نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناس ارشد رشته علوم ارتباطات اجتماعی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار علوم ارتباطات اجتماعی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

اگرچه، گفت‌وگو و مباحثه مستدل و آزادانه که به شکل‌گیری افکار عمومی بینجامد، مشخصه نظریه حوزه عمومی هابرماس است؛ اما در توئیتر فارسی به علت خوشه‌ای شدن کاربران و مواجهه آنها با افکار و عقاید مشابه، گفت‌و‌گو و تضارب آرا کمتر پدید خواهدآمد. هدف از انجام این پژوهش شناسایی و بررسی ویژگی‌ها و مشخصه‌های منحصربه‌فرد کاربرانی است که در میان قطب‌های اصلی شبکه توئیتر فارسی توزیع شده‌ و کار تسهیل‌گری ارتباط و فراهم آوردن زمینه گفت‌وگو میان قطب‌های شبکه را انجام می‌دهند. برای تحقق این هدف ابتدا از طریق بهینه‌سازی معیار‌های مرکزیت، واسطه‌گران (بروکرها) را شناسایی و سپس با کدگذاری توئیت‌های آنان بر‌اساس رویکرد تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی رسانه‌های اجتماعی، کردارها و گفتارهای خاص آن‌ها را تعیین نمودیم. در پایان و در بخش نتیجه‌گیری، تشابه گفتارها و کردار‌های بروکر‌ها را با نظریه کنش ارتباطی هابرماس نشان‌داده‌ و استنباط نمودیم، کاربرانی ویژگی‌های مد نظر نظریه کنش ارتباطی را دارا هستند که در میانه جریان ارتباطی و مرتبط با سایر خوشه‌ها قرار دارند و در قامت واسطه‌گر یا تسهیل‌گر ارتباطی ظاهر می‎شوند، نه آنهایی که در خوشه‌های مجزا و بدون ارتباط با دیگر بخش‌های شبکه قرار می‏گیرند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Twitter as a public sphere: The role of brokers in lessening Persian Twitter's polarisation (Case study: General Soleimani's assassination and the crash of Ukrainian jet)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Amir Mohamad Ghodsi 1
  • Seyed Jamal Akbarzadeh Jahromi 2

1 M.A. in Social Communication Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

Although, the reasoned and open debate that results in the formation of public opinion is a defining feature of Habermas' notion of the public sphere. However, because of the clustering of people and their exposure to similar concepts and ideas, there will be less conversation and conflict of votes on Persian Twitter, and if there is, it will be illogical and reasoned. This study aims to discover and explore the distinctive traits and features of users who are scattered among the network's major poles and enable communication. We determined brokers' exact activities and utterances by optimizing centrality indicators and categorizing their tweets using a social media critical discourse analysis approach. Finally, after summarising and concluding, we demonstrated how the brokers' words and deeds parallel Habermas' theory of communicative action. We deduced that if the user applies the criteria suggested in the theory of communicative action, they will most likely function as a mediator or facilitator of communication in a distinct and unrelated cluster rather than in the midst of the communication stream, which is connected to other clusters.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Broker
  • Public Sphere
  • Communication Action
  • Persian Twitter
  • Network Analysis
کلاهی، رضا. (1398). «پوپولیسم و قطبیدگی». اقتصاد نیوز
 https://www.eghtesadnews.com/fa/tiny/news-292628
References
Bail, C. A., Argyle, L. P., Brown, T. W., Bumpus, J. P., Chen, H., Fallin Hunzaker, M. B., 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.
Baldassarri, D., & Gelman, A. (2015). Partisans without Constraint: Political Polarization and Trends in American Public Opinion1, 114(2), 408–446.
Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(10), P10008.
Carmines, E. G., Ensley, M. J., & Wagner, M. W. (2012). Who Fits the Left-Right Divide? Partisan Polarization in the American Electorate, 56(12), 1631–1653.
Christensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means? First Monday, 16(2).
Conover, M. D., Davis, C., Ferrara, E., McKelvey, K., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2013). The Geospatial Characteristics of a Social Movement Communication Network. PLoS ONE, 8(3).
Easley, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2010). Networks, Crowds, and Markets: A Book by David Easley and Jon Kleinberg. In Book. h
Fuchs, C. (2014). Social Media and the Public Sphere. TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 12(1), 57–101.
Glenn, C. L. (2015). Activism or “Slacktivism?”: Digital Media and Organizing for Social Change. Https://Doi.Org/10.1080/17404622.2014.1003310, 29(2), 81–85.
Habermas, Jurgen. (1991). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. MIT Press.
Habermas, Jürgen. (2006). Political Communication in Media Society: Does Democracy Still Enjoy an Epistemic Dimension? The Impact of Normative Theory on Empirical Research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426.
Highfield, T., Harrington, S., & Bruns, A. (2013). Twitter as a Technology for Audiencing and Fandom., 16(3), 315–339.
Jackson, S. J., & Foucault Welles, B. (2016). #Ferguson is everywhere: initiators in emerging counterpublic networks. Information Communication and Society, 19(3), 397–418.
Kermani, H., & Adham, M. (2021). Mapping Persian Twitter: Networks and mechanism of political communication in Iranian 2017 presidential election. Big Data and Society, 8(1).
Khazraee, E. (2019a). Mapping the political landscape of Persian Twitter: The case of 2013 presidential election. Big Data and Society, 6(1), 1–15.
Khazraee, E. (2019b). Mapping the political landscape of Persian Twitter: The case of 2013 presidential election, 6(1).
KhosraviNik, M. (2017). Social media critical discourse studies (SM-CDS). In J. Flowerdew & J. Richardson (Eds.), Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies (pp. 582–596). Routledge.
Kruse, L. M., Norris, D. R., & Flinchum, J. R. (2017). Social Media as a Public Sphere? Politics on Social Media. Https://Doi.Org/10.1080/00380253.2017.1383143, 59(1), 62–84.
Meraz, S., & Papacharissi, Z. (2013). Networked Gatekeeping and Networked Framing on #Egypt. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18(2), 138–166.
Papacharissi, Z., Chadwick, A., & Howard, P. (2009). The virtual sphere 2.0: The Internet, the public sphere, and beyond. Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics.
Papacharissi, Z., & de Fatima Oliveira, M. (2012). Affective News and Networked Publics: The Rhythms of News Storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 266–282.
Peddinti, S. T., Ross, K. W., & Cappos, J. (2017). User Anonymity on Twitter. IEEE Security and Privacy, 15(3), 84–87.
Recuero, R., Zago, G., & Soares, F. (2019). Using Social Network Analysis and Social Capital to Identify User Roles on Polarized Political Conversations on Twitter:, 5(2), 205630511984874.
ShuKai, SlivaAmy, WangSuhang, TangJiliang, & LiuHuan. (2017). Fake News Detection on Social Media. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 19(1), 22–36.
Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Echo chambers: Bush v. Gore, impeachment, and beyond. Princeton University Press.
Tremayne, M. (2014). Anatomy of Protest in the Digital Era: A Network Analysis of Twitter and Occupy Wall Street. Social Movement Studies, 13(1), 110–126.
Welles, B. F., & Jackson, S. J. (2019). The battle for #Baltimore: Networked counterpublics and the contested framing of urban unrest. International Journal of Communication, 13, 1699–1719.
Zappavigna, M. (2011). Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on Twitter:, 13(5), 788–806.