Everyday Making through Facebook Engagement: Young Citizens’ Political Interactions in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States

Vromen, Ariadne; Loader, Brian D.; Xenos, Michael A.; Bailo, Francesco

doi:10.1177/0032321715614012

Cited by 64 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As is widely acknowledged in political science, political participation is not limited to the ballot box (Hayward 2006;Milbrath 1965;Verba, Schlozman and Brady 1995;Vromen et al 2016). No political scientist would claim that voting is the only significant form of political participation.…”

Section: Modes Of Political Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Drawing on various NZES questions, we find that in New Zealand in 2014 young people were significantly less likely to believe that their votes would 'count', a little less likely to believe that voting makes a difference and that who is in power can make a difference, and a little more likely to believe that globalisation reduces government's 'room for manoeuvre'. Qualitative analysis could no doubt provide further evidence and insight (for example, Vromen et al 2016). Lower turnout might also relate to more rational decisions about the lack of electoral competitiveness in 2014 or a sense that few of the parties had much to offer younger voters.…”

Section: Modes Of Political Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Bark But No Bite: Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election

Vowles¹,

Coffé²,

Curtin³

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Modes Of Political Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modes Of Political Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Bark But No Bite: Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election

Vowles¹,

Coffé²,

Curtin³

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moeller et al found that exposure to digital news influenced their political participation, and developed their sense of civic duty and information efficacy. In another study, Vromen, Loader, Xenos, and Bailo (2016) surveyed young people in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and found that social media had become a regular source of information on politics and that youth engagement through social media is a form of political participation worthy of our attention. Glynn's (2006) "Critical Appraisal Checklist" confirmed that this study was valid in several areas: Institutional Review Board approval was received, and focus group interview and essay questions were provided.…”

Section: Commentarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Diverse Online Resources amongst Politically Active University Students Fosters Civic Knowledge Integration

Muellenbach

2019

EBLIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Review of: Soe, Y. (2018) Understanding politics more thoroughly: How highly engaged young citizens use the Internet for civic knowledge integration. First Monday, 23(6), 1-17. http://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v23i6.7923 Abstract Objective – To examine the process by which university students with a high interest in politics and public affairs incorporate new information into their understanding of politics and public affairs, a process referred to as civic knowledge integration. Design – This study utilized a qualitative research design that consisted of focus group interviews and essay questions. Setting – Two large four-year Midwestern public universities and two four-year East coast private universities in the United States of America in 2008 and 2010. Subjects – A total of 65 undergraduate and graduate (masters) students participated in the focus group interviews and answered essay questions by e-mail. Methods – In 2008, the researcher conducted 11 focus groups consisting of 5 to 7 participants per group. In 2010, additional data were collected from students at another large four-year Midwestern public university who responded by e-mail to essay questions that were adapted from those used in the focus groups. Recruitment of participants was achieved by contacting professors of media and political science at the universities and targeting students with interest in media, politics, and public affairs, and who were politically active. Course credit or a small monetary incentive was offered to students as compensation. Data resulting from the focus group and essay responses were combined and imported into the QDA Miner software. Data analysis, which used some techniques of grounded theory, was conducted in two phases. In the first phase, 120 analyzable subsets were identified, and open coding of 36 subsets was performed to determine themes. These themes were then modified and renamed using an axial and selective coding process. Examples of resulting topics included collaborative layering of ideas, comparison of differing viewpoints, and monitorial scanning. The second phase involved coding of the 120 subsets, and 65 subgroups that focused on civic knowledge integration were identified. Ultimately, open, thematic coding of the 65 subsets was performed to identify comments that contained the most common themes. Main Results – An analysis of the data revealed that participants used the resulting themes as self-guided learning strategies when searching the Internet for civic knowledge integration, the process by which university students with a high interest in politics and public affairs incorporate new information into their understanding of these areas. One of the strategies used was a two-step process of monitorial scanning and opinion sampling. Monitorial scanning involves the careful selection of search engines in order to scan the news and determine their potential levels of interest, and the use of online encyclopedias such as Wikipedia to locate background information and other details. Opinion sampling involves the process of sorting the sources found, such as blogs and candidates’ web pages. Another strategy used was verification (cross-checking), which consisted of checking multiple sources to find more information on a particular news item or news show, such as those watched on CNN.com. Comparison of differing and opposing viewpoints was another strategy used, that involved the comparing of information about political candidates' perspectives or views to justify their own opinions. Finally, collaborative layering of ideas was a strategy that involved participation in online forums, such as Facebook. This strategy provided participants with the opportunity to express their thoughts and opinions globally, and to contribute to a change in a set practice. Conclusion – Through the use of strategies for self-guided learning, participants were able to add new information to their knowledge base and to develop new points of view. These students developed advanced search strategies and took pleasure in finding opposing perspectives, and as a result, enhanced their critical thinking skills. The conclusions also increased general knowledge of why young people used specific online platforms, information resources, or social media sites to enhance their understanding of politics and public affairs. These findings may also challenge media and political science to investigate the long-term effects of self-guided learning strategies for civic knowledge integration practiced by some young people.

show abstract

“…In the recent digital politics and movements literature, there is an over-reliance on platforms that are mainly public facing and where the application programming interface can be accessed to create more complete datasets; thus, a focus on Twitter and distributed petitioning sites. Yet, most ordinary citizens are still much more likely to use Facebook, and various studies consistently show that it is the leading social media platform for accessing everyday information on news and politics (Reuters Institute 2015; Vromen et al 2016). It is possible, however, to focus on public or community Facebook pages (see e.g.…”

Section: Digital Campaigning: Facebookmentioning

confidence: 99%

GetUp! in Election 2016

Vromen¹

2018

Double Disillusion: The 2016 Australian Federal Election

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

GetUp! is a unique political organisation in Australian politics. Since their formation in mid-2005, they have accrued over 1 million members and fundraise about $8 million annually in donations from mostly small donors. From the 2010 Australian election onwards, their high level of declared third-party political expenditure to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) has placed them among an influential group of traditional Australian interest group organisations of business and unions (see Vromen and Coleman 2011). In 2016, they had their most successful election campaign so far, both in terms of member mobilisation and political impact. Yet, they do not construct themselves as just another insideroriented interest group, but as a mass movement intent on progressive mass mobilisation. Their networked approach to online campaigning uses distinctive rapid response, repertoire switching. Members can pick and choose which campaigns they are active on, and some campaigns have been much more successful than others, ranging from issues such as electoral enrolment reform, abortion law reform, mental health policy, refugee rights, marriage equality, climate change, carbon tax, renewable energy, coal seam gas, higher education fees, Medicare charges and so on. They have also run dedicated national election campaigns in 2007, 2010, 2013, as well as several State election campaigns including the most recent elections in Victoria (VIC) and Queensland (QLD). However, the strategic approach GetUp! took in the 2016 election was a departure from

show abstract

Everyday Making through Facebook Engagement: Young Citizens’ Political Interactions in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States

Cited by 64 publications

References 39 publications

A Bark But No Bite: Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election

A Bark But No Bite: Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election

Use of Diverse Online Resources amongst Politically Active University Students Fosters Civic Knowledge Integration

GetUp! in Election 2016

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About