The virus of polarization: online debates about Covid-19 in Germany

References

• Abramowitz, A. I. 2013. The Polarized Public: Why American Government Is so Dysfunctional. New York: Pearson Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Abramowitz, A. I., and K. L. Saunders. 2008. “Is Polarization a Myth?” The Journal of Politics 70 (2): 542–555. doi:10.1017/S0022381608080493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angermuller, J. 2015. “Discourse Studies.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, edited by J. Wright, 510–515. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Asimovic, N., J. Nagler, R. Bonneau, and J. A. Tucker. 2021. “Testing the Effects of Facebook Usage in an Ethnically Polarized Setting.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 118 (25): 1–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.2022819118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bächtiger, A., S. Niemeyer, M. Neblo, M. R. Steenbergen, and J. Steiner. 2010. “Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities*.” Journal of Political Philosophy 18 (1): 32–63. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00342.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bessi, A., M. Coletto, G. A. Davidescu, A. Scala, G. Caldarelli, and W. Quattrociocchi. 2015. “Science vs Conspiracy: Collective Narratives in the Age of Misinformation.” PLoS ONE 10 (2): e0118093. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118093. (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boberg, S., T. Quandt, T. Schatto-Eckrodt, and L. Frischlich. 2020. Pandemic Populism: Facebook Pages of Alternative News Media and the Corona Crisis - A Computational Content Analysis. Muenster Online Research Working Paper (1/2020). Münster: University of Münster. http://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.02566v3 (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Boxell, L., M. Gentzkow, and J. Shapiro. 2020. Cross-Country Trends in Affective Polarization. NBER Working Paper 26669. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
   Google Scholar
• Brasted, M. C. 2012. “MoveOn: The Rhetoric of Polarization.” Relevant Rhetoric 13, http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12648/2130 (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Bruckmüller, S., P. Hegarty, K. H. Teigen, G. Böhm, and O. Luminet. 2017. “When Do Past Events Require Explanation? Insights from Social Psychology.” Memory Studies 10 (3): 261–273. doi:10.1177/1750698017701607.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bundesministerium des Innern. 2019. Verfassungsschutzbericht 2018. Berlin: Bundesministerium des Innern. https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/DE/publikationen/themen/sicherheit/vsb-2018-gesamt.pdf (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Callison, W., and Q. Slobodian. 2021. “Coronapolitics from the Reichstag to the Capitol.” Boston Review Online. https://bostonreview.net/articles/quinn-slobodian-toxic-politics-coronakspeticism/ (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Carothers, T., and A. O’Donohue. 2019. “Introduction.” In Democracies Divided: The Global Challenge of Political Polarization, edited by T. Carothers, and A. O’Donohue, 1–13. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Cinelli, M., W. Quattrociocchi, A. Galeazzi, C. M. Valensise, E. Brugnoli, A. L. Schmidt, P. Zola, F. Zollo, and A. Scala. 2020. “The COVID-19 Social Media Infodemic.” Scientific Reports 10: 1016598. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-73510-5. (accessed on 23 August 2022)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connolly, W. E. 1991. Identity/Difference: Democratic Negotiations of Political Paradox. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. A. 1998. On Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Del Vicario, M., A. Bessi, F. Zollo, F. Petroni, A. Scala, G. Caldarelli, E. H. Stanley, and W. Quattrociocchi. 2016. “The Spreading of Misinformation Online.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113 (3): 554–559. doi:10.1073/pnas.1517441113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P., J. Evans, and B. Bryson. 1996. “Have Americans’ Social Attitudes Become More Polarized?” American Journal of Sociology 102 (3): 690–755. doi:10.1086/230995.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doherty, C., J. Kiley, and B. Jameson. 2016. Partisanship and Political Animosity in 2016: Highly Negative Views of the Opposing Party – and Its Members. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/06/22/partisanship-and-political-animosity-in-2016/ (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Druckman, J. N., S. Klar, Y. Krupnikov, M. Levendusky, and J. B. Ryan. 2021. “How Affective Polarization Shapes Americans’ Political Beliefs: A Study of Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Journal of Experimental Political Science 8 (3): 223–234. doi:10.1017/XPS.2020.28.
   Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. S. 2009. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elswah, M., and P. N. Howard. 2020. ““Anything That Causes Chaos”: The Organizational Behavior of Russia Today (RT).” Journal of Communication 70 (5): 623–645. doi:10.1093/joc/jqaa027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fengler, S., and B. Vestring. 2008. Politikjournalismus. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
   Google Scholar
• Fishkin, J. S. 2011. When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Garcia-Guadilla, M. P., and A. Mallen. 2019. “Polarization, Participatory Democracy, and Democratic Erosion in Venezuela's Twenty-First Century Socialism.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681 (1): 62–77. doi:10.1177/0002716218817733.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godwin, D., M. Raffin, P. Jeffrey, and H. Smith. 2018. “Evaluating Media Framing and Public Reactions in the Context of a Water Reuse Proposal.” International Journal of Water Resources Development 34 (6): 848–868. doi:10.1080/07900627.2017.1347085.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grömping, M. 2014. “‘Echo Chambers’ Partisan Facebook Groups During the 2014 Thai Election.” Asia Pacific Media Educator 24 (1): 39–59. doi:10.1177/1326365X14539185.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. 1998. The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hacker, K., M. Coombs, C. Weaver, and G. Mcculloh. 2006. “Possible Uses of Blogs and Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) for Depolarizing Political Discourse.” Paper Presented at the Communication and Technology Division of the International Communication Association, Dresden, Germany. June, 19–23.
   Google Scholar
• Harel, T. O., J. K. Jameson, and I. Maoz. 2020. “The Normalization of Hatred: Identity, Affective Polarization, and Dehumanization on Facebook in the Context of Intractable Political Conflict.” Social Media + Society 6 (2): 1–10. doi:10.1177/2056305120913983.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herman, L. E. 2017. “Democratic Partisanship: From Theoretical Ideal to Empirical Standard.” American Political Science Review 111 (4): 738–754. doi:10.1017/S0003055417000247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hetherington, M. J., and J. D. Weiler. 2009. Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hofstadter, R. 1965. The Paranoid Style in American Politics, and Other Essays. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
   Google Scholar
• Holsti, O. R. 1969. Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Iyengar, S., Y. Lelkes, M. Levendusky, N. Malhotra, and S. J. Westwood. 2019. “The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States.” Annual Review of Political Science 22 (1): 129–146. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyengar, S., G. Sood, and Y. Lelkes. 2012. “Affect, Not Ideology.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76 (3): 405–431. doi:10.1093/poq/nfs038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyengar, S., and S. J. Westwood. 2015. “Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science 59 (3): 690–707. doi:10.1111/ajps.12152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krochik, M., and J. T. Jost. 2011. “Ideological Conflict and Polarization: A Social Psychological Perspective.” In Intergroup Conflicts and Their Resolution: A Social Psychological Perspective, edited by D. Bar-Tal, 145–174. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lelkes, Y. 2016. “Mass Polarization: Manifestations and Measurements.” Public Opinion Quarterly 80 (S1): 392–410. doi:10.1093/poq/nfw005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lelkes, Y., G. Sood, and S. Iyengar. 2017. “The Hostile Audience: The Effect of Access to Broadband Internet on Partisan Affect.” American Journal of Political Science 61 (1): 5–20. doi:10.1111/ajps.12237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mouffe, C. 1999. “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?” Social Research 66 (3): 745–758. doi:10.1177/030437540202700403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mouffe, C. 2013. Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Mutz, D. C. 2006. “How the Mass Media Divide Us.” In Red and blue nation? Characteristics and causes of America’s polarized politics, edited by P. S. Nivola, and D. W. Brady, 223–248. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mutz, D. C., and L. Young. 2011. “Communication and public opinion: Plus ça change?” Public Opinion Quarterly 75 (5): 1018–1044. doi:10.1093/poq/nfr052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, N., R. Fletcher, A. Kalogeropoulos, and R. K. Nielsen. 2019. Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2019. Oxford: Oxford University.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2020. How’s Life? 2020: Measuring Wellbeing. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/23089679 (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2021. Government at a Glance 2021. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/22214399 (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Spahn, S. 2018. Russische Medien in Deutschland. Unabhängiger Journalismus oder politisches Instrument? Potsdam: Friedrich Naumann Stiftung.
   Google Scholar
• Springer, N., I. Engelmann, and C. Pfaffinger. 2015. “User Comments: Motives and Inhibitors to Write and Read.” Information, Communication & Society 18 (7): 798–815. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2014.997268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starbird, K., J. Maddock, M. Orand, P. Achterman, and R. M. Mason. 2014. “Rumors, False Flags, and Digital Vigilantes: Misinformation on Twitter After the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombing.” iConference 2014 Proceedings: 654–662. doi:10.9776/14308.
   Google Scholar
• Steuter, E., and D. Wills. 2009. “Discourses of Dehumanization: Enemy Construction and Canadian Media Complicity in the Framing of the war on Terror.” Global Media Journal 2 (2): 7–24.
   Google Scholar
• Strickler, R. 2018. “Deliberate with the Enemy? Polarization, Social Identity, and Attitudes Toward Disagreement.” Political Research Quarterly 71 (1): 3–18. doi:10.1177/1065912917721371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suhay, E., E. Bello-Pardo, and B. Maurer. 2018. “The Polarizing Effects of Online Partisan Criticism: Evidence from two Experiments.” The International Journal of Press/Politics 23 (1): 95–115. doi:10.1177/1940161217740697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C. R. 2007. Republic.com 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C. R., and A. Vermeule. 2009. “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures.” The Journal of Political Philosophy 17 (2): 202–227. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00325.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker, J. A., A. Guess, P. Barberá, C. Vaccari, A. Siegel, S. Sanovich, D. Stukal, and B. Nyhan. 2018. “Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature”. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3144139 (accessed on 23 August 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Van Prooijen, J.-W., and K. M. Douglas. 2017. “Conspiracy Theories as Part of History: The Role of Societal Crisis Situations.” Memory Studies 10 (3): 323–333. doi:10.1177/1750698017701615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaughan, M., and A. Heft. 2022. “Anti-Elitism in the European Radical Right in Comparative Perspective.” Journal of Common Market Studies 60 (3): 1–19. doi:10.1111/jcms.13347.
   Google Scholar
• Willig, C. 2014. “Discourse and Discourse Analysis.” In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis, edited by U. Flick, 341–353. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wodak, R., and M. Rheindorf. 2022. Identity Politics Past and Present: Political Discourses from Post-War Austria to the Covid Crisis. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yablokov, I. 2015. “Conspiracy Theories as a Russian Public Diplomacy Tool: The Case of Russia Today (RT).” Politics 35 (3-4): 301–315. doi:10.1111/1467-9256.12097.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarchi, M., C. Baden, and N. Kligler-Vilenchik. 2021. “Political Polarization on the Digital Sphere: A Cross-Platform, Over-Time Analysis of Interactional, Positional, and Affective Polarization on Social Media.” Political Communication 38 (1-2): 98–139. doi:10.1080/10584609.2020.1785067.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar