Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales

In the field of political communication, social networks have become an indispensable tool for election campaigns in recent years. In addition to opening communication and dialogue channels that are not available in other media and public spaces, these platforms promote the emergence of online commu...

Full description

Autores:

Tipo de recurso:

Fecha de publicación:: 2019

Institución:: Universidad de Medellín

Repositorio:: Repositorio UDEM

Idioma:: spa
eng

id	REPOUDEM2_bbfea2bb9b3ad06453bd9610b763071a
oai_identifier_str	oai:repository.udem.edu.co:11407/5415
network_acronym_str	REPOUDEM2
network_name_str	Repositorio UDEM
repository_id_str
dc.title.eng.fl_str_mv	Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales
dc.title.por.fl_str_mv	Formação de comunidades políticas afins e dissímeis no Twitter durante a campanha eleitoral à prefeitura de Manizales em 2015
dc.title.spa.fl_str_mv	Formación de comunidades políticas afines y disímiles en Twitter durante la campaña electoral a la alcaldía de Manizales en 2015
title	Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales
spellingShingle	Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales Public sphere Political communication Twitter Interaction Polarization Fragmentation Political Communities Democracy Esfera pública Comunicação política Twitter Interação Polarização Fragmentação Comunidades Políticas Democracia Esfera pública Comunicación política Twitter Interacción Polarización Fragmentación Comunidades Políticas Democracia
title_short	Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales
title_full	Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales
title_fullStr	Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales
title_full_unstemmed	Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales
title_sort	Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales
dc.contributor.affiliation.none.fl_str_mv	López Londoño, Luis Miguel; Universidad de Manizales
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv	Public sphere Political communication Twitter Interaction Polarization Fragmentation Political Communities Democracy
topic	Public sphere Political communication Twitter Interaction Polarization Fragmentation Political Communities Democracy Esfera pública Comunicação política Twitter Interação Polarização Fragmentação Comunidades Políticas Democracia Esfera pública Comunicación política Twitter Interacción Polarización Fragmentación Comunidades Políticas Democracia
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv	Esfera pública Comunicação política Twitter Interação Polarização Fragmentação Comunidades Políticas Democracia
dc.subject.spa.fl_str_mv	Esfera pública Comunicación política Twitter Interacción Polarización Fragmentación Comunidades Políticas Democracia
description	In the field of political communication, social networks have become an indispensable tool for election campaigns in recent years. In addition to opening communication and dialogue channels that are not available in other media and public spaces, these platforms promote the emergence of online communities that spawn conversations and exchange of political opinions. However, democratic participation in the digital age can lead to overcome certain obstacles, but also to deepen them. A content analysis technique to the messages published during the last twenty-five days of the 2015 mayoral campaign in the official Twitter accounts of the four candidates for Manizales Mayor’s Office, aimed at establishing if the followers of these accounts confronted their points of view with dissimilar perspectives, or if they expressed them only to users who were politically sympathetic to them. The results show a pivotal difference between the two accounts with the greatest participation of citizens regarding the formation of political communities: only one of facilitates the meeting between politically opposed voices, but they appeal to grievance, hostility and disqualification of the other as someone who has an opinion. Nevertheless, the dynamics of both accounts raise the same consequence: The fragmentation of the public sphere, the polarization and the dissolution of the essence of deliberative democracy.
publishDate	2019
dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv	2019-10-04T18:45:23Z
dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv	2019-10-04T18:45:23Z
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv	2019-06-14
dc.type.coarversion.fl_str_mv	http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
dc.type.coar.fl_str_mv	http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dc.type.driver.none.fl_str_mv	info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv	1692-2522
dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv	http://hdl.handle.net/11407/5415
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv	https://doi.org/10.22395/angr.v17n34a6
dc.identifier.eissn.none.fl_str_mv	2248-4086
dc.identifier.reponame.spa.fl_str_mv	reponame:Repositorio Institucional Universidad de Medellín
dc.identifier.instname.spa.fl_str_mv	instname:Universidad de Medellín
identifier_str_mv	1692-2522 2248-4086 reponame:Repositorio Institucional Universidad de Medellín instname:Universidad de Medellín
url	http://hdl.handle.net/11407/5415 https://doi.org/10.22395/angr.v17n34a6
dc.language.iso.none.fl_str_mv	spa eng
language	spa eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv	https://revistas.udem.edu.co/index.php/anagramas/article/view/2112
dc.relation.ispartof.none.fl_str_mv	Anagramas Rumbos y Sentidos de la Comunicación
dc.relation.ispartofseries.none.fl_str_mv	Anagramas Rumbos y Sentidos de la Comunicación, Universidad de Medellín; Vol. 17, Núm. 34 (2019)
dc.relation.haspart.none.fl_str_mv	Anagramas Rumbos y Sentidos de la Comunicación Vol. 17, Núm. 34 enero-junio 2019
dc.relation.citationvolume.none.fl_str_mv	17
dc.relation.citationissue.none.fl_str_mv	34
dc.relation.citationstartpage.none.fl_str_mv	115
dc.relation.citationendpage.none.fl_str_mv	134
dc.relation.references.none.fl_str_mv	Aparaschivei, P. (2011). The use of Nueva media in electoral campaigns: Analysis on the use of blogs, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in the 2009 Romanian presidential campaign. Journal of Media Research, 4(2), 39-60. Barredo, D., Arcila, C., y Arroyave, J. (2015). Influence of Social Networks in the Decision to Vote: An Exploratory Survey on the Ecuadorian Electorate. International Journal of E-Politics, 6(4), 15-34. doi: 10.4018/IJEP.2015100102 Blumler, J. y Gurevitch, M. (2001). The New Media and Our Political Communication Discontents: Democratizing Cyberspace. Information, Communication y Society 4(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1080/713768514 Bode, L., Hanna, A., Yang, J., y Shah, D. (2015). Candidate networks, citizen clusters, and political expression: Strategic Hashtag use in the 2010 midterms. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 149–165. doi:10.1177/0002716214563923 Borondo, J., Morales, A., Losada, J. y Benito, R. (2012). Characterizing and modeling an electoral campaign in the context of Twitter: 2011 Spanish Presidential election as a case study. Chaos, 22(2). doi:10.1063/1.4729139 Castells, M. (2009). Comunicación y poder. Madrid: Alianza. Cifuentes, C. y Pino, J. (2018). Conmigo o contra mí: análisis de la concordancia y estrategias temáticas del Centro Democrático en Twitter. Palabra Clave, 21(3), 885-916. doi: 10.5294/pacla.2018.21.3.10 Conover, M., Gonçalves, B., Flammini, A., y Menczer, F. (2012). Partisan asymmetries in online political activity. EPJ Data Science, 1(1), 1–19. doi:10.1140/epjds6 Dahlberg, L. (2007). Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: from consensus to contestation. Nueva Media y Society, 9(5), 827–847. doi: 10.1177/1461444807081228 Dahlberg, L. (2007). The Internet, deliberative democracy, and power: Radicalizing the public sphere. International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 3(1), 47-64. doi: 10.1386/macp.3.1.47/1 Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, Public Spheres, and Political Communication: Dispersion and Deliberation. Political Communication, 22(2), 147-162. doi: 0.1080/10584600590933160 Eveland, W. y Hively, M. (2009). Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 205–224. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.0141 Feller, A., Kuhnert, M., Sprenger, T. y Welpe, I. (2011). Divided they tweet: The network structure of political microbloggers and discussion topics. En N. Nicolov, J. G. Shanahan, L. Adamic, R. Baeza-Yates y S. Counts (Eds.), ICWSM 2011: Proceedings of the 5th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 474–477). Menlo Park: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). Recuperado de https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM11/paper/view/2759 Fredland, L., Hove, T. y Rojas, H. (2006). The networked public sphere. Javnost-The Public, 13(4), 5-26. doi: 10.1080/13183222.2006.11008922 García-Perdomo, V. (2017). Between peace and hate: Framing the 2014 Colombian presidential election on Twitter. Cuadernos.info, 41, 57-70. https://doi.org/10.7764/cdi.41.1241 Habermas, J. (1981). Historia y crítica de la opinión pública: la transformación estructural de la vida pública. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili. Han, B. (2014). En el enjambre. Barcelona: Herder. Hanna, A., Wells, C., Maurer, P., Shah, D., Friedland, L. y Matthews, J. (2013). Partisan alignments and political polarization online: A computational approach to understanding the French and US presidential elections. En I. Weber, A. M. Popescu y M. Pennacchiotti (Eds.), PLEAD 2013: Proceedings of the Politics, Elections, and Data Workshop (pp. 15–21). Nueva York: ACM. Recuperado de http://alexhanna.com/static/pdf/Hanna_etal.PLEAD2013.pdf Himelboim, I., McCreery, S. y Smith, M. (2013). Birds of a feather tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine cross-ideology exposure on Twitter. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(2), 40-60. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12001 Jenkins, H. (2008). Convergence culture: la cultura de la convergencia de los medios de comunicación. Barcelona: Paidós. Jungherr, A. (2016). Twitter use in election campaigns: A systematic literature review. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 13(1), 72-91. doi: 10.1080/19331681.2015.1132401 Jungherr, A., Schoen, H., y Jürgens, P. (2016). The mediation of politics through Twitter: An analysis of messages posted during the campaign for the German federal election 2013. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(1), 50–68. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12143 Kim, J., Wyatt, R., y Katz, E. (1999). News, Talk, Opinion, Participation: The Part Played by Conversation in Deliberative Democracy. Political Communication, 16(4), 361-385. doi:10.1080/105846099198541 Keane, J. (1997). Transformaciones estructurales de la esfera pública. Estudios Sociológicos, 43, 47-77. Krippendorff, K. (1989). Content analysis. En E. Barnouw, G. Gerbner, W. Schramm, T. L. Worth y L. Gross (Eds.), International encyclopedia of communication (pp. 403-407). Nueva York: Oxford University Press. Recuperado de http://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/226 Krippendorff, K. (1990). Metodología de análisis de contenido: teoría y práctica. Barcelona: Paidós. Kruikemeier, S. (2014). How political candidates use Twitter and the impact on votes. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 131-139. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.025 Manovich, L. (2005). El lenguaje de los nuevos medios de comunicación: la imagen en la era digital. Barcelona: Paidós. Morales, A.J., Borondo, J., Losada, J.C. y Benito, R.M. (2015). Measuring political polarization: Twitter shows the two sides of Venezuela. Chaos, 25(3), 1-9. doi:10.1063/1.4913758 Moy, P. y Gastil, J. (2006). Predicting Deliberative Conversation: The Impact of Discussion Networks, Media Use, and Political Cognitions. Political Communication, 23, 443–460. doi: 10.1080/10584600600977003 Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: the internet as a public sphere. Nueva Media and Society, 4(1), 9–27. doi: 10.1177/14614440222226244 Price, V., Cappella, J. y Nir, L. (2002). Does Disagreement Contribute to More Deliberative Opinion? Political Communication, 19(1), 95-112. doi:10.1080/105846002317246506 Raimondo, N., Reviglio, M. y Divisni, R. (2015). Esfera pública y redes sociales en Internet ¿Qué es lo nuevo en Facebook? Revista Mediterránea de Comunicación, 7(1), 211-229. doi: 10.14198/MEDCOM2016.7.1.12 Raynauld, V.y Greenberg, J. (2014). Tweet, click, vote: Twitter and the 2010 Ottawa municipal election. Journal of Information Technology y Politics, 11(4), 412–434. doi:10.1080/19331681.2014.935840 Sampedro, V., y Resina, J. (2010). Opinión pública y democracia deliberativa en la Sociedad Red. Ayer, 80 (4), 139-162. Recuperado de http://www.ciberdemocracia.net/articulos/Ayer80SampedroyResina.pdf Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Deliberation or dispute? An exploratory study examining dimensions of public opinion expression. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 11, 25–58. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/11.1.25 Scolari, C. (2008). Hipermediaciones: elementos para una teoría de la comunicación digital interactiva. Barcelona: Gedisa. Slimovich, A. (2016). Política y redes sociales en Argentina: el caso de los candidatos presidenciales de 2011 en Twitter. Signo y Pensamiento, 68, 86-100. doi:10.11144/Javeriana.syp35-68.prsa Stromer-Galley, J. (2003). Diversity of Political Conversation on the Internet: Users’ Perspectives. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication 8(3). doi: 10.1111/j.1083-101.2003.tb00215.x Sunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Recuperado de http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v14/14HarvJLTech753.pdf Sunstein, C. (2002). The Law of Group Polarization. Journal Of Political Philosophy, 10(2), 175-195. doi:10.1111/1467-9760.00148 Vergeer, M. y Hermans, L. (2013). Campaigning on Twitter: Microblogging and online social networking as campaign tools in the 2010 general elections in the Netherlands. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(4), 399-419. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12023 Waisbord, S. (2015). Diversidad, diferencia, tolerancia. Revisando utopías democráticas a la luz de la comunicación digital. En A. Rojas (Presidencia), Convergencias comunicativas. Mutaciones de la cultura y del poder. Conferencia Magistral del XV Encuentro Latinoamericano de Facultades de Comunicación Social, Medellín, Colombia. Wilhelm, A. G. (2000). Democracy in the digital age: Challenges to political life in cyberspace. Nueva York: Routledge. Zamora, R. y Zurutuza, C. (2014). Campaigning on Twitter: Towards the “Personal Style”” campaign to activate the political engagement during the 2011 spanish general elections. Communication y Society, 27(1), 83-106.
dc.rights.coar.fl_str_mv	http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.uri.*.fl_str_mv	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
rights_invalid_str_mv	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv	application/pdf PDF
dc.format.extent.none.fl_str_mv	p. 115-134
dc.format.medium.spa.fl_str_mv	Electrónico
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv	Lat: 06 15 00 N degrees minutes Lat: 6.2500 decimal degreesLong: 075 36 00 W degrees minutes Long: -75.6000 decimal degrees
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv	Universidad de Medellín
dc.publisher.faculty.none.fl_str_mv	Facultad de Comunicación
publisher.none.fl_str_mv	Universidad de Medellín
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv	Anagramas Rumbos y Sentidos de la Comunicación; Vol. 17 Núm. 34 (2019): Enero-Junio; 115-134
institution	Universidad de Medellín
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv	http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/1/Anagramas_339.pdf http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/2/Anagramas_339_infografia_esp.pdf http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/3/Anagramas_339_infografia_ing.pdf http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/4/Anagramas_339.pdf.jpg http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/5/Anagramas_339_infografia_esp.pdf.jpg http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/6/Anagramas_339_infografia_ing.pdf.jpg
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv	0b274f457af51e932aa0cd6485d592c6 8d28df82cdd60f2b78fd5d0cb3feb692 21b9c577812868e5537e691d5ef9fe16 6e24ad3346493a2a818589988b9848da 9c448ac8c33075e0ba6841b1d43bfc2d 69294f56e095d9e14e692cf38cb7485e
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv	MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv	Repositorio Institucional Universidad de Medellin
repository.mail.fl_str_mv	repositorio@udem.edu.co
_version_	1808481186388901888
spelling	2019-06-142019-10-04T18:45:23Z2019-10-04T18:45:23Z1692-2522http://hdl.handle.net/11407/5415https://doi.org/10.22395/angr.v17n34a62248-4086reponame:Repositorio Institucional Universidad de Medellíninstname:Universidad de MedellínIn the field of political communication, social networks have become an indispensable tool for election campaigns in recent years. In addition to opening communication and dialogue channels that are not available in other media and public spaces, these platforms promote the emergence of online communities that spawn conversations and exchange of political opinions. However, democratic participation in the digital age can lead to overcome certain obstacles, but also to deepen them. A content analysis technique to the messages published during the last twenty-five days of the 2015 mayoral campaign in the official Twitter accounts of the four candidates for Manizales Mayor’s Office, aimed at establishing if the followers of these accounts confronted their points of view with dissimilar perspectives, or if they expressed them only to users who were politically sympathetic to them. The results show a pivotal difference between the two accounts with the greatest participation of citizens regarding the formation of political communities: only one of facilitates the meeting between politically opposed voices, but they appeal to grievance, hostility and disqualification of the other as someone who has an opinion. Nevertheless, the dynamics of both accounts raise the same consequence: The fragmentation of the public sphere, the polarization and the dissolution of the essence of deliberative democracy.No campo da comunicação política, as redes sociais se converteram, nos últimos anos, em uma ferramenta indispensável nas campanhas eleitorais. Além de abrir canais de comunicação e diálogo indisponíveis em outros espaços midiáticos e públicos, essas plataformas promovem o surgimento de comunidades on-line que geram conversas e intercâmbio de opiniões políticas. No entanto, a participação democrática na era digital pode supor a superação de certos obstáculos, mas também seu aprofundamento. Esta pesquisa aplicou uma análise de conteúdo às mensagens publicadas durante os últimos 25 dias de campanha nas contas oficiais do Twitter dos quatro aspirantes à prefeitura de Manizales em 2015, com o objetivo de determinar se os seguidores desses perfis confrontaram seus pontos de vista com perspectivas dissímeis ou se os expressaram unicamente diante dos usuários politicamente afins. Os resultados apontam para uma diferença central entre as duas contas com maior participação dos cidadãos com respeito à formação de comunidades políticas: o encontro de vozes politicamente opostas é propiciado somente em uma, mas são vozes que apelam à queixa, à hostilidade e à desqualificação do outro como legítimo portador de uma opinião. Mas as dinâmicas das duas contam apresentam uma mesma consequência: a fragmentação da esfera pública, a polarização e a dissolução da essência da democracia deliberativa.En el campo de la comunicación política, las redes sociales se han convertido en los últimos años en una herramienta indispensable en las campañas electorales. Además de abrir canales de comunicación y diálogo no disponibles en otros espacios mediáticos y públicos, estas plataformas promueven el surgimiento de comunidades en línea que generan conversaciones e intercambio de opiniones políticas. Sin embargo, la participación democrática en la era digital puede suponer la superación de ciertos obstáculos, pero también su profundización. Esta investigación aplicó un análisis de contenido a los mensajes publicados durante los últimos veinticinco días de campaña en las cuentas oficiales de Twitter de los cuatro aspirantes a la alcaldía de Manizales de 2015, con el objetivo de determinar si los seguidores de estas cuentas confrontaron sus puntos de vista con perspectivas disímiles o si los expresaron únicamente frente a usuarios políticamente afines. Los resultados hablan de una diferencia central entre las dos cuentas con mayor participación de los ciudadanos en cuanto a la formación de comunidades políticas: en solo una se propicia el encuentro entre voces políticamente opuestas, pero son voces que apelan al agravio, a la hostilidad y a la descalificación del otro como legítimo portador de una opinión. Pero las dinámicas de las dos cuentas plantean una misma consecuencia: la fragmentación de la esfera pública, la polarización y la disolución de la esencia de la democracia deliberativa.https://revistas.udem.edu.co/index.php/anagramas/article/view/2112application/pdfPDFp. 115-134ElectrónicospaengUniversidad de MedellínFacultad de Comunicaciónhttps://revistas.udem.edu.co/index.php/anagramas/article/view/2112Anagramas Rumbos y Sentidos de la ComunicaciónAnagramas Rumbos y Sentidos de la Comunicación, Universidad de Medellín; Vol. 17, Núm. 34 (2019)Anagramas Rumbos y Sentidos de la Comunicación Vol. 17, Núm. 34 enero-junio 20191734115134Aparaschivei, P. (2011). The use of Nueva media in electoral campaigns: Analysis on the use of blogs, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in the 2009 Romanian presidential campaign. Journal of Media Research, 4(2), 39-60.Barredo, D., Arcila, C., y Arroyave, J. (2015). Influence of Social Networks in the Decision to Vote: An Exploratory Survey on the Ecuadorian Electorate. International Journal of E-Politics, 6(4), 15-34. doi: 10.4018/IJEP.2015100102Blumler, J. y Gurevitch, M. (2001). The New Media and Our Political Communication Discontents: Democratizing Cyberspace. Information, Communication y Society 4(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1080/713768514Bode, L., Hanna, A., Yang, J., y Shah, D. (2015). Candidate networks, citizen clusters, and political expression: Strategic Hashtag use in the 2010 midterms. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 149–165. doi:10.1177/0002716214563923Borondo, J., Morales, A., Losada, J. y Benito, R. (2012). Characterizing and modeling an electoral campaign in the context of Twitter: 2011 Spanish Presidential election as a case study. Chaos, 22(2). doi:10.1063/1.4729139Castells, M. (2009). Comunicación y poder. Madrid: Alianza.Cifuentes, C. y Pino, J. (2018). Conmigo o contra mí: análisis de la concordancia y estrategias temáticas del Centro Democrático en Twitter. Palabra Clave, 21(3), 885-916. doi: 10.5294/pacla.2018.21.3.10Conover, M., Gonçalves, B., Flammini, A., y Menczer, F. (2012). Partisan asymmetries in online political activity. EPJ Data Science, 1(1), 1–19. doi:10.1140/epjds6Dahlberg, L. (2007). Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: from consensus to contestation. Nueva Media y Society, 9(5), 827–847. doi: 10.1177/1461444807081228Dahlberg, L. (2007). The Internet, deliberative democracy, and power: Radicalizing the public sphere. International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 3(1), 47-64. doi: 10.1386/macp.3.1.47/1Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, Public Spheres, and Political Communication: Dispersion and Deliberation. Political Communication, 22(2), 147-162. doi: 0.1080/10584600590933160Eveland, W. y Hively, M. (2009). Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 205–224. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.0141Feller, A., Kuhnert, M., Sprenger, T. y Welpe, I. (2011). Divided they tweet: The network structure of political microbloggers and discussion topics. En N. Nicolov, J. G. Shanahan, L. Adamic, R. Baeza-Yates y S. Counts (Eds.), ICWSM 2011: Proceedings of the 5th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 474–477). Menlo Park: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). Recuperado de https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM11/paper/view/2759Fredland, L., Hove, T. y Rojas, H. (2006). The networked public sphere. Javnost-The Public, 13(4), 5-26. doi: 10.1080/13183222.2006.11008922García-Perdomo, V. (2017). Between peace and hate: Framing the 2014 Colombian presidential election on Twitter. Cuadernos.info, 41, 57-70. https://doi.org/10.7764/cdi.41.1241Habermas, J. (1981). Historia y crítica de la opinión pública: la transformación estructural de la vida pública. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.Han, B. (2014). En el enjambre. Barcelona: Herder.Hanna, A., Wells, C., Maurer, P., Shah, D., Friedland, L. y Matthews, J. (2013). Partisan alignments and political polarization online: A computational approach to understanding the French and US presidential elections. En I. Weber, A. M. Popescu y M. Pennacchiotti (Eds.), PLEAD 2013: Proceedings of the Politics, Elections, and Data Workshop (pp. 15–21). Nueva York: ACM. Recuperado de http://alexhanna.com/static/pdf/Hanna_etal.PLEAD2013.pdfHimelboim, I., McCreery, S. y Smith, M. (2013). Birds of a feather tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine cross-ideology exposure on Twitter. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(2), 40-60. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12001Jenkins, H. (2008). Convergence culture: la cultura de la convergencia de los medios de comunicación. Barcelona: Paidós.Jungherr, A. (2016). Twitter use in election campaigns: A systematic literature review. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 13(1), 72-91. doi: 10.1080/19331681.2015.1132401Jungherr, A., Schoen, H., y Jürgens, P. (2016). The mediation of politics through Twitter: An analysis of messages posted during the campaign for the German federal election 2013. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(1), 50–68. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12143Kim, J., Wyatt, R., y Katz, E. (1999). News, Talk, Opinion, Participation: The Part Played by Conversation in Deliberative Democracy. Political Communication, 16(4), 361-385. doi:10.1080/105846099198541Keane, J. (1997). Transformaciones estructurales de la esfera pública. Estudios Sociológicos, 43, 47-77.Krippendorff, K. (1989). Content analysis. En E. Barnouw, G. Gerbner, W. Schramm, T. L. Worth y L. Gross (Eds.), International encyclopedia of communication (pp. 403-407). Nueva York: Oxford University Press. Recuperado de http://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/226Krippendorff, K. (1990). Metodología de análisis de contenido: teoría y práctica. Barcelona: Paidós.Kruikemeier, S. (2014). How political candidates use Twitter and the impact on votes. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 131-139. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.025Manovich, L. (2005). El lenguaje de los nuevos medios de comunicación: la imagen en la era digital. Barcelona: Paidós.Morales, A.J., Borondo, J., Losada, J.C. y Benito, R.M. (2015). Measuring political polarization: Twitter shows the two sides of Venezuela. Chaos, 25(3), 1-9. doi:10.1063/1.4913758Moy, P. y Gastil, J. (2006). Predicting Deliberative Conversation: The Impact of Discussion Networks, Media Use, and Political Cognitions. Political Communication, 23, 443–460. doi: 10.1080/10584600600977003Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: the internet as a public sphere. Nueva Media and Society, 4(1), 9–27. doi: 10.1177/14614440222226244Price, V., Cappella, J. y Nir, L. (2002). Does Disagreement Contribute to More Deliberative Opinion? Political Communication, 19(1), 95-112. doi:10.1080/105846002317246506Raimondo, N., Reviglio, M. y Divisni, R. (2015). Esfera pública y redes sociales en Internet ¿Qué es lo nuevo en Facebook? Revista Mediterránea de Comunicación, 7(1), 211-229. doi: 10.14198/MEDCOM2016.7.1.12Raynauld, V.y Greenberg, J. (2014). Tweet, click, vote: Twitter and the 2010 Ottawa municipal election. Journal of Information Technology y Politics, 11(4), 412–434. doi:10.1080/19331681.2014.935840Sampedro, V., y Resina, J. (2010). Opinión pública y democracia deliberativa en la Sociedad Red. Ayer, 80 (4), 139-162. Recuperado de http://www.ciberdemocracia.net/articulos/Ayer80SampedroyResina.pdfScheufele, D. A. (1999). Deliberation or dispute? An exploratory study examining dimensions of public opinion expression. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 11, 25–58. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/11.1.25Scolari, C. (2008). Hipermediaciones: elementos para una teoría de la comunicación digital interactiva. Barcelona: Gedisa.Slimovich, A. (2016). Política y redes sociales en Argentina: el caso de los candidatos presidenciales de 2011 en Twitter. Signo y Pensamiento, 68, 86-100. doi:10.11144/Javeriana.syp35-68.prsaStromer-Galley, J. (2003). Diversity of Political Conversation on the Internet: Users’ Perspectives. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication 8(3). doi: 10.1111/j.1083-101.2003.tb00215.xSunstein, C. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Recuperado de http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v14/14HarvJLTech753.pdfSunstein, C. (2002). The Law of Group Polarization. Journal Of Political Philosophy, 10(2), 175-195. doi:10.1111/1467-9760.00148Vergeer, M. y Hermans, L. (2013). Campaigning on Twitter: Microblogging and online social networking as campaign tools in the 2010 general elections in the Netherlands. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(4), 399-419. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12023Waisbord, S. (2015). Diversidad, diferencia, tolerancia. Revisando utopías democráticas a la luz de la comunicación digital. En A. Rojas (Presidencia), Convergencias comunicativas. Mutaciones de la cultura y del poder. Conferencia Magistral del XV Encuentro Latinoamericano de Facultades de Comunicación Social, Medellín, Colombia.Wilhelm, A. G. (2000). Democracy in the digital age: Challenges to political life in cyberspace. Nueva York: Routledge.Zamora, R. y Zurutuza, C. (2014). Campaigning on Twitter: Towards the “Personal Style”” campaign to activate the political engagement during the 2011 spanish general elections. Communication y Society, 27(1), 83-106.http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2Anagramas Rumbos y Sentidos de la Comunicación; Vol. 17 Núm. 34 (2019): Enero-Junio; 115-134Public spherePolitical communicationTwitterInteractionPolarizationFragmentationPolitical CommunitiesDemocracyEsfera públicaComunicação políticaTwitterInteraçãoPolarizaçãoFragmentaçãoComunidades PolíticasDemocraciaEsfera públicaComunicación políticaTwitterInteracciónPolarizaciónFragmentaciónComunidades PolíticasDemocraciaTwitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in ManizalesFormação de comunidades políticas afins e dissímeis no Twitter durante a campanha eleitoral à prefeitura de Manizales em 2015Formación de comunidades políticas afines y disímiles en Twitter durante la campaña electoral a la alcaldía de Manizales en 2015López Londoño, Luis Miguel; Universidad de ManizalesLópez Londoño, Luis MiguelComunidad Universidad de MedellínLat: 06 15 00 N degrees minutes Lat: 6.2500 decimal degreesLong: 075 36 00 W degrees minutes Long: -75.6000 decimal degreesMedellíninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1ORIGINALAnagramas_339.pdfAnagramas_339.pdfArtículoapplication/pdf981502http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/1/Anagramas_339.pdf0b274f457af51e932aa0cd6485d592c6MD51Anagramas_339_infografia_esp.pdfAnagramas_339_infografia_esp.pdfInfografía en españolapplication/pdf229337http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/2/Anagramas_339_infografia_esp.pdf8d28df82cdd60f2b78fd5d0cb3feb692MD52Anagramas_339_infografia_ing.pdfAnagramas_339_infografia_ing.pdfInfografía en inglésapplication/pdf228926http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/3/Anagramas_339_infografia_ing.pdf21b9c577812868e5537e691d5ef9fe16MD53THUMBNAILAnagramas_339.pdf.jpgAnagramas_339.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg9420http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/4/Anagramas_339.pdf.jpg6e24ad3346493a2a818589988b9848daMD54Anagramas_339_infografia_esp.pdf.jpgAnagramas_339_infografia_esp.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg13575http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/5/Anagramas_339_infografia_esp.pdf.jpg9c448ac8c33075e0ba6841b1d43bfc2dMD55Anagramas_339_infografia_ing.pdf.jpgAnagramas_339_infografia_ing.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg13445http://repository.udem.edu.co/bitstream/11407/5415/6/Anagramas_339_infografia_ing.pdf.jpg69294f56e095d9e14e692cf38cb7485eMD5611407/5415oai:repository.udem.edu.co:11407/54152019-11-13 23:00:28.037Repositorio Institucional Universidad de Medellinrepositorio@udem.edu.co

Twitter formation of like-minded and dissimilar political communities during the 2015 mayoral campaign in Manizales

Publicaciones similares