Polarización en Twitter. El caso de Brasil a través de cinco conflictos políticos

  1. Eva Campos-Domínguez 1
  2. Claudio Penteado 2
  3. Emerson Cervi 3
  1. 1 Universidad de Valladolid
    info

    Universidad de Valladolid

    Valladolid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01fvbaw18

  2. 2 Universidade Federal do ABC
    info

    Universidade Federal do ABC

    Santo André, Brasil

    ROR https://ror.org/028kg9j04

  3. 3 Universidad Federal do Paraná
Montrer des affiliations +
Revue:
Cultura, lenguaje y representación = Culture, language and representation: revista de estudios culturales de la Universitat Jaume I = cultural studies journal of Universitat Jaume I

ISSN: 1697-7750

Année de publication: 2021

Titre de la publication: Lenguaje y política / Language and politics

Número: 26

Pages: 127-147

Type: Article

DOI: 10.6035/CLR.5837 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAccès ouvert editor

D'autres publications dans: Cultura, lenguaje y representación = Culture, language and representation: revista de estudios culturales de la Universitat Jaume I = cultural studies journal of Universitat Jaume I

Résumé

his research focuses on transformations in the digital public sphere. Its objective is to analyze Twitter profiles in the polarization of discursive political conflicts. Through the analysis of five different conflicts in Brazil, registered during 2020, this work studies the 500 accounts that registered the highest number of retweets within a sample of 447,762 messages collected through hashtags, which totaled 334,588 retweets. Applying a standardized residual analysis, using R language, the objectives are to identify if there is indeed ideological polarization in the public debate on Twitter and to identify the type of profile that generates, if applicable, that polarization on Twitter. Although the data refer only to a specific case study in Brazil, the results provide value for a broader analysis, given that the Brazilian political and social context raises high levels of confrontation and political polarization with international projection. The results allow us to point out that the digital public sphere is dynamic, the predominance of personalization and customization of the public debate, increased with the entry of new actors or sources in the political discussion and the loss of space as a source of information in the public debate by part of classical actors such as the media.

Références bibliographiques

  • Barberá, Pablo, & Zeitzoff, Thomas. 2018. The new public address system: why do world leaders adopt social media?. International Studies Quarterly, 62(1), 121-130.
  • Bruns, Axl. 2019. Are filter bubbles real?. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Carvalho, Cássia de França, Fabrício, Goya, Denise., & de Camargo Penteado, Claudio 2016. Brazilians divided: Political protests as told by twitter. In Transactions on Large-Scale Data-and Knowledge-Centered Systems XXVII (pp. 1-18). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  • Castells, Manuel. 2015. Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Chadwick, Andrew. 2017. The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press.
  • De Blasio, Emiliana., Kneuer, Mariane, Schünemann, Wolf & Sorice, Michele. 2020. The Ongoing Transformation of the Digital Public Sphere: Basic Considerations on a Moving Target.
  • Dahlberg, Lincoln. 2007, “Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: from consensus to contestation”, New Media & Society, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 827-847.
  • De Blasio, Emiliana, Sorice, Michele. 2018. Populism between direct democracy and the technological myth. Palgrave Commun 4, 15.
  • Dufva, Tommi & Dufva, Mikko. 2019. Grasping the future of the digital society. Futures, 107, 17-28.
  • Freelon, Deen., McIlwain, Charlton., & Clark, Meredith. 2018. Quantifying the power and consequences of social media protest. New Media & Society, 20(3), 990-1011.
  • García Marzá, Domingo. 1999. Teoria de la democràcia. Colección Universitas, 3. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.
  • Gerbaudo, Paolo. 2018. Social media and populism: an elective affinity?. Media, Culture & Society, 40(5), 745-753.
  • Gerbaudo, Paolo. 2012. Tweets and the streets: Social media and contemporary activism. Pluto Press.
  • Igual Castelló, Cristina. 2017. «Solimàn el Magnifico y Roxolona. El poder del turco en la cultura visual y escrita de Occidente». Potestas, 9: 233–260.
  • Laclau, Ernesto & Mouffe, Chantal. 2014. Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. Verso Trade.
  • López Cantos, Francisco José. 2016a. Tecnología audiovisual. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.
  • López Cantos, Francisco José. 2016b. Tecnología de la comunicación. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.
  • Luengo, Óscar; Fernández-García, Belén. 2019. Campaign Coverage in Spain: Populism, Emerging Parties, and Personalization. In Mediated Campaigns and Populism in Europe (pp. 99-121). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
  • Montlleó Peris, Rosa, Iván Medall Peris y Alfredo Fornas Pallarés. 2014. Biografies rescatades del silenci. Experiències de guerra i posguerra a Castelló. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.
  • Moro Ipola, Micaela y Laura Mezquita Guillamón. 2015. Entrena't les neurones: programa de rehabilitació neurocognitiva per a pacients amb trastorn mental greu. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.
  • Giuseppe & Lipizzi, Carlo. 2017. Measuring polarization in twitter enabled in online political conversation: The case of 2016 us presidential election, in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI), pp. 607–613, 2017.
  • TERMCAT. 2008. Diccionari d'infermeria. Madrid: LID.
  • Recuero, Raquel, Zago, Gabriela, Bastos, Marco & Araújo, Ricardo. 2015. Hashtags functions in the protests across Brazil. Sage Open, 5(2), 2158244015586000.
  • Serrano-Contreras, Ignacio-Jesús. García-Marín, Javier, & Luengo, Óscar. 2020. Measuring online political dialogue: does polarization trigger more deliberation?. Media and Communication, 8(4), 63-72.
  • Soares, Felipe, Recuero, Raquel., & Zago, Gabriela. 2019. Asymmetric polarization on Twitter and the 2018 Brazilian presidential elections. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on social media and society (pp. 67-76).
  • Solà, Joan. 2008. «Castelló 75». En Les Normes de Castelló fan 75 anys. Homenatge de la premsa, ed. Vicent Pitarch. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.
  • Souza, Rafael Martins, Graça, Luís Felipe & Silva, Ralf. 2017. Politics on the web: using twitter to estimate the ideological positions of Brazilian representatives. Brazilian Political Science Review, 11(3).
  • Strömbäck, Jesper, & Luengo, Óscar G. 2008. Polarized pluralist and democratic corporatist models: A comparison of election news coverage in Spain and Sweden. International Communication Gazette, 70(6), 547-562.
  • Stromer-Galley, Jennifer. 2019. Presidential campaigning in the Internet age. Oxford University Press.
  • van Dijck, Jose., Poell, Thomas & de Waal, Martijn. 2018. Platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Welch, Kathleen E. 1999. Electric Rhetoric: Classical Rhetoric, Oralism and a New Literacy. Cambridge: MIT Press. http://netlibrary.com.
  • Woolley, Samuel, & Howard, Philip. 2017. Computational propaganda worldwide: Executive summary.
La source de données: Dialnet