Abstract
According to liberal political theory, democracy can flourish only to the extent to which its citizenry have free access to information, are able to reason well, and, consequently, are able to make reasonable choices. The advent of Web 2.0 had opened up new ways to access, share and publish information about politics. Hence, many have argued how Web 2.0 represents the ultimate realization of participatory democracy. On the other hand, new information technologies have enabled consumers to filter and select content they want to be exposed to, thus making it possible for people to deprive themselves of “cross cutting” content. This could lead to group fragmentation and political polarization which is in contradiction with the republican ideal of deliberative democracy. By conducting a survey on social media habits on Facebook, the author tested this thesis about polarization in the case of Croatian students.
Keywords
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Digital democracy can be defined as “the pursuit and the practice of democracy in whatever view using digital media in online and offline political communication” [15, p. 3].
- 2.
A gap between those “online and off line that falls along socioeconomic, ethnic, racial, and gender lines”.
- 3.
Cross cutting content refers to “content with an ideological bent that is shared by, for example, a liberal, and then is consumed by a conservative, and vice versa” [24].
- 4.
The tendency of individuals with similar sociodemographic, behavioural and interpersonal characteristic to associate with one another. According to McPherson et al., “homophily limits people’s social worlds in a way that has powerful implications for the information they receive, the attitudes they form, and the interactions they experience” [32, p. 415].
References
McNair, B.: An introduction to political communication. Fakultet političkih znanosti Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb (2003)
Nussbaum, M.: Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. AGM, Zagreb (2012)
Andersen, J.: The public sphere and discursive activities. Information literacy as sociopolitical skill. J. Documentation 62(22), 213–228 (2006)
Correia, A.M.R.: Information literacy for an active and effective citizenship. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228765129_Information_literacy_for_an_active_and_effective_citizenship
Jacobs, H., Berg, S.: Reconnecting information literacy policy with the core values librarianship. Libr. Trends 60, 383–394 (2011)
Bawden, D.: Information and digital literacies: a review of concepts. J. Documentation 57(2), 218–259 (2001)
Rheingold, H.: The Great Equalizer. Whole Earth Review, Summer (1991)
Dahl, R.A.: Democracy and its Critics. Politička Kultura, Zagreb (1999)
Mitchel, A., Gotfried, J., Killey, J., Matsa, K.E.: The role of news on Facebook. Common, yet Incidental. http://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/section-2-social-media-political-news-and-ideology/
Sunstein, C.R.: Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford (2009)
Guerra, P.H.C., Wagner, M.J., Cardie, C., Kleinberg, R.A: Measure of polarization on social media networks based on community boundaries (2013). www.aaai.org
Meyer, T.: Media democracy: how the media colonize politics. Fakultet političkih znanosti Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb (2003)
Herman, E.S., Chomsky, N.: Manufacturing consent: the political economy of the mass media. Pantheon Books, New York (1988)
Dahlgren, P.: The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: dispersion and deliberation. Polit. Commun. 22, 147–162 (2005)
van Dijk, J.A.G.M.: Digital democracy: vision and reality. http://www.doc88.com/p-8905287751229.html
Breindl, Y.: Critique of the democratic potentialities of the Internet: a review of current theory and practice. Triple 8(1), 43–59 (2010)
Clarke, A.: Exploiting the Web as a tool for democracy: new ways forward in the study and practice of digital democracy. World Forum for Democracy 2013. Issue Paper (2013)
Putnam, R.D.: Bowling Alone. The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Mediteran Publishing, Novi Sad (2008)
Tilly, C., Tarrow, S.: Contentious Politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2015)
Norris, P.: Digital Divide, Civic Engagement, Information Poverty and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)
Castells, M.: The Internet galaxy. Reflections on the Internet, business and society. Naklada Jesenski i Turk, Zagreb (2003)
Hargitai, E., Gallo, J., Kane, M.: Cross-ideological discussions among conservative and liberal bloggers. Public Choice 134, 67–86 (2008)
Holmes, J.W., McNeal, R.S.: Social media, participation, and attitudes: does social media drive polarization? In: Deželan, T., Vobić, I. (eds.) (R)evolutionizing Political Communication Through Social Media. Information Science Reference, Hershey (2016)
Kim, Y.: The contribution of social network sites to exposure to political difference: the relationship among SNSs, online political messaging, and exposure to cross-cutting perspectives. Comput. Hum. Behav. 27, 971–977 (2011)
Wihlbey, J.: Does Facebook drive political polarization? http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/social-media/facebook-political-polarization-data-science-research
Pew Internet & American Life Project: The Internet and Democratic Debate (2004)
Conover, M.D., Ratkiewicz, J., Goncalves, F.B., Flammini, A., Menczer, F.: Political polarization on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (2011)
Mitchel, A., Killey, J., Gottfried, J., Guskin, E.: Social media, political news and ideology. Pew Research Center (2014)
Gottfried, J., Barthel, M.: How Millennials political news habits differ from those of Gen Xers and Baby Boomers. Pew Research (2015)
Mitchel, A., Gottfried, J., Kiley, J. Matsa, K.E.: Political polarization & media habits. Pew Research (2014)
Bakhsy, E., Messing, S., Adamic, L.: Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. www.sciencemag.org
McPherson, M., Lovin, L.S., Cook, J.M.: Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 27(1), 415–444 (2001)
Douglas, S., Raine, R.B., Maruyama, M., Robertson, S.P.: Community matters: how young adults use Facebook to evaluate political candidate. Inf. Polity 20(2, 3), 135–150 (2015)
Turcotte, J., York, C., Irving, J., Scholl, R.M., Pingree, R.J.: News recommendations from social media opinion leaders: effect on media trust and information seeking. J. Comput. Mediated Commun. 20, 520–535 (2015)
Knoblach, M.: Millennials trust user-generated content 50% more than other media. http://mashable.com/2014/04/09/millennials-user-generated-media/#pJXf0X4tIgq1
Vilović, G.: Ethical contoveries in globus and nacional. Politička misao, Zagreb (2004)
Ilišin, V.: Political participation of youth and politics toward youth: Croatia in European context. Politička misao 40(3) (2004)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lacković, S. (2016). Ideological Views, Social Media Habits, and Information Literacy. In: Kurbanoğlu, S., et al. Information Literacy: Key to an Inclusive Society. ECIL 2016. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 676. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52162-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52162-6_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52161-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-52162-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)