Drowning Out the Message: How Online Comments on News Stories About Nike’s Ad Campaign Contributed to Polarization and Gatekeeping

Abstract

This study examined audience commentary on Fox News, Cable News Network, and MSNBC’s YouTube and Facebook platforms associated with news stories on Nike’s selection of controversial former National Football League quarterback Colin Kaepernick as the spokesman for its 2018 campaign. The study, using the theory of gatekeeping as a starting point, sought evidence for a drowning effect, in which the audience strayed from the primary message of the journalism presented to it. Content analysis revealed a significant drowning effect across platforms and outlets.

Keywords

gatekeeping polarization social media drowning effect Nike

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abad-Santos

(2018). Nike’s Colin Kaepernick ad sparked a boycott—And earned US$6 billion for Nike. Vox. https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17895704/nike-colin-kaepernick-boycott-6-billion

Barzilai-Nahon

(2008). Toward a theory of network gatekeeping: A framework for exploring information control. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 1493–1512.

Bieler

Bonesteel

(2018). What was Nike thinking? Trump reacts to Nike ad featuring Colin Kaepernick. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2018/09/06/nikes-colin-kaepernick-ad-airs-during-nfl-season-opener-on-nbc/?utm_term=7080a63bb8fa

Bociurkiw

(2008). Commentary: Put on your bunny ears, take your TV around the block: Old and new discourses of gender and nation in mobile, digital, and HDTV. Canadian Journal of Communication, 33(3), 537–544.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Bro

Wallberg

(2015). Gatekeeping in a digital era. Journalism Practice, 9(1), 92–105.

Bruns

(2008). The active audience: Transforming journalism from gatekeeping to gatewatching. In Paterson

C. A.

Domingo

(Eds.), Making online news: The ethnography of new media production (pp. 171–184). Peter Lang

Cho

Hong

(2009). Netizens’ evaluations of corporate social responsibility: Content analysis of CSR news stories and online readers’ comments. Public Relations Review, 35(2), 147–149.

Ciszek

E. L.

(2016). Digital activism: How social media and dissensus inform theory and practice. Public Relations Review, 42(2), 314–321.

10.

Coddington

Holton

(2014). When the gates swing open: Examining network gatekeeping in a social media setting. Mass Communication & Society, 17(2), 236–257.

11.

Cohen

(1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46.

12.

Dupont

(2018). Let’s look at the impact of the Nike ad featuring Colin Kaepernick. The Boston Globe. https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/patriots/2018/09/08/looking-impact-nike-featuring-colin-kaepernick/BQIWws5enExbAzHbkbvt6K/story.html

13.

Erzikova

Gandy

Hall

Kuntz

. (2016, July 12–13). The 2014 NFL player Ray Rice domestic abuse case: An analysis of factors that contributed to tweet popularity during the scandal. In 3rd European conference on social media research EM normandie (pp. 75–82).

14.

Erzikova

Simpson

(2018). When the gated misbehave: Online reader comments on Anthony Weiner’s sexting scandal. Journalism Practice, 12(9), 1148–1164.

15.

Flaxman

Goel

Rao

J. M.

(2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80, 298–320.

16.

Gálvez-Rodríguez

M. D. M.

Caba-Pérez

López-Godoy

(2016). Drivers of Twitter as a strategic communication tool for non-profit organizations. Internet Research, 26(5), 1052–1071.

17.

Gandy

Erzikova

(2017). Exploring crisis management via Twitter in the age of political transparency. In Austin

Jin

(Eds.), Social media and crisis communication (pp. 321–334). Routledge.

18.

Gassam

(2018). Nike’s new ad features Colin Kaepernick: A good business decision or a bad move? https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2018/09/05/nikes-new-ad-features-colin-kaepernick-a-good-business-decision-or-a-bad-move/#742592671458

19.

Hamdy

Gomaa

E. H.

(2012). Framing the Egyptian uprising in Arabic language newspapers and social media. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 195–211.

20.

Han

Federico

C. M.

(2017). Conflict-framed news, self-categorization, and partisan polarization. Mass Communication & Society, 20(4), 455–480.

21.

Han

Wackman

D. B.

(2017). Partisan self-stereotyping: Testing the salience hypothesis in a prediction of political polarization. International Journal of Communication, 11, 603–605.

22.

Hansen

D. L.

Shneiderman

Smith

M. A.

(2010). Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world. Morgan Kaufmann

23.

Hong

Cameron

G. T.

(2018). Will comments change your opinion? The persuasion effects of online comments and heuristic cues in crisis communication. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26, 173–182.

24.

Kane

Tiell

(2017). Application of normative ethics to explain Colin Kaepernick’s silent protest in the NFL. The Sport Journal, 19, 1–11.

25.

Kim

(2017). Knowledge versus beliefs: How knowledge and beliefs mediate the influence of likeminded media use on political polarization and participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61(4), 658–681.

26.

Klostermann

(2015). YouTube comment scraper. Web-based application. http://ytcomments.klostermann.ca/.

27.

Lee

Shin

Hong

(2018). Does social media use really make people politically polarized? Direct and indirect effects of social media use on political polarization in South Korea. Telematics & Informatics, 35(1), 245–254.

28.

Lee

J. K.

Choi

Kim

(2014). Social media, network heterogeneity, and opinion polarization. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 702–722.

29.

Liu

Shi

(2018). How do online comments affect perceived descriptive norms of e-cigarette use? The role of quasi-statistical sense, valence perceptions, and exposure dosage. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 24(1), 1–20.

30.

Malone

(2008). The sky’s the limit for stations online. Broadcasting & Cable, 137(16), 44–47.

31.

Marie-Claire

(2010). Changing the meaning of peer-to-peer? Exploring online spaces as sites of negotiated expertise. Journal of Science Communication, 9(1), 1–13.

32.

McHugh

M. L.

(2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282.

33.

Meirick

P. C.

(2013). Motivated misperception? Party, education, partisan news, and belief in “death panels”. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 90(1), 39–57.

34.

Neubaum

Krämer

N. C.

(2017). Opinion climates in social media: Blending mass and interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 43(4), 464–476.

35.

Paskin

(2010). Say what? Journal of International Communication, 16(2), 67–83.

36.

Pew Research Center. (2018). Social media fact sheet. http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/social-media/

37.

Richardson

J. E.

Stanyer

(2011). Reader opinion in the digital age: Tabloid and broadsheet newspaper websites and the exercise of political voice. Journalism, 12(8), 983–1003.

38.

Schultz

Sheffer

(2008). Left behind: Local television and the community of sport. Western Journal of Communication, 72(2), 180–195.

39.

Shoemaker

P. J.

Johnson

P. R.

Seo

Wang

(2010). Readers as gatekeepers of online news: Brazil, China, and the United States. Brazilian Journalism Research, 6(1), 55–77.

40.

Shoemaker

P. J.

Vos

(2009). Gatekeeping theory. Routledge.

41.

Singer

J. B.

(2009). Separate spaces: Discourse about the 2007 Scottish elections on a national newspaper web site. International Journal of Press/Politics, 14(4), 477–496.

42.

Singer

J. B.

(2014). User-generated visibility: Secondary gatekeeping in a shared media space. New Media & Society, 76(1), 55–73.

43.

Smith

Anderson

(2018, March 1). Social media use in 2018. http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/

44.

Stephens

K. K.

Malone

P. C.

(2009). If the organizations won’t give us information: The use of multiple new media for crisis technical translation and dialogue. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21(2), 229–239.

45.

Tewksbury

Riles

J. M.

(2015). Polarization as a function of citizen predispositions and exposure to news on the Internet. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(3), 381–398.

46.

Waddell

T. F.

(2018). This tweet brought to you by a journalist: How comment gatekeeping influences online news credibility. Electronic News, 12(4), 218–234.

47.

Welbers

Opgenhaffen

(2018). Social media gatekeeping: An analysis of the gatekeeping influence of newspapers’ public Facebook pages. New Media & Society, 20(12), 4728–4747.

48.

White

D. M.

(1950). The “gate keeper”: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly, 27(4), 383–390.