Going deeper: Social media use and the development of democratic attitudes in Latin America

Abstract

The deepening of democracy in developing regions requires that individuals support their political systems not only through democratic behaviours but also through the continual strengthening of democratic attitudes. Traditional news media have long held a favoured position when it comes to understanding democracy. Now social media has emerged as a new and exciting communication technology. This project explores social media use and the unique way in which media affect Latin Americans’ attitudes. Empirical analysis of survey data from eight Latin American states supports social media as a ‘public sphere’ where participants hold attitudes that are more democratic, separable from traditional media as well as general Internet use.

Keywords

Attitudes Central America democracy political communication social media

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ali

(2011) The power of social media in developing nations: New tools for closing the global digital divide and beyond. Harvard Human Rights Journal 24: 185–219.

Almond

Verba

(1963) The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Boston, MA: Princeton University Press.

Anderson

Caumont

(2014) How social media is reshaping news. Pew Research Center. Available at: www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/24/how-social-media-is-reshaping-news/

Aristotle (1997) Politics. The Politics of Aristotle (ed. Simpson

PLP

). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Bartels

(1993) Messages received: The political impact of media exposure. American Political Science Review 87(2): 267–285.

Benkler

(2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Boas

(2008) Chile: Promoting the personal connection. In: Ward

Owen

Davis

et al . (eds) Making a Difference: A Comparative View of the Role of the Internet in Election Politics. New York: Lexington Books, pp.15–34.

Bohman

(2004) Expanding dialogue: The internet, the public sphere and prospects for transnational democracy. The Sociological Review 52(1): 131–155.

Booth

(1979) Political participation in Latin America: Levels, structure, context, concentration, and rationality. Latin American Research Review 14: 29–60.

10.

Booth

Seligson

(2009) The Legitimacy Puzzle in Latin America: Political Support and Democracy in Eight Nations. New York: Cambridge University Press.

11.

Calhoun

(1992) Introduction: Habermas and the public sphere. In: Calhoun

(ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp.1–50.

12.

Carroll

Hackett

(2006) Democratic media activism through the lens of social movement theory. Media, Culture, & Society 28(1): 83–104.

13.

Castells

(2010) The Rise of the Network Society, 2nd edn. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.

14.

Christensen

Bengtsson

(2011) The political competence of internet participants. Information, Communication & Society 14(6): 896–916.

15.

Comstock

(1978) Television and Human Behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.

16.

Crouch

(2004) Post-Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

17.

Dahl

(1998) On Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

18.

Dahlgren

(1995) Television and the Public Sphere: Citizenship, Democracy, and the Media. London: SAGE.

19.

Dahlgren

(2005) The internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication 22(2): 147–162.

20.

Davis

(2009) Typing Politics: The Role of the Blogs in American Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

21.

Delli Carpini

(2012) Entertainment media and the political engagement of citizens. In: Semetko

Scammell

(eds) The Sage Handbook of Political Communication.

22.

Diamond

(1999) Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

23.

Diamond

(2008) The Spirit of Democracy: The Struggle to Build Free Societies Throughout the World. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

24.

Diamond

Linz

Lipset

(1995) Politics in Developing Countries: Comparing Experiences with Democracy. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

25.

Gerhards

Schafer

(2009) Is the internet a better public sphere? Comparing old and new media in the US and Germany. New Media & Society 20(10): 1–18.

26.

Green

A-m

Kirton

(2003) Possibilities for remote participation in trade unions: Mobilising women activists. Industrial Relations Journal 34(4): 319–333.

27.

Habermas

([1962] 1989) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry Into a Category of Bourgeois Society (trans. Burger

). Cambridge: Polity Press.

28.

Habermas

(1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

29.

Habermas

(2009) Political communication in media society: Does democracy still have an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. In: Habermas

(ed.) Europe: The Faltering Project. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp.138–183.

30.

Herman

(2014) Hashtags and human rights–Activism in the age of Twitter. Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs. Available at: http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/publications/ethics_online/0099

31.

Iosifidis

(2011) The public sphere, social networks and public service media. Information, Communication & Society 14(5): 619–637.

32.

Jamieson

Cappella

(2008) Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. New York: Oxford University Press.

33.

Jennings

Zeitner

(2003) Internet use and civic engagement: A longitudinal analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly 67(3): 311–334.

34.

Kaplan

Haenlein

(2010) Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons 53(1): 59–68.

35.

LAPOP (2012) AmericasBarometer: Sample design. Latin American Public Opinion Project. Available at: https://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/ab2012/AB-2012-Tech-Info-12.18.12.pdf

36.

Loader

Mercea

(2011) Introduction: Networking democracy? Social media innovations and participatory politics. Information, Communication & Society 14(6): 757–769.

37.

Long

Freese

(2006) Regression Models for Categorical and Dependent Variables Using Stata, 2nd edn. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.

38.

Nelson

Clawson

Oxley

(1997) Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review 91(3): 567–583.

39.

Norris

(2000) A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.

40.

Nowak

Spiller

(2017) Two billion people coming together on Facebook. Facebook Newsroom. Available at: https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/06/two-billion-people-coming-together-on-facebook/

41.

Orces

(2008) Challenges of tolerance in the Americas. In: Challenges to Democracy in Latin America and the Caribbean. Center for the Americas at Vanderbilt, Latin American Public Opinion Project, United States Agency for International Development, pp.195–214.

42.

Parker

(2014) Social media and the Hong Kong protests. The New Yorker, 1 October. Available at: http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/social-media-hong-kong-protests (accessed 9 December 2014).

43.

Przeworski

(1991) Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.

44.

Rasmussen

(2014) Internet and the political public sphere. Sociology Compass 8: 1315–1329.

45.

Rose

Mishler

(1996) Testing the Churchill hypothesis: Popular support for democracy and its alternatives. Journal of Public Policy 16(1): 29–58.

46.

Salzman

(2012) Understanding news media consumption and political interest in Latin America. Journal of Latin American Communication Research 2(2): 61–81.

47.

Salzman

(2015a) News media consumption and political behavior in Latin America. Journal of Politics in Latin America 7(2): 71–98.

48.

Salzman

(2015b) Understanding social media use among Latin Americans. Palabra Clave 18(3): 842–858.

49.

Salzman

Albarran

(2011) Internet use in Latin America. Palabra Clave 14(2): 297–313.

50.

Shirky

(2011) The political power of social media: Technology, the public sphere, and political change. Foreign Affairs 90: 28–41.

51.

Simcot

(2014) Social media fast facts: Latin America. In: eModeration blog. Available at: http://www.emoderation.com/social-media-fast-facts-latin-america/

52.

Stieglitz

Dang-Xuan

(2013) Social media and political communication: A social media analytics framework. Social Network Analysis and Mining 3(4): 1277–1291.

53.

Susen

(2011) Critical notes on Habermas’s theory of the public sphere. Sociological Analysis 5(1): 37–62.

54.

Tolbert

McNeal

(2003) Unraveling the effects of the internet on political participation. Political Research Quarterly 56(2): 175–185.

55.

Voltmer

(2006) The mass media and the dynamics of political communication in processes of democratization: An introduction. In: Voltmer

(ed.) Mass Media and Political Communication in New Democracies. New York: Routledge.

56.

Ward

Gibson

Lusoli

(2003) Online participation and mobilisation in Britain: Hype, hope, and reality. Parliamentary Affairs 56(4): 652–668.

57.

Ward

Owen

Davis

et al . (2008) Making a Difference: A Comparative View of the Role of the Internet in Election Politics. New York: Lexington Books.

58.

Woolridge

(2006) Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, 3rd edn. Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.

59.

Wright

(2012) Politics as usual? Revolution, normalization and a new agenda for online deliberation. New Media & Society 14(2): 244–261.

60.

Zuniga

Jung

Valenzuela

(2012) Social media use for news and individuals, social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17(3): 319–344.