POLARIZATION IN AMERICAN DIGITAL POLITICAL NEWS: MULTIMODAL ANALYSIS OF ONLINE MEDIA AND SOCIAL NETWORKS
Yaroslava Apatska
Słowa kluczowe:
multimodal analysis, polarization, digital political news, social networksAbstrakt
Although extensive studies have explored the political polarisation phenomenon in American digital news media and social networks, there has been little discussion about the multimodal analysis across online media platforms and social networks that synthesises linguistic, visual, and interactive elements. The article defends the relevance of investigating the mechanisms of political polarisation in English-language (American) digital political news through a comprehensive multimodal analysis of journalistic content and user interaction across online media platforms and social networks. To address the aim of the study, the paper: 1) reviews and synthesizes the existing scientific works on political polarization in digital media, focusing particularly on the multimodal approach; 2) evaluates the methodological advantages of the integrated multimodal approach in political communication research; and 3) demonstrates the scientific novelty by analysing journalistic content and user commentary through journalistic textual news and user commentaries. Such an approach advances interdisciplinary understanding, linking linguistics, media studies, and political activities. The results of the study are supposed to highlight the significant role of political polarization in shaping public discourse.
Bibliografia
Caple, H. (2013). Photojournalism: A social semiotic approach. Palgrave Macmillan.
Caple, H., & Bednarek, M. (2016). Rethinking news values: What a discursive approach can tell us about the construction of news discourse and news photography. Journalism, 17(4), 435–455. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884914568078.
Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Charteris-Black, J. (2011). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. Routledge.
Coe, K., Kenski, K., & Rains, S.A. (2014). Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 658–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12104.
Del Vicaro, M., et.al. (2016). The spreading of misinformation online. ProcNatl Acad Sci USA, 113(3), 554–559; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517441113.
Druckman, J.N. (2005). Media matter: How newspapers and television news cover campaigns and influence voters. Political Communication, 22(4), 463–481; https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600500311394.
Entman, R.M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. University of Chicago Press.
Entman, R.M. (2007). Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 163–173; https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14602466.2006.00336.x.
Fairclough, N. (1995a). Media discourse. Edward Arnold. Fairclough, N. (1995b). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power (2nd ed.). Longman.
Faris, R., Benkler, Y., & Roberts, H. (2018). Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radicalization in American politics. Oxford University Press.
Finkel, E., et al. (2020) Political sectarianism in America. Sience, 370(6516), 533–536; https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe1715.
Freelon, D., Wells, C., & Bennett, W.L. (2020). Participation, polarization, and platform design: The democratic affordances of social media. American Behavioral Scientist, 64(5), 643–664; https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219859611.
Groeling, T. (2013). Media bias by the numbers: Challenges and opportunities in the empirical study of partisan news. Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 040811-115123. 129–151. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisciIyengar,
S., & Westwood, S.J. (2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 690–707; https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12152.
Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., & Westwood, S. (2019). The origins and consequences of affective polarisation in the United States. Ann Rev Polit Sci. 22(1), 129–146; https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034.
Klein, E. (2020). Why we’re polarized. London, The Profile Press.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. Arnold.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Lelkes, Y. (2016). Mass polarization: Manifestations and measurements. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 392–410. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw005.
Machin, D., & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction. SAGE Publications.
Mason, L. (2018). Uncivil agreement: how politics became our identity. Chicago (IL), University of Chicago Press; https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226524689.001.0001.
Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford University Press.
Richardson, J.E. (2007). Analysing newspapers: An approach from critical discourse analysis. Palgrave Macmillan.
Rowe, I. (2015). Civility 2.0: A comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion. Information, Communication & Society, 18(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.940365.
Settle, J.E. (2018). Frenemies: How social media polarizes America. Cambridge University Press.
Simchon, A., Brady, W.J. & Van Bavel, J.J. (2022). Troll and divide: the language of online polarization, PNAS Nexus, V.1 (1), March, pgac019; https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac019.
Stroud, N.J. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 556–576; https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14602466.2010.01497.x.
Stroud, N.J. (2011). Niche news: The politics of news choice. Oxford University Press.
van Dijk, T.A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. SAGE Publications.
van Dijk, T.A. (2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(3), 359–383; https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926506060250.
