Helping populism win? Social media use, filter bubbles, and support for populist presidential candidates in the 2016 US election campaign

References

• Akkerman, A., Mudde, C., & Zaslove, A. (2014). How populist are the people? Measuring populist attitudes in voters. Comparative Political Studies, 47(9), 1324–1353. doi: 10.1177/0010414013512600
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, D. (2016). The “Filter Bubble” explains why Trump won and you didn’t see it coming. Retrieved December 12, 2016, from http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/11/how-facebook-and-the-filter-bubble-pushed-trump-to-victory.html.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, R., Blumberg, S. J., Brick, M., Couper, M. P., Courtright, M., Dennis, J. M. … Groves, R. M. (2010). AAPOR report on online panels. Retrieved from http://www.comm.ohio-state.edu/Opt-in_panel_best_practices.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Bakker, T. P., & de Vreese, C. H. (2011). Good news for the future? Young people, internet use, and political participation. Communication Research, 38(4), 451–470. doi: 10.1177/0093650210381738
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakker, B. N., Rooduijn, M., & Schumacher, G. (2016). The psychological roots of populist voting: Evidence from the United States, the Netherlands and Germany: The psychological roots of populist voting. European Journal of Political Research, 55(2), 302–320. doi: 10.1111/1475-6765.12121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa1160
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartels, L. M. (2016). Elections in America. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 667(1), 36–49. doi: 10.1177/0002716216662035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BBC Trending. (2016). US election 2016: Trump's ‘hidden’ Facebook army. Retrieved November 15, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-37945486.
   Google Scholar
• Benkler, Y., Faris, R., Roberts, H., & Zuckerman, E. (2017). Study: Breitbart-led right-wing media ecosystem altered broader media agenda. Retrieved March 7, 2017, from http://www.cjr.org/analysis/breitbart-media-trump-harvard-study.php.
   Google Scholar
• Boulianne, S. (2009). Does internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26(2), 193–211. doi: 10.1080/10584600902854363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boulianne, S. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 524–538. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castells, M. (2007). Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication, 1, 238–266.
   Google Scholar
• Ceron, A., & d’Adda, G. (2016). E-campaigning on Twitter: The effectiveness of distributive promises and negative campaign in the 2013 Italian election. New Media & Society, 18(9), 1935–1955. doi: 10.1177/1461444815571915
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colleoni, E., Rozza, A., & Arvidsson, A. (2014). Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in twitter using big data: Political homophily on twitter. Journal of Communication, 64(2), 317–332. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12084
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitrova, D. V., Shehata, A., Strömbäck, J., & Nord, L. W. (2014). The effects of digital media on political knowledge and participation in election campaigns: Evidence from panel data. Communication Research, 41(1), 95–118. doi: 10.1177/0093650211426004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El-Bermawy, M. (2016). Your filter bubble is destroying democracy. Retrieved December 12, 2016, from https://www.wired.com/2016/11/filter-bubble-destroying-democracy/.
   Google Scholar
• Engesser, S., Ernst, N., Esser, F., & Büchel, F. (2016). Populism and social media: How politicians spread a fragmented ideology. Information, Communication & Society, 1–18. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1207697
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernst, N., Engesser, S., & Esser, F. (2016). Switzerland. Favorable conditions for growing populism. In T. Aalberg, F. Esser, C. Reinemann, J. Stromback, & C. H. De Vreese (Eds.), Populist political communication in Europe. Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315623016
   Google Scholar
• Fawzi, N., Obermaier, M., & Reinemann, C. (2016). Germany. Is the populism laggard catching up? (T. Aalberg, F. Esser, C. Reinemann, J. Stromback, & C. H. De Vreese, Eds.) London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315623016
   Google Scholar
• Fenton, N. (2016). The internet of me (and my ‘friends’). In J. Curran, N. Fenton, D. Freedman (Eds.). Misinformation and the internet. Routledge. ISBN: 978-1-315-69562-4.
   Google Scholar
• Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2013). Ideological segregation and the effects of social media on news consumption. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2363701
   Google Scholar
• Gidengil, E., Hennigar, M., Blais, A., & Nevitte, N. (2005). Explaining the gender gap in support for the new right: The case of Canada. Comparative Political Studies, 38(10), 1171–1195. doi: 10.1177/0010414005279320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gil de Zúñiga, H., Garcia-Perdomo, V., & McGregor, S. C. (2015). What is second screening? Exploring motivations of second screen use and its effect on online political participation: Second screen use & online political participation. Journal of Communication, 65(5), 793–815. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groshek, J., & Cutino, C. (2016). Meaner on mobile: Incivility and impoliteness in communicating contentious politics on sociotechnical networks. Social Media+Society, 2(4). doi: 10.1177/2056305116677137
   Google Scholar
• Groshek, J., & Dimitrova, D. (2013). A cross-section of political involvement, partisanship and online media in middle america during the 2008 presidential campaign. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 21(2), 108–124. doi: 10.1080/15456870.2013.773484
   Google Scholar
• Groshek, J., & Engelbert, J. (2013). Double differentiation in a cross-national comparison of populist political movements and online media uses in the United States and the Netherlands. New Media & Society, 15(2), 183–202. doi: 10.1177/1461444812450685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groshek, J., & Tandoc, E. (2017). The affordance effect: Gatekeeping and (non)reciprocal journalism on Twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 201–210. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halpern, D., & Gibbs, J. (2013). Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1159–1168. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermida, A. (2014). Tell everyone: Why we share and why it matters. Toronto, Canada: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Herrman, J. (2016, August 24). Inside Facebook’s (Totally insane, unintentionally gigantic, hyperpartisan) Political-media machine: How a strange new class of media outlet has arisen to take over our news feeds. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/magazine/inside-facebooks-totally-insane-unintentionally-gigantic-hyperpartisan-politicalmedia-machine.html?_r=0.
   Google Scholar
• Hmielowski, J. D., Hutchens, M. J., & Cicchirillo, V. J. (2014). Living in an age of online incivility: Examining the conditional indirect effects of online discussion on political flaming. Information, Communication & Society, 17(10), 1196–1211. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2014.899609
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooton, J. (2016, November 10). Your social media echo chamber is the reason Donald Trump ended up being voted President. Retrieved December 11, 2016, from http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-president-social-media-echo-chamber-hypernormalisation-adam-curtis-protests-blame-a7409481.html.
   Google Scholar
• Isaac, M. (2016, November 12). Facebook, in Cross Hairs After Election, Is Said to Question Its Influence. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/14/technology/facebook-is-said-to-question-its-influence-in-election.html.
   Google Scholar
• Isaac, M., & Ember, S. (2016, November 8). For Election Day Influence, Twitter Ruled Social Media. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/09/technology/for-election-day-chatter-twitter-ruled-social-media.html.
   Google Scholar
• Jagers, J., & Walgrave, S. (2007). Populism as political communication style: An empirical study of political parties’ discourse in Belgium. European Journal of Political Research, 46(3), 319–345. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00690.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klinger, U., & Svensson, J. (2015). The emergence of network media logic in political communication: A theoretical approach. New Media & Society, 17(8), 1241–1257. doi: 10.1177/1461444814522952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koopmans, R., & Muis, J. (2009). The rise of right-wing populist Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands: A discursive opportunity approach. European Journal of Political Research, 48(5), 642–664. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.00846.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krastev, I. (2007). The populist moment. Retrieved December 11, 2016, from http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2007-09-18-krastev-en.html.
   Google Scholar
• Kriesi, H. (2014). The populist challenge. West European Politics, 37(2), 361–378. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2014.887879
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kruikemeier, S., van Noort, G., Vliegenthart, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2014). Unraveling the effects of active and passive forms of political internet use: Does it affect citizens’ political involvement? New Media & Society, 16(6), 903–920. doi: 10.1177/1461444813495163
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lapowksy, I. (2016, November 15). Popular media all over the world are claiming that it was social media that impacted the outcomes of the election and vote for Trump. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/2016/11/facebook-won-trump-election-not-just-fake-news.
   Google Scholar
• Maruyama, M., Robertson, S. P., Douglas, S., Semaan, B., & Faucett, H. (2014). Hybrid media consumption: How tweeting during a televised political debate influences the vote decision. In Paper presented at ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW 2014), Baltimore, MD. New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• McCormick, R. (2016b, November 10). Mark Zuckerberg sidesteps blame for Trump presidency, says we should all ‘work harder’. The Verge. Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/10/13582008/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-trump-president-statement.
   Google Scholar
• McKenzie, F. (2016, November 19). The Secret Agenda of a Facebook Quiz. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/the-secret-agenda-of-a-facebook-quiz.html.
   Google Scholar
• Miconi, A. (2015). Italy’s “five stars” movement and the role of a leader: Or, how charismatic power can resurface through the web. New Media & Society, 17(7), 1043–1058. doi: 10.1177/1461444814520872
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moffitt, B., & Tormey, S. (2014). Rethinking populism: Politics, mediatisation and political style: Rethinking populism. Political Studies, 62(2), 381–397. doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller, J.-W. (2016). What is populism? Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, J. (2017). Is ‘fake news’ a fake problem? Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from http://www.cjr.org/analysis/fake-news-facebook-audience-drudge-breitbart-study.php.
   Google Scholar
• Newton, C. (2016, November 10). Zuckerberg: The idea that fake news on Facebook influenced the election is ‘crazy’. Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/10/13594558/mark-zuckerberg-election-fake-news-trump.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, J. E., & Rahn, W. M. (2016). Rise of the Trumpenvolk: Populism in the 2016 election. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 667(1), 189–206. doi: 10.1177/0002716216662639
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pagani, M., Hofacker, C. F., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2011). The influence of personality on active and passive use of social networking sites. Psychology and Marketing, 28(5), 441–456. doi: 10.1002/mar.20395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. London: Viking/Penguin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Parkinson, H. (2016, November 14). Click and elect: How fake news helped Donald Trump win a real election. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/14/fake-news-donald-trump-election-alt-right-social-media-tech-companies.
   Google Scholar
• Peifer, J., & Garrett, K. (2014). Best practices for working with opt-in online panels. Retrieved from http://www.comm.ohio-state.edu/Opt-in_panel_best_practices.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Rooduijn, M. (2014). The mesmerising message: The diffusion of populism in public debates in Western European media: The mesmerising message. Political Studies, 62(4), 726–744. doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sides, J., Tesler, M., & Vavreck, L. (2016). The electoral landscape of 2016. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 667(1), 50–71. doi: 10.1177/0002716216658922
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverman, C. (2016). This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook. Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook?utm_term=.yjaky1Omp#.qi7z4ybq8.
   Google Scholar
• Skoric, M. M., Zhu, Q., Goh, D., & Pang, N. (2016). Social media and citizen engagement: A meta-analytic review. New Media & Society, 18(9), 1817–1839. doi: 10.1177/1461444815616221
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spruyt, B., Keppens, G., & Van Droogenbroeck, F. (2016). Who supports populism and what attracts people to it? Political Research Quarterly, 69(2), 335–346. doi: 10.1177/1065912916639138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strandberg, K. (2013). A social media revolution or just a case of history repeating itself? The use of social media in the 2011 Finnish parliamentary elections. New Media & Society, 15(8), 1329–1347. doi: 10.1177/1461444812470612
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trudel, D. (2016). L’élection de Trump dans l’oeil de l’École de Francfort. Le Devoir. Retrieved from http://www.ledevoir.com/societe/le-devoir-de-philo/486824/le-devoir-de-philo-l-election-de-trump-dans-l-oeil-de-l-ecole-de-francfort.
   Google Scholar
• Tufekci, Z. (2015). Facebook said its algorithms do help form echo chambers, and the tech press missed it. New Perspectives Quarterly, 32, 9–12. doi:10.1111/npqu.11519
   Google Scholar
• van der Brug, W., & Mughan, A. (2007). Charisma, leader effects and support for right-wing populist parties. Party Politics, 13(1), 29–51. doi: 10.1177/1354068806071260
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Elsas, E. J., Hakhverdian, A., & van der Brug, W. (2016). United against a common foe? The nature and origins of Euroscepticism among left-wing and right-wing citizens. West European Politics, 39(6), 1181–1204. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2016.1175244
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vezzoni, C., & Mancosu, M. (2016). Diffusion processes and discussion networks: An analysis of the propensity to vote for the 5 star movement in the 2013 Italian election. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 26(1), 1–21. doi: 10.1080/17457289.2015.1102145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welch, C. (2016, November 29). Mark Zuckerberg's posts about fake news and the US election briefly disappeared Tuesday. Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/29/13777018/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-fake-news-election-post-disappeared.
   Google Scholar
• Xenos, M., Vromen, A., & Loader, B. D. (2014). The great equalizer? Patterns of social media use and youth political engagement in three advanced democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 151–167. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.871318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar