Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Polarisation and echo chambers? Making sense of the climate issue with social media in everyday life Cover

Polarisation and echo chambers? Making sense of the climate issue with social media in everyday life

Open Access
|Feb 2023

References

  1. Aalen, I., & Hoem Iversen, M. (2021). Sosiale medier [Social media]. Fagbokforlaget.
  2. Anderson, A. A. (2017). Effects of social media use on climate change opinion, knowledge, and behavior. Oxford research encyclopedia of climate science. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.369
  3. Arlt, D., Rauchfleisch, A., & Schäfer, M. S. (2019). Between fragmentation and dialogue: Twitter communities and political debate about the Swiss “nuclear withdrawal initiative.” Environmental Communication, 13(4), 440–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1430600
  4. Bakardjieva, M. (2005). Internet society: The internet in everyday life. Sage. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446215616
  5. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor books.
  6. Bhatasara, S. (2015). Debating sociology and climate change. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 12(3), 217–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2015.1108342
  7. Blaikie, N., & Priest, J. (2017). Social research paradigms in action. Polity Press.
  8. Boulianne, S., Lalancette, M., & Ilkiw, D. (2020). “School strike 4 climate”: Social media and the international youth protest on climate change. Media and Communication, 8(2), 208–218. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i2.2768
  9. Bruns, A. (2019). Are filter bubbles real? Polity Press.
  10. Bruns, A., & Moon, B. (2019). One day in the life of a national twittersphere. Nordicom Review, 40(S1), 11–30. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2019-0011
  11. Carvalho, A., van Wessel, M., & Maeseele, P. (2017). Communication practices and political engagement with climate change: A research agenda. Environmental Communication, 11(1), 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2016.1241815
  12. Converse, P. E. (2006). The nature of belief systems in mass publics (1964). Critical Review, 18(1–3), 1–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913810608443650
  13. Crouch, M., & McKenzie, H. (2006). The logic of small samples in interview-based qualitative research. Social Science Information, 45(4), 483–499. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018406069584
  14. Dervin, B. (1998). Sense-making theory and practice: An overview of user interests in knowledge seeking and use. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2(2), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673279810249369
  15. Erman, E. (2016). Representation, equality, and inclusion in deliberative systems: Desiderata for a good account. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 19(3), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2016.1144854
  16. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press.
  17. Fletcher, R., Cornia, A., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). How polarized are online and offline news audiences? A comparative analysis of twelve countries. International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(2), 169–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161219892768
  18. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Research Practice, 12(2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608191.d33
  19. Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, (25/26), 56–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/466240
  20. Gregersen, T. (2022). Bekymring for klimaendringer [Worry about climate change]. Energi Og Klima [Energy and climate]. https://energiogklima.no/nyhet/bekymring-for-klimaendringer/
  21. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1564.001.0001
  22. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790867
  23. Happer, C., & Philo, G. (2016). New approaches to understanding the role of the news media in the formation of public attitudes and behaviours on climate change. European Journal of Communication, 31(2), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323115612213
  24. Hestres, L. E. (2014). Preaching to the choir: Internet-mediated advocacy, issue public mobilization, and climate change. New Media and Society, 16(2), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813480361
  25. Hilson, M. (2008). The Nordic model: Scandinavia since 1945. Reaktion Books.
  26. Holst, C., & Moe, H. (2021). Deliberative systems theory and citizens’ use of online media: Testing a critical theory of democracy on a high achiever. Political Studies, 69(1), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321719890809
  27. Hutchins, B. (2016). The many modalities of social networking: The role of Twitter in greens politics. Environmental Communication, 10(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.966853
  28. Höijer, B. (2010). Emotional anchoring and objectification in the media reporting on climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 19(6), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509348863
  29. Jensen, K. B. (2017). Speaking of the weather. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 23(4), 439–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517700379
  30. Jupskås, A. R., Ivarsflaten, E., Kalsnes, B., & Aalberg, T. (2017). Norway: Populism from anti-tax movement to government party. In T. Aalberg, F. Esser, C. Reinemann, J. Strömbäck, & C. H. de Vreese (Eds.), Populist political communcation in Europe (pp. 54–67). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315623016
  31. Katz-Kimchi, M., & Manosevitch, I. (2015). Mobilizing Facebook users against Facebook's energy policy: The case of Greenpeace unfriend coal campaign. Environmental Communication, 9(2), 248–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.993413
  32. Knutsen, O. (Ed.). (2017). The Nordic models in political science: Challenged but still viable? Fagbokforlaget.
  33. Krange, O., Kaltenborn, B. P., & Hultman, M. (2019). Cool dudes in Norway: Climate change denial among conservative Norwegian men. Environmental Sociology, 5(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2018.1488516
  34. Krange, O., Kaltenborn, B. P., & Hultman, M. (2021). “Don’t confuse me with facts” – how right wing populism affects trust in agencies advocating anthropogenic climate change as a reality. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00930-7
  35. Kunelius, R., & Roosvall, A. (2021). Media and the climate crisis. Nordic Journal of Media Studies, 3(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.2478/njms-2021-0001
  36. Lomborg, S., & Mortensen, M. (2017). Users across media: An introduction. Convergence, 23(4), 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517700555
  37. Mahony, M., & Hulme, M. (2018). Epistemic geographies of climate change: Science, space and politics. Progress in Human Geography, 42(3), 395–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132516681485
  38. MedieNorge/SSB. (2022). Bruk av sosiale medier en gjennomsnittsdag [Use of social media on an average day]. Retrieved December 1, 2022, from https://www.medienorge.uib.no/statistikk/aspekt/tilgang-og-bruk/412
  39. Moe, H., Hovden, J. F., Ytre-Arne, B., Figenschou, T., Nærland, T. U., Sakariassen, H., & Thorbjørnsrud, K. (2019). Informerte borgere? Offentlig tilknytning, mediebruk og demokrati [Informed citizens? Public connection, media use and democracy]. Universitetsforlaget.
  40. Nadim, M. (2015). Generalisering og bruken av analytiske kategorier i kvalitativ forskning. [Generalisation and the use of analytical categories in qualitative research]. Sosiologisk Tidsskrift, 23(03), 129–148. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn1504-2928-2015-03-01
  41. Naumer, C., Fisher, K., & Dervin, B. (2008). Sense-making: A methodological perspective. CHI2008 Workshop on SenseMaking Florence, 1–5.
  42. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robertson, C. T., Eddy, K., & Nielsen, R. K. (2022). Reuters institute digital news report 2022. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2022
  43. Norgaard, K. M. (2011). Living in denial: climate change, emotions, and everyday life. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262015448.001.0001
  44. NTB/Aftenposten. (2020, February 20). Full klimakrig på Facebook [Full climate war on Facebook]. https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/politikk/i/g7GRM1/full-klimakrig-paa-facebook
  45. Odén, T., Djerf-Pierre, M., Ghersetti, M., & Johansson, B. (2016). Kriskommunikation 2.0 Allmänhet, medier och myndigheter i det digitala medielandskapet [Crisis communication 2.0: Public, media, and authorities in the digital media landscape]. Department of Journalism, Media and Communication, University of Gothenburg.
  46. Olausson, U. (2011). We’re the ones to blame: Citizens’ representations of climate change and the role of the media. Environmental Communication, 5(3), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2011.585026
  47. Olausson, U. (2018). “Stop blaming the cows!”: How livestock production is legitimized in everyday discourse on Facebook. Environmental Communication, 12(1), 28–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2017.1406385
  48. Pearce, W., Niederer, S., Özkula, S. M., & Sánchez Querubín, N. (2019). The social media life of climate change: Platforms, publics, and future imaginaries. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 10(2), e569. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.569
  49. Rojas, H. (2010). “Corrective” actions in the public sphere: How perceptions of media and media effects shape political behaviors. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(3), 343–363. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq018
  50. Rosenthal, S. (2020). Media literacy, scientific literacy, and science videos on the internet. Frontiers in Communication, 5(September), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2020.581585
  51. Sakariassen, H. (2020). A digital public sphere: Just in theory or a perceived reality for users of social network sites? MedieKultur: Journal of media and communication research, 36(68), 126–146. https://doi.org/10.7146/mediekultur.v36i68.118440
  52. Sakariassen, H. (2021). Women's emotion work on Facebook: Strategic use of emotions in public discourse. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 4(October), 100148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100148
  53. Schrøder, K. C. (2011). Audiences are inherently cross-media: Audience studies and the cross-media challenge. Communication Management Quarterly, 18(VI), 5–28.
  54. Schrøder, K. C., Drotner, K., Kline, S., & Marray, C. (2003). Researching audiences. Edward Arnold.
  55. Schäfer, M. S. (2012). Online communication on climate change and climate politics: A literature review. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 3(6), 527–543. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.191
  56. Selm, K. R., Nils Peterson, M., Hess, G. R., Beck, S. M., & McHale, M. R. (2019). Educational attainment predicts negative perceptions women have of their own climate change knowledge. PLoS ONE, 14(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210149
  57. Syvertsen, T., Enli, G. S., Mjøs, O., & Moe, H. (2014). The media welfare state: Nordic media in the digital era. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/nmw.12367206.0001.001
  58. Thorbjørnsrud, K., & Figenschou, T. U. (2022). The alarmed citizen: Fear, mistrust, and alternative media. Journalism Practice, 16(5), 1018–1035. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1825113
  59. Thorhauge, A. M., & Lomborg, S. (2016). Cross-media communication in context: A mixed-methods approach. MedieKultur: Journal of Media and Communication Research, 32(60), 70–86. https://doi.org/10.7146/mediekultur.v32i60.22090
  60. Sandvik, K., Thorhauge, A. M., & Valtysson, B. (Eds.). (2016). The media and the mundane: Communication across media in everyday life. Nordicom, University of Gothenburg. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:norden:org:diva-4688
  61. Totland, A. (2021). Vindmøllekampen: Historia om eit folkeopprør [The fight over windmills: The history of a public revolt]. Samlaget.
  62. van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970773.001.0001
  63. van Dijck, J., & Alinead, D. (2020). Social media and trust in scientific expertise: Debating the Covid-19 pandemic in the Netherlands. Social Media and Society, 6(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120981057
  64. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Sage.
  65. Williams, H. T. P., McMurray, J. R., Kurz, T., & Hugo Lambert, F. (2015). Network analysis reveals open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate change. Global Environmental Change, 32, 126–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.03.006
  66. Ytre-Arne, B. (2023). Media use in digital everyday life. Emerald Publishing.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2023-0002 | Journal eISSN: 2001-5119 | Journal ISSN: 1403-1108
Language: English
Page range: 23 - 43
Published on: Feb 14, 2023
Published by: University of Gothenburg Nordicom
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2023 Hallvard Moe, Synnøve Lindtner, Brita Ytre-Arne, published by University of Gothenburg Nordicom
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.