Abstract
With the increasing spread of information technologies and their potential to filter content, some have argued that people will abandon the reading of dissenting political opinions in favor of material that is closely aligned with their own ideological position. We test this theory empirically by analyzing—both quantitatively and qualitatively—Web links among the writings of top conservative and liberal bloggers. Given our use of novel methods, we discuss in detail our sampling and data collection methodologies. We find that widely read political bloggers are much more likely to link to others who share their political views. However, we find no increase in this pattern over time. We also analyze the content of the links and find that while many of the links are based on straw-man arguments, bloggers across the political spectrum also address each others’ writing substantively, both in agreement and disagreement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackland, R. (2005). Mapping the U.S. political blogosphere: Are conservative bloggers more prominent? Australian National University.
Adamic, L., & Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. elections: Divided they blog.
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. New York: Verso.
Bimber, B. (2003). Information and American democracy: Technology in the evolution of political power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bimber, B., & Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning online: The Internet in U.S. elections. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bloom, J. D. (2003). The blogosphere: How a once-humble medium came to drive elite media discourse and influence public policy and elections. In 2nd annual Pre-APSA conference on political communication: Mass communication and civic engagement. Philadelphia, PA.
Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. In Seventh international World Wide Web conference. Brisbane, Australia.
Browning, G. (1996). Electronic democracy: Using the Internet to influence American politics. Wilton: Pemberton Press.
Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22, 147–162.
DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, R., & Robinson, J. (2001). Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307–336.
Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Freedman, J. L., & Sears, D. (1965). Selective exposure. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 58–98.
Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 41–80.
Hill, K. A., & Hughes, J. E. (1998). Cyberpolitics: Citizen activism in the age of the Internet. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Horrigan, J. B., Garrettt, K., & Resnick, P. (2004). The Internet and democratic debate. Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
Howard, P. E. N. (2003). Digitizing the social contract: Producing American political culture in the age of new media. Communication Review, 6, 213–245.
Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Katz, J. E., & Rice, R. E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement and interaction. Cambridge: MIT.
Klam, M. (2004). Fear and laptops on the campaign trail. The New York Times Magazine.
Lazarsfeld, P., & Merton, R. K. (1954). Friendship and a social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. In M. Berger (Ed.), Freedom and control in modern society (pp. 8–66). New York: Van Nostrand.
Lenhart, A., Horrigan, J.B., & Fallows, D. (2004). Content creation online. Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet and Americal Life Project.
Lev-on, A., & Manin, B. (2005). Deliberation and online exposure to opposing views. In Second Conference on Online Deliberation. Stanford, CA.
Marsden, P. V. (1987). Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 52, 122–131.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. New York: Knopf.
Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: civic engagement, information poverty and the Internet in democratic societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Olasky, P. (2004). Blogs: Media watchdogs or pundits in pajamas? In MTV.com Headlines.
Rainie, L. (2005). The state of blogging (pp. 1–4). Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
Rainie, L., Cornfield, M., & Horrigan, J. B. (2005). The Internet and campaign 2004.
Rainie, L., Fox, S., & Fallows, D. (2003). The Internet and the Iraq War. Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
Stromer-Galley, J., Foot, K. A., Schneider, S. M., & Larsen, E. (2000). How citizens used the Internet in election 2000. In S. Coleman (Ed.), Elections in the Age of the Internet: Lessons from the United States (pp. 21–26). London: Hansard Society.
Sunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Xenos, M., & Foot, K. A. (2005). Politics as usual, or politics unusual: Position-taking and dialogue on campaign web sites in the 2002 U.S. elections. Journal of Communication, 55, 169–185.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hargittai, E., Gallo, J. & Kane, M. Cross-ideological discussions among conservative and liberal bloggers. Public Choice 134, 67–86 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-007-9201-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-007-9201-x