Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Backlash and Side Effects

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The History and Theory of Post-Truth Communication

  • 330 Accesses

Abstract

The dangerous potential of the media has traditionally been counterbalanced in democratic and pluralistic societies by a series of measures that today have been greatly weakened. This weakening has triggered a series of ‘side effects,’ only partially desired or foreseen, which appear to be less amenable to control than in the past.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For general studies on credibility, see also Jacobson (1969), Berlo et al. (1969), Shaw (1973), Singletary (1976), Gaziano and McGrath (1986), Meyer (1974, 1988), Schweigner (2000), and Wöllker and Powell (2018). With respect to online media, see Mings (1997), Deuze (1999), Flanagin and Metzger (2000), and Nozato (2002).

  2. 2.

    The digital divide is one of the most discussed consequences of the digital revolution. See Norris (2001), James (2003), Warschauer (2003), van Dijk (2005), and Bentivegna (2009).

References

  • Altschull, J. H. (1984). Agents of Power. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, C. E. (2002). Media, Markets and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, J. (2018). The People vs Tech: How the Internet Is Killing Democracy (and How We Save It). London: Ebury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentivegna, S. (2009). Disuguaglianze digitali. Le nuove forme di esclusione nella società dell’informazione. Roma and Bari: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berelson, B., Lazarsfeld, P., & McPhee, W. (1954). Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., & Metz, R. J. (1969). Dimensions for Evaluating the Acceptability of Message Sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33(4), 563–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birchner, T., & Donk, A. (2018). Collective Memory and Social Media: Fostering a New Historical Consciousness in the Digital Era? Memory Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698017750012.

  • Boccia Artieri, G. (2012). Stati di connessione. Pubblici, cittadini e consumatori nella (Social) Network Society. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, S. (2011). L’intimité au travail. La vie privée et les communicationes personnelles dans l’entreprise. Limonges: FYP Éditions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, A. (2017). Echo Chamber? What Echo Chamber? Reviewing the Evidence. 6th Biennial Future of Journalism Conference (FOJ17), September 14–15, Cardiff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M., Fernández-Ardèvol, M., Linchuan Qiu, J., & Sey, A. (2007). Mobile Communication and Society: A Global Perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2009). Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. New York: Little, Brown & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence. The Psychology of Persuasion. New York: Quill William Morrow & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, V., & Gili, G. (2014). Raccontare il mondo della vita: una sfida per il giornalismo. Problemi dell’informazione, 39(3), 301–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Kerckhove, D. (1998). Connected Intelligence: The Arrival of the Web Society. London: Kegan Page Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deuze, M. (1999). Journalism and the Web. Gazette, 61(5), 373–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, N. B., & boyd, d. (2013). Sociality Through Social Network Sites. In W. H. Dutton (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies (pp. 151–172). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2000). Perceptions of Internet Information Credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(3), 515–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2018). Intervista: Le filter bubbles non sono né temporanee né fragili, ma non sono un destino. In G. Giacomini (Ed.), Potere digitale. Come Internet sta cambiando la sfera pubblica e la democrazia (pp. 248–257). Milano: Meltemi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedom House. (2017). Freedom on the Net: Manipulating Social Media to Undermine Democracy. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/freedom-net-2017.

  • Freedom House. (2018). Freedom on the Net: The Rise of the Digital Authoritarianism. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2018.

  • Gaziano, C. (1983). The Knowledge Gap: An Analytical Review of Media Effects. Communication Research, 10(4), 447–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaziano, C., & McGrath, K. (1986). Measuring the Concept of Credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 63(3), 451–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gili, G. (2001). Il problema della manipolazione: peccato originale dei media? Milano: FrancoAngeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzales, M. H., Aronson, E., & Costanzo, M. A. (1988). Increasing the Effectiveness of Energy Auditors: A Field Experiment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18(2), 1046–1066.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1987). Theory of Communicative Action. Volume Two. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, J. T. (2004). All the News That’s Fit to Sell: How the Market Transforms Information into News. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hanitzsch, T., Hanusch, F., Mellado, C., Anikina, M., Berganza, R., Cangoz, I., et al. (2010). Mapping Journalism Culture Across Nations. Journalism Studies, 12(3), 273–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman-Riem, W. (1987). National Identity and Cultural Values: Broadcasting Safeguards. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 31(1), 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, H. K. (1969). Mass Media Believability: A Study of Receiver Judgements. Journalism Quarterly, 46(1), 20–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, J. (2003). Bridging the Global Digital Divide. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1948). The People’s Choice. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, P. (1999). Collective Intelligence. Mankind’s Emerging World in Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddalena, G. (2017). Troppo lungo, Zuck, Il Foglio, 2017/2/21. Retrieved from http://www.ilfoglio.it/tecnologia/2017/02/21/news/zuckerberg-manifesto-cosa-non-torna-121559/.

  • McManus, J. H. (2009). The Commercialization of News. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), The Handbook of Journalism Studies (pp. 218–238). New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McQuail, D. (1992). Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, T. J. (1974). Media Credibility: The State of the Research. Public Telecommunications Review, 2(4), 48–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, P. (1988). Defining and Measuring Credibility of Newspapers: Developing an Index. Journalism Quarterly, 65(3), 567–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mings, S. M. (1997). Uses and Gratifications of Online Newspapers: A Preliminary Study. Electronic Journal of Communication, 7(3). Retrieved from http://www.cios.org/getfile/Mings_VN397.

  • Nora, S., & Minc, A. (1978). L’informatisation de la société. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, P. (2001). Digital Divide? Civic Engagement, Information Poverty and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nozato, Y. (2002). Credibility of Online Newspapers. Communication & Development Studies, Center for International Studies, Ohio University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. New York and London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reese, S. D. (2019). The Threat to the Journalistic Institution. Journalism, 20(1), 202–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, P. (2007). The Global Brain. The Awakening Earth in a New Century. Edinburgh: Floris Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweigner, W. (2000). Media Credibility: Experience or Image? European Journal of Communication, 15(1), 37–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, E. F. (1973). Media Credibility: Taking the Measure of a Measure. Journalism Quarterly, 50(2), 306–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverstone, R. (2007). Media and Morality: On the Rise of the Mediapolis. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singletary, M. W. (1976). Components of Credibility of a Favorable News Source. Journalism Quarterly, 53(2), 316–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2007). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., & Olien, C. N. (1970). Mass Media Flow and Differential Growth in Knowledge. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(2), 159–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming Conversation. The Power of Talk in a Digital Era. New York: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijk, J. (2005). The Deepening Divide. Inequality in the Information Society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veltri, G. A., & Di Caterino, G. (2017). Fuori dalla bolla. Politica e vita quotidiana nell’epoca della post-verità. Milano: Mimesis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wöllker, A., & Powell, T. E. (2018). Algorithms in the Newsroom? News Reader’s Perceived Credibility and Selection of Automated Journalism. Journalism. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918757072.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy

    Giovanni Maddalena & Guido Gili

Authors
  1. Giovanni Maddalena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guido Gili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Maddalena, G., Gili, G. (2020). The Backlash and Side Effects. In: The History and Theory of Post-Truth Communication. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41460-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation