A Tale of Two Blogospheres.pdf

8/14/2019 A Tale of Two Blogospheres.pdf

1/60

Harvard Law SchoolPublic Law & Legal Theory Working Paper Series

Paper No. 10-33

A Tale of Two Blogospheres: DiscursivePractices on the Left and Right

Yochai BenklerHarvard Law School

Aaron ShawHarvard University

This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social ScienceResearch Network (SSRN) electronic library.


2/60Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1611312

Research Publication No. 2010-6April 27, 2010

A Tale of Two Blogospheres:

Discursive Practices on the Left and Right

Yochai BenklerAaron Shaw

This paper can be downloaded without charge at:

The Berkman Center for Internet & Society Research Publication Series:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/publicationsThe Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1611312

2 3 E v e r e t t S t r e e t S e c o n d F l o o r C a m b r i d g e , M a s s a c h u s e t t s 0 2 1 3 85 0 C h u r c h S t r e e t T h i r d F l o o r C a m b r i d g e , M a s s a c h u s e t t s 0 2 1 3 8

+ 1 6 1 7 . 4 9 5 . 7 5 4 7 + 1 6 1 7 . 4 9 5 . 7 6 4 1 ( f a x ) h t t p : / / c y b e r . l a w . h a r v a r d . e d u c y b e r @ l a w . h a r v a r d . e d u



A Tale of Two Blogospheres: Discursive Practices on the Left and Right 1

March, 2 1

!ochai Ben"ler a, # and Aaron $haw a,c

aBer"%an &enter for 'nternet and $ociet(, )arvard *niversit(+ #)arvard Law $chool+cDepart%ent of $ociolog(, *niversit( of &alifornia, Ber"ele(



A Tale of Two Blogospheres 2

Abstract

Discussions of the political effects of the 'nternet and networ"ed discourse tend to presu%e consistent patterns of technological adoption and use within a given societ( &onsistentwith this assu%ption, previous e%pirical studies of the *nited $tates political #logosphere havefound evidence that the left and right are relativel( s(%%etric in ter%s of various for%s oflin"ing #ehavior despite their ideological polari-ation 'n this paper, we revisit these findings #(co%paring the practices of discursive production and participation a%ong top * $ political #logson the left, right, and center during $u%%er, 2 . Based on /ualitative coding of the top 100

political #logs, our results reveal significant cross ideological variations along several i%portantdi%ensions ota#l(, we find evidence of an association #etween ideological affiliation and thetechnologies, institutions, and practices of participation across political #logs $ites on the leftadopt %ore participator( technical platfor%s+ are co%prised of significantl( fewer sole authored

sites+ include user #logs+ %aintain %ore fluid #oundaries #etween secondar( and pri%ar(content+ include longer narrative and discussion posts+ and 3a%ong the top half of the #logs inour sa%ple4 %ore often use #logs as platfor%s for %o#ili-ation as well as discursive production

5ur findings spea" to two %a6or theoretical de#ates on the political effects of the 'nternetand networ"ed discourse 7irst, the variations we o#serve #etween the left and right wings of the* $ political #logosphere provide insights into how varied patterns of technological adoptionand use within a single societ( %a( produce distinct effects on de%ocrac( and the pu#lic sphere$econdl(, our stud( suggests that the prevailing techni/ues of do%ain #ased lin" anal(sis used tostud( the political #logosphere to date %a( have funda%ental li%itations The fact that we findevidence of significant cross ideological variation when we co%pare intra do%ain attri#utes of

political #logs de%onstrates that lin" anal(sis studies have o#scured #oth the diversit( of

participator( affordances online as well as the pri%ar( %echanis%s #( which the networ"ed pu#lic sphere alters de%ocratic participation relative to the %ass %ediated pu#lic sphere


5/60


Introduction

7ollowing the historic election of Barac" 5#a%a to the presidenc( of the *nited $tates,

few will den( the i%portance of stud(ing the effect of the 'nternet on politics and de%ocrac(

8udged in its i%%ediate after%ath, the 5#a%a ca%paign see%s li"el( to do for the political

centralit( of the 'nternet what the Roosevelt presidenc( did for radio, or the i9on enned(

de#ates for television *nderstanding the effect of the 'nternet on de%ocrac( involves two

distinct in/uiries The first as"s how the 'nternet affects de%ocratic practice: participation,

deli#eration, %o#ili-ation, and collective action ai%ed at political outco%es The second

involves the degree to which technolog( interacts with the for%s of "nowledge production in a

societ( 'n this paper, we contri#ute to #oth of these lines of in/uir( through an e%pirical

anal(sis of discursive practices in the *nited $tates political #logosphere

Prior e%pirical studies of the *nited $tates political #logosphere have found evidence

that the left and right are relativel( s(%%etric despite their ideological polari-ation 3Ada%ic ;


6/60


deter%inis% in the relationship #etween technolog( and the structure of the pu#lic sphere

3McLuhan, 1>?@+ $tarr, 2 04 Past research on political #logs would appear to support a

deter%inist conclusion through the s(%%etric patterns found across political ideologies 3Ada%ic

;


7/60


contri#utors and editors, and a flow of dail( writing fro% hundreds of participants

3Dail( os co%4 Lin" anal(sis studies have treated #oth sites as the sa%e pheno%enon: a single

node with a ver( large nu%#er of in lin"s and out lin"s

=hile these two top sites are selected for dra%atic illustration purposes onl(, our

%ethodolog( and sa%ple, the largest e9a%ined to date, ena#les us to deter%ine whether or not

the( are outliers =hile we cannot answer the see%ingl( perennial /uestion of whether the

networ"ed pu#lic sphere is polari-ed and frag%ented, we can #egin to as" and answer %ore fine

grained /uestions: such as what ele%ents in the networ"ed pu#lic sphere i%prove or under%ine

participation+ and how participator( sites differ fro% non participator( sites 'n addition, we

investigate whether the alread( %(thical 5#a%a online ca%paign, while e9tre%el( well run in

its own right, %a( have capitali-ed on i%%anent practices alread( present in the left wing of the

#logosphere generall( 5ur findings also provide insights into how, despite access to the sa%e

technologies, different patterns of technological adoption and use within a single societ( %a(

produce distinct effects on de%ocrac( and the shape of the pu#lic sphere

Background and Literature Review

Anal(sis of the effects of the 'nternet on de%ocrac( dates #ac" to earl( 1>> s, a ti%e of

significant utopianis% owhere is this captured #etter than in the $upre%e &ourt s paean to the

et: An( person or organi-ation with a co%puter connected to the 'nternet can pu#lishC

infor%ation Through the use of chat roo%s, an( person with a phone line can #eco%e a town

crier with a voice that resonates farther than it could fro% an( soap#o9 Through the use of =e#

pages, %ail e9ploders, and newsgroups, the sa%e individual can #eco%e a pa%phleteerC 3Reno


8/60


v A&L* 1>> 4 icholas egroponte, at that ti%e, was touting the #enefits of the "nowledge we

would sea%lessl( ac/uire, coining the %etaphor the Dail( MeC to capture the #readth and

precision of infor%ation collection we would #e a#le to teach our co%puters to perfor% for us

3 egroponte, 1>>04 7airl( soon thereafter, however, concerns a#out the e9cesses of the 'nternet

found voice in the s"eptical criti/ue of &ass $unstein 32 24, who flipped egroponte s Dail(

MeC on its head, arguing that it would lead to frag%entation and polari-ation, and the destruction

of the possi#ilit( of co%%on discourse in a shared pu#lic sphere This first generation of

argu%ents was #ased largel( on anecdotal evidence Beginning in 2 1 2 2, scholars #egan to

appl( lin" anal(sis and graph theor( to /uestion the effects of the 'nternet on de%ocrac(, and in

particular to two /uestions: does the 'nternet increase participation, and does the 'nternet

increase deli#erationE The pri%ar( argu%ent against the clai% that the 'nternet enhanced

participation, or allowed an(one to #e a pa%phleteer, was that the power law distri#ution of lin"s

into sites prevented all #ut a ver( few sites fro% #eing o#served According to this view, (ou can

tal", #ut no one will hear (ou 3Bara#Fsi, 2 G+ )ind%an, 2 .4 5n the other hand, in recent

articles, 3Dre-ner ; 7arrell, 2 . and Lawrence, $ides ; 7arrell, 2 1 4, )enr( 7arrell and

colla#orators have %ade the e%pirical o#servation that #log readers are particularl( activatedC

readers, and in surve(s report greater degrees of political participation 'nterpreting then

availa#le lin" anal(sis data, Ben"ler 32 ?4 argued that participation increased to the e9tent that

individuals could contri#ute to de#ates directl(, or through so%eone the( "now directl( B(

contri#uting to #logs that are part of tightl( clustered co%%unities of interest Ben"ler clai%s

that less well "nown individuals can attract attention fro% ever larger attention clusters and

co%%unities =allsten s anal(sis of the role of the #logosphere in agenda setting during the 2 @


9/60


ca%paign provides additional e%pirical support for this clai% 3=allsten, 2 4 2 )ind%an

32 .4 countered these argu%ents with e%pirical clai%s that the overall si-e of the political

pu#lic sphere was negligi#le, and that the leading voices in the #logosphere were few and as

elitist as the %ost e9clusive editorial pages of the countr( s leading newspapers The clai% that

the 'nternet i%proved deli#eration, as opposed to participation, was never forcefull( %ade, #ut

$unstein 32 + 2 4 has repeatedl( e%phasi-ed the ris" of the 'nternet under%ining

deli#eration Ada%ic ;


10/60


elite left wing #logs too" a %ore participator( approach to #uilding new political co%%unities of

interest and action 3Bowers ; $toller, 2 0: @ 04 )owever, the report neither engaged nor

infiltrated the acade%ic de#ates a#out the networ"ed pu#lic sphere As a result, the e%pirical

foundations of the s(%%etric #logospheresC argu%ent has re%ained unchallenged More

recentl(, er#el s 32 >4 wor" on the netroots has revived this argu%ent evertheless, e%pirical

evidence to support the view that the left and right #logospheres var( re%ains in short suppl(

Anal(-ing the graph structure of #logs as a wa( of understanding pu#lic de#ate entailed

interpreting #log do%ains as discrete spea"ers, and lin"s across do%ains as co%%unicative acts

The standard approach has #een to depict each #log do%ain 3for e9a%ple,

htttp:HHwww hotair co% or http:HHwww %(dd co%4 as a node in the graph that represents the

networ"ed pu#lic sphere+ and to treat inter do%ain lin"s as characteri-ing 3a4 attention to

state%ents and 3#4 conversational %oves Thus, a low lin" count into the #log do%ain necessaril(

%eans low attention levels to state%ents %ade on it 5nl( lin"s into do%ains, in this approach,

counts as attending to what is said there 'nternal attention a%ong users of the sa%e #log did not

count, #ecause it was not counted This, of necessit(, overloo"s the actual discrete

co%%unications, li"e the #log post itself, co%%ent, or foru% thread, and an( actual discrete

spea"ersI#log usersIwho congregate in a single #log do%ain As our stud( shows, loo"ing at

the level of the #log, one finds a widel( diverse set of discursive practices

'n effect, the resolution of the standard tools used in these prior studies was too low to

show the actual practice and diversit( of the networ"ed pu#lic sphere The i%portance of the

level of resolution is shown %ost clearl( in )argittai et al 32 .4 Their lin" anal(sis confir%s

the sa%e pattern across the political divide as was revealed in prior studies, #ut the( then use


11/60


content anal(sis to show that the prior interpretations of this lin"ing patternIpolari-ation and

frag%entationIis false B( increasing the resolutionIanal(-ing the content of the actual

state%ents lin"ed toIthe( showed that %an( state%ents across the political divide are

su#stantive, and that positions e9pressed on the left and the right have not #eco%e %ore e9tre%e

over ti%e =e now e9tend that %ethodological criti/ue of lin" anal(sis #( loo"ing %ore closel(

at the entire picture of the networ"ed pu#lic sphere, as presented #( do%ain #ased lin" anal(sis

and un%odified #( closer o#servation of within do%ain practices and state%ents 'n doing so, we

investigate whether studies grounded in lin" anal(sis alone %a( have o#scured #oth the diversit(

of participator( affordances online as well as the pri%ar( %echanis%s #( which the networ"ed

pu#lic sphere increases or decreases de%ocratic participation relative to the %ass %ediated

pu#lic sphere

5ne conse/uence of the low resolution has #een that prior studies portra(ed the left and

right wing #logospheres as %irroring each other in all %aterial respects =hile Ada%ic ;


12/60


ter%s of educational credentials, professional or technical #ac"ground, and the fact that the( are

disproportionatel( white %en Jnhanced participation in the networ"ed pu#lic sphere is,

according to this view, a %(th 3)ind%an, 2 .4 As we said in the introduction, an( %ethod that

treats a platfor% hosting su#stantive contri#utions fro% thousands of users dail( as an identical

unit of anal(sis to a site authored #( a single individual with %ini%al contri#utions fro% readers

%isses a core attri#ute of #logosphere discourse

5ur present stud( does not shed light on the /uestion of the /ualit( of deli#eration or the

concern with polari-ation in online discourse But those cannot alone #e the touchstones of the

nature of the networ"ed pu#lic sphere &oncern with polari-ationC co%es out of a particular

de%ocratic theor( that e%phasi-es deli#eration, or the capacit( to attend respectfull( to the

argu%ents of others The foundational /uestion for a wider range of de%ocratic theories is who

has the opportunit( to #e heard at all, and to for% a sufficient level of coherence around an issue

to turn it into a credi#le ite% on a societ( s political agenda 3Ben"ler, 2 ?4 5ur research has

su#stantial i%plications for these /uestions of participation: first, in ter%s of the capacit( to #e

heard in a space or conte9t in which one s views can #e ta"en up #( %an( others, and wor"ed

into a coherent position with a credi#le #ac"ing of a co%%unit( of interest sufficient to sta"e a

clai% on the pu#lic agenda+ and second, in ter%s of the capacit( for practical %o#ili-ation and

organi-ation for action To the e9tent that one holds a view of de%ocrac( that is not e9clusivel(

focused on deli#eration, #ut is oriented toward recogni-ing the diversit( of views in societ( and

the i%portance of political action, affordances that allow interest groups to %eet, discuss and

develop their own agendas, and then coalesce around the% and convert the% into pu#lic action,

enhance de%ocrac( To the e9tent one ta"es a view that participation can #e s/uelched #(


13/60


e9isting structures of political, econo%ic, and cultural power, pathwa(s around these #loc"ages

support effective participation #( people who, in the past, were e9cluded fro% setting the pu#lic

agenda The creation of such pathwa(s i%proves the openness of the pu#lic sphere to views and

agenda setting efforts outside the traditional sources of discursive and cultural power 'f one

holds a view that de%ocrac( entails the a#ilit( to spea" pu#licl( and to a group of potential

political allies, to cr(stalli-e a co%%on position, and to organi-e for action, then it is critical to

investigate whether the 'nternet can #e used to enhance those aspects of de%ocratic

participationG

5ur stud( also spea"s to an older de#ate in co%%unications theor(: the degree of

deter%inis% with which a co%%unications technolog( affects how "nowledge is produced,

controlled, and used in a societ( Media deter%inis%, the view that a given technolog( has

strong characteristics that deter%inisticall( structure its use, is anchored in Marshall McLuhan s

31>?@4 wor", and its centralit( to structures of political power and authorit( in the wor" of

)arold 'nnis 31>014 =hile few acade%ics toda( su#scri#e to McLuhan s strong for%

deter%inistic view, it continues to e9ert influence in popular and non acade%ic polic( circles

More co%%on is a range of views fro% softC deter%inis% to %ore thoroughgoing

institutionalis% B( softC deter%inis% we %ean scholarship that e%phasi-es how the technical

affordances and constraints of a technolog( affect its li"el( patterns of use, interacting with,

so%eti%es even shaping, other forces that structure discourse in a given period 3'nnis, 1>01+

Jisenstein, 1> >+ Beniger, 1>.?4 B( institutionalis% we %ean clai%s that e%phasi-e the legal

political decisions that surround the use of a technolog( of co%%unication 3Mc&hesne(, 1>>G+

$tarr, 2 04 The division is clear in theor(, #ut few toda(, including those who e%phasi-e


14/60


institutional e9planations, hold a si%ple single cause view of either for%, and a large #od( of

wor" focuses on the interpla( and %utual shaping of technological, political, organi-ational, and

cultural for%s 3)a#er%as, 1>?2+ Barnouw, 1>??+ =inner, 1>.?+ &astells, 1>>?+ Ben"ler, 2 ?4

'n practice, a %ore co%ple9 relationship %a( characteri-e the e%ergence of a particular

technolog(, its adoption patterns, and the political theoretical i%plications of its actual use The

technolog( in this case, the we#log, offers a wide range of fle9i#le affordances, rather than

constraining to a particular set of uses+ and it is i%ple%ented in a legal fra%ewor" that offers it

wide #erth, without deter%ining or su#stantiall( narrowing its uses Li"ewise, the organi-ational

for%s for control of the technolog( do not tend to constrain its use All these historical facts

a#out the wa( the 'nternet has #een deplo(ed and adopted are contingent, and suscepti#le to

challenge and change 3Ben"ler, 2 ?4 evertheless, the( characteri-e the actual state of affairs

in the 1>> s and 2 s+ and this state of affairs left the technological and institutional

fra%ewor"s relativel( open This stud( helps us to see whether the networ"ed pu#lic sphere has

in fact developed a ho%ogeneous practice, which %ight support a %ore deter%inistic view, or

whether the evidence supports %ore co%plicated patterns of difference 5nl( su#se/uent studies

will reveal whether or not these patterns will persist over ti%e

Methods and Study Design

'n order to test for differences in the colla#orative and discursive practices across top

* $ political #logs, we selected the 100 top political #logs and designed a structured, /ualitative

content anal(sis instru%ent =e then applied the instru%ent during a two wee" period in earl(

August 2 . The rest of this section presents an overview of several "e( concepts and varia#les,


15/60


our coding sche%e, sa%pling procedure and anal(tical techni/ues

't is eas( to %a"e the %ista"e that there is onl( one technolog( or cluster of technologies

involved in #logging 'n fact, the ter% #loggingC has %ore of a cultural %eaning than a

technical %eaning 'n particular, there are %an( different "inds of platfor%s and plug ins

availa#le that %a"e user 3as opposed to pri%ar( author4 participation easier, and allow

participants other than the pri%ar( author or authors to %a"e contri#utions that have pro%inent

placing in the site $o%e of these technologies are e9plicitl( intended to facilitate contri#utions

and the %anage%ent of large nu%#ers of contri#utions These include $coop, Drupal, $oapBlo9,

and J9pression Jngine @ 7urther%ore, standard #logging platfor%s li"e Blogger or =ordPress

the%selves also offer options 3through so called plugins such as Dis/us, phpBB, and )alo$can4

that allow for potentiall( richer interaction #etween the core #logger or #loggers who have

pri%ar( author privileges, and %an( contri#utors who do not have those privileges 7or e9a%ple,

site ad%inistrators can configure $coop, Drupal, $oapBlo9 or J9pression Jngine to allow

registered users of the site to %aintain their own #logs or diariesC and to reco%%end other

users content Dail( os and &alitics are e9a%ples of pro%inent sites that run $coop and

$oapBlo9 respectivel( $i%ilarl(, Dis/us and phpBB e9tend the co%%enting functions of %ore

traditional #logging tools, facilitating threaded co%%entar(, colla#orative filtering, and user

reputation scores as in A%erica Blog 3http:HHwww a%erica#log co%H4 or Jschaton

3http:HHeschaton#log co%4

Instrument Design 5

The coding instru%ent we use in this stud( draws on techni/ues of content anal(sis


16/60


adopted widel( #( co%%unication researchers 3 rippendorff, 2 @4 The instru%ent was

intended to capture relevant infor%ation related to our research /uestions a#out the #logs 3A4

organi-ational for%+ 3B4 co%%unit( of participants+ 3&4 content+ and 3D4 technological

architecture 5ur /uestions focused on sta#le, structural attri#utes of each #log, avoiding ti%e

sensitive ele%ents of the te9t and h(perlin"s

To e9a%ine effective participation , that is, speech that is not onl( eas( to %a"e #ut also

suscepti#le to #eing heard #( a relevant co%%unit( 3Ben"ler, 2 ?4, we anchored our

o#servations in an o#6ective %easure of the significance of contri#utions, or their availa#ilit( to

other users of a site as %oves in an on site conversation To do so, we adapt Hargittai's (2000)

distinction between accessible and available online content. Early optimism about the ability of

the Internet to radically reduce the costs of media production and distribution overlooked the

problems that would result from such an overwhelming flood of information. Building on studies

of server logs indicating that people rarely went deeper than a couple of clicks on any website,

Hargittai shows that although the Internet makes an enormous amount of information available ,

most users are unlikely to encounter the vast majority of it. Her results imply that unless online

content is presented, indexed, curated, or otherwise linked-to in such a way that it becomes more

easily accessible , it will likely remain unseen.

Operationalizing Hargittai's insights, we term content accessible on the front page of a

site primary, and everything that requires additional clicks to reach secondary. Our

distinction reflects the fact that many blogs with multiple authors contributing posts, comments,

and/or forum threads reserve the front page for high status authors and posts. Doing so creates a

core-periphery distinction among participants on a site. This distinction therefore allows us to


17/60


characterize how the blogs in our sample organize and structure their site irrespective of

particular writing styles or the substance of content. It is worth underscoring that we do not aim

to over-interpret our distinction between primary/secondary content in the absence of empirical

data about the behavior of site visitors. Further research on blog reading and writing practices

would be necessary to confirm or refute the extent to which these categories play a role in the

actual production and consumption of site content. Nevertheless, the distinction between front

page and non-front page content is likely a valid proxy for accessibility. Inasmuch as the

distinction reflects a status hierarchy as well as a formal aspect of the website's structure, it is

also an important marker of organizational relations on the site, even if future studies find that it

has little or no effect on reading practices.

The primary/secondary content distinction helps us assess another crucial aspect of blogs

that no previous study had rendered explicit: the boundaries between primary content producers

and other users or readers. In this regard, not all secondary blog content is created equal. Some

blogs retain rigid barriers between user-generated contributions (whether in the form of

comments, internal blogs, and/or forums) and authorized primary content. Frequently, a

combination of technological and social affordances keep primary content insulated from

secondary content. For example, the blog Little Green Footballs (http://littlegreenfootballs.com)

has an extremely active discussion forum and comment threads, none of which are more than a

click away from the site's landing page. Nevertheless, author/owner Charles Johnson is the only

person with primary content posting privileges very rarely includes user-generated secondary

content on the front page of the site. Both Johnson's habits as well as the configuration of the

software he has embedded in the site maintain a clear distinction between the site's primary and


18/60


secondary content areas. Occasionally, a blog will create opportunities for user-generated and

secondary content to earn a promotion to the front page. 6 Less often, a site excludes secondary

content entirely. Most unusual of all, a site can make no meaningful distinction between user-

generated work and the work of site-leaders among the sites in our sample, this is most closely

approximated in especially large, dynamic forums such as Free Republic or Democratic

Underground. 7 The primary/secondary content distinction therefore allows us to identify an

externally-observable, objective measure, from which we can evaluate the character of

participation: the degree to which contributions by people other than the owners/operators/core

authors of a site are practically visible on the site; the degree to which they are separated from

high-status statements; and the degree to which they have been filtered as relevant and credible

for reading and discussion among site participants and visitors.

=e added one %ore o#serva#le %easure of participation #( evaluating the technical

features that ena#led it 'n particular, we categori-ed whether or not the #logging platfor%s used

#( the sites in our stud( included enhanced technical affordances for colla#oration, participation,

and discussion 7or the purposes of this /uestion, we counted an( of the following technical tools

as an enhancedC affordance: foru%s+ chat+ secondar( and user #logs+ sta#le user profiles or

content feeds+ and colla#orative %oderation or filtering tools &o%%ents alone are standard in

al%ost all #logs, and we did not count the% as enhanced C

Finally, we sought to characterize the predominant style of both primary and secondary

content appearing on each blog. In this regard, we use a distinction between linkers and

thinkers that originally appeared in response to an April, 2002 blog post by Steven Den Beste

(quoted by Drezner & Farrell, 2008). 8 The premise of Den Beste's analysis is that some bloggers


19/60


tend to write little and link a lot, effectively acting as an editorial filter for their readers; while

others tend to write a lot and link much less. In order to evaluate this aspect of each blog's

primary content, we looked at the twenty most recent front page posts. For secondary content, we

included as many as possible of the most recent fifty comments drawn from at least three

separate comment and/or forum threads; and the five most recent user blogs or diaries. In both

cases, we assessed qualitatively whether primary and secondary content tended strongly towards

the linking or thinking extreme. We also included an option for content that embraced both

practices equally. Given the limitations of this qualitative assessment, we interpret the results of

this variable with care.

Definitions and Sample Selection

=e structured our sa%pling procedure to incorporate a range of definitional and ran"ing

criteria used #( scholars, independent #logging e9perts, authors, and #log anal(tics co%panies

5ur sa%pling %ethods thus ena#led us to overco%e the a#sence of an o#6ective set of a priori

criteria for defining #logs in addition to the proliferation of %etrics for producing #log ran"ings

'n order to do this, we first generated a large and inclusive list of *RLs categori-ed as

top political #logsC #( aggregating seven e9isting lists fro% si9 different sources >:

KTABLJ 1


20/60


Each of these lists uses slightly different metrics to determine its ranking, such as hits, total in-

links, blogroll in-links, ranking algorithms, and editorial opinion. We chose the seven lists with

the objective of including valid and widely respected ranking systems which, once combined,

would provide a ranking of top political blogs. Our selection followed the work of previous

blogosphere research in this regard (Adamic & Glance, 2005; Wallsten, 2007; Hargittai et al.,

2008). 1 Roughl( spea"ing, if a #log appeared on %ore than one list, we 6udged it as %ore

influential

=e ran"ed the *RLs in our aggregated list #ased on the nu%#er of original listings in

which each *RL appeared 11 7inall(, we applied the following criteria to the ran"ed aggregated

list To #e included in our sa%ple, a *RL had to:

1 Appear on at least four of the seven lists of top #logsC 3or at least five of the seven lists,

for the top ?0 #logs in our stud(4+

2 $how signs of active posting andHor co%%enting within the G da(s prior to the

#eginning of our coding+

G &ontain content that predo%inantl( andHor consistentl( addressed * $ political issues+

@ &ontain at least one page la#eled or descri#ed e9plicitl( as a #log C The resulting list

contained a total of 1?0 *RLs, ten of which were later discovered to #e alternate *RLs

for the sa%e we#site, and therefore e9cluded, leaving the total nu%#er of uni/ue #logs in

our sa%ple at 100 12

't is i%portant to underscore a few characteristics of our sa%ple 7irst, even though it includes

over 10 *RLs, the group of top political #logs in our stud( re%ains ver( s%all and e9clusive


21/60


There are literall( %illions of #logs in the Jnglish language and %an( thousands of those are

concerned with political topics on a regular #asis A rando% sa%ple drawn fro% this universe

would fail to capture the #logs that attract the vast %a6orit( of site visits and in lin"s, which

previous research has shown follow power lawC t(pe distri#utions 3Ada%ic and )u#er%an,

2 4


22/60


/uestions in the code#oo" without the aid of an( sources #e(ond those availa#le within the site s

address do%ain 7or the sites that were coded once 3i e that were not part of the intercoder set4,

we accepted the answers provided #( each coder A s%all nu%#er of conflicting codes e%erged

within the intercoder sa%ple and $haw settled these disagree%ents #( reviewing each conflict #(

hand and, if possi#le, revisiting the site in /uestion

$u#se/uent to the co%pletion of all coding, $haw applied left, right, and center codes for

ideological affiliation to all of the valid *RLs within the sa%ple 'n doing so, he applied the

sa%e criteria for left and right used #( )argittai et al 32 .4 Blogs which 3a4 did not

de%onstrate e9plicit signs of partisanship or 3#4 de%onstrated e/ual representation of left and

right views were coded as center C =e chose to appl( left, right, and center la#els after the

co%pletion of our su#stantive coding so as to prevent these la#els fro% influencing our

assess%ent of the sites To ensure that this process did not introduce #ias in the for% of

selectivel( la#eling sites that confor%ed with our h(potheses, another researcher rando%l(

chec"ed $haw s codes against the categori-ations %ade in prior studies 3Ada%ic ;


23/60


such a relatively small proportion of blogs in the center suggests that the most visible and heavily

linked blogs remain strongholds of partisanship. The limited number of center blogs also

constrained our ability to draw statistically meaningful conclusions about the relationship of the

top center blogs to the top blogs of the left and right.

$tatistical Tests and Anal(tical Techni/ues:

7or each /uestion in the code#oo" we tested whether there was a significant difference in

the distri#ution of responses #( political affiliation 5ur null h(pothesis was that there is no

difference in response #ased on part( align%ent Most of our /uestions had a #inar( response or

were collapsed into #inar( for%, for e9a%ple, whether co%%ents are per%itted on the site or not,

giving us a si%ple contingenc( ta#le As is t(pical for a contingenc( ta#les, we test used the 2

test for independence to deter%ine whether what we o#served fro% our coding of the #logs was

significantl( different fro% what we would e9pect if the null h(pothesis were true

=e classified whether a #log was left, right, or center #( a visual inspection of the front

page of the 100 #logs $ee section on &enter Blogs Results and Anal(sis 3#elow4 for a discussion

of selection criteria 5ur sa%ple #ro"e into ?0 and ? #logs on the left and right respectivel(, and

2G in the center The s%all nu%#er of #logs in the center %ade it i%possi#le to calculate the 2

test across the three groups for %an( of our varia#les As a result, we separate the results and

anal(sis for the &enter #logs in order to avoid the i%plication that our findings a#out the% were

co%para#l( ro#ust to our findings a#out the left and right =e used the software pac"age R for

the statistical testing and co%pared left versus right, then each against the center coded #log

responses Previous literature suggests a power law distri#ution 3Ada%ic ; )u#er%an, 2 +


24/60


Dre-ner ; 7arrell, 2 .+ $hir"(, 2 .: @?4 of traffic, lin"s, and attention in the #logosphere

$ince the characteristics of the higher ran"ed #logs %a( #e different than those ran"ed lower, we

created a second s%aller sa%ple fro% those *RLs that appeared on onl( five or %ore of our

seven lists of the top political #logs =e then repeated the leftHright anal(sis for these ?0 super

elite #logs

Results

5ur star"est and %ost o#6ective finding is that the left and right wings of the #logosphere

adopted significantl( different technological features and platfor%s 5ver @ of #logs on the

left adopt platfor%s with enhanced user participation features 5nl( a#out 1G of #logs on the

right do so =hile there is su#stantial overlap, and co%%ents of so%e level of visi#ilit( are used

in the vast %a6orit( of #logs on #oth sides of the political divide, the left adopts ena#ling

technologies that %a"e user generated diaries and #logs %ore central to the site to a significantl(

greater degree than does the right

[TABLE 2]

K7'


25/60


difference separates the two sides in active i%ple%entation of user diaries or #logs 322 vs ? 4

The distri#ution of fle9i#le content #oundaries is nearl( identical 322 on the left vs > on the

right4 Together, the results of all three /uestions illustrate a gap in the participator( affordances

of the left and right

The differences in technological platfor% and tool adoption across the left and right

reflect a related distinction in the organi-ational structure of sites on #oth sides )ere the left and

right differ as well, with the left tending towards larger nu%#ers of site owners, ad%inistrators,

or leaders 3Ta#le G4 Right wing #loggers tend to operate on #logs that are %anaged or governed

#( a single individual %ore often than do #loggers on the left, with @2 of #logs on the right

falling in this categor(, and 2 on the left 37igure 24

KTABLJ G

K7'


26/60


relegated to passive reception of the #log s contents 'nstapundit is an e9a%ple of such a #log on

the right, and Li#eral5asis on the left At the other end of the spectru%, we see sites in which

content generated #( non core participants is easil( and widel( included and pla(s a su#stantial

role in the highl( visi#le parts of the site, so that it can #e said to have a core role in shaping the

discursive space Broadl( spea"ing, there are three t(pes or for%ats for such non core

contri#utions The first, and %ost co%%on, are co%%ents These tend to #e relativel( peripheral

to the %ain content, are culturall( understood to #e short and punch(, and are usuall( lin"ed to

fro% the front page, as part of a deeper dive a reader %a( ta"e into a given post, and so re%ain

secondar( content The second are foru%s 3also called #ulletin #oard s(ste%s4 These are usuall(

portions of a site dedicated to user interaction, separated fro% the %ain page of the site and its

pri%ar( content 7oru%s tend to have so%ewhat %ore e9tensive de#ate, #ut, li"e co%%ents, are

relativel( punch( and short, and are located off the front page of a site, outside of the %ain stage

3Although in so%e cases, li"e 7reeRepu#lic co%, the( %a(, as a cultural practice, #eco%e the

pri%ar( focus of the site 4 The third are diaries or secondar( #logs, which tend to include longer

posts, and which are eas( to integrate into the %ain parts of the site

$o%e of the earliest #logging platfor%s included features that ena#led co%%ents fro%

readers &onsistent with the historical %odel provided #( #roadcast %edia and letters to the

editorC pages of newspapers, the designers of these sites generall( assu%ed that there were no

%ore than one or a few core contri#utors to the site and that site visitors would #e content to

leave onl( co%%ents 3or 6oin a foru% if the( felt a need for %ore interaction and discussion4 All

of these assu%ptions changed with the rise of large scale peer %oderated co%%unities li"e

$lashDot 3http:HHslashdot org4 $lashdot was #uilt on a custo%i-ed platfor% that %ade it possi#le


27/60


for ever( visitor of the site to register, %a"e contri#utions in %uch the sa%e wa( as the site s

editors, and %oderate the contri#utions of their peers The result was a cross #etween a foru% or

%essage #oard and a #log 3as it was then understood4 N and it gave rise to a d(na%ic

conversation with a continual churn of freshl( posted %aterial which was constantl( #eing vetted

#( %e%#ers of the co%%unit( in a distri#uted fashion 3La%pe, 8ohnston ; Resnic", 2 4

=ithin the political #logosphere, secondar( #logs or diaries appear to have first e%erged

on Dail( os in 5cto#er, 2 G and M(DD shortl( thereafter 10 The adoption of platfor%s that

could support this "ind of distri#uted %oderation and contri#ution signaled an i%portant shift in

ter%s of the structure of political de#ate in the networ"ed pu#lic sphere B( the ti%e of the

presidential election the following (ear, political #logs had #eco%e a widel( pu#lici-ed %edia

pheno%enon and Dail( os had developed a reputation #ased on its large, and often

controversial co%%unit( of %e%#ers

Perhaps not surprisingl(, given this histor( we find no significant difference #etween the

left and the right in the use of co%%ents or foru%s, #ut a significant difference in the use of

diaries, which are used %ore widel( on the left 3Ta#le @ and 7igure G4

KTABLJ @

K7'


28/60


front page of the site =hen we loo", independentl(, at the structure of the relationship #etween

secondar( content and pri%ar( content, we find that here, too, the left adopts %ore fluid and

per%ea#le #oundaries #etween pri%ar( and secondar( content, while the right adopts practices

that %ore strictl( separate secondar( fro% pri%ar( content 3see Ta#le 2 and 7igure 1, a#ove4

5ur findings on content #oundaries are i%portant for two reasons 7irst, a critic %ight

argue that we are too dis%issive of the participator( potential of co%%ents and foru%s, and

therefore #iasing our findings againstC the right wing #logs )ere, we see that the actual

infor%ation flow #etween secondar( and pri%ar( is structured to #e less fluid, leaving user

contri#uted state%ents on the peripher( of the agenda of the right wing sites Powerline

3http:HHwww powerline#log co%4, one of the %ost popular #logs on the right, illustrates this

point The content created #( all three of the core #loggers appears on the landing page of the

site in reverse chronological order The landing page also includes various lin"s to the foru%, the

location of all secondar( content contri#uted #( non core participants, #ut no technological

affordance %a"es it possi#le for non core authors to contri#ute to this %ain page 3even as

co%%enters4 The la(out reinforces the sharp division #etween these secondar( contri#utions

and those of the core authors, as the foru% has a co%pletel( different appearance fro% the %ain

site =hile this is not a hard and fast ruleIthe 7ree Repu#lic 7oru% is a highl( participator(

site, %ore si%ilar on %ost %easures to the left wing #logs, even though it is on the rightIit is

nonetheless the o#served pattern

$econd, this finding e%phasi-es for us that even when technolog( allows the eas(

integration of colla#orative features, cultural, organi-ational, or social practice %a( wor" at cross

purposes 5ne e9a%ple of this is Town)all, a right wing site that does ena#le user #logs, #ut


29/60


where, despite their technical availa#ilit(, these secondar( #logs are strictl( separated fro%

pri%ar( author #logs, so that the( re%ain a less accessi#le, secondar( co%ponent of the

discursive practice of that site 't is i%portant to reiterate that such technical and editorial

decisions a#out the structure of pri%ar( and secondar( content do not foreclose active

engage%ent with non core contri#utions Personal e%ail co%%unications with pri%ar( authors,

which are perhaps the %ost off site invisi#le for% of participation, can #e integrated into the

pri%ar( content This is a practice fre/uentl( used #( 8oshua Micah Marshall 32 .4, founder of

Tal"ingPointsMe%o co% 'n other words, whatever the technological affordance, it is e%#edded

in a social cultural practice, which, in turn, can a%plif( or %uffle participator( potential

Another i%portant aspect of political #log s discursive culture concerns the writing st(le

and depth of anal(sis We encounter a significant difference #etween the left and the right is that

the pri%ar( authors on the left tend slightl( to write %ore su#stantive reporting and opinion

posts, whereas the right wing #logs tend to focus on relativel( short and punch( posts, lin"ing

e9ternall( to other sites 3Ta#le 0 and 7igure @4

KTABLJ 0

K7'


30/60


different role for the left and the right The right see%s to focus %ore heavil( on #logs that

aggregate and a%plif( news stories written #( others, although we did not collect data to suggest

who those others are 't also e9plains wh( right wing #logs have #een o#served to lin" %ore

often than left wing #logs 3Ada%ic ;


31/60


within the sa%ple as a whole, #ut a significant difference #etween the top ?0 #logs on the left

and the right along di%ensions related to %o#ili-ation 3Ta#le ? and 7igure 04

KTABLJ ?

K7'


32/60


#est chance of ta"ing seats awa( fro% Repu#lican incu%#ents Jven in 2 ., so%e of these

efforts specificall( targeted congressional ca%paigns through the online Political Action

&o%%ittee 3PA&4 ActBlue Loo"ing at the structures of participation and the levels of

%o#ili-ation on the left, however, leads us to thin" that the stellar 5#a%a 'nternet ca%paign was

largel( an e9tension of practices that alread( characteri-ed the left wing #logosphere, rather than

a new order i%posed on a previousl( disorgani-ed or non participator( population

K7'


33/60


however, the tenor of the discourse in the center was oriented more towards substantive

discussion than sarcasm, combative one-liners, or short linking posts. With regards to technical

affordances for collaboration, almost none of the center blogs had user diaries or secondary blogs

or offered anything in the way of enhanced commenting, social networking, recommendation, or

reputation functions. In this, they were more similar to the right than the left, although the

number of center blogs offering collaborative affordances was too low to render statistically

meaningful comparisons. In contrast to the right, however, the center blogs called for more

reporting tips and had more in-depth secondary content, although the intensity of secondary

participation remained relatively low. Taken together, these attributes suggest that the center may

have a culture of participation that is distinct from that of the right or left. Further research will

be necessary to confirm or reject these observations. 19

Conclusions

=e find that the left and right wings of the political #logosphere are different on %an(

di%ensions that are at the core of assessing the effect of the 'nternet on de%ocrac( and the

structure of the pu#lic sphere The left adopts technical platfor%s that enhance participation in

the #log s pri%ar( discursive space The right e%phasi-es sole authored #logs, and constructs

#logs in which the %odes of participation of users are separated rigidl( fro% the %ain content,

and largel( set to the side of the %ain discursive space The left not onl( chooses %ore

participator( technolog(, #ut also uses the availa#le technological tools to %aintain %ore fluid

relations #etween the secondar( or user contri#uted %aterials and those of pri%ar( contri#utors

The left is %ore egalitarian in opportunities for speech, %ore discursive, and %ore colla#orative


34/60


in %anaging the sites The right is %ore individualistic and hierarchical, with its practice

consisting %ore of pointing to e9ternal stories than engaging in discussion or co%%entar( We

do not contend that these characteristics are inherently correlated in any way for example, it is

not a given that sites operated by individuals would link more actively than sites where there is

broader participation and discussion. Nevertheless, among the blogs in our study, these were the

attributes that characterized the left and right respectively. The differences offer evidence of a

%ore co%ple9 relationship #etween the e%ergence of a technolog(, its adoption patterns, and the

political theoretical i%plications of the adoption patterns actuall( practiced

5ur stud( suggests that the effects of the 'nternet on de%ocrac( are neither ho%ogeneous

nor unifor%, and %a( change over ti%e The left s practices are %ore consistent with an

interpretation of a participator( pu#lic sphere, though our stud( sa(s nothing a#out deli#eration

versus polari-ation The e%phasis in current anal(ses on the power law distri#ution of #log lin"s,

coupled with the clai% that there are onl( a s%all nu%#er of h(per lin"ed #logs and onl( their

authors are visi#le, understates the i%portance of participator( practices within #logs $i%ilarl(,

an( effort to characteri-e the socio econo%ic and educational status of contri#utors #( loo"ing at

the lead author of a #log %a( %isrepresent who is participating depending on the t(pe of

co%%unit( =hether we are loo"ing at Bar#inMD, a self descri#ed sta( at ho%e %other of two

who spent her ti%e helping with school pro6ects and chauffeuring "ids to soccer or lacrosse,C and

is now, #etween chauffeuring "ids, a %asthead contri#utor to Dail( os co% with a dail(

readership of several hundred thousand, or at an( one of thousands of co%%enters on the top left

and right wing #logs, the( represent a participator( practice that was uni%agina#le two decades

ago And, where tens or even hundreds of thousands of people in a population have direct access


35/60


to a visi#le platfor%, people who are one or at %ost two degrees of social separation out fro%

the% are %uch closer to a visi#le outlet than the( are to the op ed contri#utors of The New York

Times , for e9a%ple The practices of the right wing of the #logosphere are, however, %ore

consistent with the clai%s that the networ"ed pu#lic sphere is no less elitist than the %ass

%ediated pu#lic sphere 7urther research will #e necessar( to deter%ine the e9tent to which these

affordances %a( under%ine or reinforce e9isting social ine/ualities 3)argittai ; =ale6"o, 2 .4

$i%ilarl(, su#se/uent studies could co%#ine #etter %eans of trac"ing influence with %ore

nuanced %easures of participation and engage%ent #e(ond the evidence we have presented here

=allsten s 32 4 anal(sis of agenda setting and arpf s 32 .a+ 2 .#4 Blogosphere Authorit(

'nde9 #oth suggest pro%ising avenues in this regard

A second, %ethodologicall( i%portant point, is that lin" anal(sis as it has #een used to

%ap the networ"ed pu#lic sphere, has clear li%itations for anal(-ing participation )owever

%an( studies #ased on lin" anal(sis disagreed a#out so%e /uestions, the( portra(ed a unifor%

and s(%%etric political #logosphere 3e g Ada%ic ;


36/60


each case+ however, we can point to particular variations in technolog(, organi-ational for%,

authorial role, and participator( practices to suggest that these sustain a significant difference

#etween the left and right wings of the #logosphere

=hile the left wing of the #logosphere e9hi#its stronger indicators of %o#ili-ation and

organi-ation for action, it is i%possi#le to tell fro% our stud( whether the difference is causall(

connected to the fact that the left also uses %ore participator( and discursive platfor%s 't is

certainl( possi#le that participants and users who are %ore engaged on a da( to da( #asis would

#e %ore a%ena#le to %o#ili-ation for action as well 3Lawrence et al , 2 1 4 But the une/ual

levels of %o#ili-ation %a( also reflect the fact that we too" our o#servations during an election

c(cle at a %o%ent when the left was highl( energi-ed, while the right, 6ust #efore $arah Palin s

appoint%ent as 8ohn Mc&ain s running %ate, was lethargic and de6ected politicall( =hile that

fact does not affect our core findings, it does %oderate our confidence in the sta#ilit( of the

difference with regard to %o#ili-ation to action

=hat would account for the different patterns of we#log use on the left and the rightE 't

cannot #e one of the deter%inants that is shared across the ideological divide, li"e the political

institutional fra%ewor" 3* $ law or the part( s(ste%4 or the availa#le technologies Possi#le

e9planations of the divergence range fro% %ore to less deter%inistic 5ne line of research tries

to tie political positions, at the individual level, to fairl( sta#le personal characteristics, such as

wor" #( ps(chologists see"ing to anchor political #eliefs in their satisfaction of ps(chological

needs 38ost,


37/60


#o9es created fro% the two #inaries: individualistHco%%unitarian and hierarchicalHegalitarian

5ur findings are certainl( consistent with identif(ing the influential sites on the right wing

#logosphere with the individualistHhierarchical /uadrant, where, for e9a%ple, opponents of gun

control and environ%ental regulation often reside 3 ahan, Bra%an, $lovic,


38/60


fro% %ainstrea% %edia+ and had no clear co%%unit( #ased structures of participation

3Moulitsas, 2 .4 Man( individuals on the left felt alienated fro% the structures of power within

the De%ocratic part( 3Ar%strong ; Moulitsas, 2 ? 4 *nder these conditions, it is perhaps

unsurprising that the right wing of the #logosphere would place less of an e%phasis on #uilding

engaged participation online, while the left would sei-e upon the affordances of the new %ediu%

to #uild platfor%s of engage%ent and active %o#ili-ation 3Bowers ; $toller, 2 0+ er#el,

2 >4 &ertainl( this stor( is consistent with the self understanding of %a6or #loggers on the left

3Moulitsas, 2 .+ Ar%strong ; Moulitsas, 2 ?+ Bowers ; $toller,, 2 04 't also suggests that

nothing inherent in the cultural or ps(chological profiles of #loggers on the right will prevent

the% fro% e%#racing %ore colla#orative %odes of participation in (ears to co%e

!et another e9planation %a( #e #ased on de%ograph( ationall( representative phone

surve(s have found that increasing nu%#ers of (ounger people have tended to affiliate with the

political left in recent decades 3 eeter, )orowit- ; T(son, 2 .4, and that (ounger people are

the %ost active users of the 'nternet for purposes of political engage%ent 3$%ith, 2 >4 't is

certainl( possi#le that users who are generall( %ore activel( engaged online %a( #e attracted to

#logging platfor%s and plugins that e%#race higher levels of user engage%ent )owever, we do

not find this e9planation co%pelling for several reasons 7irst, $%ith 32 >4 reports that

Repu#licans 3?. 4 were %ore li"el( than De%ocrats 30G 4 or 'ndependents 30? 4 to #e online

political usersC during the 2 . ca%paign c(cle Repu#licans 3.@ 4 were also %ore li"el( than

De%ocrats 3 1 4 to use the 'nternet at all 'n addition, Lawrence et al 32 1 4 find evidence of a

ver( s%all age difference, on average, #etween #log readers and non #log readers and 3%ore to

the point4 the( find that political blog readers are, on average, so%ewhat older than the


39/60


population of #log readers as a whole 'n separate surve(s of first (ear college students, )argittai

32 >4 si%ilarl( finds that (oung people tend to read political #logs far less than the( read other

"inds of online %edia The availa#le evidence thus suggests overwhel%ingl( that it is not a

cohort of tech savv( (outh driving the growth of participator( political #log co%%unities on the

left

o stud( that we are aware of can ad6udicate conclusivel( #etween these different

e9planations of our findings =e can sa( that the relative freedo% to choose technological

ele%ents and deplo( the% in discursive practice allowed the left and the right to adopt divergent

#logging platfor%s, organi-ational and authorial for%s, and %o#ili-ation practices 7urther

nuanced and high resolutionC research into patterns of posting, co%%enting and discussion+

participation+ and the capacit( of the #logosphere to drive levels of engage%ent along various

other di%ensions will #e necessar( to understand the i%plications of these findings %ore full(

=idel( divergent adoption patterns of a given technolog( are not a new pheno%enon

Protestant and &atholic Jurope had different and antagonistic approaches to the printing press,

resulting in centuries of difference in levels of literac( and reading practices, which did not

narrow until the late 1> th and earl( 2 th centuries 3Jisenstein, 1> >+ $tarr, 2 04 't re%ains to #e

seen whether, and to what e9tent, the shift in political power in the *nited $tates #etween 2 ?

and 2 . will elicit a shift in practices of online participation and %o#ili-ation, or whether the

practices re%ain, either #ecause the( reflect sta#le cultural or ps(chological t(pes or #ecause

historical patterns of practice at transition points tend to have their own inertia But the perennial

de#ates over the degree to which the 'nternet enhances de%ocratic participation will to so%e

e9tent depend on whether the left or right wing of the #logosphere is generali-ed, and how newer


40/60


technological platfor%s are incorporated into the e9tant practices of the societies and

co%%unities into which the( are introduced


41/60


References

Ada%ic, L , ; ??4 + Tower in ,abel! + &istor( of ,roadcasting in the -nited States 59ford:59ford *niversit( Press

Beniger, 8 R 31>.?4 The Control #evolution &a%#ridge: )arvard *niversit( Press

Ben"ler, ! 32 ?4 The )ealth of Networks! &ow Social Production Transforms *arkets and .reedom ew )aven: !ale *niversit( Press

Bowers, & , ; $toller, M 32 04 'mergence of the Progressive ,logosphere! + New .orce in +merican Politics ew Politics 'nstitute Availa#le at:http:HHwww newpolitics netHnodeH. Efull reportS1 KAccessed Dece%#er , 2 .

&astells, M 31>>?4 The #ise of the Network Societ( Malden, MA: Blac"well

Dre-ner, D, ; 7arrell, ) 32 .4 The Power and Politics of Blogs C Public Choice 31G@4:10 G

Jisenstein, J L 31> >4 The Printing Press as an +gent of Change &a%#ridge: &a%#ridge*niversit( Press

Lawrence, J , $ides, 8 , ; 7arrell, ) 32 1 4 $elf $egregation or Deli#erationE BlogReadership, Participation, and Polari-ation in A%erican Politics C Perspectives on

Politics .314:1@1 10

)a#er%as, 8 31>?24 The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere! +n In/uir( Into aCategor( of ,ourgeois Societ( London: Polit(


42/60


)argittai, J 32 4 5pen portals or closed gatesE &hanneling &ontent on the =orld =ide=e# C Poetics 2 :2GG 20G

32 >4 Digital a3t4ivesE The Role of $"ill in 'nternet *se,C presentation at the M'T)arvard Jcono%ic $ociolog( $e%inar, 7e#ruar( 11, &a%#ridge, MA

)argittai, J , 014 The ,ias of Communication Toronto: *niversit( of Toronto Press

8ost, 8 T , G.0

eeter, $ , )orowit-, 8 M , ; T(son, A en Dems! The Part(4s +dvantage +mong Youngoters )idens =ashington, D & : Pew Research &enter for the People and the Press,

April http:HHpewresearch orgHpu#sH.1GH 3Accesed Ma( G, 2 >4

er#el, M R 32 >4 Netroots! 6nline Progressives and the Transformation of +merican Politics Boulder, &5: Paradig% Pu#lishers

rippendorff, 32 @4 Content +nal(sis! +n Introduction to Its *ethodolog( 2nd edThousand 5a"s, &A: $age

Lampe, C., Johnston, E., & Resnick, P. (2007). Follow the Reader: Filtering Comments on


43/60


Slashdot, Conference on Human Factors in Computer Systems (CHI), San Jose, CA.

Marshall, 8 M 32 .4 'nterview with Authors &a%#ridge, MA, Ma( 1?

Mc&hesne(, R = 31>>G4 Telecommunications" *ass *edia" and Democrac(! The ,attle forthe Control of -0S0 ,roadcasting" 1789$17:5 ew !or": 59ford *niversit( Press

McLuhan, M 31>?24 The utenberg ala;(! The *aking of T(pographic *an Toronto:*niversit( of Toronto Press

Moulitsas O niga, M 32 .4 Taking 6n the S(stem! #ules for #adical Change in a Digital 'ra ew !or": Penguin

egroponte, 31>>04 ,eing Digital ew !or": nopf

Reno vs A%erican &ivil Li#erties *nion, 581 -0S0 922 31>> 4

Shirky, C. (2008). Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations .New York: Penguin Press.

$%ith, A 32 >4 The Internet4s #ole in Campaign 84

$tarr, P 32 04 The Creation of the *edia! Political 6rigins of *odern Communication ew!or": Basic Boo"s

$unstein, & R 32 24 #epublic0com Princeton, 8: Princeton *niversit( Press

32 4 #epublic0com 80< Princeton, 8: Princeton *niversit( Press

=allsten, 32 4 Agenda $etting and the Blogosphere: An Anal(sis of the Relationship #etween Mainstrea% Media and Political Blogs #eview of Polic( #esearch 2@, no ?:0? 0.

=ic"ha%, ) 32 >4 ggplot8! 'legant raphics for Data +nal(sis ew !or": $pringer

=inner, L 31>.?4 Do Artifacts )ave PoliticsEC 'n The )hale and the #eactor! + Search for %imits in an +ge of &igh Technolog( , &hicago: *niversit( of &hicago Press, p 1> G>


44/60


Figures and ables


45/60



46/60



47/60



48/60



49/60



50/60



51/60



52/60



53/60



54/60


A!!endi" #$Blogs in our Study by %olitical Classification

&enter Blogs:

http:HHwww politicalwire co%http:HHwww the%oderatevoice co%http:HHwww realclearpolitics co%http:HHwww #alloon 6uice co%http:HHwww theagitator co%http:HHwww warandpiece co%

http:HHwww %sn#c %sn co%http:HHwww %arginalrevolution co%http:HHwww poli#logger co%http:HHwww %e%eorandu% co%http:HHwww andrewsullivan theatlantic co%http:HHwww %edia#istro co%http:HH#log thehill co%http:HHwww lao#served co%http:HHwww c/politics co%http:HHwww professor#ain#ridge co%

http:HHwww o9#log #logspot co%http:HH#log foreignpolic( co%http:HHeconlog econli# org http:HHwww pollster co%H#logshttp:HHwww watch#log co%http:HHwww sa%i-data nethttp:HHwww right thin"ing co%

Left Blogs:

http:HHwww %(dd co%http:HHwww washington%onthl( co%http:HHwww croo"sandliars co%http:HHwww won"ette co%http:HHwww tal"ingpoints%e%o co%http:HHwww dail("os co%


55/60


http:HHwww thin"progress orghttp:HHwww atrios #logspot co%http:HHwww 6uancole co%

http:HHwww firedogla"e co%http:HHwww oliverwillis co%http:HHwww tal"left co%http:HHwww li#eraloasis co%http:HHwww #urntorangereport co%http:HHwww theleftcoaster co%http:HHwww de%ocraticunderground co%http:HHwww dig#(s#log #logspot co%http:HHwww huffingtonpost co%http:HHwww this%odernworld co%http:HHwww pandagon nethttp:HHwww swingstatepro6ect co%http:HHwww tp%cafe co%http:HHwww rawstor( co%http:HHwww thewashingtonnote co%http:HHwww dneiwert #logspot co%http:HHwww #logfora%erica co%http:HHwww patriot#o( #logspot co%http:HHwww to%#ur"a co%http:HHwww croo"edti%#er orghttp:HHwww a%erica#log #logspot co%

http:HHwww co%%ondrea%s orghttp:HHwww %a6i"thise t(pepad co%http:HHwww #oo%antri#une co%http:HHwww susie%adra" co%http:HHwww angr(#ear #logspot co%http:HHwww rudepundit #logspot co%http:HHwww o#sidianwings #logs co%http:HHwww iowatrue#lue co%http:HHwww %other6ones co%http:HHwww thenation co%http:HHwww culture"itchen co%http:HHwww 9nerg #logspot co%http:HHwww salon co%HopinionHgreenwaldhttp:HHwww #rad#log co%http:HHwww theoildru% co%http:HHwww agonist orghttp:HHwww newshounds ushttp:HHwww %aha#log co%
http://www.liberaloasis.com/http://www.digbysblog.blogspot.com/http://www.pandagon.net/http://www.rawstory.com/http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/http://www.dneiwert.blogspot.com/http://www.patriotboy.blogspot.com/http://www.tomburka.com/http://www.majikthise.typepad.com/http://www.boomantribune.com/http://www.susiemadrak.com/http://www.angrybear.blogspot.com/http://www.rudepundit.blogspot.com/http://www.obsidianwings.blogs.com/http://www.thenation.com/http://www.xnerg.blogspot.com/http://www.agonist.org/http://www.mahablog.com/http://www.liberaloasis.com/http://www.digbysblog.blogspot.com/http://www.pandagon.net/http://www.rawstory.com/http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/http://www.dneiwert.blogspot.com/http://www.patriotboy.blogspot.com/http://www.tomburka.com/http://www.majikthise.typepad.com/http://www.boomantribune.com/http://www.susiemadrak.com/http://www.angrybear.blogspot.com/http://www.rudepundit.blogspot.com/http://www.obsidianwings.blogs.com/http://www.thenation.com/http://www.xnerg.blogspot.com/http://www.agonist.org/http://www.mahablog.com/


56/60


http:HHwww correntewire co%http:HHwww sadl(no co%http:HHwww alternet org

http:HHwww 6ournalis% n(u eduhttp:HHwww faf#log #logspot co%http:HHwww ta(lor%arsh co%http:HHwww %atthew(glesias co%http:HHwww reach% co%Ha%streethttp:HHwww %athewgross co%http:HHwww s%ir"ingchi%p co%http:HHwww d(na%ist co%Hwe#loghttp:HHwww #agnewsnotes co%http:HHwww pa%shouse#lend co%http:HHwww thecarpet#aggerreport co%http:HHwww %edia%atters orghttp:HHwww pacificviews orghttp:HHwww left(#logs co%

Right Blogs:

http:HHwww instapundit co%

http:HHwww powerline#log co%http:HHwww %ichelle%al"in co%http:HHwww ace %u nuhttp:HHwww deanes%a( co%http:HHwww stoptheaclu co%http:HHwww wi-#ang#log co%http:HHwww littlegreenfoot#alls co%http:HHwww news#usters orghttp:HHwww outsidethe#eltwa( co%http:HHwww i%ao ushttp:HHwww rightwingnews co%http:HHwww hotair co%http:HHwww #logsforvictor( co%http:HHwww rogerlsi%on co%http:HHwww %(pet6awa %u nuhttp:HHwww evangelicaloutpost co%http:HHwww #ets(spage #logspot co%http:HHwww polipundit co%
http://www.correntewire.com/http://www.sadlyno.com/http://www.fafblog.blogspot.com/http://www.taylormarsh.com/http://www.reachm.com/amstreethttp://www.mathewgross.com/http://www.smirkingchimp.com/http://www.dynamist.com/webloghttp://www.bagnewsnotes.com/http://www.pamshouseblend.com/http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/http://www.leftyblogs.com/http://www.powerlineblog.com/http://www.deanesmay.com/http://www.newsbusters.org/http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/http://www.blogsforvictory.com/http://www.rogerlsimon.com/http://www.polipundit.com/http://www.correntewire.com/http://www.sadlyno.com/http://www.fafblog.blogspot.com/http://www.taylormarsh.com/http://www.reachm.com/amstreethttp://www.mathewgross.com/http://www.smirkingchimp.com/http://www.dynamist.com/webloghttp://www.bagnewsnotes.com/http://www.pamshouseblend.com/http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/http://www.leftyblogs.com/http://www.powerlineblog.com/http://www.deanesmay.com/http://www.newsbusters.org/http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/http://www.blogsforvictory.com/http://www.rogerlsimon.com/http://www.polipundit.com/


57/60


http:HHwww patterico co%http:HHwww redstate co%http:HHwww dail(pundit co%

http:HHwww althouse #logspot co%http:HHwww lashawn#ar#er co%http:HHwww %ichaeltotten co%http:HHwww sa(an(thing#log co%http:HHwww nationalreview co%http:HHwww 6ihadwatch orghttp:HHwww a%ericandigest orghttp:HHwww volo"h co%http:HHwww vod"apundit co%http:HHwww scrappleface co%http:HHwww pa6a%as%edia co%http:HHwww ira/the%odel #logspot co%http:HHwww 6onswift #logspot co%http:HHwww %udvillega-ette co%http:HHwww da"otawarcollege co%http:HHwww opinion6ournal co%H#esthttp:HHthepin"fla%ingo #loghar#or co%http:HHwww fall#ac"#el%ont #logspot co%http:HHwww capecodporcupine #logspot co%http:HHwww #logsofwar co%http:HHwww conserva#logs co%

http:HHwww an"le#itingpundits co%http:HHwww nicedoggie nethttp:HHwww coldfur( co%http:HHwww floppingaces nethttp:HHwww #lac"five nethttp:HHwww "ausfiles co%http:HHwww #log electro%ne(in2 . co%http:HHwww townhall co%http:HHwww freerepu#lic co%http:HHwww atlasshrugs2 t(pepad co%http:HHwww co%%onsensewonder co%http:HHwww corner nationalreview co%http:HHwww alar%ingnews co%http:HHwww proteinwisdo% co%http:HHwww hughhewitt townhall co%http:HHwww senatesite co%http:HHwww redstate orghttp:HHwww drudgereport co%
http://www.patterico.com/http://www.dailypundit.com/http://www.althouse.blogspot.com/http://www.michaeltotten.com/http://www.sayanythingblog.com/http://www.americandigest.org/http://www.volokh.com/http://www.vodkapundit.com/http://www.iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/http://www.dakotawarcollege.com/http://www.opinionjournal.com/besthttp://thepinkflamingo.blogharbor.com/http://www.fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/http://www.capecodporcupine.blogspot.com/http://www.blogsofwar.com/http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/http://www.coldfury.com/http://www.floppingaces.net/http://www.blackfive.net/http://www.freerepublic.com/http://www.atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/http://www.commonsensewonder.com/http://www.alarmingnews.com/http://www.senatesite.com/http://www.drudgereport.com/http://www.patterico.com/http://www.dailypundit.com/http://www.althouse.blogspot.com/http://www.michaeltotten.com/http://www.sayanythingblog.com/http://www.americandigest.org/http://www.volokh.com/http://www.vodkapundit.com/http://www.iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/http://www.dakotawarcollege.com/http://www.opinionjournal.com/besthttp://thepinkflamingo.blogharbor.com/http://www.fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/http://www.capecodporcupine.blogspot.com/http://www.blogsofwar.com/http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/http://www.coldfury.com/http://www.floppingaces.net/http://www.blackfive.net/http://www.freerepublic.com/http://www.atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/http://www.commonsensewonder.com/http://www.alarmingnews.com/http://www.senatesite.com/http://www.drudgereport.com/


58/60


http:HHwww #a%apach(der% co%http:HHwww gopusa co%http:HHwww #illho##s co%

http:HHwww de##ieschlussel co%http:HHwww rightwingnuthouse co%http:HHwww sweetness light co%
http://www.bamapachyderm.com/http://www.billhobbs.com/http://www.debbieschlussel.com/http://www.rightwingnuthouse.com/http://www.sweetness-light.com/http://www.bamapachyderm.com/http://www.billhobbs.com/http://www.debbieschlussel.com/http://www.rightwingnuthouse.com/http://www.sweetness-light.com/


59/60

1 The research for this paper was conducted while $haw was a Research 7ellow at the Ber"%an &enter for 'nternetand $ociet( at )arvard *niversit( The authors wish to ac"nowledge the Directors, 7ellows, and $taff of theBer"%an &enter for their "indness and support =e would especiall( li"e to than" $ilpa ovvali for her diligentresearch assistance and data collection+ as well as )enr( 7arrell and Js-ter )argittai, #oth of who% providedthoughtful and constructive feed#ac" on an earlier draft Than"s also to 8ohn ell( and the fol"s at Morningside

Anal(tics for sharing their list of top #logs with us The wor"ing paper was originall( released as authored #(Ben"ler, $haw, and $todden out of respect for Qictoria $todden s earl( participation, and after a long periodduring which $haw and Ben"ler had proceeded to co%plete the paper with li%ited co%%unication with $toddenAfter the original release, it #eca%e clear that what we saw as an act of respect, in the na%ing of authors, wasnot welco%e As a result, Ben"ler and $haw ta"e full responsi#ilit( for the paper in its entiret(, the /ualit( of thedata and anal(sis, and the conceptual fra%ing and authorship The present authorship designation reflects thatfact Please direct all correspondence to Aaron $haw, Ber"%an &enter for 'nternet and $ociet(, 2G Jverett $t ,$econd 7loor, &a%#ridge, MA 21G.+ or e%ail: ashaw Kat c(#er law harvard edu

2 't is interesting to note that =allsten see%s to draw %i9ed conclusions in this regard 5n the one hand, he clai%sthat #logs perfor% an influential role in the pu#lic sphere vis a vis their effect on the traditional %ass %edia+ atthe sa%e ti%e, he 6oins )ind%an 32 .4 in clai%ing that the de%ographics of A list #loggers 3white, %ale,educated, wealth(4 tend to reinforce the cultural and political #iases of the traditional %edia =e engage withthis argu%ent in %ore detail #elow

G 't is i%portant to underscore the contingencies i%plicit in this clai% Js-ter )argittai s wor" on the participationdivideC %a"es clear that the %ere e9istence of participator( affordances online does not ensure that suchaffordances will #e adopted in wa(s that under%ine e9isting social ine/ualities or status hierarchies 3see, fore9a%ple, )argittai ; =ale6"o, 2 .4

@ $ee http:HHsourceforge netHpro6ectsHscoop, http:HHdrupal orgH, http:HHwww soap#lo9 netH, andhttp:HHe9pressionengine co%H

0 =e onl( review so%e of the "e( varia#les here The full coding instru%ent is availa#le fro% the authors uponre/uest

? $ee, for e9a%ple, this post on the left wing $wing $tate Pro6ectC which was a user diar( that one of the siteeditors pro%oted to the front page of the site: http:HHwww swingstatepro6ect co%Hdiar(H0 2Ha%a-ing politicalhistor( of n(2G

7 $ee http:HHwww freerepu#lic co% and http:HHwww de%ocraticunderground co%. $ee http:HHden#este nuHcd log entriesH2 2H @HLotsoftraffic sht%l 3Accessed Dece%#er 0, 2 .4 'n fact, Den

Beste used the ter%s writersC and editorsC in his post+ however he /uic"l( added the following update: $everal people have alread( pointed out that instead of editors and writers , a %uch #etter pair of ter%s is lin"ers and

thin"ers $heesh+ ' should have thought of that C> The site we used twice was The Truth Laid Bear,C which pu#lishes separate lists #ased inlin"s and site traffic

Because the author of this site, O Bear, does not separate out political #logs, we reviewed 1 of the *RLs onhis lin" #ased list and 20 on his hit #ased list to deter%ine which ones were political =e counted a *RL as

political if #oth coders found that it contained so%e political content on its front page =e did not consider adsor third part( content as political

1 7or another approach to ran"ing top #logs, see arpf 32 .a+ 2 .#4 =hile his %ethod is appealing for itstransparenc( and replica#ilit(, we found that ours produced nearl( identical results insofar as we captured thevast %a6orit( of his top #logs in our sa%ple

11 This process resulted in a list of 1 . *RLs, each with a ran"ing fro% 1 corresponding to total nu%#er of listson which the *RL appeared

12 The resulting list of #logs included in our stud( is in Appendi9 1, #elow1G The De%ocratic ational &onvention too" place several da(s after the co%pletion of our coding N August 20 2.14 All of the plots were produced in R using the ggplot2 pac"age 3http:HHhad co n-Hggplot2H4, created #( )adle(

=ic"ha% 32 >4 The color sche%e was generated using &olorBrewer2 3http:HHcolor#rewer2 org4, created #(&(nthia Brewer and Mar" )arrower

10 Mar"os Moulitsas announced the change on 5cto#er 10, 2 G:http:HHwe# archive orgHwe#H2 @ G21 [email protected] dail("os netH

16 $ee http:HHwww #urntorangereport co%HshowDiar( doEdiar('dS?@ 0 3Accessed Dece%#er >, 2 .41 5ur %easure of calls to action did not include fundraising per se , #ut focused on off line events such as phone

#an"ing, rallies, and other for%s of volunteer participation At the sa%e ti%e, #ecause so %an( off line for%s of

Footnotes


60/60

participation are also fundraising activities, we cannot distinguish perfectl( #etween the two $ee the codinginstru%ent availa#le at Kpaper *RL for %ore detail

1. =e calculated rippendorff s alpha for all research /uestions coded =ith the e9ception of the /uestions%entioned, all e9ceeded or were ver( close to the rule of thu%# of 7ull results of all rippendorff s alphacalculations are availa#le fro% the authors upon re/uest

1> A%ong the top ?0 #logs, seven were in the political center, %a"ing %eaningful statistical anal(sis difficultThese are, in order of ran"ing, http:HHwww politicalwire co%, http:HHwww realclearpolitics co%,http:HHwww #alloon 6uice co%, http:HHwww theagitator co%, and http:HHwww %sn#c %sn co%

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	angrytx
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

A Tale of Two Blogospheres.pdf

Documents