As the most widely used social media platform in China, WeChat has penetrated into daily life and has broad implications for the development of civil society. This article assesses the impact of WeChat in three aspects. The small closed networks on WeChat provide a comfortable space for discussions and cultivate a series of alternative public spheres. In addition, it promotes online debates and popular protests in spite of strengthened Internet censorship. Finally, WeChat creates new ways for ordinary people to be associated with one another and to build solidarity. Apart from these positive implications, this article also emphasizes the unstable character of WeChat. Since WeChat is a platform where market, state, and civil society merge and compete, WeChat can be used to facilitate civil society as well as to constitute obstacles for it.
Drawing on digitaltrace data, publicly accessible government documents, and journalistic reports, this research integrates Beck's risk society theory with digital media theories to examine the mediated process of risk definition and assessment of PM2.5 (particulate matters with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometers) in a networked public sphere. Network and content analysis of a PM2.5 Twitter network shows that political and professional elite remained the most powerful producers of risk definition. Established media played a key role, yet faced challenges from a variety of actors who disseminated and filtered information. Laypersons, while peripheral, actively interacted with elite and established media. The blurring geographic boundary in the PM2.5 Twitter network revealed an emerging transnational public sphere, which, however, was segregated by language. This research advances a layered understanding of the contingent, paradoxical media impact for social changes in a risk society.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Existing studies have been inconclusive on whether and the extent to which gendered social networks contribute to the gender gap in business performance. Drawing on a random sample of Chinese Canadian entrepreneurs, this research examines the nexus of social networks, Internet use, and the gender gap in business performance. Results reveal a marked gender difference in firm size, which becomes narrowed after social networks, voluntary association participation, Internet use, and business characteristics are controlled. More important, network composition and structural position have different implications for men and women entrepreneurs. Men are more effective in converting relational advantages into business advantages. Interaction effects suggest that kin homophily hurts women's business performance but not men's. Yet, women gain more from participating in transnational entrepreneurship.
How credulous are we when engaging information on social media? Addressing this question, this article aims to understand how individuals’ epistemic vigilance, a set of cognitive mechanisms that comprise our system of precaution in social interactions, may operate and fall short. Reporting findings from two survey experiments (Study 1, N = 413; Study 2, N = 392), we show that participants tended to be skeptical toward social media news, were reasonably successful in identifying true news, and reported a tendency to share true rather than false news. In one study, social endorsement enticed a higher accuracy rating of news posts. In both studies, people judged attitudinally congruent news posts as being more accurate and reported a higher likelihood to share them. Individuals’ propensity to reflective thinking measured by cognitive reflection test potentially operated as a restraint on sharing inaccurate information and bolstered veracity anchoring in their information engagement.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.