Blogging and the public sphere博客與公共領(lǐng)域_第1頁(yè)
Blogging and the public sphere博客與公共領(lǐng)域_第2頁(yè)
Blogging and the public sphere博客與公共領(lǐng)域_第3頁(yè)
Blogging and the public sphere博客與公共領(lǐng)域_第4頁(yè)
Blogging and the public sphere博客與公共領(lǐng)域_第5頁(yè)
已閱讀5頁(yè),還剩19頁(yè)未讀, 繼續(xù)免費(fèi)閱讀

下載本文檔

版權(quán)說(shuō)明:本文檔由用戶(hù)提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請(qǐng)進(jìn)行舉報(bào)或認(rèn)領(lǐng)

文檔簡(jiǎn)介

BloggingandthepublicsphereLifeOnlineBruceFerwerdaTommyvanderVorst31maart2021InthispresentationWhoarethosebloggers?Lenhart&Fox(2006):Aportraitoftheinternet’snewstorytellersWhatdobloggersdo?McKenna&Pole(2007):Whatdobloggersdo:anaveragedayonanaveragepoliticalblogThepowerofweblogsDrezner&Farell(2007):Blogs,politicsandpowerInteractionsamongbloggers:theblogosphereHargittai,Gallo&Kane(2007):Cross-ideologicaldiscussionsamongconservativeandliberalbloggers/InnovationSciencesPAGE14/5/2024Weblogs/InnovationSciencesPAGE24/5/2024Whoarethosebloggers?Let’sthrowinsomestatistics.../InnovationSciencesPAGE34/5/2024Whoarethosebloggers?BloggingisbringingnewvoicestotheonlineworldLenhart&FoxconductedasurveyintheUS:54%ofbloggershaveneverpublishedanywhereelse8%ofinternetusersmaintainsablog39%readblogsVarioustopics&motivesforbloggingHighpercentageofbloggersstop

afterawhile/InnovationSciencesPAGE44/5/2024Whoarethosebloggers?Thebloggingpopulation:Isyoung(54%is<30)ConsistsofasmanywomenasmenMostlyinurban/suburbanareas(13%inruralareas)Lesslikelytobewhitethanaverageinternetuser/InnovationSciencesPAGE54/5/2024Whoarethosebloggers?Blogscanbepersonalorbea‘publicendeavour’:55%ofbloggersuseapseudonymFor84%,bloggingisahobbyor“somethingIdo,butnotsomethingaspendalotoftimeon〞59%spendjustoneortwohoursperweekmaintainingtheirblog52%blogmostlyforthemselves,notforanaudience;32%blogmostlyfortheiraudience(Whyblog‘justforyourself’?)/InnovationSciencesPAGE64/5/2024Whoarethosebloggers?Bloggingvs.Journalism:34%considertheirblogaformofjournalism57%includelinkstooriginalsources‘often’/InnovationSciencesPAGE74/5/2024Whatdobloggersdo?McKenna&Pole(2007):exploratoryempiricalstudyHowdopoliticalbloggersusetheirblogsCategorizationofbloggingactivities:InformeractivitiesWatchdogactivities(“keepinganeyeonmainstreammedia〞)PoliticalactivitiesPhilantropicactivities/InnovationSciencesPAGE84/5/2024Whatdobloggersdo?Findingsaverageblogger≠averagecitizen

(DemographicsdifferfromLenhart&Fox:morewhites,moremales)Informeractivities/InnovationSciencesPAGE94/5/2024Whatdobloggersdo?FindingsWatchdogactivities80%ofbloggersnotifytheirreadersaboutbiasoromissionsinthemediaClosesecondtoinformingactivitiesBloggersdonottrustmainstreammediaButalsorelyonit!Bloggingas‘first-ratejournalism’incountrieswithoutfreepressorinthecaseofevents(i.e.HurricaneKatrina)/InnovationSciencesPAGE104/5/2024Whatdobloggersdo?FindingsPoliticalactivities:2/3ofbloggerswanttoengagepeopleTheywantyou:/InnovationSciencesPAGE114/5/2024Whatdobloggersdo?FindingsPoliticalactivities:2/3ofbloggerswanttoengagepeopleTheywantyou:/InnovationSciencesPAGE124/5/2024Whatdobloggersdo?FindingsPoliticalactivities:2/3ofbloggerswanttoengagepeopleTheywantyou:/InnovationSciencesPAGE134/5/2024Whatdobloggersdo?FindingsPhilantropicactivitiesAskingreaderstodonate(44%)(interestingly,thisislowerthanthe66%donatorsintheUS)Rarelypursuedactivity(i.e.notthe‘corebusiness’)/InnovationSciencesPAGE144/5/2024ThepowerofweblogsDrezner&Farell(2007)Introduction:Blogs,politicsandpower:aspecialissueofPublicChoiceAreblogsindeedimportanttopolitics?Dotheyhaveabeneficialorharmfuleffect?/nameofdepartmentPAGE154/5/2024ThepowerofweblogsDoblogsaffectpolitics?BlogscanbeimportantMoreimportantasreactorstothemediathanindependentagendasettersWhendoesblogshavepoliticalpower?Leasttrustedsourceofnews(BBC/Reuters/MediaCenter2006)/nameofdepartmentPAGE164/5/2024ThepowerofweblogsAreblogsgoodforpolitics?OngoingdiscussionCyberapartheid“...increasingpeople’sabilitytohearechoesoftheirownvoicesandtowallthemselvesofffromothers.〞(Sunstein2001,p.49)Linking&comments/nameofdepartmentPAGE174/5/2024InteractionsamongbloggersHargittai,Gallo&Kane(2007)Cross-ideologicaldiscussionsamongconservativeandliberalbloggersDopeopleabandonthereadingofdissentingpoliticalopinionsinfavorofmaterialthatiscloselyalignedwiththeirownideologicalposition?/nameofdepartmentPAGE184/5/2024InteractionsamongbloggersH1BlogsaremorelikelytolinktoblogsthatmatchtheirideologicalpersuasionH2Theamountofcross-ideologicallinkingamongblogswilledeclineovertimeHargittai,Gallo&Kane(2007)/nameofdepartmentPAGE194/5/2024InteractionsamongbloggersCross-ideologicallinkagesinthepoliticalblogosphereBlogrollconnections27%presentedinthewholenetwork91%resembleideologicalpositions9%differentviewpoints/nameofdepartmentPAGE204/5/2024InteractionsamongbloggersCross-ideologicallinkagesinthepoliticalblogosphereLinksinpostsMorelikelytolinktoideologicalblogs12%conservativeliberal16%liberalconservative/nameofdepartmentPAGE214/5/2024Interactionsam

溫馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有資源如無(wú)特殊說(shuō)明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請(qǐng)下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
  • 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請(qǐng)聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶(hù)所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁(yè)內(nèi)容里面會(huì)有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒(méi)有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒(méi)有圖紙。
  • 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
  • 5. 人人文庫(kù)網(wǎng)僅提供信息存儲(chǔ)空間,僅對(duì)用戶(hù)上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護(hù)處理,對(duì)用戶(hù)上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對(duì)任何下載內(nèi)容負(fù)責(zé)。
  • 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當(dāng)內(nèi)容,請(qǐng)與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
  • 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準(zhǔn)確性、安全性和完整性, 同時(shí)也不承擔(dān)用戶(hù)因使用這些下載資源對(duì)自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。

評(píng)論

0/150

提交評(píng)論