Impact of Social Media & Traditional News Media on Political Interest & Participation: Age, Apuntes de Publicidad y Promoción

¡Descarga Impact of Social Media & Traditional News Media on Political Interest & Participation: Age y más Apuntes en PDF de Publicidad y Promoción solo en Docsity! http://ejc.sagepub.com/ Communication European Journal of http://ejc.sagepub.com/content/28/1/19 The online version of this article can be found at: DOI: 10.1177/0267323112465369 2013 28: 19European Journal of Communication Kristoffer Holt, Adam Shehata, Jesper Strömbäck and Elisabet Ljungberg political interest and participation: Do social media function as leveller? Age and the effects of news media attention and social media use on Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com can be found at:European Journal of CommunicationAdditional services and information for http://ejc.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts: http://ejc.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions: http://ejc.sagepub.com/content/28/1/19.refs.htmlCitations: What is This? - Feb 11, 2013Version of Record >> by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from European Journal of Communication 28(1) 19 –34 © The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0267323112465369 ejc.sagepub.com Age and the effects of news media attention and social media use on political interest and participation: Do social media function as leveller? Kristoffer Holt, Adam Shehata, Jesper Strömbäck and Elisabet Ljungberg Mid Sweden University, Sweden Abstract This article investigates how media use differs across age groups- and whether this matters for people’s inclination to participate politically. More specifically, the study investigates the impact of social media use for political purposes and of attention to political news in traditional media, on political interest and offline political participation. The findings, based on a four-wave panel study conducted during the 2010 Swedish national election campaign, show (1) clear differences in media use between age groups and (2) that both political social media use and attention to political news in traditional media increase political engagement over time. Thus, this study suggests that frequent social media use among young citizens can function as a leveller in terms of motivating political participation. Keywords Media use, political participation, social media, young citizens Introduction A key issue in political communication is the relationship between patterns of media use, political motivation and political participation. A core assumption is that in a democracy, people should follow news and current affairs, be politically interested and participate in political processes (Habermas, 1989). Major differences between groups of people in Corresponding author: Kristoffer Holt, Department of Information Technology and Media, Mid Sweden University, Holmgatan 10, Sundsvall, S-851 70, Sweden. Email: kristoffer.holt@miun.se 465369 EJC28110.1177/0267323112465369European Journal of CommunicationHolt et al. 2013 Article by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from 22 European Journal of Communication 28(1) generations seems to be how active they are in their interaction with people and content online. Hence, we hypothesize that younger citizens are more frequent users of social media for political purposes than older citizens: H1: Young citizens are more frequent users of social media than older citizens. H2: Young citizens are less frequent users of traditional news media than older citizens. The media use–political engagement relationship Many studies have attempted to explain what causes some young citizens to partici- pate politically, while others do not participate (Bakker and de Vreese, 2011; Bennett, 1997; Buckingham, 2008; Buckingham and Willett, 2006; Livingstone, 2007; Livingstone et al., 2005; Loader, 2007; Masters et al., 2004; Mesch and Coleman, 2007; Olsson and Dahlgren, 2010; Zukin et al., 2006). One key issue that has been widely discussed is the extent to which various forms of media use have a causal impact on political engagement. Several studies have in fact found consistent positive relationships between traditional news media use – such as television news exposure and newspaper reading – and different aspects of political involvement (Dimitrova et al., 2011; Newton, 1999; Norris, 2000; Strömbäck and Shehata, 2010). Correspondingly, since the arrival of the Internet, many assumptions have been made about how it may reshape the conditions for participation and stimulate active partaking in politics (Lévy, 1997; Lévy and Council of Europe, 2001; Rheingold, 2002). However, research into the actual outcome has mostly failed to demonstrate clear signs of increased or improved participation as a result of the Internet becoming more incorporated into people’s lives (Boulianne, 2009; Coleman and Blumler, 2009; Dahlberg, 2007; Dahlgren, 2009; Hindman, 2009; Holt and Karlsson, 2011; Papacharissi, 2002; Scheufele and Nisbet, 2002; Ward et al., 2003; Wojcieszak and Mutz, 2009). In a recent meta-study, however, investigating existing research about the Internet and its effects on political engagement, Boulianne (2009) found that while the effects found in different studies may be small, they are mostly positive, and they seem to be increasing across time. Furthermore, the advent of social media (Web 2.0) has led to renewed hopes that the technological ease of connecting with others and of sharing content online would ignite political engagement both on- and offline (Bruns, 2008; Chu, 2010; Downey and Fenton, 2003; Jenkins, 2006). However, this optimism has also invited critical remarks, and scholars have emphasized the need to go beyond assertions towards empirical research for a fuller understanding of how social media influence demo- cratic participation (Hindman, 2009; Rebillard and Touboul, 2010; Van Dijck and Nieborg, 2009). Bakker and de Vreese suggest that studying young people’s ‘speci- fied forms of Internet use’ will shed light on what makes young people participate (Bakker and de Vreese, 2011). While Scheufele and Nisbet (2002: 55) found that respondents who mainly used the web for entertainment purposes were ‘less likely to feel efficacious about their potential role in the democratic process and also knew less about facts relevant to current events’, Bakker and de Vreese (2011) found a positive relation between other, communicative and non-informational, forms of Internet use by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from Holt et al. 23 and political participation among young citizens. Use of interactive web activities, like chat-forums, was strongly related to political participation among young people (Bakker and de Vreese, 2011). In a study of blog readers, Gil de Zúniga et al. (2009) found, however, that only print and TV news use predicted offline political participa- tion, while use of online news did not. Correlations between certain forms of media use, on the one hand, and political engagement, on the other hand, are however not sufficient for making strong empirical claims about causal relations (Boulianne, 2011). More specifically, a positive relationship between media use and participation could also be the result of (1) a spurious relation- ship due to a third common factor, or (2) reversed causation, whereby those citizens who are politically active are more likely to seek out additional information from various media sources. To rule out such alternative explanations, we will in this study make use of panel data, which will allow us to exercise a stronger – but not full – control over the time-order criteria of causality. The key argument suggested by our overall hypothesis holds that attention to political news in traditional media, as well as use of social media for political purposes, has a causal effect on interest and participation. We expect these two forms of media use to exert a causal impact on political engagement due both to the type of content involved as well as the level of personal interest assumed to underlie these types of media use. According to Norris’s virtuous circle theory, political information provided by the media promotes civic engagement through increasing political knowledge and awareness among citizens (Norris, 2002b: 11). Eveland (2005) furthermore argued that attentive forms of news media use – in contrast to mere exposure – should be related to participation in public life, because they increase understanding of the political ‘implications’ of the news (Eveland, 2005: 234). Similarly, social media use for political purposes both exposes an individual to political information, and suggests a certain motivation to pro- cess this kind of content in the first place. Based on similar logic, Dimitrova et al. (2011) argued that a combination of site characteristics and personal motivations among the users shape the mobilizing potential of different websites – arguing that ‘the primary function of social media is to connect and as well as involve and facilitate voter mobili- zation’ (Dimitrova et al., 2011: 7; see also Lupia and Philpot, 2005). Even though panel studies that go beyond cross-sectional correlations between online media and political engagement are few, there are important exceptions. For instance, Boulianne (2011) recently found, based on panel data, that use of online news media had a positive casual effect on political interest, concluding that ‘use of online news sources transforms people into interested and … engaged citizens to a greater degree than online news serves as a tool for those already interested in politics’ (Boulianne, 2011: 157). Focusing on the impact of traditional news media, Strömbäck and Shehata (2010) similarly concluded that there are causal but reciprocal positive relations between attention to political news and political interest. Looking at various forms of online media using panel data, Dimitrova et al. (2011) found that use of party websites and social media for political purposes had a causal impact on offline political participation. Furthermore, a recent panel study of media use among American adolescents revealed consistent posi- tive effects of news and political discussion online on civic and political participation, concluding that the ‘findings underscore the potential of digital media, especially blogs by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from 24 European Journal of Communication 28(1) and other interactive media outlets, to mobilize young people into more active engagement with civic and political life’ (Lee et al., 2012: 19; see also Kahne et al., 2012). Consequently, we expect that attention to political news in traditional media, as well as use of social media for political purposes, will have positive effects on political interest and offline participation: H3: Attention to political news in traditional media will have a positive effect on political interest. H4: Use of social media for political purposes will have a positive effect on political interest. H5: Attention to political news in traditional media will have a positive effect on offline participation. H6: Use of social media for political purposes will have a positive effect on offline participation. To the extent that the six hypotheses outlined above are supported we can con- clude that traditional news media and social media serve different functions when it comes to influencing political interest and participation across age groups. While traditional news media may increase levels of engagement primarily among older segments of the population, social media might stimulate engagement among younger citizens. Methodology and data To test the hypotheses a panel study was conducted in four waves during the 2010 Swedish election campaign. The study was conducted by the Centre for Political Communication Research at Mid Sweden University, in cooperation with the polling institute Synovate. The sample was drawn using stratified probability sampling from a database of approximately 28,000 citizens from Synovate’s pool of web survey partici- pants. The participants included are recruited continuously using both random digit dial- ling and mail surveys based on random probability samples. Approximately 5% of those who are initially contacted and invited agree to be part of this pool of respondents. As the invitations are not done for this specific study, but rather for the purpose of doing market research, the common bias towards politically interested citizens is to some extent reduced. The survey is based on a sample of 4010 respondents aged 18–74 from this pool, stratified by gender, age, county size, political interest and Internet use, in order to be as representative of the Swedish population within this age span as possible. Respondents were asked to complete a web survey four times during a period of approximately five months leading up to the election. Wave 1 of the panel took place in May (3–20 May); wave 2 in mid-June (14–23 June); wave 3 in mid-August (16–23 August); and wave 4 immediately after election day (20–27 September). In order to utilize the strength of the panel data, the regression analyses are based on respondents who completed all four questionnaires, resulting in a cooperation rate of 35% (COOP2, AAPOR). by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from Holt et al. 27 corresponding difference is 2.48 for newspapers (t = −11.85, p < .000) and 2.63 for political radio news (t = −11.51, p < .000). In sum then, younger citizens more frequently use social media for political purposes while older citizens turn their attention to tradi- tional media for political news. Table 3 presents results speaking to hypotheses 3–6 regarding the effects of social media use and attention to political news in traditional news media on political interest and participation, which concerns the ‘potency’ side of the mobilization argument (Sotirovic and McLeod, 2009). By using the lagged dependent variables on the right- hand side of the regression equation we estimate how media use affects changes in political interest (model 1) and participation (model 2) over time, while also control- ling for several other background variables. Hypotheses 3 and 4, predicting positive effects of attention to political news and use of social media for political purposes on political interest respectively, are tested in the first regression model presented in column 1. Both forms of media use increase political interest during the election campaign. The more people use social media for political purposes, and the more they pay attention to political news in traditional news media, the more their levels of political interest increase during the election campaign. Thus, both hypotheses 3 and 4 are supported by the data. Finally, hypotheses 5 and 6 similarly predicted that social media use for political pur- poses and attention to political news in traditional media would have positive effects on offline participation. Both these hypotheses are supported as well, as can be seen by the Table 1. Political interest and offline participation by age (in percentages). 18–33 years 34–45 years 46–64 years 65–74 years Political interest (wave 1) – percentage ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ interested Interest in politics 50.9 49.1 56 78.6 Interest in the election campaign 50.4 46.5 55.1 73.9 Offline participation (wave 1) – at least once during the last 12 months Signed a petition 35.8 35.8 32.3 30.5 Contacted a politician 5.9 8.5 11.6 13.5 Written a letter to the editor 4.4 6.8 11.3 12.3 Argued for your opinion in a political discussion 36.1 31.7 31.7 27.9 Contacted mass media 3.4 5.8 7.9 8.5 Participated in a demonstration 7.2 5.0 5.1 5.3 Attended a political meeting 6.2 5.8 9.4 13.5 Tried to convince others to vote for a political party 6.2 5.8 9.4 13.5 N (unweighted) 601 418 967 541 Notes: Total N = 2527. The sample is weighted on gender, age, type of residence, education, political interest, general Internet use and voting choice in the 2006 national election. by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from 28 European Journal of Communication 28(1) Table 2. Traditional and social media use by age (percentages and mean values). 18–33 years 34–45 years 46–64 years 65–74 years Social media use (wave 1) – at least once during the last month (%) Read blog about politics and current affairs 33.1 30.6 19.4 21.4 Wrote text about politics or current affairs on my own blog 5.7 2.2 2.0 2.1 Commented or discussed politics or current affairs on the Internet 13.8 12.3 8.1 7.0 Followed a politician or party on Twitter 3.6 3.3 1.8 1.5 Followed a politician or party on Facebook 7.7 6.3 3.9 5.0 Followed a politician or party on YouTube 4.2 3.6 2.5 2.9 Social media index (0–19, mean values) 1.08 1.06 0.59 0.56 N (unweighted) 601 418 685 418 Attention to political news in traditional media (waves 1–3) – mean values Television news (0–12, α = 0.90) 5.34 5.80 6.59 8.10 Newspapers (0–12, α = 0.89) 5.23 5.80 6.10 7.71 Radio (0–12, α = 0.89) 3.58 4.29 5.02 6.21 N (unweighted) 357 256 685 418 Notes: Total N = 2527. The sample is weighted on gender, age, type of residence, education, political interest, general Internet use and voting choice in the 2006 national election. Each measure of attention to political news is an additive index based on responses to the same question in waves 1, 2 and 3. final column of Table 3. Thus, both political social media use and political news attention increase offline participation, even when controlling for prior levels of offline participation. To illustrate the main findings of the study, Figure 1 summarizes the differential mobilization across age groups based on the results of the regression models in Table 3 as well as the previously presented data on media use differences. Thus, Figure 1 accounts both for the size of the media effects (potency) as well as differences in usage (dosage), based on conditional level importance estimates (Achen, 1982) – where the y-axis repre- sents the size of the impact measured in units of the dependent variable. The two upper graphs illustrate the influence of traditional media on interest and participation across age groups, clearly capturing the stronger influence of traditional media among older citizens. The lower graphs show the opposite impact of social media use, where younger citizens are mobilized to a larger extent than older. Comparisons of the absolute size of by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from Holt et al. 29 the traditional news and social media effects are not possible however, due to differences in question wordings and scale construction between the two media use measures. Rather, the figure illustrates the differential impact of traditional and social media use among various groups. It is also important to note that these differential effects are due to variations in dosage – levels of media use – assuming that the potency of the media effects are constant across age groups. Conclusions In a recent overview of the research field, Mossberger (2009: 175) argued that the ‘greater presence of young people in internet politics increases political participation among the young, and if these trends are sustained, they may result in greater overall levels of political interest and activity in the future’. The present study has put this claim to a critical test by investigating age and the effects of news media attention and social media use for political purposes, focusing particularly on whether the use of social media for political purposes may function as a leveller of political interest and participation between younger and older citizens. Overall, we find substantial support for the idea of such differential mobilization effects across age groups. In sum, our results show that there are, indeed, differences between younger and older citizens in terms of both our dependent variables – political interest and offline political participation. Both political interest and offline political participation increase with age. The only exceptions are signing a petition, participating in a demonstration or arguing for one’s opinion. These, overall more expressive, political activities are more common among younger citizens than older. Still, the general pattern is that political Table 3. Effects of media use on political interest and offline participation (OLS). Political interest Offline participation Gender (ref. ‘women’) −.00 (.04) −.32** (.10) Age −.01** (.00) −.02*** (.00) Education (ref. ‘elementary school’) High school .01 (.07) .09 (.16) University .05 (.07) −.00 (.17) Income −.01 (.01) −.04 (.03) Political interestt-3 .51*** (.02) .14** (.05) Offline participationt-3 .02** (.01) .49*** (.02) Attention to political news in traditional media t-3 .07*** (.00) .03** (.01) Social media t-3 .04** (.01) .20*** (.03) Adjusted R2 .72 .54 N 1716 1387 Note: Estimates are unstandardized OLS coefficients with standard errors in parentheses. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from 32 European Journal of Communication 28(1) Hence, younger people’s greater use of social media for political purposes may compen- sate for their lower levels of attention to political news in traditional news media. In this respect, social media could serve as a leveller of political interest and offline political participation between younger and older citizens. In sum, our results suggest that there are perhaps fewer reasons to worry than suggested by many accounts lamenting the declining use of traditional news media. Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. References Achen C (1982) Interpreting and Using Regression. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Bakardjieva M (2010) The Internet and subactivism. In: Olsson T and Dahlgren P (eds) Young People, ICTs and Democracy. Gothenburg: Nordicom, pp. 129–145. Bakker TP and de Vreese CH (2011) Good news for the future? Young people, internet use, and political participation. Communication Research 38(4): 451–470. Bennett SE (1997) Why young Americans hate politics, and what we should do about it. PS: Political Science and Politics 30(1): 47–53. Boulianne S (2009) Does internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication 26(2): 193–211. Boulianne S (2011) Stimulating or reinforcing political interest: Using panel data to examine reciprocal effects between news media and political interest. Political Communication 28(2): 147–162. Bruns A (2008) Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond : From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang. Buckingham D (2008) Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Buckingham D and Willett R (2006) Digital Generations: Children, Young People, and New Media. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Chu D (2010) In search of prosumption: Youth and the new media in Hong Kong. First Monday 15(2-1). Available at: firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/ view/2772. Coleman S (2007) How democracies have disengaged from young people. In: Loader BD (ed.) Young Citizens in the Digital Age: Political Engagement, Young People and New Media. New York: Routledge, pp. 166–185. Coleman S and Blumler JG (2009) The Internet and Democratic Citizenship: Theory, Practice and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dahl RA (1998) On Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Dahl RA (2006) On Political Equality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Dahlberg L (2007) Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: From consensus to contestation. New Media and Society 9(5): 827–847. Dahlgren P (2009) Media and Political Engagement: Citizens, Communication, and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Delli Carpini MX (2000) Gen.com: Youth, civic engagement, and the new information environ- ment. Political Communication 17(4): 341–349. Delli Carpini MX (2004) Mediating democratic engagement: The impact of communications on citizens’ involvement in political life. In: Kaid LL (ed.) Handbook of Political Communication Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 395–434. by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from Holt et al. 33 Delli Carpini MX and Keeter S (1997) What Americans Know About Politics and Why it Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Dimitrova DV, Shehata A, Strömbäck J and Nord LW (2011) The effects of digital media on political knowledge and participation in election campaigns: Evidence from panel data. Communication Research 2 November. Downey J and Fenton N (2003) New media, counter publicity and the public sphere. New Media and Society 5(2): 185–202. Eurostat (2010) 80% of young internet users in the EU27 active on social media. No. 193/2010. Eurostat. Eveland WP (2005) Information processing strategies in mass communication research. In: Dunwoody S, Becker LB, McLeod DM and Kosicki GM (eds) The Evolution of Key Mass Communication Concepts. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, pp. 217–250. Finkel SE (1995) Causal Analysis with Panel Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gil de Zúniga H, Puig-I-Abril E and Rojas H (2009) Weblogs, traditional sources online and politi- cal participation: An assessment of how the internet is changing the political environment. New Media and Society 11(4): 553–574. Habermas J (1989) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Henn M and Foard N (2012) Young people, political participation and trust in Britain. Parliamentary Affairs 65(1): 47–67. Hindman MS (2009) The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Holt K and Karlsson M (2011) Edited participation: Comparing editorial influence on traditional and participatory online newspapers in Sweden. Javnost/The Public 18(2): 19–36. Jenkins H (2006) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press. Kahne J, Middaugh E, Lee N-J and Feezell JT (2012) Youth online activity and exposure to diverse perspectives. New Media and Society 14(3): 492–512. Kimberlee RH (2002) Why don’t British young people vote at general elections? Journal of Youth Studies 5(1): 85–98. Lee N-J, Shah DV and McLeod JM (2012) Processes of political socialization: A communication mediation approach to youth civic engagement. Communication Research. Epub ahead of print 28 February 2012. Lenhart A, Purcell K, Smith A and Zickuhr K (2010) Social Media and Mobile Internet Use Among Teens and Young Adults. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Lévy P (1997) Collective Intelligence: Mankind’s Emerging World in Cyberspace. New York: Plenum Trade. Lévy P and Council of Europe (2001) Cyberculture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Livingstone S (2007) The challenge of engaging youth online. European Journal of Communication 22(2): 165–184. Livingstone S, Bober M and Helsper EJ (2005) Active participation or just more information? Information, Communication and Society 8(3): 287–314. Loader B (2007) Young Citizens in the Digital Age: Political Engagement, Young People, and New Media. London: Routledge. Lupia A and Philpot TS (2005) Views from inside the net: How websites affect young adults’ political interest. Journal of Politics 67(4): 1122–1142. Masters Z, Macintosh A and Smith E (2004) Young people and e-democracy: Creating a cul- ture of participation. In: Traunmüller R (ed.) Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 15–22. by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from 34 European Journal of Communication 28(1) Mesch GS and Coleman S (2007) New media and new voters: Young people, the Internet and the 2005 election campaign. In: Loader BD (ed.) Young Citizens in the Digital Age: Political Engagement, Young People and New Media. New York: Routledge, pp. 35–47. Mossberger K (2009) Toward digital citizenship: Addressing inequality in the information age. In: Chadwick A and Howard PN (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics. New York: Routledge. Newton K (1999) Mass media effects: Mobilization or media malaise? British Journal of Political Science 29(4): 577–599. Norris P (2000) A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Norris P (2002a) Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Norris P (2002b) Tuned out voters? Media impact on campaign learning. In: Politeia Conference. Olsson T and Dahlgren P (2010) Young People, ICTs and Democracy: Theories, Policies, Identities, and Websites. Göteborg: Nordicom, University of Gothenburg. Palfrey J and Gasser U (2008) Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. New York: Basic Books. Papacharissi Z (2002) The virtual sphere. New Media and Society 4(1): 9–27. Rebillard F and Touboul A (2010) Promises unfulfilled? Journalism 2.0, user participation and editorial policy on newspaper websites. Media, Culture and Society 32(2): 323–334. Rheingold H (2002) Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Perseus. Scheufele DA and Nisbet MC (2002) Being a citizen online. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 7(3): 55–75. Sotirovic M and McLeod DM (2009) Media coverage of U.S. elections: Persistence of tradition. In: Strömbäck J and Kaid LL (eds) The Handbook of Election News Coverage around the World. New York: Routledge. Strömbäck J and Johansson B (2007) Electoral cycles and the mobilizing effects of elections: A longitudinal study of the Swedish case. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 17(1): 79–99. Strömbäck J and Shehata A (2010) Media malaise or a virtuous circle? Exploring the causal relationships between news media exposure, political news attention and political interest. European Journal of Political Research 49(5): 575–597. Van Deth JW (2000) Interesting but irrelevant: Social capital and the saliency of politics in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research 37(2): 115–147. Van Dijck J and Nieborg D (2009) Wikinomics and its discontents: A critical analysis of Web 2.0 business manifestos. New Media and Society 11(5): 855–874. Verba S, Schlozman KL and Brady HE (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ward S, Gibson R and Lusoli W (2003) Online participation and mobilisation in Britain: Hype, hope and reality. Parliamentary Affairs 56(4): 652–668. Wattenberg MP (2004) The changing presidential media environment. Presidential Studies Quarterly 34(3): 557–572. Wojcieszak ME and Mutz DC (2009) Online groups and political discourse: Do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement? Journal of Communication 59(1): 40–56. Xenos M and Moy P (2007) Direct and differential effects of the internet on political and civic engagement. Journal of Communication 57(4): 704–718. Zukin C, Keeter S, Andolina M et al. (2006) A New Engagement? Political Participation, Civic Life, and the Changing American Citizen. Oxford: Oxford University Press. by guest on March 23, 2014ejc.sagepub.comDownloaded from