Participation in Contentious Politics: Rethinking the Roles of News, Social Media, and Conversation Amid Divisiveness

References

• Abramowitz, A. I. (2011). The disappearing center: Engaged citizens, polarization, and American democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Abramowitz, A. I. (2014). Partisan nation: The rise of affective partisanship in the American electorate. In J. C. Green, D. J. Coffey, & D. B. Cohen (Eds.), The state of the parties: The changing role of contemporary American parties (pp. 21–36). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Baldassari, D., & Bearman, P. (2007). Dynamics of political polarization. American Sociological Review, 72(5), 784–811. doi:10.1177/000312240707200507
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barberá, P., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J. A., & Bonneau, R. (2015). Tweeting from left to right is online political communication more than an echo chamber? Psychological Science, 26, 1531–1542. doi:10.1177/0956797615594620
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnidge, M. (2015). The role of news in promoting political disagreement on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 211–218. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bello, J. (2012). The dark side of disagreement? Revisiting the effect of disagreement on political participation. Electoral Studies, 31(4), 782–795. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2012.06.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bode, L. (2016a). Political news in the News Feed: Learning politics from social media. Mass Communication & Society, 19(1), 24–28. doi:10.1080/15205436.2015.1045149
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bode, L. (2016b). Pruning the news feed: Unfriending and unfollowing political content on social media. Research and Politics, 3(3). doi:10.1177/2053168016661873
   Google Scholar
• Bode, L. (2017). Gateway political behaviors: The frequency and consequences of low-cost political engagement on social media. Social Media+ Society, 3(4), 2056305117743349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bode, L., Vraga, E.K., Yang, J.H., Edgerly, S., Thorson, K., Shah, D.V., & Wells, C. (2016). Political engagement within parent-child dyads: Rethinking the transmission model of socialization in digital media environments. In C. Klofstadt (Ed.), Resources, engagement, and recruitment: New advances in the study of civic voluntarism (pp. 127–144). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
   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
• Boydstun, A. E., Hardy, A., & Walgrave, S. (2014). Two faces of media attention: Media storm versus non-storm coverage. Political Communication, 31(4), 509–531. doi:10.1080/10584609.2013.875967
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brace, P., & Jewett, A. (1995). The state of state politics research. Political Research Quarterly, 48(3), 643–681. doi:10.1177/106591299504800310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownstein, R., & Czekalinski, S. (2013). How Washington ruined governors. National Journal, 12(April), 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Brundidge, J. (2010). Encountering ‘difference’ in the contemporary public sphere: The contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks. Journal of Communication, 60(4), 680–700. doi:10.1111/jcom.2010.60.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, J. E. (2008). The American campaign: U.S. presidential campaigns and the national vote (2nd ed.). College Station, Texas: Texas A&M Press.
   Google Scholar
• Campus, D., Ceccarini, L., & Vaccari, C. (2015). What a difference a critical election makes: Social networks and political discussion in Italy between 2008 and 2013. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 27(4), 588–601. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edv045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, J. W. (1995). The press, public opinion and public discourse. In T. L. Glasser & C. T. Salmon (Eds.), Public opinion and the communication of consent (pp. 373–402). New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Centola, D. (2010). The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science, 329(5996), 1194–1197. doi:10.1126/science.1185231
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charles, M., & Grusky, D. (2004). Occupational ghettos: The worldwide segregation of women and men. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Christenson, H. S. (2011). Political participation on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means? First Monday 16, Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3336/2767 for details
   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. Journal of Communication, 64, 317–332. doi:10.1111/jcom.2014.64.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cramer, K. (2012). Putting inequality in its place: Rural consciousness and the power of perspective. American Political Science Review, 106(3), 517–532. doi:10.1017/S0003055412000305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cramer, K. (2016). The politics of resentment. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Meo, P., Ferrara, E., Fiumara, G., & Provetti, A. (2014). On Facebook, most ties are weak. Communications of the ACM, 57(11), 78–84. doi:10.1145/2629438
   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
• Edgerly, S. (2015). Red media, blue media, and purple media: News repertoires in the colorful media landscape. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59, 1–21. doi:10.1080/08838151.2014.998220
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elazar, D. J. (1987). Exploring federalism. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elazar, D. J. (1994). The American mosaic: The impact of space, time, and culture on American politics. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Farnsworth, S. J., & Owen, D. (2004). Internet use and the 2000 presidential election. Electoral Studies, 23(3), 415–429. doi:10.1016/S0261-3794(03)00029-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorina, M. P., & Abrams, S. J. (2008). Political polarization in the American public. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 563–588. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053106.153836
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumptions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80, 298–320. doi:10.1093/poq/nfw006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gil De Zúñiga, H., & Valenzuela, S. (2011). The mediating path to a stronger citizenship: online and offline networks, weak ties and civic engagement. Communication Research, 38(3), 397–421. doi:10.1177/0093650210384984
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, C. (2012). Recall turnout June 5: high in most places, insanely high in some. JSOnline, 27(June), 2012. Retrieved from http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/160537265.html
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, C. (2013, March). Wisconsin’s partisan chasm: A case of divided voters or divisive politicians? JSOnline. Retrieved from http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/196780801.html
   Google Scholar
• Gimpel, J. G., Kaufmann, K. M., & Pearson-Merkowitz, S. (2007). Battleground states versus blackout states: The behavioral implications of modern presidential campaigns. Journal of Politics, 69(3), 786–797. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00575.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gladwell, M. (2010). Small change: Why the revolution will not be tweeted. The New Yorker, 4(October), 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Goel, S., Mason, W., & Watts, D. J. (2010). Real and perceived attitude agreement in social networks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(4), 611–621. doi:10.1037/a0020697
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Government Accountability Board. (2012). Canvass results for 2012 JUNE 5 RECALL ELECTION. Madison, WI. Retrieved from http://gab.wi.gov/sites/default/files/Statewide%20Percentage%20Results_6.5.12%20Recall%20Election_PRE%20SEN21%20RECOUNT.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1962). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–431. doi:10.1093/poq/nfs038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahne, J., & Bowyer, B. (2018). Political communication. The Political Significance of Social Media Activity and Social Networks. online first. doi:10.1080/10584609.2018.1426662
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, D. (2012, May 24). How did Wisconsin become the most divisive place in America? New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/magazine/how-did-wisconsin-become-the-most-politically-divisive-place-in-america.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
   Google Scholar
• Kim, Y., & Chen, H. (2016). Social media and online political participation: The mediating role of exposure to cross-cutting and like-minded perspectives. Telematics and Informatics, 33, 320–330. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2015.08.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreiss, D. (2012). Taking our country back: The crafting of networked politics from Howard Dean to Barack Obama. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kreiss, D. (2017). The fragmenting of the civil sphere: How partisan identity shapes the moral evaluation of candidates and epistemology. American Journal of Cultural Sociology, 5(3), 443–459. doi:10.1057/s41290-017-0039-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristofferson, K., White, K., & Peloza, J. (2013). The nature of Slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action. Journal of Consumer Research, 40, 1149–1166. doi:10.1086/674137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Layman, G. C., Carsey, T. M., & Menasce Horowitz, J. (2006). party polarization in American politics: Characteristics, causes, and consequences. Annual Review of Political Science, 9, 83–110. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.9.070204.105138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manin, B. (1987). On legitimacy and political deliberation. Political Theory, 15(3), 338–368. doi:10.1177/0090591787015003005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marichal, J. (2012). Facebook democracy: The architecture of disclosure and the threat to public life. London: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• McLeod, D. M. (1995). Communicating deviance: The effects of television news coverage of social protest. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 39(1), 4–19. doi:10.1080/08838159509364285
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLeod, D. M. (1999). The protest paradigm and news coverage of the “right to party” movement. In D. Schultz (Ed.), It’s show time!: Media, politics, and popular culture (pp. 29–50). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• McLeod, D. M., & Detenber, B. H. (1999). Framing effects of television news coverage of social protest. Journal of Communication, 49(3), 3–23. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02802.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLeod, K. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16, 315–336. doi:10.1080/105846099198659
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messing, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2012). Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research, 41(8), 1042–1063. doi:10.1177/0093650212466406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, A., Gottfried, J., Kiley, J., & Matsa, K. E. (2014, October 21). Political polarization & media habits. Pew Research Center. http://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/#social-media-conservatives-more-likely-to-have-like-minded-friends
   Google Scholar
• Morozov, E. (2011). The net delusion: The dark side of Internet freedom. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Mutz, D. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mutz, D. C., & Mondak, J. J. (2006). The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse. The Journal of Politics, 68(1), 140–155. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00376.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagourney, A., & Martin, J. (2013). Washington keeps sinking, governors rise. New York Times. November 9.
   Google Scholar
• Pan, Z., Shen, L., Paek, H. J., & Sun, Y. (2006). Mobilizing political talk in a presidential campaign. Communication Research, 33(5), 315–345. doi:10.1177/0093650206291478
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pariser, E. (2012). The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. New York, NY: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center. (2012). Number of Americans who read print newspapers continues to decline. 11 October 2012. http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/number-of-americans-who-read-print-newspapers-continues-decline/
   Google Scholar
• Public Policy Polling. (2013). Clinton would beat Walker, Ryan, in Wisconsin in 2016. Full poll results Retrieved from http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_WI_022813.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Roh, J., & Haider Markel, D. P. (2003). All politics is not local: National forces in state abortion initiatives. Social Science Quarterly, 84(1), 15–31. doi:10.1111/ssqu.2003.84.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt-Beck, R., & Mackenrodt, C. (2010). Social networks and mass media as mobilizers and demobilizers: A study of turnout at a German local election. Electoral Studies, 29(3), 392–404. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2010.03.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sewell, A. (2011). Protestors out in force nationwide to oppose Wisconsin’s anti-union bill. Los Angeles Times. February 27.
   Google Scholar
• Shah, D. V., Cho, J., Eveland, W. P., & Kwak, N. (2005). Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling Internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research, 32(5), 531–565. doi:10.1177/0093650205279209
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sotirovic, M., & McLeod, J. M. (2001). Values, communication behavior, and political participation. Political Communication, 18(3), 273–300. doi:10.1080/10584600152400347
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroud, N. (2008). media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30(3), 341–366. doi:10.1007/s11109-007-9050-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweet, S. A., & Meiksins, P. F. (2013). Changing contours of work: Jobs and opportunities in the new economy. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Thorson, K., & Wells, C. (2015). Curated flows: A framework for mapping media exposure in the digital age. Communication Theory, 26(3), 309–328. doi:10.1111/comt.12087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C., Valeriani, A., Barbera, P., Bonneau, R., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. A. (2015). Political expression and action on social media: Exploring the relationship between lower- and higher-threshold political activities among Twitter users in Italy. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20, 221–239. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valeriani, A., & Vaccari, C. (2016). Accidental exposure to politics on social media as online participation equalizer in Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom. New Media & Society, 18(9), 1857–1874. doi:10.1177/1461444815616223
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veenstra, A. S., Iyer, N., Hossain, M. D., & Park, J. (2014). Time, place, technology: Twitter as an information source in the Wisconsin labor protests. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 65–72. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wells, C., Cramer, K. J., Wagner, M. W., Alvarez, G., Friedland, L. F., Shah, D. V., … Franklin, C. (2017). When we stop talking politics: The maintenance and closing of conversation in contentious times. Journal of Communication, 67(1), 131–157. doi:10.1111/jcom.12280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, M. (2010). Clicktivism is ruining leftist activism. The Guardian, 12(August), 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Wyatt, R. O., Katz, E., & Kim, J. (2000). Bridging the spheres: Political and personal conversation in the public and private spaces. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 71–92. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02834.x
   Web of Science ®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, 151–167. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2013.871318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yates, M. D. (2010). Wisconsin uprising: Labor fights back. New York: Monthly Review Press.
   Google Scholar