#decadenza on Twitter: a case of online naming & shaming?

Author/s Alessandra Micalizzi, Manuela Farinosi
Publishing Year 2015 Issue 2015/49 Language Italian
Pages 22 P. 83-104 File size 265 KB
DOI 10.3280/SC2015-049006
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The proliferation of social platforms has led to profound changes in the interaction between individuals and society, giving rise to new practices and new spaces of collective discussion and expanding the spaces of interaction and formation of opinions. In this paper, the attention will be focused on a specific case: the expulsion of Berlusconi from Italy’s Senate. Through a quali-quantitative analysis of 1,500 tweets containing the hashtag #decadenza, we investigate the characteristics of a particular way of being part of the political debate of a country, focusing specifically on the use of hashtags and retweets and on the sentiment analysis of content.

Keywords: Bottom up participation, digital methods, Twitter, Berlusconi, sentiment analysis, emotional spreading.

  1. Colozzi C. (a cura di) (1994), Varianti di Comunitarismo, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  2. Ausserhofer J., Maireder A. (2013), National politics on Twitter. Structures and topics of a networked public sphere, «Information, Communication & Society», 16, pp. 291-314.
  3. Bennato D. (2012), Sociologia dei media digitali. Relazioni sociali e processi comunicativi del web partecipativo, Roma-Bari, Laterza.
  4. Bennet W. L., Segerberg A. (2013), The logic of connective action. Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics, Cambridge University Press.
  5. Boccia Artieri G. (2012), Stati di connessione. Pubblici, cittadini e consumatori nella (Social) Network Society, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  6. Bruns A. (2012), How long is a tweet? Mapping dynamic conversation networks on Twitter using Gawk and Gephi, «Information, Communication & Society», vol. 15, n. 9, pp. 1-29.
  7. Bruns A., Burgess J. (2011), #Ausvotes: how Twitter covered the 2010 Australian federal election, «Communication, Politics & Culture», vol. 4, n. 2, pp. 37-56.
  8. Bruns A., Highfield T. (2013), Political networks on Twitter. Tweeting the Queensland state election, «Information, Communication & Society», vol. 16, n. 5, pp. 667-691.
  9. Carpentier N. (2007), Theoretical frameworks for participatory media, in Carpentier N., Pruulman-Vengerfeldt P., Nordenstreng K., Hartmann M., Vihalemm P., Cammaerts B., Nieminen H. (eds.), Media technologies and democracy in an enlarged Europe: The intellectual work of the 2007 European media and communication doctoral summer school, Tartu University Press, Tartu, pp. 81-94.
  10. Castells M. (2012), Reti di indignazione e speranza. Movimenti sociali nell’era di Internet, Università Bocconi Editore, Milano.
  11. Dahlberg L. (2001), The Internet and democratic discourse: exploring the prospects of online deliberative forums extending the public sphere, «Information, Communication & Society», vol. 4, n. 4, pp. 615-633.
  12. Debatim B. (2008), The Internet as a New Platform for Expressing Public Opinions and as a New Public Sphere, in Donsbach W., Traugott M. W. (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Public Opinion Research, Sage, London.
  13. Giglietto F., Rossi L., Bennato D. (2014), The Open Laboratory: Limits and Possibilities of Using Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube as a Research Data Source, «Journal of Technology in Human Services», vol. 30, n. 3-4, pp. 145-159.
  14. Goffman E. (1990), Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs Graham T., Broersma M., Hazelhoff K., Van’t Haar G. (2013), Between broadcasting political messages and interacting with voters, «Information, Communication & Society», 16, pp. 692-716.
  15. Habermas J. (2001), Storia e Critica dell’Opinione Pubblica, Laterza, Roma-Bari.
  16. Hogan B. (2008), Analyzing social networks via the Internet, in The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods, Sage, London, pp. 141-160.
  17. Huberman B.A., Romero D.M, Wu F. (2009), Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope, «First Monday», vol. 14, n. 1.
  18. Jackson N., Lilleker D. (2011), Microblogging, constituency service and impression management. UK MPs and the use of Twitter, «The Journal of Legislative Studies», n. 17, pp. 86-105.
  19. Jenkins H. (2006), Convergence Culture: Where old and new media collide, New York University Press, New York.
  20. Jungherr A., Jürgens P. (2013), Through a glass, darkly. Tactical support and symbolic association in Twitter messages commenting on Stuttgart 21, «Social Science Computer Review», n. 32, pp. 74-89.
  21. Karpf D. (2012), Social Science research methods in Internet time, «Information, Communication & Society», vol. 15, n. 5, pp. 639-661.
  22. La Cecla F. (2006), Surrogati di presenza. Media e vita quotidiana, Mondadori, Milano.
  23. Larsson A., Moe H. (2012), Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign, «New Media & Society», vol. 14, n. 5, pp. 729-747.
  24. Lee E. J., Jang J. W. (2013), Not so imaginary interpersonal contact with public figures on social network sites. How affiliative tendency moderates its effects, «Communication Research», n. 40, pp. 27-51.
  25. Levomre S., Nussbaum M. C. (2010), The offensive internet. Privacy, speech and reputation, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
  26. Mannarini T. (2004), Comunità e partecipazione. Prospettive psicosociali, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  27. Murthy D. (2011), Twitter: Microphone for the masses?, «Media, Culture & Society », vol. 33, n. 5, pp. 779-789.
  28. Papacharissi Z. (2002), The virtual sphere: the Internet as the public sphere, «New Media & Society», vol. 4, n. 1, pp. 5-23.
  29. Papacharissi Z., de Fatima Oliveira M. (2012), Affective news and networked publics. The rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt, «Journal of Communication», n. 62, pp. 266-282.
  30. Parmalee J. H., Bichard S. L. (2012), Politics and the Twitter revolution: how tweets influence the relationship between political leaders and the public, Lexington Books, Lanham, MD.
  31. Rice J. (2012), Distant publics: development rethoric and the subject of crisis, Pittsburg University Press, Pittsburg.
  32. Riva C. (2014), Partecipazione e politica nei new media, in Stella R., Riva C., Scarcelli C.M., Drusian M. (a cura di), Sociologia dei New Media, Utet Università, Torino.
  33. Rogers R. (2009), The end of the virtual. Digital Methods, Amsterdam University
  34. Press. Rowbottom J. (2012), To publish, inform and criticize: the goals of naming and shaming, Proceedings of Media and Boundaries of the International Conference: Disclosure: Media, morals, Public Shaming and Privacy (Oxford, UK – Feb. 23-24 2012).
  35. Shirky C. (2011), The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, The Public Sphere, and Politcal Change, «Foreign Affairs», January/February, pp. 1-12.
  36. Small T. A. (2011), What the hashtag? A content analysis of Canadian politics on Twitter, «Information, Communication & Society», vol. 14, n. 6, pp. 872-895.
  37. Solove D. J. (2010), Speech, privacy and reputation on the Internet, in Levomre S., Nussbaum M. C., The offensive internet. Privacy, speech and reputation, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp. 15-31.
  38. Westling M. (2007), Expanding the Public Sphere. The impact of Facebook on Political Communication. The New Vernacular, testo disponibile in: http://www.thenewvernacular.com/projects/facebook_and_political_communic ation.pdf.

Alessandra Micalizzi, Manuela Farinosi, #decadenza su Twitter: un caso di naming e shaming online? in "SOCIOLOGIA DELLA COMUNICAZIONE " 49/2015, pp 83-104, DOI: 10.3280/SC2015-049006