Given the recent surge of global populism, this article explores the relationship between Internet/social media and support for populist parties by focusing on the structure of the online marketplace. We argue that structure shapes digital networks’ incentives in terms of the content they favor, and marketing strategies they employ to distribute content on a mass scale. Specifically, concentrated/oligopolistic markets mean powerful digital entities that can leverage the regulatory process—thereby weakening constraints and incentivizing consumption/profit above all else. Consequently, these entities can freely favor more incendiary/attention-generating content, and use their outsized influence to saturate the online marketplace with targeted advertising—all of which can amplify the diffusion of populist rhetoric and intensify support bases. Using original data on Internet ownership concentration, social media user-traffic, and populist party vote share in 34 democracies, our findings suggest that concentration of Internet ownership and online audiences each contribute to rising support for populism.
AdenaMEnikolopovRPetrovaM, et al. (2015) Radio and the Rise of the Nazis in Prewar Germany. The Quarterly Journal of Economics130 (4): 1885–1939.
2.
Anna VachudovaM (2020) Ethnopopulism and Democratic Backsliding in Central Europe. East European Politics36 (3): 318–340.
3.
BagdikianB (1997/1983) The Media Monopoly. Boston, MA: Beacon Press
4.
Baldwin-PhilippiJ (2019) The Technological Performance of Populism. New Media & Society21 (2): 376–397.
5.
BaumMAZhukovY (2012) What Determines the News About Foreign Policy? Newspaper Ownership, Crisis Dynamics, and the 2011 Libyan Uprising. Paper Presented at the International Studies Association Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA, 4 April 2012.
6.
BennettLSegerbergA (2012) The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics. Information, Communication, and Society15 (5): 739–768.
7.
BennettWLManheimJB (2006) The One-Step Flow of Communication. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science608 (1): 213–232.
8.
BetzH-G (1994) Radical Right Wing Populism in Western Europe. London: Macmillan Press.
9.
BonikowskiBGidronN (2016) The Populist Style in American Politics: Presidential Campaign Discourse, 1952-1996. Social Forces94 (4): 1593–1621.
10.
BormannN-CGolderM (2013) Democratic Electoral Systems Around the World, 1946-2011. Electoral Studies32: 360–369.
11.
BosLVan der BrugWDe VreeseC (2010) Media Coverage of Right-Wing Populist Leaders. Communications35 (2): 141–163.
BrowningG (2002) Electronic Democracy: Using the Internet to Transform American Politics. Information Today, Inc.
14.
CaianiMGrazianoP (2016) Varieties of Populism: Insights from the Italian Case. Italian Political Science Review46 (2): 243–267.
15.
CanovanM (1999) Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy. Political Studies47 (1): 2–16.
16.
CarterE (2005) The Extreme Right in Western Europe: Success or Failure?Manchester: Manchester University Press.
17.
ChambersTHowardH (2008) The Economics of Media Consolidation. In: AlbarranAMierzejewskaBJungJ (eds) Handbook of Media Management and Economics. Routledge
ColleoniERozzaAArvidssonA (2014) Echo Chamber or Public Sphere? Predicting Political Orientation and Measuring Political Homophily in Twitter Using Big Data. Journal of Communication64 (2): 317–332.
20.
De la TorreCLemosAO (2016) Populist Polarization and the Slow Death of Democracy in Ecuador. Democratization23 (2): 221–241.
21.
DjankovSMcLieshCNenovaT, et al. (2003) Who Owns the Media?The Journal of Law and Economics46 (2): 341–382.
22.
DöringHManowP (2019) Parliaments and Governments Database (ParlGov): Information on Parties, Elections and Cabinets in Modern Democracies.
23.
EatwellR (2005) Charisma and the Revival of the European Extreme Right. In: Movements of Exclusion: Radical Right-Wing Populism in the Western World. New York: Nova Science Publishers, pp. 101–120.
24.
EllinasAA (2009) Chaotic but Popular? Extreme-Right Organisation and Performance in the Age of Media Communication. Journal of Contemporary European Studies17 (2): 209–221.
25.
EngesserSErnstNEsserF, et al. (2017a) Populism and Social Media: How Politicians Spread a Fragmented Ideology. Information, Communication & Society20 (8): 1109–1126.
26.
EngesserSFawziNLarssonAO (2017b) Populist Online Communication: Introduction to the Special Issue. Information, Communication, & Society20: 1279–1292.
27.
EsserFStepinskaAHopmannD (2017) Populism and the Media: Cross-National Findings and Perspectives. In: AalbergTEsserFReinemannC, et al. (eds) Populist Political Communication in Europe. London: Routledge, pp.365–380.
FlaxmanSGoelSRaoJM (2016) Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly80 (S1): 298–320.
30.
FowlerEFFranzMRidoutT (2020) Online Political Advertising in the US. In: PersilyNTuckerJA (eds) Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, Prospects for Reform. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 111–138.
31.
FreedenM (1996) Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
FukuyamaFGrottoA (2020) Comparative Media Regulation in the US and Europe. In: PersilyNTuckerJA (eds) Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, Prospects for Reform. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 199–219.
34.
GolderM (2003) Explaining Variation in the Success of Extreme Right Parties in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies36 (4): 432–466.
35.
GygliSHaelgFPotrafkeN, et al. (2019) The KOF Globalisation Index—Revisited. Review of International Organizations14 (3): 543–574.
36.
HameleersMBosLde VreeseCH (2017) They Did It: The Effects of Emotionalized Blame Attribution in Populist Communication. Communication Research, 44, 870–900.
HawkinsKA (2009) Is Chavez a Populist? Measuring Populist Discourse in Comparative Perspective. Comparative Political Studies42 (8): 1040–1067.
39.
HawkinsKAAguilarRJenneE, et al. (2019a) Global Populism Database: Populism Dataset for Leaders 1.0. Available at: https://poppulism.byu.edu/Pages/Data (accessed 1 April 2020).
40.
HawkinsKAAguilarRSilvaBC, et al. (2019b) Measuring Populist Discourse: The Global Populism Database. Paper Presented at the 2019 EPSA Annual Conference, Belfast, 20–21 June.
41.
HawkinsKACarlinRELittvayL, et al. (eds) (2019c) The Ideational Approach to Populism: Concept, Theory, and Analysis. London: Routledge.
42.
HermanESMcChesneyR (1997) The Global Media: The New Missionaries of Corporate Capitalism. Washington, DC: Cassell.
43.
HindmanM (2009) The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
44.
HorwitzRB (2005) On Media Concentration and the Diversity Question. The Information Society21 (3): 181–204.
45.
InglehartRFNorrisP (2016) Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash. Harvard Faculty Research Working Paper Series, Harvard Kennedy School, Cambridge, MA.
JungherrASchroederRStierS (2019) Digital Media and the Surge of Political Outsiders: Explaining the Success of Political Challengers in the United States, Germany, and China. Social Media+ Society5 (3). DOI: 10.1177/2056305119875439.
50.
KatzRSMairP (2009) The Cartel Party Thesis: A Restatement. Perspectives on Politics7 (4): 753–766.
51.
KlingerUSvenssonJ (2016) Network Media Logic: Some Conceptual Considerations. In: BrunsAEnliGSkogerbøE, et al. (eds) The Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics. New York: Routledge, pp.23–38.
52.
KoopmansRMuisJ (2009) The Rise of Right-wing Populist Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands: A Discursive Opportunity Approach. European Journal of Political Research48 (5): 642–664.
53.
KoopmansROlzakS (2004) Discursive Opportunities and the Evolution of Right-Wing Violence in Germany. American Journal of Sociology110 (1): 198–230.
54.
KriesiH (2014) The Populist Challenge. West European Politics37 (2): 361–378.
MorozovE (2011) The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom. New York: PublicAffairs.
63.
MuddeC (2004) The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition39 (4): 541–563.
64.
MuddeC (2007) Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
65.
MuddeCRovira KaltwasserC (2017) Populism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: University Press.
66.
MuisJImmerzeelT (2017) Causes and Consequences of the Rise of Populist Radical Right Parties and Movements in Europe. Current Sociology65 (6): 909–930.
67.
NadlerA (2019) Populist Communication and Media Environments. Sociology Compass13 (8): e12718.
68.
NegroponteN (1995) Being Digital. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
69.
NoamEM (ed.) (2016) Who Owns the World’s Media? Media Concentration and Ownership around the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
PelinkaA (2013) Right-Wing Populism: Concept and Typology. In: Wodak R, KhsraviNik M and Mral B (eds) Right-Wing Populism in Europe: Politics and Discourse, pp. 3–22.
74.
RooduijnM (2014) The Mesmerising Message: The Diffusion of Populism in Public Debates in Western European Media. Political Studies62 (4): 726–744.
75.
RooduijnMVan KesselSFroioC, et al. (2019) The PopuList: An Overview of Populist, Far Right, Far Left and Eurosceptic Parties in Europe. Available at: www.popu-list.org
76.
Rovira KaltwasserC (2012) The Ambivalence of Populism: Threat and Corrective for Democracy. Democratization19 (2): 184–208.
77.
SchaubMMorisiD (2020) Voter Mobilization in the Echo Chamber: Broadband Internet and the Rise of Populism in Europe. European Journal of Political Research59: 752–773.
SunsteinCR (2007) Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
85.
TaggartP (2000) Populism. Buckingham: Open University Press.
86.
TeorellJDahlbergSHolmbergS, et al. (2019) The Quality of Government Standard Dataset, version Jan 19. University of Gothenburg: The Quality of Government Institute. DOI: 10.18157/qogstdjan19.
87.
TurowJ (1997) Breaking Up America: Advertisers and the New Media World. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
88.
VaccariCValerianiA (2015) Follow the Leader! Direct and Indirect Flows of Political Communication during the 2013 Italian General Election Campaign. New Media & Society17 (7): 1025–1042.
89.
VaidhyanathanS (2018) Antisocial Media: How Facebook Disconnects Us and Undermines Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
90.
Van DijkJ (2006) The Network Society. London: SAGE Publishing.
91.
VliegenthartRBoomgaardenHGVan SpanjeJ (2012) Anti-Immigrant Party Support and Media Visibility: A Cross-Party, Over-Time Perspective. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties22 (3): 315–358.
92.
WaisbordSAmadoA (2017) Populist Communication by Digital Means: Presidential Twitter in Latin America. Information, Communication & Society20 (9): 1330–1346.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
