Can celebrity athletes burst the echo chamber bubble? The case of LeBron James and Lady Gaga

Abstract

This study examines the case of basketball superstar LeBron James, who openly identifies as a liberal. Our analysis of LeBron James’ Twitter profile revealed normal distribution between liberals and conservatives following his account. We then compared James’ followers’ distribution to those of the singer Lady Gaga and liberal-tilting sport network ESPN and found that James’ followers’ distribution represented the most diverse distribution of the three accounts. We further found that James was the only liberal source in most of his conservative followers’ profiles. The findings highlight the potency of celebrity athletes to narrow the trend of political polarization.

Keywords

celebrity athlete echo chamber LeBron James political polarization Twitter

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adamic

Glance

(2005) The political blogosphere and the 2004 US election: Divided they blog. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Link Discovery. Chicago: ACM, pp. 36–43.

Agyemang

Singer

DeLorme

(2010) An exploratory study of black male college athletes’ perceptions on race and athlete activism. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 45(4): 419–435.

Aisch

Leonhardt

Quealy

(2014) World cup opinions in 19 countries: Likes, dislikes, predictions. The New York Times, 10 June. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/upshot/world-cup-opinions-in-19-countries-likes-dislikes-predictions.html (accessed 2 June 2019).

Augustyn

(2017) The 10 greatest basketball players of all time. In: Encyclopedia Britannica. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/list/the-10-greatest-basketball-players-of-all-time (accessed 2 June 2019).

Bakshy

Messing

Adamic

(2015) Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science 348(6239): 1130–1132.

Bennett

(2014) “If we stick together we can do anything”: Lady Gaga fandom, philanthropy and activism through social media. Celebrity Studies 5(1–2): 138–152.

Bimber

Davis

(2003) Campaigning Online: The Internet in U.S. Elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Boutyline

Willer

(2011) The social structure of political echo chambers: Ideology leads to asymmetries in online political communication networks. Working Paper, Political Networks Paper Archive. Available at: https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~andrei/downloads/echo.pdf (accessed 2 June 2019).

Bruns

Stieglitz

(2013) Towards more systematic Twitter analysis: Metrics for tweeting activities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 16(2): 91–108.

10.

Centeno

DDG

(2010) Celebrification in Philippine politics: Exploring the relationship between celebrity endorser’s parasociability and the public’s voting behavior. Social Science Diliman 6(1): 66-85.

11.

Chung

Cho

(2017) Fostering parasocial relationships with celebrities on social media: Implications for celebrity endorsement. Psychology & Marketing 34(4): 481–495.

12.

Colleoni

Rozza

Arvidsson

(2014) Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in Twitter using big data. Journal of Communication 64: 317–332.

13.

Coombs

Cassilo

(2017) Athletes and/or activists: LeBron James and Black Lives Matter. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 41(5): 425–444.

14.

Coombs

Lambert

Cassilo

, et al. (2019) Flag on the play: Colin Kaepernick and the protest paradigm. Howard Journal of Communications. Epub. ahead of print 7 February. DOI: 10.1080/10646175.2019.1567408

15.

Cunningham

Regan

Jr (2012) Political activism, racial identity and the commercial endorsement of athletes. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 47(6): 657–669.

16.

ESPN (2016) All-time #NBA rank: Counting down the greatest players ever. ESPN, 3 March. Available at: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankalltime/greatest-players-ever (accessed 2 June 2019).

17.

Gajanan

(2017) LeBron James: No, I don’t regret calling Trump a “bum”. Time, 25 September. Available at: http://time.com/4956223/donald-trump-lebron-james-nfl/ (accessed 2 June 2019).

18.

Garrett

Stroud

(2014) Partisan paths to exposure diversity: Differences in pro and counter-attitudinal news consumption. Journal of Communication 64: 680–701.

19.

Gelman

(2009) Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

20.

Golbeck

Hansen

(2011) Computing political preference among Twitter followers. In: Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on human factors in computing systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 7-12 May 2011, pp. 1105–1108.

21.

Groseclose

Milyo

(2005) A measure of media bias. Quarterly Journal of Economics 120(4): 1191–1237.

22.

Hayat

Lyons

(2017) A typology of collaborative research networks. Online Information Review 41(2): 155–170.

23.

Hayat

(2015) Advice giving and receiving within a research network. American Behavioral Scientist 59(5): 582–598.

24.

Hayat

Samuel-Azran

(2017) “You too, Second Screeners?” Second screeners’ echo chambers during the 2016 US elections primaries. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 61(2): 291–308.

25.

Hayat

Hershkovitz

Samuel-Azran

(2019) The independent reinforcement effect: The role diverse social ties play in the credibility assessment process. Public Understanding of Science 28(2): 201–217.

26.

Hayat

Samuel-Azran

Galily

(2016) Al-Jazeera Sport’s US Twitter followers: Sport-politics nexus? Online Information Review 40(6): 785–797.

27.

Hayat

Lesser

Samuel-Azran

(2017) Gendered discourse patterns on online social networks: A social network analysis perspective. Computers in Human Behavior 77: 132–139.

28.

Himelboim

McCreery

Smith

(2013) Birds of a feather Tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine cross-ideology exposure on Twitter. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 18: 40–60.

29.

Holbert

Garrett

Gleason

(2010) A new era of minimal effects? A response to Bennett and Iyengar. Journal of Communication 60(1): 15–34.

30.

Huckfeldt

Mendez

Osborn

(2004) Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology 25: 65–95.

31.

Jones

(2003) King James: Believe the Hype—the LeBron James Story. New York: St Martin’s Press.

32.

Kaufman

Wolff

(2010) Playing and protesting: Sport as a vehicle for social change. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 34(2): 154–175.

33.

Kim

Song

(2016) Celebrity’s self-disclosure on Twitter and parasocial relationships: A mediating role of social presence. Computers in Human Behavior 62: 570–577.

34.

Lynch

(2017) Ranking the 25 greatest players in NBA history. FoxSports, 25 December. Available at: https://www.foxsports.com/nba/gallery/ranking-the-25-greatest-players-in-nba-history-100716 (accessed 2 June 2019).

35.

Mutz

(2002a) Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice. The American Political Science Review 96(1): 111–126.

36.

Mutz

Martin

(2001) Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. American Political Science Review 95: 97–114.

37.

Panger

(2016) Reassessing the Facebook experiment: Critical thinking about the validity of big data research. Information, Communication & Society 19(8): 1108–1126.

38.

Pew Research Center (2014) Political polarization in the American Public, 12 June. Available at: http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/ (accessed 2 June 2019).

39.

Price

Cappella

Nir

(2002) Does disagreement contribute to more deliberative opinion? Political Communication 19: 95–112.

40.

Rossi

Giglietto

(2016) Twitter use during TV: A full-season analysis of #serviziopubblico hashtag. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 60(2): 331–346.

41.

Samuel-Azran

Hayat

(2017) Counter-hegemonic contra-flow and the Al Jazeera America fiasco: A social network analysis of Al Jazeera America’s Twitter users. Global Media and Communication 13(3): 267–282.

42.

Samuel-Azran

Galily

Karniel

, et al. (2016) Let the Germans win? Israeli attitudes towards Die Mannschaft during the 2014 World Cup tournament. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 45(5): 391–343.

43.

Stever

Lawson

(2013) Twitter as a way for celebrities to communicate with fans: Implications for the study of parasocial interaction. North American Journal of Psychology 15(2): 339-354.

44.

Sunstein

(2000) Echo Chambers: Bush v. Gore, Impeachment, and beyond. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

45.

Wasserman

Faust

(1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, vol. 8. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

46.

Watkins

(2017) Experimenting with dialogue on Twitter: An examination of the influence of the dialogic principles on engagement, interaction, and attitude. Public Relations Review 43(1): 163–171.

47.

Weeks

Ksiazek

Holbert

(2016) Partisan enclaves or shared media experiences? A network approach to understanding citizens’ political news environments. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 60(2): 248–268.

48.

West

(2008) Angelina, Mia, and Bono: Celebrities and international development. Global Development 2: 74–84.

49.

Westhead

(2004) The greening of the games. Canadian Business 77(20): S4–S8.