Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Who Is Shaping Your Agenda? Social Network Analysis of Anti-Islam and Anti-immigration Movement Audiences on Czech Facebook

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Expressions of Radicalization

Abstract

Šlerka and Šisler explore the audiences of Czech anti-immigration and anti-Islamic movements’ pages on Facebook and analyse them through social network analysis. The public debate on the immigration crisis on Czech Facebook is highly polarized, Šlerka and Šisler argue, and it is fragmented into different clusters, whose audiences rarely share the same content or overlap. The chapter uses new quantitative method called Normalized Social Distance that calculates the distance between various social groups based on these groups members’ online behaviour. Drawing on empirical evidence, Šlerka and Šisler demonstrate how social network sites create echo chambers and filter bubbles, thus strengthening confirmation bias. The methods proposed in this chapter could be adopted by a variety of actors to support their research or decisions with empirical evidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agarwal, S. 2015. Applying Social Media Intelligence for Predicting and Identifying On-line Radicalization and Civil Unrest Oriented Threats. Arxiv.org. Accessed 4 May 2016. https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.06858

  • Bakshy, E., S. Messing, and L.A. Adamic. 2015. Exposure to Ideologically Diverse News and Opinion on Facebook. Science 348 (6239): 1130–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basalingappa, A., M.S. Subhas, and R. Tapariya. 2015. Understanding Likes on Facebook: An Exploratory Study. In IV. International Conference on Communication, Media, Technology and Design Proceedings, ed. Agah Gümüş and Fahme Dabaj. Famagusta, North Cyprus: Eastern Mediterranean University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bode, L. 2012. Political Information 2.0: A Study in Political Learning Via Social Media. Unpublished dissertation, University of Wisconsin.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Political News in the News Feed: Learning Politics from Social Media. Mass Communication and Society 19 (1): 24–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouchard, M., and P. Levey. 2015. Radical and Connected: An Introduction. In Social Networks, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism, ed. M. Bouchard. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouchard, M., and R. Nash. 2015. Researching Terrorism and Counter-terrorism Through a Network Lens. In Social Networks, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism, ed. M. Bouchard. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • boyd, d.m., and K. Crawford. 2012. Critical Questions for Big Data. Information, Communication & Society 15 (5): 662–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • boyd, d.m., and N.B. Ellison. 2007. Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (1): 210–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brundidge, J. 2010. Encountering ‘Difference’ in the Contemporary Public Sphere: The Contribution of the Internet to the Heterogeneity of Political Discussion Networks. Journal of Communication 60 (4): 680–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cilibrasi, R.L., and P.M.B. Vitányi. 2010. Normalized Web Distance and Word Similarity. In Handbook of Natural Language Processing, ed. N. Indurkhya and F.J. Damerau. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colleoni, E., A. Rozza, and A. Arvidsson. 2014. Echo Chamber or Public Sphere? Predicting Political Orientation and Measuring Political Homophily in Twitter Using Big Data. Journal of Communication 64 (2): 317–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, M. 2012. From Al-Zarqawi to Al-Awlaki: The Emergence and Development of an Online Radical Milieu. Counter Terrorism Exchange 2 (4): 12–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalgaard-Nielsen, A. 2010. Violent Radicalization in Europe: What We Know and What We Do Not Know. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 33 (9): 797–814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D.C. 1996. The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducol, B. 2015. A Radical Sociability: In Defense of an Online/Offline Multidimensional Approach to Radicalization. In Social Networks, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism, ed. M. Bouchard. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, C., and L. Gribbon. 2013. Pathways to Violent Extremism in the Digital Era. The RUSI Journal 158 (5): 40–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, G., and D. Fudenberg. 1995. Word-of-mouth Communication and Social Learning. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 93–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Facebook. 2013. 12 Best Practices for Media Companies Using Facebook Pages. Facebook.com. Accessed 23 September 2016. https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-media/12-best-practices-for-media-companies-using-facebook-pages/518053828230111/

  • Facebook Audience Insights. 2016. Accessed 4 May 2016. https://www.facebook.com

  • Flaxman, S., S. Goel, and J.M. Rao. 2016. Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly 80 (S1): 298–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halavais, A. 2015. Bigger Sociological Imaginations: Framing Big Social Data Theory and Methods. Information, Communication & Society 18 (5): 583–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegghammer, T. 2006. Terrorist Recruitment and Radicalization in Saudi Arabia. Middle East Policy 13 (4): 39–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huckfeldt, R., P.A. Beck, R.J. Dalton, and J. Levine. 1995. Political Environments, Cohesive Social Groups, and the Communication of Public Opinion. American Journal of Political Science 39: 1025–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, M. 2015. Facebook has Taken Over from Google as a Traffic Source for News. Fortune.com. Accessed 23 September 2016. http://fortune.com/2015/08/18/facebook-google/

  • Kosinski, M., D. Stillwell, and T. Graepel. 2013. Private Traits and Attributes are Predictable from Digital Records of Human Behavior. PNAS 110 (15): 5802–5805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, D. 1998. An Information-Theoretic Definition of Similarity. In ICML 98 Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, ed. J.W. Shavlik. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manovich, L. 2011. The Promises and the Challenges of Big Social Data. Software Studies Initiative. Accessed 4 May 2016. http://lab.softwarestudies.com/2011/03/promises-and-challenges-of-big-social.html

  • McPherson, M., L. Smith-Lovin, and J.M. Cook. 2001. Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27: 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, P. 2013. The Trouble with Radicalization. International Affairs 89 (4): 873–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obar, J.A., and S. Wildman. 2015. Social Media Definition and the Governance Challenge: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Telecommunications Policy 39 (9): 745–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pariser, E. 2011. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. London: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parse.ly. 2015. Authority Report: The State of Tags in Digital Media. Parsely.com . Accessed 23 September 2016. http://www.parsely.com/resources/authority-report-8/

  • Pelletier, M., and A. Horky. 2013. The Anatomy of a Facebook Like: An Exploratory Study of Antecedents and Outcomes. Annals of the Society for Marketing Advances 25: 207–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainie, L., and B. Wellman. 2012. Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sageman, M., ed. 2004. Understanding Terror Networks. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———., ed. 2008. Leaderless Jihad: Terror Networks in the Twenty-First Century. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, A.P. 2013. Radicalisation, De-Radicalisation, Counter-Radicalisation: A Conceptual Discussion and Literature Review. ICCT Research Paper, March, The International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, The Hague. Accessed 28 May 2016. https://www.icct.nl/download/file/ICCT-Schmid-Radicalisation-De-Radicalisation-Counter-Radicalisation-March-2013.pdf

  • Šlerka, J. 2013. Jak se fanoušci politických stran liší—politické strany na Facebooku (2.). Data Boutique. Accessed 4 May 2016. http://databoutique.cz/post/62064377499

  • ———. 2016. Polarizovaná společnost? Nikoli, je to složitější. ReporterMagazin.cz, 23 September. Accessed 23 September 2016. http://reportermagazin.cz/polarizovana-spolecnost-nikoli-je-to-slozitejsi/

  • Šlerka, J., and V. Šisler. 2017. Normalized Social Distance: Quantitative Analysis of Religion-centered Gaming Pages on Social Networks. In Methods for Studying Video Games and Religion, ed. V. Šisler, K. Radde-Antweiler, and X. Zeiler. New York: Routledge. in print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stroud, N.J. 2010. Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure. Journal of Communication 60 (3): 556–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, E., I. Buil, and L. de Chernatony. 2012. Facebook ‘Friendship’ and Brand Advocacy. Journal of Brand Management 20: 128–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, E., I. Buil, L. de Chernatony, and M. Hogan. 2014. Who ‘Likes’ You… and Why? A Typology of Facebook Fans from ‘Fan’–atics and Self Expressives to Utilitarians and Authentics. Journal of Advertising Research 54 (1): 92–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weimann, G. 2006. Terror on the Internet: The New Arena, The New Challenges. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Terror on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. Brown Journal of World Affairs 16 (2): 45–54.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was partially supported by the Faculty of Arts of Charles University programs Progres Q15 and Primus/Hum/03.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

    Josef Šlerka & Vít Šisler

Authors
  1. Josef Šlerka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vít Šisler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Global Political Studies, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden

    Kristian Steiner

  2. Department of Literature, History of Ideas & Religion, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Andreas Önnerfors

Appendix: Complete dataset

Appendix: Complete dataset

Daniel Herman (Minister of Culture), Martin Stropnický (Minister of Defence), Jan Veleba (p), Svobodné fórum (n), Alexandra Udženija (p), Andrej Babiš (Minister of Finance), ANO (m), Pavel Bělobrádek (Minister of Science), Blesk (n), Block Against Islam (m), Pirate Party, Milan Chovanec (Minister of the Interior), Social Democratic Party, ČT24 (n), Echo24 (n), Jiří Dienstbier (Minister for Human rights), Referendum (n), European Commission CR, European Values, Generation Identity, Hate Free Culture, Freedom and Direct Democracy, iDNES (n), Hospodářské noviny (n), Miroslav Lidinský (p), Stop Islam in Czech Republic (m), Jana Černochová (p), Marian Jurečka (p), Miroslav Kalousek (p), Christian and Democratic Union (m), Martin Konvička (p), Communist Party, Lidové noviny (n), Lubomír Zaorálek (Minister of Foreign Affairs), Michaela Marksová-Tominová (Minister of Social Affairs), NO to Brussels—National Democracy (m), Svatopluk Němeček (Minister of Health), Novinky (n), Civic Democratic Party, Parlamentní Listy (n), Petr Fiala (p), Pravý břeh (n), Miloš Zeman (President), Czech Radio—Radiožurnál (n), Reflex (n), Karla Šlechtová (Minister of Regional Development), Bohuslav Sobotka (Prime Minister), Green Party, Pavel Svoboda (p), Free Citizens’ Party, Tomio Okamura (p), Tomáš Zdechovský (p), TOP 09 (m), TV Noe (n), Respekt (n), Kateřina Valachová (Minister of Education)

Note: For clarity, we have translated the Facebook pages’ names into English wherever possible (e.g., Green Party) or labelled these pages according to the following key: (n) = news media, (m) = political movement or party, (p) = individual politician. In specific cases, we provide a full description of the page in parentheses.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Šlerka, J., Šisler, V. (2018). Who Is Shaping Your Agenda? Social Network Analysis of Anti-Islam and Anti-immigration Movement Audiences on Czech Facebook. In: Steiner, K., Önnerfors, A. (eds) Expressions of Radicalization. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65566-6_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation