donalddo-cxp306 - Tumblr blog

[donalddo-cxp306]

We build the future for our youth?

Source: https://www.azquotes.com/quote/363189

Youth has a crucial position in the society especially in political debate as this could directly affect the policy making in the future. (Mycock & Tonge 2011). Political participation is important to every social classes as democracies are forms of government that represent “The People” in the exercise of political power. (Wall, 2011).

Mycock & Tonge (2011) suggested that Generation Y (young adult aged at 20-30 at the time) have relatively low political engagement compared to older generations when participating in traditional forms of politics such as voting and joining a political party.

Despite there is evident showing an improved voting rate among the age group 18-29 in recent US presidential electoral, the average voting rate of young adult has remains the least in over population (Gramlich, 2020).

Why youth is discouraged?

The civic voluntarism model developed by Verba et al. (1995) suggested there are 3 factors affecting political participation including Socio-Economic Status, Political Involvement and Recruitment. Research supported that people shared higher degree of predictors tend to participate in political activity more frequently (Kim &Khang, 2014).

A paper published by the UK House of commons has concluded that people are politically disengaged if they do not know, value or participate in the democratic process, especially on youth who generally has less political knowledge (Uberoi & Johnston, 2020).

However, recent researches show that young people do not patriciate in politics since they do not agree with party identification (Ehsan, 2018) and more seriously candidates in election cannot represent their political views or diverge in ideology (Turner, 2020).

Source: https://www.headcount.org/talk-about-voting/

In practical sense, the opt-in system of voter registration is a physical barrier to people, which directly affect young people have the lowest register rate among all age groups (Uberoi & Johnston, 2020). Research shows that if voter registration is scheduled to young people, it increase the likelihood of voting (Ulbig & Waggener, 2011).

How to raise the political participation for Gen-Z and millennials?

Based on above difficulties, political party should consider to rebrand themselves if an active listener to young people in order to grant their support. More preparations should be tailored to young people in order to encourage them to engage in politics with least effort but not prioritises older voters (Mycock & Tonge, 2011)

Political party rebrand and immerse their activities on social media by giving real voice to young members (Mycock & Tonge, 2011) could be a solution. Mobile platforms has the minimal cost for young people to discuss issues seriously (Ling, 2007), it can be used to collect young people aspirations for policy making (Mycock & Tonge, 2011) and at the meantime increasing community involvement (Smith and French, 2009).

Also, to strengthen their loyalty, Scammell (2015) suggested that political party could identify themselves as the opponent of a common oppositions, the emotional differentiation between the group and others could further consolidate the cohesion of a community. 

Fruthermore, Renström et al. (2020) proposed alternative political activities such as performance is more attractive to young people as they eager to gain approval from their desired peer groups and offered them social group belongings.

Source: https://world.time.com/2012/09/17/occupy-wall-street-one-year-later-a-history-in-masks/photo/02_42-30207341/

In conclusion, we cannot always build the future for our youth but political party could rebrand and actively engage with youth to encourage them to build their future.

Reference Ehsan, M. (2018). What Matters? Non-Electoral Youth Political Participation in Austerity Britain. Societies, 8(4), 101. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc8040101

Gramlich, J. (2020, October 26). What the 2020 electorate looks like by party, race and ethnicity, age, education and religion. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/26/what-the-2020-electorate-looks-like-by-party-race-and-ethnicity-age-education-and-religion/

Kim, Y., & Khang, H. (2014). Revisiting civic voluntarism predictors of college students’ political participation in the context of social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.044

Ling, R. (2007). CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND MOBILE COMMUNICATION. Journal of Children and Media, 1(1), 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482790601005173

Mycock, A., & Tonge, J. (2011). The Party Politics of Youth Citizenship and Democratic Engagement. Parliamentary Affairs, 65(1), 138–161. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsr053

Renström, E. A., Aspernäs, J., & Bäck, H. (2020). The young protester: the impact of belongingness needs on political engagement. Journal of Youth Studies, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2020.1768229

Scammell, M. (2015). Politics and Image: The Conceptual Value of Branding. Journal of Political Marketing, 14(1–2), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2014.990829

Turner, K. (2020, October 15). Young people don’t vote for these often-overlooked reasons. Vox. https://www.vox.com/21497637/election-2020-youth-vote-young-people-voting

Uberoi, E., & Johnston, N. (2020, December 9). Political disengagement in the UK: who is disengaged? House of Commons Library. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7501/

Ulbig, S. G., & Waggener, T. (2011). Getting Registered and Getting to the Polls: The Impact of Voter Registration Strategy and Information Provision on Turnout of College Students. PS: Political Science & Politics, 44(03), 544–551. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096511000643

Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Harvard University Press.Wall, J. (2011). Can democracy represent children? Toward a politics of difference. Childhood, 19(1), 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568211406756

[donalddo-cxp306]

Is polarization a desirable effect to social media giants? Or they don’t care?

Source:https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-division-top-executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499

Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey were criticise by senates about the fact-check labels their companies applied during the election. Conspiracy theories about the deep state controlling the social media and press have spread widely. Despite conspiracy theory cannot be fact-checked, it is understandable that why people doubt the gatekeeping ability of Facebook and Twitter.

Business model & Propaganda model

Propaganda model (Bennett et al.,1989) used to describe the audience question about media tycoon who has a relationship with a political party and doubt on its creditability. I believe the filers could also be applied to Facebook and Twitter cases. Facebook and Twitter employees have given $2.7million to Democrats in 2020 (Smith, 2020) and about 99% (Reiff, 2020) & 86% (Johnston, 2020) of revenue comes from ads for Facebook and Twitter. 

These statistics had given valid support to poeple which make the “Logic” flows. The money flow and interest has given an explanation for deep-state taking control on social media. 

Profit maximisation is the primary motive of all business especially to social media giants Facebook and Twitter listed in Nasdaq. This assumption is crucial to consider if political polarization and propaganda is a desirable on their platform. This framework is highly important in advance to investigate if social media platform could manipulate their algorithm to reduce the polarized gap between democrats and republicans.

Facebook and Twitter used their data to advertise products on the user’s timeline by the algorithm (Reiff, 2020). It applies that the volume and time spent on their platform are directly affect the probability of advertisement exposure and advertising revenue.

If no polarization, and too polarized?

A country without polarization is a place where most of the people support the government while there has only very limited extreme ideologist such as the case in the Philippines (Kenny, 2020). However, research indicates that extreme ideologists are very unlikely to talk politics online. Online political discussion would decrease as online political talk is often aimed at persuasion (Weeks et al., 2015). 

In contrast, the situation in the US mentioned in the previous blog post, there is a trend of conservatives migration on social media from ‘traditional elite social media’ to ‘decentralized’ social media such as MeWe or conservative social media such as gab and Parler. The “Migration” makes online political persuasion not possible. The lost of social media users could lead to smaller data size and decrease in views of advertisements. In short conclusion, a pendulum without touching the apex seems to be the best scenario to maximise their profit.  

Polarization at apex? Socially responsible algorithm? 

A group of students suggest bridging opposing views on social media by recommending relevant content to certain users (Kiran et al., 2017) . However, this move would violate the idea of social media connection and research also indicates that viewing opposite may lead to further polarize effect (Bail et al., 2018).

Instead of bridging opposing people together, a group of Taiwan hackers suggests using an alternative algorithm on finding the common ground between partisan and create consensus but not division (Tang, 2019). This algorithm use hashtags to create trending on social media and collect support for new policies (Olivier, 2020).

Reference

Bail, C. A., Argyle, L. P., Brown, T. W., Bumpus, J. P., Chen, H., Hunzaker, M., Lee, J., Mann, M., Merhout, F., & Volfovsky, A. (2018). Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(37), 9216–9221. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804840115

Bennett, J. R., Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1989). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Contemporary Sociology, 18(6), 937. https://doi.org/10.2307/2074220 Facebook - Resources. (n.d.). Facebook. https://investor.fb.com/resources/default.aspx 

Johnston, M. (2020, November 5). How Facebook Makes Money. Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/120114/how-does-facebook-fb-make-money.asp 

Kenny, P. D. (2020, August 18). Why Is There No Political Polarization in the Philippines? - Political Polarization in South and Southeast Asia: Old Divisions, New Dangers. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/2020/08/18/why-is-there-no-political-polarization-in-philippines-pub-82439 

Garimella K, De Francisci Morales G, Gionis A, Mathioudakis M (2017) Reducing controversy by connecting opposing views. In: Proceedings of the Tenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. WSDM ’17. ACM, New York. pp 81–90 https://doi.org/10.1145/3018661.3018703 

Olivier, J. (2020, September 22). Taiwan’s Digital Minister on the New Economy. Taiwan Business TOPICS. https://topics.amcham.com.tw/2020/09/taiwan-digital-minister-new-economy/ 

Reiff, N. (2020, November 6). How Twitter Makes Money: advertising comprises the bulk of revenue. Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/120114/how-does-twitter-twtr-make-money.asp 

Smith, J. (2020, October 16). 90% of Facebook and Twitter employee political donations is to Democrats. Mail Online. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8848313/90-Facebook-Twitter-employee-political-donations-Democrats.html 

Tang, A. (2019, October 15). A Strong Democracy Is a Digital Democracy. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/opinion/taiwan-digital-democracy.html 

[donalddo-cxp306]

The rise of AOC and ‘She finds the youth’

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) is the representative for New York’s 14th congressional district. She has not caught my attention until her controversial proposal of “Trump Accountability Project” (“TAP”), a project to blacklist Donald Trump’ supporters and employees (Dorman, News,2020).

Source: @AOC Twitter

Source: Trump Accountability Project

AOC as the rookie in 2019 has already 1.54 million Twitter followers more than all 63 democratic freshmen combined (Silva,2019). 

Source:https://www.axios.com/ocasio-cortez-dominates-twitter-6a997938-b8a5-4a8b-a895-0a1bcd073fea.html

AOC branded herself in distinctive purple colour and personalised design layout when she was first running in the congress. Born in Puerto Rico as a female gave her great amount of stakes and political correctness acting in the democratic party. As the youngest congresswoman in the history, putting controversial tweets such as the “TAP”, boycott work after corona-virus shutdown (Fox News Dorman,2020) and boycott Goya Food over CEO praising Trump. (Ebrahimji, 2020) had sharpened her image and the distinctive image differ from democratic set her in the centre of the stage (Scammell, 2015).

Source: Tandem Design NYC

If Trump had discouraged the Black community to vote in 2016, I believe AOC has her strategy to encourge the youth to vote. 

According to the PEW research’s data in 2016, youth in 18-29 shares the largest proportion of support to the democratic party, however, this group has equally the same percentage of non-voters with another backbone of the party. It reflects many sleeping potential youths could be activated and motivate to vote. 

The research conducted by Kaid et al. (2007) suggested that young citizen tends not to vote because they are not confident in political issues. Interestingly, attractive politicians are more likely to be voted by the public if they do not have adequate political knowledge (by heuristic) and not cognitive nor motivated to correct their choice. (Hart et al.,2011).

A political brand could give shortcuts to supporters that remind them of their key attitude and direction when making a political decision such as voting (Smith et al., 2009).

Back to the time when the computer penetration rate is relatively low and, mobile media was not well-developed. Nickerson’s experiment illustrated that contacting the youth is the major obstacle to persuade them to vote and he suggested that the persuasion work the best in youth’s daily mission (Nickerson, 2006).

When the time has come to 2020, politicians are trying very hard to adapt mobile technology to maximize their reach to their potential supporters especially the not awake Millennials.

The youngest congress member has an alternative strategy to target the youth voters. As the non-voting youth are less likely to find the news by themselves suggested in Matthew Effect (Fletcher, 2017).

Instead of the old-fashioned door to door canvassing, she tried to make the news to find the unexposed youth. AOC takes the initiative and takes a step into the undiscovered gaming world. 

AOC accompanied with star-streamers to play the recently popular “Among Us” on Twitch on 20th October. The live stream not only open the opportunity to encourage viewers to vote, but viewers also enjoyed the game streaming is likely to build up a sense of involvement with the channel community in terms of sympathy and built a personal relationship with streamers (Wulf,2018). This door enables AOC to educate the youth consistently and implant her brand in their heart. Despite the brand of AOC is not representing her democratic party all the time, smaller political brands could form a more structured bonding with more trust and shared value (Abid et al., 2020). 

Source: @FionnOnFire Twitter

To conclude, I believe capturing the Millennials and Gen-Z’s awareness is the most important mission for actors no matter in politics or marketing. Despite the news may not find them straight away, the case of AOC had demonstrated political actors can actively work on the undiscovered audience.

Reference Abid, A., Harrigan, P., & Roy, S. (2020). A relationship marketing orientation in politics: Young voters’ perceptions of political brands’ use of social media. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254x.2020.1777457 

Dorman, S. (2020a, April 23). AOC suggests low-income Americans should boycott work after coronavirus shutdown ends. Fox News. https://www.foxnews.com/media/aoc-boycott-work-coronavirus-shutdown

Dorman, S. (2020, November 10). AOC, others pushing for apparent blacklist of people who worked with Trump. Fox News. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-blacklist-trump-supporters

Ebrahimji, S. C. A. A. A. (2020, July 10). Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Chef José Andrés and more criticize Goya CEO for support of Trump. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/10/business/goya-foods-boycott-reaction-trnd/index.html

Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2017b). Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2450–2468. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817724170

Hart, W., Ottati, V., & Krumdick, N. (2011). Physical Attractiveness and Candidate Evaluation: A Model of Correction. Political Psychology, 32(2), 181-203. Retrieved November 28, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41262892

Hollis, D. (2020, October 22). Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘Among Us’ stream was one of Twitch’s biggest. NME. https://www.nme.com/en_au/news/gaming-news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-among-us-stream-was-one-of-twitchs-biggest-2795396

Kaid, L. L., McKinney, M. S., & Tedesco, J. C. (2007). American Behavioral Scientist. Political Information Efficacy and Young Voters, 50(9), 1093–1111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764207300040

Nickerson, D. W. (2006). Hunting the Elusive Young Voter. Journal of Political Marketing, 5(3), 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1300/j199v05n03_03

Scammell, M. (2015). Politics and Image: The Conceptual Value of Branding. Journal of Political Marketing, 14(1–2), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2014.990829

Silva, C. (2019, January 7). Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Has as Many Twitter Followers as Incoming Democratic Freshman House Members Combined. Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-has-many-twitter-followers-incoming-60-democratic-1251551

Smith, G., & French, A. (2009). The political brand: A consumer perspective. Marketing Theory, 9(2), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593109103068

[donalddo-cxp306]

The fake news, ‘mass migration’ and political persuasion

After various red flags on Donald Trump’s Tweets, conservatives including Donald Trump, Senator Ted Cruz and netizens (more than 3.5 millions as reported by WIRED, 2020) had moved to another social media platform Parler: A platform similar to Twitter claims itself as ‘censor-free’ besides from spam and illegal materials.

Source: https://www.wired.com/story/parler-app-free-speech-influencers/

Social media plays a huge role in political persuasion where political disagreement and civil reasoning are important elements for persuading (Gil de Zuñiga et al., 2018). However, with the differences in political views and especially on the concerns over "Fake News", the political talk between the left and right seems to be disconnected and tearing apart. Social media platforms are no longer silent while start intervening users posts by hiding sensitives threads and inserting warning misinformation labels.

Source: https://news.sky.com/story/twitter-is-warning-users-when-they-attempt-to-like-misinformation-12140940

This consequently leads to the "Mass migration" (Kraychik,2020) to other "free-speech" social media site namely the Parler, Gab and MeWe.

Source: https://screenrant.com/parler-vs-mewe/

The debate on fake news? 

The term "Fake news" has been widely used and misused. It has a very board meaning and unclear until Quandt (2019) summarised this term as misleading, additions, deletion or fabrication of information without factual basis from the aspect of core content, meta-information to context (Quandt et al., 2019). 

However, the grey area is always between addition and deletion. Taking the 2020 US presidential election as an example, the democrats would treat the "election fraud" news as the addition of wrong information while Trumpers argue that major media agencies are hiding fraud-related information. 

Galileo’s declaration in Heliocentric theory was also labelled as "Fake News" when the Church and the public believed the earth is the centre of the universe. Fake news does not necessarily mean it is factually false. 

"Figure of the heavenly bodies" by Bartolomeu Velhomade, 1568 

The belief of fake news in both campaigns could be getting vital based on individual psychology theories: confirmation bias and implicit bias. 

People with strong political belief think their opponents are intentionally ignoring the fact while themselves as a group are backed by evidence (Braucher, 2016). Meanwhile, people involved in the debate tend not to doubt the credibility of the source unless it violates their preconceptions or they are reinforced to do so (Lazer, 2018). 

More importantly, this became a vicious cycle when happening on social media as the algorithm tend to feed more similar information (Valie Wright,2019). The "Mass Migration" make opposing-party information less circulate.

 Source: Elena Lacey; Getty Images

From ambivalent to earnest, no more fake news? 

Based on the assumption of confirmation bias and implicit bias, the migrates could build up a utopia without "Fake News". Similar to geographic polarization in the US, a homogenous social network also reduces tolerance of counter perspectives, more likely to accept the news with similar ideology but more protected from new information. This setting created a context which factually false news can spread to the audiences (Lazer, 2018). The split of the social network could make political persuasion almost impossible and creating the largest echo chamber ever. Reference

Braucher, D. (2016, December 28). Fake News: Why We Fall For It. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/contemporary-psychoanalysis-in-action/201612/fake-news-why-we-fall-it

Gil de Zúñiga, H., Barnidge, M., & Diehl, T. (2018). Political persuasion on social media: A moderated moderation model of political discussion disagreement and civil reasoning. The Information Society, 34(5), 302–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2018.1497743

Kraychik, R. (2020, June 29). Parler CEO John Matze: ‘Mass Migration’ of ‘Almost a Million Users’ in Weeks Due to Twitter’s Censorship. Breitbart. https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2020/06/29/parler-ceo-john-matze-mass-migration-of-almost-a-million-users-in-weeks-due-to-twitters-censorship/

Lazer, D. M. J. (2018, March 9). The science of fake news. Science. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1094.full

Pardes, A. (2020, November 12). Inside Parler, the Right’s Favorite “Free Speech” App. Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/parler-app-free-speech-influencers/

Quandt, Q., Frischlich, L., Boberg, S., & Schatto-Eckrodt, T. (2019). Fake News. Fake News, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118841570.iejs0128

Fake News with Chrysalis Wright, PhD. (2019, August 21). [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmW8THeY5BY&feature=emb_title

Weir, K. (2017, May). Why we believe alternative facts. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2017/05/alternative-facts

[donalddo-cxp306]

Who should be the referee on social media?

During the US Presidential electoral, the president Donald Trump had posted his victorious statement claiming his potential victory meanwhile claiming his opponent are “trying to steal the election”.

Source: @realDonaldTrump Twitter

Twitter hided Trump’s tweet and stated his contents as disputed and misleading. Facebook also introduced fact-check boxes on messages from Trump without direct censorship.

On the next Tuesday, the Trump campaign claimed that "Silicon Valley continues its campaign to censor and silence the president".

Drawing from the events of Trump’s Twitter intervention, it is worth to think about who should own the power to keep or censor information on social media in the post-truth era.

Cyber-Libertarianism: The Real Internet Freedom and Gatekeeping

John Perry Barlow (1996) as an internet libertarian prophet suggested that the internet should be a world of freedom and equality without constraints, prejudice and privilege. It is an ideal space to display everyone’s opinion and beliefs.

In contrast, the legacy media such as news organisation have another practice on filtering information known as “Gatekeeping” (Lewin,1947, further studied by White,1950). 

“Mr Gates” in news journalism could select information prepared by editors and place the “best” report on the newspaper base on his preference and prejudice (White, 1950).

Source:http://www.coxandforkum.com/

If social media site such as Twitter and Facebook could censor one’s speech, the situation implies that the Gatekeeping theory still applies to “Citizen journalism” (Goode, 2009) while it contradicts with Barlow’s internet spirit of cyber libertarianism. “Mr Gates” could only represent himself and a group of audiences shared similar beliefs, commonly perceived the information as true based on individual psychology theory (White, 1950).

The separation of power and the ideal internet

Thorson & Wells (2015) introduced a concept of “Curated flow” which proposed actors on social media as curators that also act as the gatekeeper.

The concept focused into 5 aspects: Journalistic curation, social curation, personal curation, strategic curation and algorithmic curation which allows stakeholders to select their information posting on the internet without examining by the “Gate”

The flow facilitates the freedom of speech on the internet as the content is only censored by curators themselves. Curators should be taking responsibility for their words while enjoying a higher degree of expression.

However, information passed curators’ gate could also be invisible to readers (Singer, 2013). Information shared on social media has more flows and gates due to its algorithm. Of cause, the opaque algorithm is a complicated language developed by the giants in Silicon Valley and platform owner could also close the gate. The power of communication has shifted from elite media to new media, there are always concerns over the control of the algorithm as the owner and income sources of those social media platform may have the interest of conflict towards politically- charged information (Herman & Chomsky, 1989).

Meanwhile, curators should also bear the responsibility as being the ‘Gatekeeper’ defending their reputation and credentials. However, it cannot prevent anonymous or “dark-participants” (Quandt, 2018) involve in the curation.

The internet is a space to trade-off between freedom and constraint. I trust a higher degree of algorithmic transparency and “Free Market” could build-up an ideal autonomous internet platform that could benefit the prosumer and the market will speak according to curators and users’ demand in an earnest internet environment without censorship. 

Reference: Barlow, J. P. (1996, February 8). A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace. Electronic Frontier Foundation. https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence

BBC News. (2020, November 4). US Election: Twitter hides Trump tweet about “disappearing” lead. https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/technology-54809165

Bennett, J. R., Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1989). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Contemporary Sociology, 18(6), 937. https://doi.org/10.2307/2074220

Goode, L. (2009). Social news, citizen journalism and democracy. New Media & Society, 11(8), 1287–1305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809341393

Quandt, T. (2018). Dark Participation. Media and Communication, 6(4), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1519

Singer, J. B. (2013). User-generated visibility: Secondary gatekeeping in a shared media space. New Media & Society, 16(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813477833

Thorson, K., & Wells, C. (2015). Curated Flows: A Framework for Mapping Media Exposure in the Digital Age. Communication Theory, 26(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12087 Welbers, K., & Opgenhaffen, M. (2018). Social media gatekeeping: An analysis of the gatekeeping influence of newspapers’ public Facebook pages. New Media & Society, 20(12), 4728–4747. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818784302 White, D. M. (1950). The “Gate Keeper”: A Case Study in the Selection of News. Journalism Quarterly, 27(4), 383–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769905002700403