Ideological Segregation in the Russian Cyberspace: Evidences from St. Petersburg

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 745)

Abstract

This paper is devoted to the study of political attitudes of Internet-users in Russia. The study is based on empirical data obtained by a survey conducted in 2015 in St. Petersburg. The authors have identified groups of political ideologies’ supporters in St. Petersburg which compose a political spectrum of communists, social-democrats, conservatives, liberals, and nationalists. These ideologically motivated groups tend to be unlike in terms of online news consumption, political online activities, and political approaches to regulate cyberspace. The authors were able to identify ideological groups that can be described as cyber-leftists and cyber-rightists in the Russian Internet.

Keywords

Political ideology Online media Russia Cyberpolicy Digital divide Ideological segregation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by St. Petersburg State University (project 106-120 ‘Political self-identification of online-communities in St. Petersburg’). Also, for this study we utilized facilities provided by the Center for Sociological and Internet Research at Saint-Petersburg State University (Russia).

References

  1. 1.
    Anderson, D.M., Cornfeld, M. (eds.): The Civic Web: Online Politics and Democratic Values. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baranov, N.A.: The main directions of an ideological discourse in modern Russia. Polit. Expert.: POLITEX 8(2), 19–34 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Birdsall, W.F.: The ideology of information technology. Queen’s Q. 104, 287–299 (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bodrunova, S.S., Litvinenko, A.A., Gavra, D.P., Yakunin, A.V.: Twitter-based discourse on migrants in Russia: the case of 2013 bashings in Biryulyovo. Int. Rev. Manag. Mark. 5(Special Issue), 97–104 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boutyline, A., Willer, R.: The Social Structure of Political Echo Chambers: Variation in Ideological Homophily in Online Networks (2015). https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~andrei/downloads/echo.pdf
  6. 6.
    Byrne, C., et al.: Online ideology: a comparison of website communication and media use. J. Comput. Mediated Commun. 18, 137–153 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chugunov, A., Filatova, O., Misnikov, Y.: Citizens’ deliberation online as will-formation: the impact of media identity on policy discourse outcomes in Russia. In: Tambouris, E., Panagiotopoulos, P., Sæbø, Ø., Wimmer, M.A., Pardo, T.A., Charalabidis, Y., Soares, D.S., Janowski, T. (eds.) ePart 2016. LNCS, vol. 9821, pp. 67–82. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45074-2_6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohen, J.E.: Privacy, Ideology, and Technology: A Response to Jerey Rosen Georgetown University Law Center (2001). http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/809/
  9. 9.
    Gentzkow, M., Shapiro, J.M.: Ideology and online news. In: Chicago Booth and NBER (2013). http://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/echo_structural.pdf
  10. 10.
    Gentzkow, M., Shapiro, J.M.: Ideological segregation online and offline. Q. J. Econ. 126(4), 1799–1839 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjr044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gurumurthy, A., Chami, N.: Internet governance as ‘ideology in practice’ India’s ‘free basics’ controversy. Internet Policy Rev. 5(3) (2016). https://doi.org/10.14763/2016.3.431, https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/internet-governance-ideology-practice-indias-free-basics-controversy
  12. 12.
    Kelly, B., Dunning, A., Guy, M., Phipps, L.: Ideology or pragmatism? Open standards and cultural heritage web sites. In: International Cultural Heritage Informatics Meetings (ICHIMs) (2003). http://opus.bath.ac.uk/12622/
  13. 13.
    Lu, Y., Chu, Y., Shen, F.: Mass media, new technology, and ideology: an analysis of political trends in China. Glob. Media China 1(1–2), 70–101 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McLachlan, S.F.: The Utopian Fallacy of Web 2.0: Community, Ideology and Exploitation on the Social Web (2011). https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/handle/11343/37116
  15. 15.
    Popova, O.: Studing the problems of political self-identification in Russia. Polit. Expert.: POLITEX 9(2), 205–219 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sarikakis, K.: Ideology and Policy: Notes on the Shaping of the Internet. In: First Monday 9(8) (2004). https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/handle/11343/37116
  17. 17.
    Sarikakis, K., Thussu, D.K. (eds.): Ideologies of Internet. Hampton Press, Broadway (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sunstein, C.R.: Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wong, S., Altman, E.: Restricting internt access: ideology and technology. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Communication Systems and Networks, pp. 260–267. India, Bangalore (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.St. Petersburg State UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations