Advertisement

What Happened to the Public Sphere? The Networked Public Sphere and Public Opinion Formation

  • Jonas Kaiser
  • Birte Fähnrich
  • Markus Rhomberg
  • Peter Filzmaier
Living reference work entry

Abstract

The concepts of democracy, public sphere, and public opinion are as closely intertwined as contested. Since the dawn of the Internet, scholars have argued about its opportunities, challenges, and risks for society. Recent developments appear fundamental in that they have touched upon the core of Western democracies – the making of a public sphere and the forming of public opinion. The spread of digital media and changing modes of communication thus have made it necessary to reconsider classical conceptions of public sphere and public opinion. Against this background, we will posit that the emergence of the networked public sphere forces us to rethink the concepts of public sphere and public opinion in a less normative, more open, and interactive way that both is permeable to the offline world as well as to transnational demands and influences.

Keywords

Public sphere Public opinion Internet Network Democracy Social media Agenda setting Climate of opinion Mass media Digital divide Online communication Fragmentation Anonymity Participation Opinion leader Spiral of silence 

References

  1. Adamic, L. A., & Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election. Divided they blog. Paper presented at the 3rd international workshop on Link discovery, Chicago.Google Scholar
  2. Albrecht, S. (2006). Whose voice is heard in online deliberation? A study of participation and representation in political debates on the Internet. Information, Communication & Society, 9(1), 62–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Althaus, S. L., & Tewksbury, D. (2002). Agenda setting and the “new” news. Patterns of issue importance among readers of the paper and online versions of the New York Times. Communication Research, 29(2), 180–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Xenos, M. A., & Ladwig, P. (2014). The “nasty effect.” Online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3), 373–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bakshy, E., Rosenn, I., Marlow, C., & Adamic, L. (2012). Proceedings of the 21st international conference on World Wide Web. New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  6. Barth, T., & Schlegelmilch, W. (2014). Cyber democracy. The future of democracy? In E. G. Carayannis, D. F. J. Campbell, & M. P. Efthymiopoulos (Eds.), Cyber-development, cyber-democracy and cyber-defense (pp. 195–206). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks. How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bennett, W. L., & Manheim, J. B. (2006). The one-step flow of communication. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 608(1), 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bieber, C. (1999). Politische Projekte im Internet. Online-Kommunikation und politische Öffentlichkeit. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  10. Binns, A. (2012). Don’t feed the trolls! Journalism Practice, 6(4), 547–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J. H. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489(7415), 295–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. boyd, d. (2008). Taken out of context. American teen sociality in networked publics. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California-Berkeley. http.//www.danah.org/papers/TakenOutOfContext.pdf
  13. Boyle, T. P. (2001). Intermedia agenda setting in the 1996 presidential election. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(1), 26–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bruns, A. (2005). Gatewatching. Collaborative online news production. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  15. Calhoun, C. (1992). Introduction. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 1–50). Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Campbell, D. F. J., Carayannis, E. G., & Rehman, S. S. (2015). Quadruple helix structures of quality of democracy in innovation systems: The USA, OECD countries, and EU member countries in global comparison. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(3), 467–493. doi:10.1007/s13132-015-0246-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  18. Castells, M. (2007). Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication, 1, 238–266.Google Scholar
  19. Chadwick, A. (2007). Digital network repertoires and organizational hybridity. Political Communication, 24(3), 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chadwick, A. (2011). The political information cycle in a hybrid news system. The British prime minister and the “Bullygate” affair. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 16(1), 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chen, W., & Wellman, B. (2005). Minding the cyber-gap. The Internet and social inequality. In M. Romero & E. Margolis (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social inequalities (pp. 523–545). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  22. Christians, C. G., Glasser, T. L., McQuail, D., Nordenstreng, K., & White, R. A. (2009). Normative theories of the media: Journalism in democratic societies. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  23. Cobb, R. W., & Elder, C. D. (1971). The politics of agenda-building. An alternative perspective for modern democratic theory. The Journal of Politics, 33(4), 892–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Coleman, R., & McCombs, M. (2007). The young and agenda-less? Exploring age-related differences in agenda setting on the youngest generation, baby boomers, and the civic generation. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(3), 495–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dahl, R. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Dahlberg, L. (2001). The Internet and democratic discourse: Exploring the prospects of online deliberative forums extending the public sphere. Information, Communication & Society, 4(4), 615–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dahlberg, L. (2007). Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: From consensus to contestation. New Media & Society, 9(5), 827–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dalrymple, K. E., & Scheufele, D. A. (2007). Finally informing the electorate? How the Internet got people thinking about presidential politics in 2004. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12(3), 96–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
  30. Donath, J. S. (1999). Identity and deception in the virtual community. In M. A. Smith & P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 29–59). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Donsbach, W. (2011). Risiken und Nebenwirkungen des Internets für die politische Kommunikation. Studies in Communication | Media, 1(1), 119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Donsbach, W., & Traugott, M. W. (2008a). Public opinion – A nebulous concept. In W. Donsbach & M. W. Traugott (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of public opinion research (pp. 1–5). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Donsbach, W., & Traugott, M. W. (Eds.). (2008b). The SAGE handbook of public opinion research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Downey, J., & Fenton, N. (2003). New media, counter publicity and the public sphere. New Media & Society, 5(2), 185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Emmer, M., & Wolling, J. (2007). Leben in verschiedenen Welten? Themenagenden von Offlinern und Onlinern im Vergleich. In S. Kimpeler, M. Mangold, & W. Schweiger (Eds.), Die digitale Herausforderung. Zehn Jahre Forschung zur computervermittelten Kommunikation (pp. 239–250). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  36. Emmer, M., & Wolling, J. (2010). Online-Kommunikation und politische Öffentlichkeit. In W. Schweiger & K. Beck (Eds.), Handbuch Online Kommunikation (pp. 36–58). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing. Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Epstein, R., & Robertson, R. E. (2015). The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of election. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(33), E4512–E4521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Eslami, M., Rickman, A., Vaccaro, K., Aleyasen, A., Vuong, A., Karahalios, K., & Sandvig, C. (2015). “I always assumed that I wasn’t really that close to [her]”: Reasoning about invisible algorithms in news feeds. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Seoul.Google Scholar
  40. Ferree, M. M., Gamson, W. A., Gerhards, J., & Rucht, D. (2002). Four models of the public sphere in modern democracy. Theory and Society, 31, 289–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Filzmaier, P., & Fähnrich, B. Strategische Kommunikation in der Politik. In M. Holenweger et al. (Eds.), Strategische Kommunikation. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  42. Fleck, R. K., & Hanssen, F. A. (2006). The origins of democracy: A model with application to ancient Greece. Journal of Law and Economics, 49(1), 115–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere. A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, (25/26), 56–80.Google Scholar
  44. Fraser, N. (1997). Justice interruptus. Critical reflections on the “postsocialist” condition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Fraser, N. (2007). Special section. Transnational public sphere. Transnationalizing the public sphere. On the legitimacy and efficacy of public opinion in a post-Westphalian world. Theory, Culture & Society, 24(4), 7–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Freedom House. (2015). Freedom in the world 2015. Washington, DC: Freedom House.Google Scholar
  47. Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 41–80). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  48. Friedland, L. A., Hove, T., & Rojas, H. (2006). The networked public sphere. Javnost – The Public, 13(4), 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Friemel, T. N., & Dötsch, M. (2015). Online reader comments as indicator for perceived public opinion. In M. Emmer & C. Strippel (Eds.), Kommunikationspolitik für die digitale Gesellschaft (Digital Communication Research, Vol. 1, pp. 151–172). Berlin: ifpuk – Institute for Media and Communication Studies at FU.Google Scholar
  50. Fuchs, D. (1998). Kriterien demokratischer Performanz in liberalen Demokratien. In M. T. Greven (Ed.), Demokratie – eine Kultur des Westens? 20. Wissenschaftlicher Kongress der Deutschen Vereinigung für Politische Wissenschaft (pp. 151–179). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.Google Scholar
  51. Gallie, W. B. (1955). Essentially contested concept. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56(1), 167–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Garrett, R. K. (2009). Echo chambers online?. Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(2), 265–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Gerhards, J., & Schäfer, M. (2007). Demokratische Internet-Öffentlichkeit? Ein Vergleich der öffentlichen Kommunikation im Internet und in den Printmedien am Beispiel der Humangenomforschung. Publizistik, 52(2), 210–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Gerhards, J., & Schäfer, M. S. (2010). Is the Internet a better public sphere? Comparing old and new media in the USA and Germany. New Media & Society, 12(1), 143–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Glynn, C. J., Hayes, A. F., & Shanahan, J. (1997). Perceived support for one’s opinions and willingness to speak out. A meta-analysis of survey studies on the “spiral of silence”. Public Opinion Quarterly, 61(3), 452–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Gonzalez-Bailon, S., & Paltoglou, G. (2015). Signals of public opinion in online communication. A comparison of methods and data sources. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 95–107. doi:10.1177/0002716215569192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  58. Habermas, J. (1990/1962). Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaften. Mit einem Vorwort zur Neuauflage 1990. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  59. Habermas, J. (1992). Faktizität und Geltung. Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaates. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  60. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  61. Habermas, J. (1998). The inclusion of the other: Studies in political theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  62. Habermas, J. (2004). The divided West. Malden: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  63. Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society. Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Habermas, J. (2008). Hat die Demokratie noch eine epistemische Dimension? Empirische Forschung und normative Theorie. In J. Habermas (Ed.), Ach, Europa (pp. 138–191). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  65. Hagen, M. (1997). Elektronische Demokratie. Computernetzwerke und politische Theorie in den USA. Hamburg: Lit-Verlag.Google Scholar
  66. Hardaker, C. (2010). Trolling in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. From user discussions to academic definitions. Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture, 6(2), 215–242.Google Scholar
  67. Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills. First Monday, 7(4).Google Scholar
  68. Hargittai, E., & Walejko, G. (2008). The participation divide: Content creation and sharing in the digital age. Information, Communication & Society, 11(2), 239–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Herbst, S. (1993a). History, philosophy, and public opinion research. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 140–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Herbst, S. (1993b). The meaning of public opinion. Citizens’ constructions of political reality. Media, Culture and Society, 15, 437–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Herring, S. C., Job-Sluder, K., Scheckler, R., & Barab, S. (2002). Searching for safety online: Managing “trolling” in a feminist forum. The Information Society, 18, 371–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Hill, K. A., & Hughes, J. E. (1998). Cyberpolitics: Citizen activism in the age of the Internet. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  73. Hindman, M. (2009). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Ho, S., & McLeod, D. M. (2008). Social-psychological influences on opinion expression in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 35, 190–207.Google Scholar
  75. Huang, H. (2005). A cross-cultural test of the spiral of silence. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17(3), 324–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Ito, M. (2008). Introduction. In K. Varnelis (Ed.), Networked publics (pp. 1–14). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  77. Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. (1955). Personal influence, the part played by people in the flow of mass communications. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  78. Kavanaugh, A., Zin, T. T., Caroll, J. M., Schmitz, J., Pérez-Quiñones, M., & Isenhour, P. (2006). When opinion leaders blog. New forms of citizen interaction. In Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on Digital government research. Digital Government Society of North America.Google Scholar
  79. Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., & Graepel, T. (2013). Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(15), 5802–5805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Ku, G., Kaid, L. L., & Pfau, M. (2003). The impact of web site campaigning on traditional news media and public information processing. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(3), 528–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Lazarsfeld, P. (1957). Public opinion research and the classic tradition. Public Opinion Quarterly, 21, 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people’s choice. How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1995). Love at first byte? Building personal relationships over computer networks. In J. T. Wood & S. Duck (Eds.), Under-studied relationships: Off the beaten track (pp. 197–233). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  84. Lee, H. (2005). Behavioral strategies for dealing with flaming in an online forum. The Sociological Quarterly, 46(2), 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Leggewie, C. (2009). Die Medien der Demokratie. Eine realistische Theorie der Wechselwirkung von Demokratisierung und Medialisierung. In F. Marcinkowski & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Politik in der Mediendemokratie (pp. 70–83). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Lembcke, O., Ritzi, C., & Schaal, G. (2012). Zwischen Konkurrenz und Konvergenz. Eine Einführung in die normative Demokratietheorie. In O. Lembcke, C. Ritzi, & G. Schaal (Eds.), Zeitgenössische Demokratietheorie. Normative Demokratietheorien (Vol. 1, pp. 9–32). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Lindner, R. (2007). Politischer Wandel durch digitale Netzwerkkommunikation? Strategische Anwendung neuer Kommunikationstechnologien durch kanadische Parteien und Interessengruppen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  88. Lippmann, W. (1925). The phantom public. Piscataway: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  89. Liu, X., & Fahmy, S. (2011). Exploring the spiral of silence in the virtual world: Individuals’ willingness to express personal opinions in online versus offline setting. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 3(2), 45–57.Google Scholar
  90. Maireder, A., & Schlögl, S. (2014). 24 hours of an #outcry. The networked publics of a socio-political debate. European Journal of Communication, 29(6), 687–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Matthes, J., Rios Morrison, K., & Schemer, C. (2010). A spiral of silence for some. Attitude certainty and the expression of political minority opinions. Communication Research, 37(6), 774–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. McCoombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Meckel, M. (1999). Cyberpolitics und Cyberpolitik: Zur Virtualisierung politischer Kommunikation. In K. Kamps (Ed.), Elektronische Demokratie? Perspektiven politischer Partizipation (pp. 229–244). Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Meraz, S., & Papacharissi, Z. (2013). Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #Egypt. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18(2), 138–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Messing, S., & Westwood, J. (2012). Selective exposure in the age of social media. Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research. doi:10.1177/0093650212466406.Google Scholar
  96. Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  97. Moy, P., Domke, D., & Stamm, K. (2001). The spiral of silence and public opinion. On affirmative action. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(1), 7–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Muhlberger, P. (2003). Political values, political attitudes, and attitude polarization in Internet political discussion: Political transformation or politics as usual? Communications, 28(2), 107–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Muñiz, C., Alvídrez, S., & Téllez, N. (2015). European public sphere| Shaping the online public debate. The relationship between the news framing of the expropriation of YPF and readers’ comments. Journal of Communication, 9, 3245–3263.Google Scholar
  100. Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side. In Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  102. Neuberger, C. (2009). Internet, Journalismus und Öffentlichkeit. Analyse des Medienumbruchs. In C. Neuberger, C. Nuernbergk, & M. Rischke (Eds.), Journalismus im Internet: Profession – Partizipation – Technisierung (pp. 19–105). Wiesbaden: VS: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Neuberger, C. (2014). Konflikt, Konkurrenz und Kooperation: Interaktionsmodi in einer Theorie der dynamischen Netzwerköffentlichkeit. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 62(4), 567–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Nisbet, M. C., & Kotcher, J. E. (2009). A two-step flow of influence? Opinion-leader campaigns on climate change. Science Communication, 30(3), 328–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Nisbet, M. C., & Scheufele, D. A. (2004). Political talk as a catalyst for online citizenship. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(4), 877–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1984). Public opinion – Our social skin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  107. Noelle-Neumann, E., Schulz, W., & Wilke, J. (Eds.). (2000). Fischer Lexikon Publizistik Massenkommunikation (7th ed.). Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag.Google Scholar
  108. Nuernbergk, C. (2013). Anschlusskommunikation in der Netzwerköffentlichkeit. Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Nuernbergk, C. (2014). Follow-up communication in the blogosphere. Digital Journalism. doi:10.1080/21670811.2014.895520.Google Scholar
  110. Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere. The Internet as a public sphere. New Media & Society, 4(1), 9–27. doi:10.1177/14614440222226244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Papacharissi, Z. (2004). Democracy online. Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups. New Media & Society, 6(2), 259–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Papacharissi, Z. (2011). A private sphere-democracy in a digital sphere. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  113. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. What the Internet is hiding from you. London: Viking.Google Scholar
  114. Peters, B. (1993). Die Integration moderner Gesellschaften. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  115. Pfetsch, B., Adam, S., & Lance, B. W. (2013). The critical linkage between online and offline media. Javnost – The Public, 20(3), 9–22.Google Scholar
  116. Porten-Cheé, P., & Eilders, C. (2015). Spiral of silence online. How online communication affects opinion climate perception and opinion expression regarding the climate change debate. Studies in Communication Sciences, 15(1), 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Price, V. (2008). The public and public opinion in political theories. In W. Donsbach & M. W. Traugott (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of public opinion research (pp. 11–24). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Reader, B. (2012). Free press vs. free speech? The rhetoric of “civility” in regard to anonymous online comments. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(3), 495–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Rheingold, H. (2000). The virtual community. Homesteading on the electronic frontier. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  122. Rhomberg, M. (2008). Agenda-Setting. Theorie der Mediendemokratie. München: Willhelm C. Fink.Google Scholar
  123. Rhomberg, M. (2009). Politische Kommunikation. Eine Einführung für Politikwissenschaftler. Paderborn: Fink/UTB.Google Scholar
  124. Rhomberg, M. (2012). Public opinion. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell encyclopedia of globalization. Boston: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  125. Rogers, E. M. (2002). Diffusion of preventive innovation. Addictive Behaviors, 27, 989–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Rössler, P. (2008). Agenda-setting, framing and priming. In W. Donsbach & M. W. Traugott (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of public opinion research (pp. 205–217). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Rucht, D., Mundo, Y., & Zimmermann, A. (2008). Politische Diskurse im Internet und in Zeitungen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  128. Santana, A. D. (2011). Online readers’ comments represent new opinion pipeline. Newspaper Research Journal, 32(3), 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Schäfer, M. S., & Taddicken, M. (2015). Opinion leadership revisited: A classical concept in a changing media environment. International Journal of Communication, 9, 960–981.Google Scholar
  130. Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
  131. Scheufele, D. A. (2008). Spiral of silence theory. In W. Donsbach & M. W. Traugott (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of public opinion research (pp. 175–191). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Schmidt, J.-H. (2013a). Social media. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Schmidt, V. A. (2013b). Democracy and legitimacy in the European Union revisited: Input, output and ‘throughput’. Political Studies, 61(1), 2–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Schradie, J. (2011). The digital production gap: The digital divide and Web 2.0 collide. Poetics, 39(2), 145–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Schudson, M. (2008). The “Lippmann-Dewey debate” and the invention of Walter Lippmann as an anti-democrat 1985–1996. International Journal of Communication, 2, 1031–1042.Google Scholar
  136. Schulz, W. (2011). Politische Kommunikation: theoretische Ansätze und Ergebnisse empirischer Forschung (3., überarb. Aufl. ed.). Wiesbaden: VS Verl. für Sozialwiss.Google Scholar
  137. Schulz, A., & Roessler, P. (2012). The spiral of silence and the Internet. Selection of online content and the perception of the public opinion climate in computer-mediated communication environments. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24(3), 346–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Shoham, A., & Ruvio, A. (2008). Opinion leaders and followers. A replication and extension. Psychology and Marketing, 25(3), 280–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Sunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  140. Sweetser, K. D., Golan, G. J., & Wanta, W. (2008). Intermedia agenda setting in television, advertising, and blogs during the 2004 election. Mass Communication and Society, 11(2), 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Takeshita, T. (2006). Current critical problems in agenda-setting research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18(3), 275–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Tomaszeski, M., Proffitt, J. M., & McClung, S. (2009). Exploring the political blogosphere. Perceptions of political bloggers about their sphere. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 17(2), 72–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Trappel, J. (2011). Why democracy needs media monitoring. In J. Trappel, H. Nieminen, & L. Nord (Eds.), The media for democracy monitor. A cross national study of leading news media (pp. 11–28). Göteborg: Nordicom.Google Scholar
  144. Trepte, S., & Scherer, H. (2010). Opinion leaders – Do they know more than others about their area of interest? Communications, 35(2), 119–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Turcotte, J., York, C., Irving, J., Scholl, R. M., & Pingree, R. J. (2015). News recommendations from social media opinion leaders. Effects on media trust and information seeking. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(5), 520–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. van der Merwe, R., & van Heerden, G. (2009). Finding and utilizing opinion leaders. Social networks and the power of relationships. South African Journal of Business Management, 3, 65–76.Google Scholar
  147. van Dijk, J. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4–5), 221–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Wall, M. (2006). Blogging Gulf War II. Journalism Studies, 7(1), 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Warner, M. (2005). Publics and counterpublics. Cambridge: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  150. Wimmer, J. (2007). (Gegen-)Öffentlichkeit in der Mediengesellschaft. Analyse eines medialen Spannungsverhältnisses. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  151. Winsvold, M. (2007). Municipal websites in the local public debate. Supplying facts or setting agenda? NORDICOM Review, 28(2), 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Wojcieszak, M. E., & Mutz, D. C. (2009). Online groups and political discourse: Do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement? Journal of Communication, 59(1), 40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Wolling, J., & Emmer, M. (2014). Individual political communication and participation. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp. 449–468). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  154. Woong Yun, G., & Park, S. (2011). Selective posting. Willingness to post a message online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 16(2), 201–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Zamith, R., & Lewis, S. C. (2014). From public spaces to public sphere. Digital Journalism, 2(4), 558–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonas Kaiser
    • 1
    • 3
  • Birte Fähnrich
    • 4
  • Markus Rhomberg
    • 1
  • Peter Filzmaier
    • 2
  1. 1.Department for Political and Social SciencesZeppelin UniversityFriedrichshafenGermany
  2. 2.Platform Political CommunicationDanube University KremsKremsAustria
  3. 3.Berkman Klein Center for Internet & SocietyHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA
  4. 4.Zeppelin UniversityFriedrichshafenGermany

Personalised recommendations