Advertisement

Beitragstypen der öffentlichen rezeptionsbegleitenden Kommunikation auf Twitter bei fiktionalen TV-Inhalten

Chapter
Part of the Medien • Kultur • Kommunikation book series (MKK)

Zusammenfassung

Fernsehen wird in der aktuellen medienwissenschaftlichen Forschung nahezu universell als Medium betrachtet, welches Anschlusskommunikation fördert. Während frühe Analysen zum Fernsehkonsum häufig von der Vorstellung geprägt waren, dass Fernsehen Kommunikation nicht begünstigen, sondern eher verhindern würde, hat sich inzwischen die Annahme durchgesetzt, dass Fernsehen zur aktiven Rezeption ermutigt. Dem vermeintlich passiven Konsum von massenmedialen Inhalten steht auch eine weitere Entwicklung entgegen: Die wachsende Popularität der Kommunikation über soziale Medien, die zeitnah oder zeitgleich zur Rezeption über einen Second Screen erfolgt.

Literatur

  1. Androutsopoulos, J., & Weidenhöffer, J. (2015). Zuschauer-Engagement auf Twitter: Handlungskategorien der rezeptionsbegleitenden Kommunikation am Beispiel von #tatort. Zeitschrift für angewandte Linguistik, 62(1), 23–59. doi: 10.1515/zfal-2015-0002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bober, M. (2014). Twitter and TV events: An exploration of how to use social media for student- led research. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(3), 297–312. doi: 10.1108/AJIM-09-2013-0097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burghardt, M., Karsten, H., Pflamminger, M., & Wolff, C. (2013). Twitter als interaktive Erweiterung des Mediums Fernsehen: Inhaltliche Analyse von Tatort-Tweets. Workshop proceedings of the 25th Conference of the German Society for Computational Linguistics. https://gscl2013.ukp.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Group_UKP/conferences/gscl2013/workshops/Long-Paper-Tatort-Tweets_resubmittedVersion.pdf.
  4. Buschow, C., Schneider, B., & Ueberheide, S. (2014). Tweeting television: Exploring communication activities on twitter while watching TV. Communications, 39(2), 129–149. doi: 10.1515/commun-2014-0009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng, J., Adamic, L. A., Dow, P. A., Kleinberg, J., & Leskovec, J. (2014). Can cascades be predicted? In W. Lee, H.-C. Rim, & D. Schwabe (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the 23rd International World Wide Web Conference (S. 1–11). Seoul: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/2566486.2567997.
  6. Chew, C., & Eysenbach, G. (2010). Pandemics in the age of Twitter: Content analysis of tweets during the 2009 H1N1 outbreak. PLoS ONE, 5(11). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014118.
  7. Couldry, N. (2012). Media, society, world: Social theory and digital media practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dann, S. (2010). Twitter content classification. First Monday, 15(12). doi: 10.5210/fm.v15i12.2745.
  9. Deller, R. (2011). Twittering on: Audience research and participation using Twitter. Participations, 8(1), 216–245. http://www.participations.org.
  10. Gaffney, D., & Puschmann, C. (2013). Data collection on Twitter. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt, & C. Puschmann (Hrsg.), Twitter and society (S. 55–67). New York: Lang.Google Scholar
  11. Greer, C. F., & Ferguson, D. A. (2011). Using Twitter for promotion and branding: A content analysis of local television Twitter sites. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 55(2), 198–214. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2011.570824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hambrick, M. E., Simmons, J. M., Greenhalgh, G. P., & Greenwell, T. C. (2010). Understanding professional athletes’ use of Twitter: A content analysis of athlete tweets. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(4), 454–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harrington, S. (2013). Tweeting about the telly: Live TV, audiences, and social media. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt, & C. Puschmann (Hrsg.), Twitter and society (S. 237–247). New York: Lang.Google Scholar
  14. Harrington, S., Highfield, T., & Bruns, A. (2013). More than a backchannel: Twitter and television. Participations, 10(1), 405–409.Google Scholar
  15. Hassoun, D. (2014). Tracing attentions: Toward an analysis of simultaneous media use. Television & New Media, 15(4), 271–288. doi: 10.1177/1527476412468621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Highfield, T., Harrington, S., & Bruns, A. (2013). Twitter as a technology for audiencing and fandom. Information, Communication & Society, 16(3), 315–339. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2012.756053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ifukor, P. (2010). ‘Elections’ or ‘selections’? Blogging and twittering the Nigerian 2007 general elections. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(6), 398–414. doi: 10.1177/0270467610380008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. ImMobi. (2014). Global mobile media consumption: A ‘new wave’ takes shape. Available from: https://info.inmobi.com/rs/inmobi/images/Global%20Mobile%20Media%20Consumption%20Wave%203%20Report.pdf.
  19. Jenkins, H. (1992). Textual poachers: Television fans and participatory culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Jungherr, A. (2014). The logic of political coverage on Twitter: Temporal dynamics and content. Journal of Communication, 64(2), 239–259. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 411–433. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00738.x.Google Scholar
  22. Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010). What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? Categories and subject descriptors. Most, S. 591–600.Google Scholar
  23. Livingstone, S. (1990). Making sense of television: The psychology of audience interpretation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Lochrie, M., & Coulton, P. (2012). Tweeting with the telly on! Mobile phones as second screen for TV. In 2012 IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (S. 729–731). doi: 10.1109/CCNC.2012.6181037.
  25. Naaman, M., Boase, J., & Lai, C. (2010). Is it really about me? Message content in social awareness streams. In E. F. Churchill (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (S. 189–192). Savannah: ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Papacharissi, Z., & de Fatima Oliveira, M. (2012). Affective News and Networked Publics: The Rhythms of News Storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 266–282. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01630.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pear Analytics. (2009). Twitter Study – August 2009. Verfügbar unter. http://pearanalytics.com.
  28. Shah, D. V., Hanna, A., Bucy, E. P., Wells, C., & Quevedo, V. (2015). The power of television images in a social media age: Linking biobehavioral and computational approaches via the second screen. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 225–245. doi: 10.1177/0002716215569220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tüfekçi, Z. (2014). Big questions for social media big data: Representativeness, validity and other methodological pitfalls. Proceedings of the Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (S. 505–514). http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM14/.
  30. Waters, R. D., & Jamal, J. Y. (2011). Tweet, tweet, tweet: A content analysis of nonprofit organizations’ Twitter updates. Public Relations Review, 37(3), 321–324. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Williams, S. A., Terras, M. M., & Warwick, C. (2013). What do people study when they study Twitter? Classifying Twitter related academic papers. Journal of Documentation, 69(3), 384–410. doi: 10.1108/JD-03-2012-0027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wohn, D. Y., & Na, E.-K. (2011). Tweeting about TV: Sharing television viewing experiences via social media message streams. First Monday, 16(3). doi: 10.5210/fm.v16i3.3368.
  33. Zimmer, M., & Proferes, N. J. (2014). A topology of Twitter research: disciplines, methods, and ethics. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(3), 250–261. doi: 10.1108/AJIM-09-2013-0083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Alexander von Humboldt Institut für Internet und GesellschaftBerlinDeutschland

Personalised recommendations