Beyond Breitbart: Comparing Right‐Wing Digital News Infrastructures in Six Western Democracies

Abstract

Right‐wing online news media have emerged in many countries as an important force in the media landscape, positioning themselves as an alternative to a perceived political and media mainstream. This article studies these sites as a cornerstone of right‐wing digital news infrastructures in six Western democracies (Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Austria, the United Kingdom, and the United States). Drawing on content analyses of websites and social media accounts on Facebook and Twitter as well as on audience metrics, the article analyses content supply and audience demand structures, as well as organizational and thematic characteristics of seventy alternative right‐wing online news sites. We find that a country’s media and political context, in particular the representation of right‐wing positions in the political and legacy media sphere, can explain variation in the supply of—and demand for—right‐wing news across countries, but is mitigated by transnational audiences. At the same time, we can account for cross‐national heterogeneity of news sites, ranging from sites with a “normalized” appearance to more radical sites that clearly set themselves apart from legacy news outlets in terms of their thematic categories, their funding strategy, and their organizational transparency, leading to various types of digital right‐wing “alternatives” to mainstream news.

Countering Extremists on Social Media: Challenges for Strategic Communication and Content Moderation

“…In exploiting social media, extremists are taking advantage of communication infrastructure, the specific affordances and cultures specific to certain platforms, media gatekeepers, and multiple networked audiences to whom they deliver content. Alternative media can be antidemocratic, repressive, and denigrating to out‐groups while continuing to challenge hegemonic discourse in mainstream media (Heft, Mayerhöffer, Reinhardt, & Knüpfer, 2020). If a social prohibition on extremist views—jihadist, far right, or otherwise—is important to uphold, primary CVE should consider the extent to which alternative media networks exploit infrastructure, affordances, and different media systems to undermine this prohibition.…”

“…The role of civil society, government, and social media platforms in addressing issues of disinformation and hyperpartisan alternative media is central to primary CVE; consequently, an engagement (offered by Heft et al, 2020, in this issue) is necessary to understanding what Marwick (2018) refers to as the sociotechnical systems in which racist, discriminatory, and hateful disinformation is mediated, potentially undermining primary CVE by legitimizing and reinforcing forms of anti‐immigrant, racist, and white supremacist discourse through alternative media networks between users, political actors, and a variety of creators active on platforms that are connected with participatory digital cultures on social media platforms (Hughes, 2019; Lewis, 2018; Marwick, 2018; Munn, 2019).…”

“…While research on far‐right exploitation of social media is increasing, much of this work focuses on representation, narratives, ideology, and discourse (Deem, 2019; Froio & Ganesh, 2019; Klein & Muis, 2019; Richards, 2019; Topinka, 2018), as well as disinformation spreading from right‐wing digital news to social media platforms and mainstream media (Benkler et al, 2018; Bennett & Livingston, 2018; Marwick & Lewis, 2017). Developing the context of such activity in comparative perspective, Heft et al (2020) in this special issue provide a thorough mapping of hyperpartisan outlets in right‐wing digital news ecosystems in Austria, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States that contributes a context for both of these lines of inquiry. The authors identify contextual factors in each country's political and media system that has led to different configurations of right‐wing alternative media online in each country; finding various structures, styles, and supply and demand markets.…”

“…The authors classify 70 websites in this alternative media system by various factors including their tendency (a measurement of how conventionally their site is structured versus how focused their site is on sensational right‐wing topics), transparency, and advertising dependency. Heft et al (2020) ultimately note that they find “different patterns of supply and demand, as well as distinct funding structures, organizational strategies, and thematic tendency” across all of the sites. More importantly, they find that right‐wing digital news is tending towards normalization, which “challenges digital news environments” because normalization makes it more difficult for audiences to differentiate hyperpartisan from regular news (Heft et al, 2020).…”

“…Heft et al (2020) ultimately note that they find “different patterns of supply and demand, as well as distinct funding structures, organizational strategies, and thematic tendency” across all of the sites. More importantly, they find that right‐wing digital news is tending towards normalization, which “challenges digital news environments” because normalization makes it more difficult for audiences to differentiate hyperpartisan from regular news (Heft et al, 2020). However, they also note the significance of transnational audiences; while there is significant heterogeneity in the news pages they explored, English‐based right‐wing digital news enjoys transnational audiences.…”