The Dynamics of Political Elections: A Big Data Analysis of Intermedia Framing Between Social Media and News Media

Abstract

This article examines the news framing of the 2017 Hong Kong Chief Executive election using a big data analysis approach. Analyses of intermedia framing of over 370,000 articles and comments are conducted including news published in over 30 Chinese press media, four prominent Chinese online press media, and posts published on three candidates’ Facebook pages within the election period. The study contributes to the literature by examining the rarely discussed role of intermedia news framing, especially the relationship between legacy print media, online alternative news media, and audience comments on candidates’ social network sites. The data analysis provides evidence that audiences’ comments on candidates’ Facebook pages influenced legacy news coverage and online alternative news coverage. However, this study suggests that legacy news media and comments on Facebook do not necessarily have a reciprocal relationship. The implication of the findings and limitations are discussed.

Keywords

frames election big data computational approach Facebook

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aalberg

Stroümbaück

de Vreese

. (2012). The framing of politics as strategy and game: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13, 162–178.

Allan

(2006). Online news: Journalism and the Internet. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

Ball-Rokeach

Loges

(1996). Making choices: Media roles in the construction of value choices. In Seligman

Olson

J. M.

Zanna

M. P.

(Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 277–298). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Baumert

Porta

Cichocki

. (2016). Biomedical signal processing: From a conceptual framework to clinical applications. Proceedings of the IEEE, 104, 220–222.

Bennett

W. L.

Iyengar

(2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58, 707–731.

Billings

A. C.

Burch

L. M.

Zimmerman

M. H.

(2015). Fragments of us, fragments of them: Social media, nationality, and U.S. perceptions of the 2014 FIFA World Cup. Soccer and Society, 16, 736–744.

Bimber

B. A.

Davis

(2003). Campaigning online: The internet in U.S. elections. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.

Bode

Lassen

Kim

Y. M.

Shah

Fowler

E. F.

Ridout

T. N.

Franz

. (2011). Social and broadcast media in 2010 midterms: The expanding repertoire of senate candidates’ campaign strategies (Working Paper). Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/1403867/Social_and_Broadcast_Media_in_2010_Midterms

Borah

(2013). Interactions of news frames and incivility in the political blogosphere: Examining perceptual outcomes. Political Communication, 30, 456–473.

10.

Boyle

T. P.

(2001). Intermedia agenda setting in the 1996 presidential primaries. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 26–44.

11.

Brands

B. J.

Graham

Broersma

(2018). Social media sourcing practices: How Dutch newspapers use tweets in political news coverage. In Schwanholz

Graham

Stoll

P. T.

(Eds.), Managing democracy in the digital age (pp. 159–178). Springer: Cham.

12.

Breitinger

Gipp

Langer

(2015). Research-paper recommender systems: A literature survey. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 17, 305–338.

13.

Bright

Hale

S. A.

Ganesh

Bulovsky

Margetts

Howard

(2017). Does Campaigning on Social Media Make a Difference? Evidence from candidate use of Twitter during the 2015 and 2017 UK Elections.

14.

Broersma

Graham

(2012). Social media as beat: Tweets a news source during the 2010 British and Dutch elections. Journalism Practice, 6, 403–419.

15.

Bruns

Burgess

J. E.

(2011, August). The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics. Paper presented at the 6th European Consortium for Political Research General Conference. Reykjavik, Iceland.

16.

Bruns

Highfield

(2013). Political networks on Twitter: Tweeting the Queensland state election. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 667–691.

17.

Cacciatore

M. A.

Anderson

A. A.

Choi

D-H.

Brossard

Scheufele

D. A.

Liang

… Xenos

. (2012). Coverage of emerging technologies: A comparison between print and online media. New Media and Society, 0, 1–21.

18.

Cappella

J. N.

Jamieson

K. H.

(1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

19.

Chan

Chen

H. T.

Lee

(2017). Hong Kong: Reuters institute for the study of journalism. Digital News Report. Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Digital%20News%20Report%202017%20web_0.pdf

20.

Chan

(2017). Hong Kong’s election: A vote without voters. Al Jazeera. Retrieved from https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/03/hong-kong-election-vote-chief-executive-170325144836936.html

21.

Chung

J. E.

(2015). Antismoking campaign videos on YouTube and audience response: Application of social media assessment metrics. Computer in Human Behavior, 51, 114–121.

22.

Conway

B. A.

Kenski

Wang

(2015). The rise of Twitter in the political campaign: Searching for intermedia agenda-setting effects in the presidential primary. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20, 363–380.

23.

Cornfield

Carson

Kalis

Simon

. (2004). Buzz, blogs, and beyond: The Internet and national discourse in the fall of 2004. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2005/05/16/buzz-blogs-and-beyond-the-internet-and-national-discourse-in-the-fall-of-2004/

24.

D’Angelo

Calderone

Territola

(2005). Strategy and issue framing: An exploratory analysis of topics and frames in campaign 2004 print news. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 13, 199–219.

25.

Dekavalla

(2016). Issue and game frames in the news: Frame-building factors in television coverage of the 2014. Scottish Independence Referendum, Journalism, 19, 1588–1607.

26.

de Vreese

(2005). The spiral of cynicism reconsidered. European Journal of Communication, 20, 283–301.

27.

Diaz

Gamon

Hofman

J. M.

Kıcıman

Rothschild

(2016). Online and social media data as an imperfect continuous panel survey. PLOS ONE, 11, 1–21. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0145406

28.

Dimitrova

D. V.

Matthes

(2018). Social media in political campaigning around the world: Theoretical and methodological challenges.

29.

Dimitrova

Strömbäck

(2011). Election news in Sweden and the United States: A comparative study of sources and media frames. Journalism, 13, 604–619.

30.

Enders

. (2014). Applied econometric time series (Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics). India: Wiley.

31.

Entman

R. M.

(1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58.

32.

Fulton

. (1996, March/April). A tour of our uncertain future. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from http://www.cjr.org/html/96-03-04.html

33.

Fung

A. Y.

(2007). Political economy of Hong Kong media: Producing a hegemonic voice. Asian Journal of Communication, 17, 159–171. doi:10.1080/01292980701306530

34.

Gamson

W. A.

Modigliani

(1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 1–37. doi:10.1086/229213

35.

Gillmor

(2006). We the media: Grassroots journalism by the people, for the people. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.

36.

Gitlin

(1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making & unmaking of the new left. Berkeley: University of California Press.

37.

Goffman

(1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

38.

Goode

(2009). Social news, citizen journalism and democracy. New Media & Society, 11, 1287–1305. doi:10. 117/1461444809341393

39.

Graber

D. A.

(1993). Mass media and American politics (4th ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.

40.

Granger

C. W. J.

(1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica, 37, 424–438.

41.

Grusell

Nord

(2016). Setting the trend or changing the game? Professionalization and digitalization of election campaigns in Sweden. Journal of Political Marketing [online]. doi:10.1080/15377857.2016.1228555

42.

Hartley

. (1982). Understanding news. London, England: Routledge.

43.

Heim

(2013). Framing the 2008 Iowa democratic caucuses political blogs and second-level intermedia agenda setting. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 90, 500–519.

44.

Hermida

(2010). Twittering the news. Journalism Practice, 4, 29–99.

45.

HKU POP. (2016). People’s appraisal of the local news media. Retrieved from https://www.hkupop.hku.hk/chinese/release/release1398.html

46.

Hong Kong Journalists Association. (2017). “Two systems under siege” (HKJA releases 2017 Annual Report). Retrieved from https://www.hkja.org.hk/site/portal/Site.aspx?id=A1-1581&lang=en-US

47.

Hwang

Y. S.

Yang

S. C

. (2003). Exploring the concept of “interactivity” for the vitalization of discussion in the internet. Media & Society, 11, 111.

48.

Iyengar

(1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

49.

Jacobson

(2013). Does audience participation on Facebook influence the news agenda? A case study of the Rachel Maddow show. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57, 338–355.

50.

James

K. J.

Albrecht

A. J.

Litchfield

R. E.

Weishaar

C. A.

(2013). A summative evaluation of a food safety social marketing campaign “4-day throw-away” using traditional and social media. Journal of Food Science Education, 12, 48–55.

51.

Jamieson

K. H.

(1992). Dirty politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

52.

Jamieson

K. H.

Cappella

J. N.

(1993, September). The effect of a strategy-based political news schema: A Markle Foundation Project Report. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Convention, Washington, DC.

53.

Jang

S. M.

Hart

P. S.

(2015). Polarized frames on “climate change” and “global warming” across countries and states: Evidence from Twitter big data. Global Environmental Change, 32, 11–17.

54.

Kim

Ball-Rokeach

S. J.

(2006). Community story telling network, neighbourhood context and civic engagement: A multilevel approach. Human Communication Research, 32, 431–439.

55.

Konishi

Kitagawa

(2008). Information criteria and statistical modeling. Berlin, Germany: Springer.

56.

Lariscy

Avery

Sweetser

K. D.

Howes

(2009). An examination of the role of online social media in journalists’ source mix. Public Relations Review, 35, 314–316.

57.

Lawrence

R. G.

(2000b). The politics of force: Media and the construction of police brutality. London, England: University of California Press.

58.

Lee

Lancendorfer

K. M.

Lee

K. J.

(2005). Agenda-setting and the Internet: The intermedia influence of internet bulletin boards on newspaper coverage of the 2000 general election in South Korea. Asian Journal of Communication, 15, 57–71.

59.

Lim

(2006). A cross-lagged analysis of agenda among online news media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83, 298–312.

60.

Lopez-Escobar

Llama

J. P.

McCombs

Lennon

F. R.

(1998). Two levels of agenda setting among advertising and news in the 1995 Spanish general elections. Political Communication, 15, 225–238.

61.

Magin

Podschuweit

Haßler

Russmann

(2017). Campaigning in the fourth age of political communication. A multi-method study on the use of Facebook by German and Austrian parties in the 2013 national election campaigns. Information, Communication & Society, 20, 1698–1719.

62.

Marwick

Boyd

(2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13, 114–133.

63.

McClure

Middleberg

(2009). Key findings from the 2009 Middleberg/SNCR survey of media in the wired world. Journal of New Communications Research, 4, 101–105.

64.

McCombs

Shaw

D. L.

Weaver

(1997). Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

65.

Meraz

(2011). Using time series analysis to measure intermedia agenda-setting influence in traditional media and political blog networks. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 88, 176–194.

66.

Moon

S. J.

Hadley

(2014). Routinizing a new technology in the newsroom: Twitter as a news source in mainstream media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 58, 289–305.

67.

Neuman

W. R.

Guggenheim

Jang

S. M.

Bae

S. Y.

(2014). The dynamics of public attention: Agenda-setting theory meets big data. Journal of Communication, 64, 193–214.

68.

Nisbet

M. C.

Huge

(2006). Attention cycles and frames in the plant biotechnology debate—Managing power and participation through the press/policy connection. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 11, 3–40.

69.

Lim

Kim

S. S.

Choi

H. J.

(2013). Research trend analysis using word similarities and clusters. International Journal of Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering, 8, 185–196.

70.

Patterson

T. E.

(1993). Out of order. New York, NY: Knopf.

71.

Pedersen

(2012). The game frame and political efficacy: Beyond the spiral of cynicism. European Journal of Communication, 27, 225–240. doi:10.1177/02673 23112454089

72.

Pew Research Center. (2017, June 1). State of the news media methodology. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org/2017/06/01/state-of-the-news-media-methodology/

73.

Quinlan

Gummer

Roßmann

Wolf

(2017). ‘Show me the money and the party!’ – variation in Facebook and Twitter adoption by politicians. Information, Communication & Society [online]. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2017.1301521

74.

Rahman

Karmaker

Hasan

. (2011). HCPR multiplied with TFIDF for effective search method: For effective web ranking. LAP Germany: LAMBERT Academic.

75.

Reese

Danielian

(1989). Intermedia influence and the drug issue: Converging on cocaine. In Shoemaker

(Ed.), Communication campaigns about drugs: Government, media and the public. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

76.

Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. (2019). Digital news report. Retrieved from http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/interactive/

77.

Rhee

J. W.

(1997). Strategy and issue frames in election campaign coverage: A social cognitive account of framing effects. Journal of Communication, 47, 26–48.

78.

Sachan

Kumar

(2015). Class vectors: Embedding representation of document classes. Computation and Language. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1508.00189

79.

Scheufele

D. A.

Tewksbury

(2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9–20. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00326.x

80.

Schoen

Gayo-Avello

Metaxas

P. T.

Mustafaraj

Strohmaier

Gloor

(2013). The power of prediction with social media. Internet Research, 23, 528–543. doi:10.1108/IntR-06-2013-0115

81.

SCMP. (2017). Carrie Lam wins Hong Kong Chief Executive election. Retrieved from https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/2082192/live-decision-day-arrives-hong-kong-race-its-next-leader

82.

Shehata

(2014). Game frames, issue frames, and mobilization: Disentangling the effects of frame exposure and motivated news attention on political cynicism and engagement. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 26, 157–177.

83.

Skogerbø

Bruns

Quodling

Ingebretsen

(2016). Agenda-setting revisited: Social media and sourcing in mainstream journalism. In: Bruns

Enli

Skogerbø

Larsson

A. O.

Christensen

. (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics (pp. 104–120). New York: Routledge.

84.

Skovsgaard

Dalen

A. V.

(2013). Dodging the gatekeepers? Social media in the campaign mix during the 2011 Danish elections. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 737–756.

85.

(2016, September 8). Xiāng găng chuán méi gōng xìnlì yòu jiàn xīn dī [The credibility of Hong Kong media reached the lowest record]. Ming Pao. Retrieved October 29, 2017, from https://news.mingpao.com/pns/dailynews/web_tc/article/20160908/s00012/1473270958100

86.

Statista. (2019). Most popular social networks worldwide as of July 2019, ranked by number of active users. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/ August 19, 2019

87.

Stewart

J. B.

(2016, May 5). Facebook has 50 minutes of your time each day. It wants more. Business day. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/06/business/facebook-bends-the-rules-of-audience-engagement-to-its-advantage.html

88.

Stier

Bleier

Lietz

Strohmaier

(2018). Election campaigning on social media: Politicians, audiences, and the mediation of political communication on Facebook and Twitter. Political Communication, 35, 50–74.

89.

Sweetser

K. D.

Golan

G. J.

Wanta

. (2008). Intermedia agenda setting in television, advertising, and blogs during the 2004 election. Mass Communication & Society, 11, 197–216.

90.

Tedesco

(2005). Issue and strategy agenda setting in the 2004 presidential election: Exploring the candidate-journalist relationship. Journalism Studies, 6, 187–201.

91.

Valentino

Beckmann

Buhr

(2001). A spiral of cynicism for some: The contingent effects of campaign news frames on participation and confidence in government. Political Communication, 18, 347–367.

92.

Vasalou

Joinson

A. N.

8c Courvoisier

. (2010). Cultural differences, experience with social networks and the nature of ‘true commitment’ in Facebook. International Journal of Human and Computer Studies, 68, 719–728.

93.

Vergeer

Hermans

(2013). Campaigning on Twitter: Microblogging and online social networking as campaign tools in the 2010 general elections in the Netherlands. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcc4.12023/full

94.

Wallsten

(2015). Non-elite Twitter sources rarely cited in coverage. Newspaper Research Journal, 36, 24–41.

95.

Ward

(2008). Making a difference: A comparative view of the role of the Internet in election politics. Lanham: Lexington Books.

96.

Wiedermann

Eye

(2016). Statistics and causality: Methods for applied empirical research (Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics). Canada: Wiley.

97.

Yuan

Y. C.

(2010). Multiple imputation for missing data: Concepts and new development (49, 1–11). Rockville, MD: SAS Institute.

98.

Zhang

Peng

T. Q.

Zhang

Y. P.

Wang

X. H.

Zhu

J. J

. (2014). Content or context: Which matters more in information processing on microblogging sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 242–249.

99.

Zhou

Moy

(2007). Parsing framing processes: The interplay between online public opinion and media coverage. Journal of Communication, 57, 79–98.

Supplementary Material

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.

0.00 MB

0.19 MB