Twitter, Public Engagement and the Eurocrisis: More than an Echo Chamber?

Part of the Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology book series (PSEPS)


Drawing on the concepts of echo and refraction, this chapter zooms in on the role of digital media in crisis communication and the conditions under which social media can spearhead a shift in public communication dynamics. The empirical analysis presented here offers a qualitative profiling of the mini Twittersphere concerning the Greek referendum (Greferendum) that took place in July 2015. Which contributors have the highest visibility and what type of content do they produce? Which sources are favoured in retweets? On which aspects of the Greferendum did the Twittersphere focus? The findings are used to further the discussion regarding the impact of social media on the European public sphere’s capacity to nurture democratic debate.


EU Crisis communication #Greferendum Twitter Echo chambers Refraction Democratic debate 



The research presented in this chapter is part of the EURODIV research project, carried out at the ARENA Centre for European Studies under the project leadership of Professor Erik Oddvar Eriksen. The funding of the project by the Research Council of Norway is gratefully acknowledged. Many thanks go to Tor Kristian Haldorsen, research assistant at ARENA, who very efficiently tested the coding schedules and subsequently processed large parts of the Eurocrisis Twittersphere data.


  1. Allison, G.T. and Zelikow, P. (1999). Essence of Decision. 2nd edition, New York/Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  2. Barberá, P., Jost, J.T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J.A. and Bonneau, R. (2015). Tweeting from left to right: Is online political communication more than an echo chamber?. Psychological Science, 26(10), pp. 1531–1542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boin, A., Hart, P., Stern, E. and Sundelius, B. (2005). The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership Under Pressure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brändström, A. and Kuipers, S. (2003). From ‘normal incidents’ to political crises: Understanding the selective politicization of policy failures. Government and Opposition, 38(3), pp. 279–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clavel, G. (2015). How France’s national front looks to capitalize on the Greferendum. Huffington Post [online], 29 June 2015. Available at: [Accessed 10 August 2016].
  6. Cohen, S. (1973). Folk Devils and Moral Panics. St. Albans: Paladin.Google Scholar
  7. Colleoni, E., Rozza, A. and Arvidsson, A. (2014). Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in twitter using big data. Journal of Communication, 64(2), pp. 317–332. doi:  10.1111/jcom.12084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coombs, W.T. (2010). Parameters for crisis communication. In: W.T. Coombs and S.J. Holladay, (eds.), The Handbook of crisis communication, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 17–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cramme, O. and Hobolt, S.B. (eds) (2015). Democratic Politics in a European Union Under Stress. Oxford University Press: Oxford.Google Scholar
  10. Crouch, C. (2004). Post-Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cybranding (2016). Twitter Hashtags search engine: [Accessed 10 August 2016], London: CyBranding Ltd.
  12. D’Haenens, L., Joris, W. and Papathanassopoulos, S. (2015). Crisis of the news: The framing of the Euro crisis and the ‘Greek problem’. In: J. Trappel, J. Steemers and B. Thomass, (eds.), European Media in Crisis: Values, Risks and Policies, New York, Oxon: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, pp. 118–132.Google Scholar
  13. De Wilde, P. and Lord, C. (2016). Assessing actually existing trajectories of EU politicisation. West European Politics, 39(1), pp. 145–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Wilde, P., Michailidou, A. and Trenz, H.J. (2013). Contesting Europe. Essex: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  15. Dubois, E. and Gaffney, D. (2014). The multiple facets of influence: Identifying political influentials and opinion leaders on twitter. American Behavioural Scientist, 58(10), pp. 1260–1277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elliott, L., Wearden, G., Watrt, N. and Smith, H. (2015). Europe’s big guns warn Greece voters that a no vote means euro exit. The Guardian [online], 30 June 2015. Available at: [Accessed 10 August 2016].
  17. Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2009). A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus to constraining dissensus. British Journal of Political Science, 39(1), pp. 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hywel, W.T.P., McMurray, J.R., Kurz, T. and Lambert, F.H. (2015). Network analysis reveals open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate change. Global Environmental Change, 32, pp. 126–138. Available at: [Accessed 23 August 2016].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jubilee Debt Campaign (2015). How Europe cancelled Germany’s debt in 1953., 26 February 2015. Available at: [Accessed 10 August 2016].
  20. Koopmans, R. and Statham, P. (eds) (2010). The Making of a European Public Sphere: The Europeanisation of Media Discourse and Political Contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Krugman, P. (2015). Greece over the brink. [online], 29 June 2015. Available at: [last accessed: 10 August 2016]
  22. Liebert, U. and Trenz, H. (2009). Civil society and the reconstitution of democracy in Europe: Introducing a new research field. Policy and Society, 28(1), pp. 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu, B.F., Austin, L. and Jin, Y. (2011). How publics respond to crisis communication strategies: The interplay of information form and source. Public Relations Review, 37(4), pp. 345–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marwick, A.E. and Boyd, D. (2011). To see and be seen: Celebrity practice on twitter. Convergence, 17(2), pp. 139–157. doi:  10.1177/1354856510394539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McNair, B. (2009). The internet and the changing global media environment. In: A. Chadwick and P.N. Howard, (eds.), Handbook of Internet Politics, London: Routledge, pp. 217–229.Google Scholar
  26. Michailidou, A., Trenz, H.J. and De Wilde, P. (2014). The Internet and European Integration. Berlin: Barbara Budrich.Google Scholar
  27. Michailidou, A. (2016). The Germans are back: Identity, stereotypes and Euroscepticism in crisis-stricken Greece. National Identities, 18, pp. 1–19. doi:  10.1080/14608944.2015.1113242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Morris, C. (2015). Analysis-Greece debt crisis: Tsipras announces bailout referendum. BBC [online], 27 June 2015. Available at: [last accessed 10 August 2016].
  29. Mylonas, Y. (2014). Crisis, austerity and opposition in mainstream media discourses of Greece. Critical Discourse Studies, 11(3), pp. 305–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Papadimas, L. and Kirschbaum, E. (2015). Greek PM tears into lenders as euro zone prepares ‘Grexit’. Reuters [online], 16 June 2015. Available at: [Accessed 10 August 2016].
  31. Raboy, M. and Dagenais, B. (eds) (1992). Media, Crisis and Democracy: Mass Communication and the Disruption of Social Order. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Rieder, B. (2012). The refraction chamber: Twitter as sphere and network. First Monday, 17(11), pp. 1–16. doi: Scholar
  33. Schneider, S., Nullmeier, F. and Hurrelmann, A. (2007). Exploring the communicative dimension of legitimacy: Text analytical approaches. In: A. Hurrelmann, S. Schneider and J. Steffek, (eds.), Legitimacy in an Age of Global Politics, London: Palgrave MacMillan, pp. 126–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schultz, F., Utz, S. and Göritz, A. (2011). Is the medium the message? Perceptions of and reactions to crisis communication via Twitter, blogs and traditional media. Public Relations Review, 37(1), pp. 20–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Seeger, M.W., Sellnow, T.L. and Ulmer, R.R. (2003). Communication and Organizational Crisis. Westport/London: Praeger.Google Scholar
  36. Sousa, H. and Santos, L.A. (2014). Portugal at the Eye of the Storm: Crisis, Austerity and the Media. Javnost - The Public, 21(4), pp. 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Statham, S. and Trenz, H.J. (2012). The Politicization of Europe: Contesting the Constitution in the Mass Media. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Stiglitz, J. (2015). How I would vote in the Greek referendum. The Guardian [online], 29 June 2015. Available at: [last accessed: 10 August 2016].
  39. Sunstein, C.R. (2007). 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Texifter (2016). DiscoverText text analytics. Massachusetts: Texifter LCC, Available at: [last accessed 10 August 2016].
  41. Thompson, K. (2006). The history and meaning of the concept. In: C. Critcher, (ed.), Critical Readings: Moral Panics and the Media, Berkshire/New York: Open University Press, pp. 60–66.Google Scholar
  42. Touri, M. and Kostarella, I. (2016). News blogs vs mainstream media: Measuring the gap through a frame analysis of Greek blogs. Journalism, published online before print May 16, 2016, pp. 1–19. doi:  10.1177/1464884916648097.
  43. Tracy, J.F. (2012). Covering ‘Financial Terrorism’. Journalism Practice, 6(4), pp. 513–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tzogopoulos, G. (2013). The Greek Crisis in the Media: Stereotyping in the International Press. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  45. Utz, S., Schultz, F. and Glocka, S. (2013). Crisis communication online: How medium, crisis type and emotions affected public reactions in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. Public Relations Review, 39(1), pp. 40–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Der Meer, T.G.L.A. and Verhoeven, P. (2013). Public framing organisational crisis situations: Social media versus news media. Public Relations Review, 39(3), pp. 229–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Veil, S.R., Buenhner, T. and Palenchar, M.J. (2011). A work-in-process literature review: Incorporating social media in risk and crisis communication. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 19(2), pp. 110–122. doi:  10.1111/j.1468-5973.2011.00639.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Walter, S., Dinas, E., Jurado, I. and Konstantinidis, N. (2016). Disintegration by popular vote: Expectations, foreign intervention and the vote in the 2015 Greek bailout referendum, paper prepared for the EPSA meeting 2016, Brussels, 23–25 June 2016.Google Scholar
  49. Wendling, C., Radisch, J. and Jacobzone, S. (2013). The use of social media in risk and crisis communication. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, 24, doi:  10.1787/5k3v01fskp9s-en [last accessed 2 February 2016].
  50. Wessler, H., Peters, B., Brüggemann, M., Kleinen-Von Köningslöw, K. and Sifft, S. (eds) (2008). Transnationalization of Public Spheres. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  51. White, C.M. (2012). Social Media, Crisis Communication, and Emergency Management. Boca Raton/London/New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  52. Williams, H.T.P., McMurray, J.R., Kurz, T. and Lambert, F.H. (2015). Network analysis reveals open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate change. Global Environmental Change, 32, pp. 126–138. Available at: [Accessed 23 August 2016].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wodak, R. and Angouri, J. (2014). From Grexit to Grecovery: Euro/crisis discourses. Discourse & Society, 25(4), pp. 417–423. Available at: [Accessed 2 April 2015].CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ARENA Centre for European StudiesUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations