Agenda-setting and power relations during the 2018 Colombian election campaign on Twitter

  1. Pedro-Carañana, Joan 1
  2. Alvarado-Vivas, Sergio 3
  3. López-López, Juan S. 2
  1. 1 Department of Journalism and New Media, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain
  2. 2 Instituto de Estudios Socio-Históricos Fray Alonso de Zamora, Santo Tomás University, Bogotá, Colombia
  3. 3 Department of Communication Sciences, University Minuto de Dios, Bogotá, Colombia
Mostrar afiliaciones +
Revista:
The Journal of International Communication

ISSN: 1321-6597,  2158-3471

Año de publicación: 2020

Volumen: 26

Número: 2

Páginas: 260-280

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1080/13216597.2020.1806900 GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: The Journal of International Communication

Resumen

This paper presents research data about features of discourses held on Twitter regarding the last presidential campaign in Colombia (2018) based on the agenda-setting theory. This case study had a quantitative research approach. The sample includes 62 Trending Topics and 620 tweets that were selected according to criteria of relevance and influence. A method of systematic content analysis was applied to gather data on sources and contents of messages using SPSS software statistical analysis. Five important findings are highlighted: 1. Traditional mass media were mainly responsible for defining the agenda on Twitter. 2. Within the context of the agenda outlined by the media, it was citizens who monopolised the discussion, thereby playing a key role in topic dissemination, candidates’ visibility, framings, and assessments. 3. The main topic of discussion was the campaign debate itself rather than programmatic measures. 4. No correlation between the positioning and visibility of the candidates in Twitter and the electoral results could be observed. 5. Positive/non-aggressive tones prevailed over negative/aggressive ones.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • 10.1007/s12115-010-9352-0
  • Alvarado-Vivas, S., López-López, J., and Pedro-Carañana, J. 2019. “Digitalización de la agenda pública: los debates electorales en Twitter y su correspondencia con las preocupaciones ciudadanas en la contienda presidencial en Colombia (2018)”. In:Digitalización de la Comunicación, Democracia y Ciudadanía,edited by M. Álvarez-Peralta y A. Segovia Alonso, 47–49. Cuenca, España: Ed. Diputación Provincial de Cuenca. Retrieved from shorturl.at/ipuRX.
  • An J., (2011), Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Med, pp. 18
  • Ansolabehere S., (1997), Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate
  • 10.32870/cys.v0i28.2929
  • Cabrera D., (2019), Revista Sociedad, pp. 81
  • 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540188
  • 10.1080/19331681.2016.1160266
  • 10.1093/oso/9780190696726.001.0001
  • Chavero P., (2019), Revista Ibérica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informação, pp. 516
  • Christakis N., (2010), Conectados. El sorprendente poder de las redes sociales y cómo nos afectan
  • 10.2307/2128415
  • 10.1089/cyber.2016.0402
  • 10.4324/9780429502002-4
  • 10.1177/106591290205500406
  • Duque A., (2012), Universidad, ciencia y Desarrollo, 6, pp. 1
  • Fenton N., (2016), Digital, Political, Radical
  • Freedman D., (2014), The Contradictions of Media Power
  • 10.2307/j.ctt21215dw
  • 10.16997/book27.f
  • García-Dussán É, (2011), Revista Tendencias and Retos, 16, pp. 291
  • García-Perdomo V., (2017), Cuadernos de Información, 41, pp. 57, 10.7764/cdi.41.1241
  • 10.1017/S1049096512000492
  • Gomes W., (2009), Cuadernos de H Ideas, 3, pp. 1
  • 10.1177/1940161217704969
  • 10.1177/1461444814555096
  • 10.1080/19331681.2018.1448735
  • Jara R., (2017), Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 72, pp. 803, 10.4185/RLCS-2017-1193
  • 10.1111/jcc4.12143
  • 10.1177/0894439316631043
  • Kim S. T., (2006), Korean Journal of Journalism and Communication Studies, 50, pp. 175
  • Kripendorff K., (1989), International Encyclopedia of Communication, 1, pp. 403
  • Krippendorff K., (2004), Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology
  • Lang G. E., (1983), The Battle for Public Opinion: The President, the Press, and the Polls During Watergate
  • Lang G. E., (1991), Agenda Setting. Readings on Media, Public Opinion and Policymaking, pp. 277
  • 10.1177/1461444811422894
  • 10.4324/9780203126974
  • López-Rabadán P., (2016), Index Comunicación, 6, pp. 165
  • López-Trigo M., (2013), Historia y Comunicación Social, 18, pp. 813
  • 10.5944/eeii.vol.6.n.11.2019.25086
  • 10.23919/CISTI.2017.7976052
  • 10.1086/267990
  • 10.1177/107769900007700403
  • 10.2307/2960400
  • 10.3145/epi.2017.jul.02
  • Posso Espinosa E., (2018), Chasqui. Revista Latinoamericana de Comunicación, 139, pp. 409
  • Prada O., (2019), Revista Humanidades: Revista de la Escuela de Estudios Generales, 9, pp. 1
  • Richard E., (2011), OPERA, 11, pp. 129
  • Rincón O., (2011), Nueva sociedad, 235, pp. 74
  • Rodríguez Díaz, R, J López-López, S Alvarado-Vivas, and A Martínez. 2009.Medios, partidos y confrontación en España: elecciones europeas 2009 Anàlisi: Quaderns de comunicació i cultura, 33–53.
  • 10.1080/23808985.1988.11678708
  • 10.1080/19331681.2016.1160263
  • Said-Hung E., (2011), Comunicación y Sociedad, 24, pp. 75
  • 10.1590/S0104-44782009000300010
  • 10.1177/1464884919845460
  • Segado-Boj F., (2015), Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 70, pp. 156, 10.4185/RLCS-2015-1040
  • 10.1080/23753234.2018.1430513
  • 10.1177/1461444816669158
  • Tumasjan A., (2010), Proceedings of the Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, pp. 178
  • Twitter. n.d.Search result FAQs[Help Center Twitter]. https://help.twitter.com/en/using-twitter/top-search-results-faqs.
  • Van den Heijkant L., (2019), International Journal of Communication, 13, pp. 23
  • 10.1111/jcom.12089