Politicians on social media curate the flow of information their followers are exposed to, and they share news as a way to do so. Previous research has shown that they are strategic in their selection of news stories—they select specific news items and outlets to appeal to their online audiences. The reach of politicians’ news-sharing posts and their possible effects, are, however, influenced by the extent to which individual social media users engage with them. Combining comparative survey data (N = 22,145) with Facebook posts (N = 21,113) by 2,021 MPs in 15 European countries, this article zooms in on user engagement with politicians’ online news-sharing posts. Results show that, in general, news content and message cues can drive user engagement, and that news outlet characteristics do not. Nevertheless, the ideological closeness between a politician and the news outlet, which was found to predict politicians’ online news-sharing behavior, does positively influence reactions in media systems with high levels of political parallelism. These findings shed a new light on partisan selective exposure following politicians’ news recommendations in the digital information environment.
AnspachN. M.2017. “The New Personal Influence: How Our Facebook Friends Influence the News We Read.” Political Communication34(4):590–606. doi:10.1080/10584609.2017.1316329.
2.
ArendtF.NorthupT.CamajL.2019. Selective Exposure and News Media Brands: Implicit and Explicit Attitudes as Predictors of News Choice. Media Psychology, 22(3): 526–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2017.1338963
3.
BaileyO. G.CammaertB.CarpentierN.2007. Understanding Alternative Media. Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
4.
BeneM.2017. “Go Viral on the Facebook! Interactions Between Candidates and Followers on Facebook During the Hungarian General Election Campaign of 2014.” Information, Communication & Society20(4):513–29. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2016.1198411.
5.
BeneM.CeronA.FenollV.HaßlerJ.KruschinskiS.LarssonA. O.MaginM.SchlosserK.WurstA.-K.2022. “Keep Them Engaged! Investigating the Effects of Self-centered Social Media Communication Style on User Engagement in 12 European Countries.” Political Communication39(4):429–53. doi:10.1080/10584609.2022.2042435.
6.
BoehmerJ.TandocE.2015. “Why We Retweet: Factors Influencing Intentions to Share Sport News on Twitter.” International Journal of Sport Communication8(2):212–32. doi:10.1123/IJSC.2015-0011.
7.
BrüggemannM.EngesserS.BüchelF.HumprechtE.CastroL.2014. “Hallin and Mancini Revisited: Four Empirical Types of Western Media Systems.” Journal of Communication64(6):1037–65. doi:10.1111/jcom.12127.
8.
BuyensW.Van AelstP.2022. “Alternative Media, Alternative Voices? A Quantitative Analysis of Actor Diversity in Alternative and Mainstream News Outlets.” Digital Journalism10(2):337–59. doi:10.1080/21670811.2021.1929366.
9.
BuyensW.Van AelstP.PaulussenS.2024. “Curating the News. Analyzing Politicians’ News Sharing Behavior on Social Media in Three Countries.” Information, Communication & Society1–17. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2024.2317901.
10.
BuyensW.Van AelstP.VaccariC.2024. “The Same Views, the Same News? A 15-Country Study on News Sharing on Social Media by European Politicians.” Political Communication 42(1): 27–56. doi:10.1080/10584609.2024.2352795.
11.
CastroL.StrömbäckJ.EsserF.Van AelstP.de VreeseC.AalbergT.CardenalA. S.CorbuN.HopmannD. N.Koc-MichalskaK.MatthesJ.SchemerC.SheaferT.SplendoreS.StanyerJ.StępińskaA.ŠtětkaV.TheocharisY.2022. “Navigating High-Choice European Political Information Environments: A Comparative Analysis of News User Profiles and Political Knowledge.” The International Journal of Press/Politics27(4):827–59. doi:10.1177/19401612211012572.
12.
ChinnS.Hiaeshutter-RiceD.ChenK.2023. “How Science Influencers Polarize Supportive and Skeptical Communities Around Politicized Science: A Cross-Platform and Over-Time Comparison.” Political Communication41(4):627–48. doi:10.1080/10584609.2023.2201174.
13.
DunL.SorokaS.2021. “Dictionaries, Supervised Learning, and Media Coverage of Public Policy.” Political Communication38(1–2):140–58. doi:10.1080/10584609.2020.1763529.
14.
EberlJ.-M.TolochkoP.JostP.HeidenreichT.BoomgaardenH. G.2020. “What’s in a Post? How Sentiment and Issue Salience Affect Users’ Emotional Reactions on Facebook.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics17(1):48–65. doi:10.1080/19331681.2019.1710318.
15.
EkmanM.WidholmA.2015. “Politicians as Media Producers: Current Trajectories in the Relation Between Journalists and Politicians in the Age of Social Media. Journalism Practice9(1):78–91. doi:10.1080/17512786.2014.928467.
16.
FlaxmanS.GoelS.RaoJ. M.2016. “Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption.” Public Opinion Quarterly80(S1):298–320. doi:10.1093/poq/nfw006.
17.
HaimM.KümpelA. S.BrosiusH.-B.2018. “Popularity Cues in Online Media: A Review of Conceptualizations, Operationalizations, and General Effects. Studies in Communication | Media7(2):186–207. doi:10.5771/2192-4007-2018-2-58.
18.
HallinD. C.ManciniP.2004. Comparing Media Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19.
HeidenreichT.EberlJ.-M.TolochkoP.LindF.BoomgaardenH. G.2022. “My Voters Should See This! What News Items Are Shared by Politicians on Facebook?” The International Journal of Press/Politics29(1):5–25. doi:10.1177/19401612221104740.
20.
HeissR.SchmuckD.MatthesJ.2019. “What Drives Interaction in Political Actors’ Facebook Posts? Profile and Content Predictors of User Engagement and Political Actors’ Reactions. Information, Communication & Society22(10):1497–513. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2018.1445273.
21.
HoltK.Ustad FigenschouT.FrischlichL.2019. “Key Dimensions of Alternative News Media.” Digital Journalism7(7):860–9. doi:10.1080/21670811.2019.1625715.
22.
HumprechtE.Castro HerreroL.BlassnigS.BrüggemannM.EngesserS.2022. «Media Systems in the Digital Age: An Empirical Comparison of 30 Countries.” Journal of Communication72(2):145–64. doi:10.1093/joc/jqab054.
23.
IyengarS.HahnK. S.2009. “Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use.” Journal of Communication59(1):19–39. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x.
24.
JamiesonK. H.CappellaJ. N.2008. Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. 1st Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
JostP.2020. “Populism Fuels Love and Anger: The Impact of Message Features on Users’ Reactions on Facebook.” International Journal of Communication14:2081–102.
27.
KaiserJ.KellerT. R.Kleinen-von KönigslöwK.2021. “Incidental News Exposure on Facebook as a Social Experience: The Influence of Recommender and Media Cues on News Selection.” Communication Research48(1):77–99. doi:10.1177/0093650218803529.
28.
KarlsenR.2015. “Followers are Opinion Leaders: The Role of People in the Flow of Political Communication on and Beyond Social Networking Sites.” European Journal of Communication30(3):301–18. doi:10.1177/0267323115577305.
29.
KatzE.LazarsfeldP. F.1955. Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. London: Routledge.
30.
KlingerU.SvenssonJ.2015. “The Emergence of Network Media Logic in Political Communication: A Theoretical Approach. New Media & Society17(8):1241–57. doi:10.1177/1461444814522952.
31.
KritzingerS.FoucaultM.LachatR.PartheymüllerJ.PlesciaC.BrouardS.2021. “‘Rally Round the Flag’: The COVID-19 Crisis and Trust in the National Government.” West European Politics44(5–6):1205–31. doi:10.1080/01402382.2021.1925017.
32.
KümpelA. S.2019. “The Issue Takes It All? Incidental News Exposure and News Engagement on Facebook.” Digital Journalism7(2):165–86. doi:10.1080/21670811.2018.1465831.
33.
MeddersR. B.MetzgerM. J.2018. The Role of News Brands and Leads in Exposure to Political Information on the Internet. Digital Journalism6(5): 599–618. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1320770
34.
MessingS.WestwoodS. J.2014. “Selective Exposure in the Age of Social Media: Endorsements Trump Partisan Source Affiliation When Selecting News Online.” Communication Research41(8):1042–63. doi:10.1177/0093650212466406.
35.
MüllerP.SchulzA.2021. “Alternative Media for a Populist Audience? Exploring Political and Media Use Predictors of Exposure to Breitbart, Sputnik, and Co. Information, Communication & Society24(2):277–93. doi:10.1080/1369118x.2019.1646778.
36.
NewmanN.FletcherR.EddyK.RobertsonC. T.NielsenR. K.2023. Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2023. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
37.
NielsenR. K.VaccariC.2013. “Do People ‘Like’ Politicians on Facebook? Not Really. Large-Scale Direct Candidate-to-Voter Online Communication as an Outlier Phenomenon.” International Journal of Communication7: 2333–56.
38.
PariserE.2011. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding from you. London: Penguin Books.
39.
PeetersJ.OpgenhaffenM.KreutzT.Van AelstP.2023. “Understanding the Online Relationship Between Politicians and Citizens. A Study on the User Engagement of Politicians’ Facebook Posts in Election and Routine Periods. Journal of Information Technology & Politics20(1):44–59. doi:10.1080/19331681.2022.2029791.
40.
Seymour-UreC. (1974). The political impact of mass media (Vol. 4). London: Constable.
41.
SingerJ. B.2014. “User-Generated Visibility: Secondary Gatekeeping in a Shared Media Space.” New Media & Society16(1):55–73. doi:10.1177/1461444813477833
42.
SorokaS.DakuM.Hiaeshutter-RiceD.GuggenheimL.PasekJ.2018. “Negativity and Positivity Biases in Economic News Coverage: Traditional Versus Social Media.” Communication Research45(7): 1078–98. doi:10.1177/0093650217725870.
43.
SunsteinC. R. (2007). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
44.
TewksburyD.WeaverA. J.MaddexB. D.2001. “Accidentally Informed: Incidental News Exposure on the World Wide Web.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly78(3):533–54. doi:10.1177/107769900107800309.
45.
ThorsonK.WellsC.2016. “Curated Flows: A Framework for Mapping Media Exposure in the Digital Age.” Communication Theory26(3):309–28. doi:10.1111/COMT.12087.
46.
TrillingD.TolochkoP.BurscherB.2017. “From Newsworthiness to Shareworthiness.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly94(1): 38–60.
47.
VaccariC.ValerianiA.2015. “Follow the Leader! Direct and Indirect Flows of Political Communication During the 2013 Italian General Election Campaign. New Media & Society17(7):1025–42. doi:10.1177/1461444813511038.
48.
Van AelstP.StrömbäckJ.AalbergTEsserF.de VreeseC.MatthesJ.HopmannD.SalgadoS.HubéN.StępińskaA.PapathanassopoulosS.BerganzaR.LegnanteG.ReinemannC.SheaferT.StanyerJ.2017. “Political Communication in a High-Choice Media Environment: A Challenge for Democracy?Annals of the International Communication Association41(1):3–27. doi:10.1080/23808985.2017.1288551.
49.
Van AelstP.TóthF.CastroL.ŠtětkaV.de VreeseC.AalbergT.CardenalA. S.CorbuN.EsserF.HopmannD. N.Koc-MichalskaK.MatthesJ.SchemerC.SheaferT.SplendoreS.StanyerJ.StępińskaA.StrömbäckJ.TheocharisY.2021. “Does a Crisis Change News Habits? A Comparative Study of the Effects of COVID-19 on News Media Use in 17 European Countries.” Digital Journalism9(9):1316–46. doi:10.1080/21670811.2021.1943481.
50.
Van AtteveldtW.Van der VeldenM. A. C. G.BoukesM.2021. “The Validity of Sentiment Analysis: Comparing Manual Annotation, Crowd-Coding, Dictionary Approaches, and Machine Learning Algorithms.” Communication Methods and Measures15(2):121–40. doi:10.1080/19312458.2020.1869198.
51.
Van KempenH. 2007. “Media-Party Parallelism and Its Effects: A Cross-National Comparative Study.” Political Communication24(3):303–20. doi:10.1080/10584600701471674.
52.
WeberP.2014. “Discussions in the Comments Section: Factors Influencing Participation and Interactivity in Online Newspapers’ Reader Comments. New Media & Society16(6):941–57. doi:10.1177/1461444813495165.
53.
WeeksB. E.LaneD. S.KimD. H.LeeS. S.KwakN.2017. “Incidental Exposure, Selective Exposure, and Political Information Sharing: Integrating Online Exposure Patterns and Expression on Social Media.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication22(6):363–79. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12199.
54.
WinterS.KrämerN. C.2012. Selecting Science Information in Web 2.0: How Source Cues, Message Sidedness, and Need for Cognition Influence Users’ Exposure to Blog Posts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication18(1): 80–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01596.x
55.
WinterS.KrämerN. C.2014. “A Question of Credibility—Effects of Source Cues and Recommendations on Information Selection on News Sites and Blogs. Communications39(4):435–56. doi:10.1515/commun-2014-0020.
56.
YoungL.SorokaS.2012. “Affective News: The Automated Coding of Sentiment in Political Texts.” Political Communication29(2):205–31. doi:10.1080/10584609.2012.671234.
57.
ZiegeleM.BreinerT.QuiringO.2014. “What Creates Interactivity in Online News Discussions? An Exploratory Analysis of Discussion Factors in User Comments on News Items.” Journal of Communication64(6):1111–38. doi:10.1111/jcom.12123.
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.
