How Twitter drives the global news agenda: Tweets from Brazil,Russia,India,China,the UK and US and online discourse about the 2016 US presidential election

Abstract

A manual content analysis compares 6019 Twitter comments from six countries during the 2016 US presidential election. Twitter comments were positive about Trump and negative about Clinton in Russia, the US and also in India and China. In the UK and Brazil, Twitter comments were largely negative about both candidates. Twitter sources for Clinton comments were more frequently from journalists and news companies, and still more negative than positive in tone. Topics on Twitter varied from those in mainstream news media. This foundational study expands communications research on social media, as well as political communications and international distinctions.

Keywords

Agenda-building agenda-setting Brazil China elections India Russia social media Twitter UK

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aalberg

Strömbäck

de Vreese

(2012) The framing of politics as strategy and game: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism 13(2): 162–178.

Albright

(2016) The #Election2016 macro-propaganda machine? Available at: https://medium.com

Anderson

(2017) Every woman is the wrong woman: The female presidentiality paradox. Women's Studies in Communication 40(2): 132–135.

Armstrong

Gao

(2011) Gender, Twitter and news content: An examination across platforms and coverage areas. Journalism Studies 12(4): 490–505.

Benkler

Faris

Roberts

, et al. (2017) Study: Breitbart-led right-wing media ecosystem altered broader media agenda. Columbia Journalism Review, 3 March. Available at: https://www.cjr.org/

Bennett

(1990) Toward a theory of press state relations in the United States. Journal of Communication 40(2): 103–125.

Benoit

Stein

Hansen

(2005) New York Times coverage of presidential campaigns. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 82(2): 356–376.

Bruno

(2011) Tweet first, verify later? How real-time information is changing the coverage of worldwide crisis events. Reuters Institute Fellowship Paper, University of Oxford. Available at: http://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk

Chang

T-K

(1998) All countries not created equal to be news: World system and international communication. Communication Research 25(5): 528–563.

10.

Chin

Abkowitz

(2016) Twitter goes on defensive about China Head’s background. The Wall Street Journal, 20 April. Available at: http://www.wsj.com

11.

Chou

(2016) The Most Widely Shared Election News? Nasty, Brutish and Short. . .and About Donald Trump. MIT Media Lab. Available at: https://medium.com/mit-media-lab/

12.

Cobb

Elder

(1972) Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda-Building. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

13.

Dearing

Rogers

(1996) Agenda-Setting. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

14.

Dwoskin

Entous

Demirjian

(2017) Twitter finds hundreds of accounts tied To Russian operatives. The Washington Post, 28 September. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com

15.

Entman

(1993) Framing: Towards clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43(4): 51–58.

16.

Entman

(2008) Theorizing mediated public diplomacy. The International Journal of Press/Politics 13: 87–102.

17.

Fallows

(2017) The Hillary emails. The Atlantic, 28 September. Available at: https://www.theatlantic.com

18.

Fandos

Shane

(2017) Senator berates Twitter over ‘inadequate’ inquiry into Russian meddling. The New York Times, 28 September, A1.

19.

Fox-Brewster

(2016) Donald Trump’s Instagram following is full of bots and Russians. Forbes, 7 November. Available at: https://www.forbes.com

20.

Gans

(1979) Deciding What’s News: A Study of the CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. New York: Vintage.

21.

Gitlin

(1980) The Whole World Is Watching: Mass Media in the Making and Unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

22.

Gleason

(2010) Harnessing social media: News outlets are assigning staffers to focus on networking. American Journalism Review 11(3): 49–67.

23.

Golan

Wanta

(2001) Second-level agenda-setting in the New Hampshire primary: A comparison of coverage in three newspaper and public perceptions of candidates. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 78: 247–259.

24.

Golan

Himelboim

(2016) Can world system theory predict news flow on twitter? The case of government-sponsored broadcasting. Information Communication & Society 19(8): 1150–1170.

25.

Golan

Viatchaninova

(2016) The advertorial as a tool of mediated public diplomacy. Journal of International Communication 8: 21–37.

26.

Greer

Ferguson

(2011) Using Twitter for promotion and branding: A content analysis of local television Twitter sites. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 55(2): 198–214.

27.

Gruszczynski

Wagner

(2016) Information flow in the 21st century: The dynamics of agenda-uptake. Mass Communication and Society 20(3): 378–402.

28.

Guo

Vargo

(2017) Global Intermedia agenda setting: A big data analysis of international news flow. Journal of Communication 67: 499–520.

29.

Gurman

Ellenberger

(2015) Reaching the global community during disasters: Findings from a content analysis of the organizational use of twitter after the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Journal of Health Communication 20(6): 687–696.

30.

Hall

(1976) Beyond Culture. New York, NY: Doubleday.

31.

Hermida

(2010) Twittering the news: The emergence of ambient journalism. Journalism Practice 4(3): 297–308.

32.

Hermida

(2013) #JOURNALISM: Reconfiguring journalism research about T, one tweet at a time. Digital Journalism 1(3): 295–313.

33.

Hermida

Lewis

Zamith

(2014) Sourcing the Arab spring: A case study of Andy Carvin’s sources on Twitter during the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 19(3): 479–499.

34.

Hofstede

(1993) Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Administrative Science Quarterly 38((1)): 132–134.

35.

Holton

Lewis

(2011) Journalists, social media, and the use of humor on Twitter. Electronic Journal of Communication 21: 1–22.

36.

Howard

Kollanyi

Bradshaw

, et al. (2017) Social Media, News & Political Information During the US Election: Was Polarizing Content Concentrated in Swing States? The Project on Computational Propaganda. Oxford Internet Institute. Available at: http://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk

37.

Isaac

Ember

(2016) For election day influence, Twitter ruled social media. The New York Times, 8 November, B3.

38.

Jang

Park

(2017) Redirecting the focus of the agenda: Testing the zero-sum dynamics of media attention in news and user-generated media. Journal of International Communication 11: 3998–4017.

39.

Kim

Xiang

Kiousis

(2011) Agenda-building effects by 2008 presidential candidates on global media coverage and public opinion. Public Relations Review 37(1): 109–111.

40.

Kiousis

Kim

Ragas

, et al. (2015) Exploring new frontiers of agenda building during the 2012 US presidential election pre-convention period. Journalism Studies 16(3): 363–382.

41.

Kiousis

Kim

McDevitt

, et al. (2009) Competing for attention: Information subsidy influence in agenda building during election campaigns. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 86(3): 545–562.

42.

Kiousis

Mitrook

, et al. (2006) First- and second-level agenda-building and agenda-setting effects: Exploring the linkages among candidate news releases, media coverage and public opinion during the 2002 Florida gubernatorial election. Journal of Public Relations Research 18(3): 265–285.

43.

Kottasova

(2016) A third of pro-Trump tweets are generated by bots. CNN.com, 18 October. Available at: money.cnn.com

44.

Lams

(2016) China: Economic magnet or rival? Framing of China in the Dutch- and French-language elite press in Belgium and the Netherlands. International Communication Gazette 78(1–2): 137–156.

45.

Lasorsa

Lewis

Holton

(2012) Normalizing Twitter: Journalism practice in an emerging communication space. Journalism Studies 13(1): 19–36.

46.

Lawrence

Molyneux

Coddington

, et al. (2014) Tweeting conventions: Political journalists' use of Twitter to cover the 2012 presidential campaign. Journalism Studies 15(6): 789–806.

47.

Lee

Kim

(2016) Tweeting public affairs or personal affairs? Journalists’ tweets, interactivity, and ideology. Journalism 17(7): 845–864.

48.

Lewis

Zamith

Hermida

(2013) Content analysis in an era of big data: A hybrid approach to computational and manual methods. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 57(1): 34–52.

49.

Lewis

Zamith

(2015) On the worlds of journalism. In: Boczknowski

Anderson

(eds) Remaking the news: Essays on the future of journalism scholarship in the digital age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp.111–128.

50.

Liu

Kliman-Silver

Mislove

(2014) The tweets they are a-changin’: Evolution of twitter users and behavior. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, 16 May. Available at: https://www.aaai.org

51.

Lotan

Graeff

Ananny

, et al. (2011) The revolutions were tweeted: Information flows during the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. Journal of International Communication 5: 1375–1405.

52.

Lowery

(2009) An explosion prompts rethinking of Twitter and Facebook. In: Nieman reports. Nieman foundation for Journalism at Harvard, Fall.

53.

Lynch

(2016) Fake news and the internet shell game. The New York Times, 28 November, A29.

54.

Maheshwari

(2016) How fake news goes viral: A case study. The New York Times, 20 November. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/business/media/how-fake-news-spreads.html

55.

Manjoo

(2016) Breaking up with Twitter. The New York Times, 12 November. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/fashion/breaking-up-with-twitter-presidential-election-2016.html

56.

McCombes

Lopez-Escobar

Llamas

(2000) Setting the agenda of attributes in the 1996 Spanish general election. Journal of Communication 50: 77–92.

57.

McIntire

(2016) How a Putin fan overseas pushed pro-Trump propaganda to Americans. The New York Times, 17 December. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com

58.

Meraz

(2011) Using time series analysis to measure intermedia agenda-setting influence in traditional media and political blog networks. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 88(1): 176–194.

59.

Molyneux

(2015) What journalists retweet: Opinion, humor, and brand development on Twitter. Journalism 16(7): 920–935.

60.

Moody

Cohen

Fournon

(2013) Negativity in a twitter age: How politicians are adapting to social media. Journal of Mass Communication and Journalism 3(3): 151–158.

61.

Nakashima

Demirjian

Barrett

(2017) FBI director Comey confirms probe of possible coordination between Kremlin and Trump campaign. The Washington Post, 20 March. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/

62.

Ono

Yang Jiao

(2008) China in the US imaginary: Tibet, the Olympics and the 2008 earthquake. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 5: 406–410.

63.

Pan

Kosicki

(2003) Framing as a strategic action in publication deliberation. In: Reese

Gandy

Grant

(eds) Framing public life. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.35–66.

64.

Parmelee

(2014) The agenda-building function of political tweets. New Media & Society 16(3): 434–450.

65.

Patterson

(1993) Out of Order. New York, NY: Vintage.

66.

Patterson

(2016) News coverage of the 2016 general election: How the press failed the voters. Available at: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election

67.

Pérez Curiel

Limón Naharro

(2019) Political influencers. A study of Donald Trump’s personal brand on Twitter and its impact on the media and online readers. Communication & Society 32(1): 57–75.

68.

Picard

(2009) Blogs, tweets, social media, and the news business. Nieman reports, journalism and social media. Available at: https://niemanreports.org/articles/blogs-tweets-social-media-and-the-news-business/

69.

Salwen

Matera

(1992) Public salience of foreign nations. Journalism Quarterly 69(3): 623–632.

70.

Segesten

Bossetta

(2017) A typology of political participation online: How citizens used Twitter to mobilize during the 2015 British general elections. Information Communication & Society 20(11): 1625–1643.

71.

Sheafer

Gabay

(2009) Mediated public diplomacy: A strategic contest over international agenda building and frame building. Political Communication 26(4): 447–467.

72.

Shoemaker

Reese

(1996) Mediating the Message: Theories of Influence on Mass Media Content. New York, NY: Longman.

73.

Silverman

(2016) This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook. Buzzfeed, 16 November. Available at: https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman

74.

Statista (2018) Number of active Twitter users in selected countries. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/242606/number-of-active-twitter-users-in-selected-countries/

75.

Stone

Gordon

(2017) FBI’s Russian-Influence Probe Includes a Look at Far-Right News Sites. McClatchy Washington Bureau. Available at: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news

76.

Thomas

McDowell-Taylor

(2019) UK election 2019: How the growing reach of alt-media is shaping the campaign. The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/uk-election-2019-how-the-growing-reach-of-alt-media-is-shaping-the-campaign-126947

77.

Timberg

(2017) As conservative Twitter use sleeps, his account is hard at work. The Washington Post, 5 February. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com

78.

Tuchman

(1978) Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. New York, NY: Free Press.

79.

Vargo

Guo

(2017) Networks, big data, and Intermedia agenda setting: An analysis of traditional, partisan, and emerging online U.S. News. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 94: 1031–1055.

80.

Vargo

Guo

Amazeen

(2017) The agenda-setting power of fake news: A big data analysis of the online media landscape from 2014 to 2016. New Media & Society, 15 June. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444817712086

81.

Wagner

Trimble

Sampert

, et al. (2017) Gender, competitiveness, and candidate visibility in newspaper coverage of Canadian party leadership contests. International Journal of Press/Politics 22(4): 471–489.

82.

Walsh

(2019) UK election 2019: Here’s how the parties’ social media campaigns have fared so far. The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/uk-election-2019-heres-how-the-parties-social-media-campaigns-have-fared-so-far-126444

83.

Wanta

Golan

Lee

(2004) Agenda setting and international news: Media influence on public perceptions of foreign nations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 81(2): 364–377.

84.

Wanta

(1993) The agenda-setting effects of international news coverage: An examination of differing news frames. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 5(3): 250–264.

85.

Xiang

(2013) China’s image on international English language social media. Journal of International Communication 19(2): 252–271.