IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tec/journl/v12y2020i1p277-289.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Modern Online Democracy: An Evaluation of Social Media's Ability to Facilitate Political Discourse

Author

Listed:
  • Hojun Choi

    (Chadwick International)

Abstract

In an ideal democracy, the opinions of individuals form the basis of societal decision-making as they exercise critical thinking and take part in political discourse to form opinions they take to the voting booths. This formation of opinions, however, is increasingly being affected by social media platforms that provide features that affect with who and in what way people interact with each other. This study will evaluate these effects that social media can have on the formation of political opinions by examining the two representative platforms Facebook and Twitter. These platforms will be evaluated for their abilities to allow freedom of expression, expose users to diverse opinions, and promote user engagement in civil political discussion. Overall, the effects are mixed due to a number of factors, and taking these conclusions into account the study also provides policy suggestions for humanity's future intertwined with social media.

Suggested Citation

  • Hojun Choi, 2020. "The Modern Online Democracy: An Evaluation of Social Media's Ability to Facilitate Political Discourse," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 12(1), pages 277-289, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:tec:journl:v:12:y:2020:i:1:p:277-289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://techniumscience.com/index.php/socialsciences/article/download/1689/669
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://techniumscience.com/index.php/socialsciences/article/view/1689
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Halberstam, Yosh & Knight, Brian, 2016. "Homophily, group size, and the diffusion of political information in social networks: Evidence from Twitter," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 73-88.
    2. Reuter, Ora John & Szakonyi, David, 2015. "Online Social Media and Political Awareness in Authoritarian Regimes," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 29-51, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ruben Enikolopov & Alexey Makarin & Maria Petrova, 2020. "Social Media and Protest Participation: Evidence From Russia," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(4), pages 1479-1514, July.
    2. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    3. Marco Manacorda & Guido Tabellini & Andrea Tesei, 2022. "Mobile internet and the rise of political tribalism in Europe," CEP Discussion Papers dp1877, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. Kerim Peren Arin & Juan A. Lacomba & Francisco Lagos & Deni Mazrekaj & Marcel Thum, 2021. "Misperceptions and Fake News during the Covid-19 Pandemic," CESifo Working Paper Series 9066, CESifo.
    5. Thomas F. Remington & Andrei A. Yakovlev & Elena Ovchinnikova & Alexander Chasovsky, 2020. "Career Trajectories Of Regional Officials: Russia And China Before And After 2012," HSE Working papers WP BRP 754/PS/2020, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    6. Nicolás Ajzenman & Bruno Ferman & Pedro C. Sant’Anna, 2023. "Rooting for the Same Team: On the Interplay between Political and Social Identities in the Formation of Social Ties," Working Papers 231, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    7. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    8. Germano, Fabrizio & Sobbrio, Francesco, 2020. "Opinion dynamics via search engines (and other algorithmic gatekeepers)," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    9. Melki, Mickael & Sekeris, Petros, 2019. "Media-driven polarization: Evidence from the US," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 13, pages 1-13.
    10. George, Lisa M. & Peukert, Christian, 2019. "Social networks and the demand for news," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    11. Alejandra Agustina Martínez, 2023. "Raise your Voice! Activism and Peer Effects in Online Social Networks," Working Papers 277, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    12. Bharati, Tushar & Jetter, Michael & Malik, Muhammad Nauman, 2024. "Types of communications technology and civil conflict," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    13. Dejean, Sylvain & Lumeau, Marianne & Peltier, Stéphanie, 2022. "Partisan selective exposure in news consumption," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Giuberti Coutinho, Lorena, 2021. "Political polarization and the impact of internet and social media use in Brazil," MERIT Working Papers 2021-032, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    15. Daron Acemoglu & Tarek A. Hassan & Ahmed Tahoun, 2018. "The Power of the Street: Evidence from Egypt’s Arab Spring," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(1), pages 1-42.
    16. Tabasso, Nicole, 2019. "Diffusion of multiple information: On information resilience and the power of segregation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 219-240.
    17. Pablo Henr'iquez & Jorge Sabat & Jos'e Patr`icio Sullivan, 2021. "Politicians' Willingness to Agree: Evidence from the interactions in Twitter of Chilean Deputies," Papers 2106.09163, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2021.
    18. Bowen, T. Renee & Galperti, Simone & Dmitriev, Danil, 2021. "Learning from Shared News: When Abundant Information Leads to Belief Polarization," CEPR Discussion Papers 15789, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Coibion, Olivier & Gorodnichenko, Yuriy & Weber, Michael, 2020. "Political Polarization and Expected Economic Outcomes," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt9h51c373, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    20. Andrea Tesei & Filipe Campante & Ruben Durante, 2022. "Media and Social Capital," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 69-91, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social media; echo-chamber; political discourse; civil discussion; homophily; opinion formation; Facebook; Twitter;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tec:journl:v:12:y:2020:i:1:p:277-289. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tasente Tanase (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.