009). Responding to a question is a complicated process, including understanding the question, recalling relevant behavior, estimation, mapping the answer onto response format, and accounting for social desir- ability (Schwarz & Oyserman,2001). If researchers and participants define content differently, this process fails in the first two steps (understanding the question and recalling relevant behavior), inherently limiting the accuracy of the data. Our study speaks to the degree to which this should be a concern for the social media research commu- nity and the factors that contribute to a consistent definition between researchers and participants.

In general, researchers have distinguished

between three prominent uses for social media: social, informational, and political (Ancu &

Cozma,2009; Ellison et al.,2011; Macafee,2013).

Notably, though, the majority of studies within

this realm fail to define these key terms, limiting reliability across studies. Rarely are terms such as "political"or"news"explicated, diversifying oper- ationalization of these ideas, and complicating our ability to generate consistent findings or generalize across multiple studies. For example, many scho- lars simply ask individuals about their exposure to news content (gil de Zuniga et al.,2012; Glynn et al.,2012; Kim et al.,2013) or engagement on political issues (Jang, Lee, & Park,2014; Vitak et al.,2011; Wojcieszak & Mutz,2009).

This leads to substantial discrepancy in what is

considered"news"by researchers and likely by audi- de Zuniga et al. (2012), ask individuals to report their via Facebook (a relatively broad interpretation of news), while Bakshy and his colleagues (2015)limit their analysis to hard news stories, including national news, politics, and world affairs. However, studies demonstrate that people consume more soft news content on Facebook, such as entertainment content, and frequently select entertainment content to share on their feed when asked to share news content (Mitchell & Page,2013;Oeldorf-Hirsch&Sundar,

2015). These contradictions harken back to earlier

debates about the line between"hard"and"soft" news, and their effects on the public (Lee,2013;

Patterson,2000;Prior,2007).Thus, what is"news"

may be a particularly fluid category of content, both for researchers and for participants, and should prove particularly difficult to reach agreement in categoriza- tion of content purpose. In this paper, we adopt an inclusive conceptualization of news, which ranges from"hard"news stories about world or local affairs to"softer"news stories that could include entertain- ment or sports to better reflect the types of content available on Facebook (Mitchell & Page,2013), but as a result may enhance potential discrepancies in how news is being defined by audiences.

H1:News content will have the lowest levels of

categorization agreement between partici- pants and researchers. Conversely, when provided, the definition of poli- ticalcontenttendstobe narrow.Scholarsinterestedin political exposure on social media often focus on political campaigns (e.g., Bode et al.,2014;Carlisle&

Patton,2013; Vitak et al.,2011)orexplicitlydefine

exposure in terms of information about presidential during elections tends to be quite high on social selves (Rainie, Smith, Schlozman, Brady, & Verba,

2012). Despite its prominence, young adults report

disliking political content on Facebook, which they tend to narrowly define in terms of contentious JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & POLITICS273Downloaded by [Leticia Bode] at 14:45 07 August 2016 thisstudy, we adoptthisrelatively narrowapproachto defining politics as explicit political events and figures - or including political actors when referencing social issues - to match existing definitions (Carlisle &

Patton,2013;Copeland&Bimber,2014; Paletz,

2002). As such, content on Facebook that focuses on

political issues, events, and actors should be an easily recognizable type of content on Facebook. H2:Political content will have the highest level of categorization agreement between partici- pants and researchers.

But despite an emphasis on news and political

content on social media from a research perspective, social mediaareprimarilysocialsites.Stayingintouch with friends and family members, seeing photographs and videos, and reconnecting with old friends are the strongest motivations for using social media (Ellison et al.,2011;Mitchell&Page,2013). Purely social content, focusing on everyday personal experiences, should be relatively clearly delineated, and the fre- quency with which users of social media see social content should make such content (as compared to types of posts. H3:Social content will achieve higher levels of cate- gorization agreement between participants and researchers compared to news content, but lower levels of categorization agreement than political content. It is worth noting that the social nature of social media means that these three categories of content are blurry at best. The norms of Facebook should encou- rage people to emphasize the personal or social nature of information, even when also referencing news or politics (Litt,2012; Marwick & boyd,2010;Oeldorf- Hirsch & Sundar,2015). News is sometimes political, social posts may contain news, and politics may include personal accounts or stories. We acknowledge the blurry nature of social media content, and believe this underlies the importance of our study. Precisely because these content categories are poorly defined and complicated, we need to understand whether, when, and how respondents agree with researchers'quotesdbs_dbs14.pdfusesText_20