Activity and involvement around the Twitter accounts of journalists and national television news programs in Mexico
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33732/ixc/09/01ActiviKeywords:
Participation, User Involvement, Twitter, Quantitative Analysis,Abstract
In the light of the growing divide between political identities on the internet, news distribution on social networks and the attitude of users towards said news has become a very important subject of study for the social sciences these past few years. This report presents the results of our analysis of formal news accounts activity on Twitter throughout 2017, as well as the interactions that surround them, arranged by account, type of activity and segment of interest. From these results, a few possible indicators are proposed for measuring user involvement, searching for an index that allows us to identify controversies in the discussion of news on Twitter. We conclude that the best way to measure involvement is by cross-graphing the amount of interactions per post and the proportion of retweets to formal interactions. This indicator could facilitate both quantitative and qualitative research on Twitter by identifying moments of high enunciation.
Metrics
References
Allcott, H. y Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211-236. Doi: 10.1257/jep.31.2.211
Arreola, F. (17 de junio de 2017). Peña Nieto: fotos con periodistas; fraude 2006 y la familia de José y María derrotada en Edomex. SDP Noticias. Recuperado el 1 de agosto de 2017 de: http://cort.as/-CDk7
Barberá, P.; Jost, J. T.; Nagler, J.; Tucker, J.A. y Bonneau, R. (2015). Tweeting from left to right: Is online political communication more than an echo chamber? Psychological science, 26(10), 1531-1542. Doi: 10.1177/0956797615594620
Boxell, L.; Gentzkow, M. y Shapiro, J. (2017). Is the internet causing political polarization? Evidence from demographics. National Bureau of Economic Research, Núm. w23258. Doi: 10.3386/w23258
Bruns, A. y Stieglitz, S. (2014). Metrics for understanding communication on Twitter. En K. Weller; A. Bruns; J. Burgess; M. Mahrt y C. Puschmann (eds.). Twitter and Society, pp. 69-82. New York: Peter Lang.
Campos-Domínguez, W. (2017). Twitter y la comunicación política. El profesional de la información, 26(5), 785-793. Doi: 10.3145/epi.2017.sep.01
Colleoni, E.; Rozza, A. y 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), 317-332. Doi: 10.1111/jcom.12084
Conover, M.; Ratkiewicz, J.; Francisco, M.; Gonçalves, B.; Menczer, F. y Flammini, A. (2011). Political polarization on twitter. ICWSM, 133, 89-96.
Continuum Analytics (2012). Anaconda (Versión Custom para Python 2.7) [Software de PC]. Recuperado de: https://anaconda.org/
Corona, A. (2018). Mecanismos de otrificación entre la oposición política en Twitter durante las elecciones estatales de 2017 en México. adComunica. Revista Científica de Estrategias, Tendencias e Innovación en Comunicación, 16, 45-70. Doi: 10.6035/2174-0992.2018.16.4
Corona, A. y Muñoz, B. A. (2018). Twitter y organización partidista a nivel local durante la elección estatal de Coahuila, 2017. Question: Revista de Periodismo y Comunicación, 1(57). Doi: 10.24215/16696581e021
De Zúñiga, G. y Liu, J. H. (2017). Second screening politics in the social media sphere: Advancing research on dual screen use in political communication with evidence from 20 countries. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61(2), 193-219. Doi: 10.1080/08838151.2017.1309420
El Financiero (6 de octubre de 2017). Cisma en el PAN: Margarita Zavala renuncia. El Financiero. Recuperado de: http://cort.as/-CDkG
El Universal (5 de enero de 2017). Ahora sufre la CDMX saqueos por gasolinazo. El Universal. Recuperado de: http://cort.as/-CDkL
Giglietto, F. y Selva, D. (2014). Second Screen and Participation: A Content Analysis on a Full Season Dataset of Tweets. Journal of Communication, 64(2), 260-277. Doi: 10.1111/jcom.12085
Gruzd, A. y Roy, J. (2014). Investigating political polarization on Twitter: A Canadian perspective. Policy & Internet, 6(1), 28-45. Doi: 10.1002/1944-2866.POI354
Kim, A.E.; Hansen, H. M.; Murphy, J.; Richards, A. K.; Duke, J. y Allen, J. (2013). Methodological Considerations in Analyzing Twitter Data. JNCI Monographs, 2013(47), 140-146. Doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgt026
La Silla Rota (7 de octubre de 2017). Sacude al PRI supuesto ‘madruguete’ en la postulación presidencial. La Silla Rota. Recuperado de: http://cort.as/-CDkP
Lockie, S. (2016). Post-truth politics and the social sciences. Environmental Sociology, 3(1), , 1-5. Doi: 10.1080/23251042.2016.1273444
McGrath, R. (2013). Twython (Versión 3.4.0 - 3.6.0) [Software de PC]. Recuperado de: https://github.com
Morales, A. J.; Borondo, J.; Lozada, J. C. y Benito, R. M. (2015). Measuring political polarization: Twitter shows the two sides of Venezuela. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 25(3). Doi: 10.1063/1.4913758
Muñoz, B. A. (2018). Análisis del involucramiento y la reconfiguración en YouTube México a partir del caso #lady100pesos. Fonseca, Journal of Communication, 16, 159-175. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14201/fjc201816155170
Niño González, J. I.; Barquero Cabrero, M. y García, E. (2017). Opinión pública e infoxicación en las redes: los fundamentos de la post-verdad. VivatAcademia Revista de comunicación, 139, 83-94. Doi: 10.15178/va.2017.139.83-94
Noguez, O. (7 de enero de 2017). Calderón se vuelve tendencia por su plan contra Trump. Merca2.0. Recuperado de: http://cort.as/-CDkU
Python Software Foundation (2010). Python (Versión 2.7). [Software de PC]. Recuperado de: https://www.python.org/download/releases/2.7/
Senado de la República. (2017). Recuento de los daños 7S y 19s: A un mes de la tragedia. Notas Estratégicas, 17. Instituto Belisario Domínguez.
Specia, M. (27 de septiembre de 2017). ‘Frida Sofia’: The Mexico Earthquake Victim Who Never Was. The New York Times. Recuperado de: http://cort.as/-CDkZ
Suiter, J. (2016). Post-Truth Politics. Political Insight, 7(3), 25-27. Doi: 10.1177/2041905816680417
Vaccari, C.; Chadwick, A. y O’Loughlin, B. (2015). Dual Screening the Political: Media Events, Social Media, and Citizen Engagement. Journal of Communication, 65(6), 1041-1061. Doi: 10.1111/jcom.12187
Williams, S.; Terras, M. y Warwick, C. (2013). What do people study when they study Twitter? Classifying Twitter related academic papers. Journal of Documentation, 69(3), 384-410. Doi: 10.1108/JD-03-2012-0027
Yardi, S. y Boyd, D. (2010). Dynamic debates: An analysis of group polarization over time on twitter. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(5), 316-327. Doi: 10.1177/0270467610380011
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Antonio Corona, Brenda Azucena Muñoz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who submit to this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and ensure the magazine's right to be the first publication of the work as licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoComercial 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of authorship of the work and the initial publication in this magazine, with no commercial purpose.
Authors can establish separate additional agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the magazine (for example, to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
It allows and authors are encouraged to disseminate their work electronically (eg, in institutional repositories or on their own website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as a citation more early and most of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
