IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v8y2020i2p98-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Media Roles in the Online News Domain: Authorities and Emergent Audience Brokers

Author

Listed:
  • Sílvia Majó-Vázquez

    (Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford, UK)

  • Ana S. Cardenal

    (Department of Politics, Open University of Catalonia, Spain)

  • Oleguer Segarra

    (Dribia Data Research S. L., Spain)

  • Pol Colomer de Simón

    (Dribia Data Research S. L., Spain)

Abstract

This article empirically tests the role of legacy and digital-born news media, mapping the patterns of audience navigation across news sources and the relationship between news providers. We borrow tools from network science to bring evidence that suggest legacy news media retain control of the most central positions in the online news domain. Great progress has been made in discussing theoretically the impact of the Internet on the news media ecology. Less research attention, however, has been given to empirically testing changes in the role of legacy media and the rising prominence of digital-born outlets. To fill this gap, in this study we use the hyperlink-induced topic search algorithm, which identifies authorities by means of a hyperlink network, to show that legacy media are still the most authoritative sources in the media ecology. To further substantiate their dominant role, we also examine the structural position of news providers in the audience network. We gather navigation data from a panel of 30,000 people and use it to reproduce the network of patterns of news consumption. While legacy news media retain control of the brokerage positions for the general population, our analysis—focused on patterns of young news consumers—reveals that new digital outlets also occupy relevant positions to control the audience flow. The results of this study have substantive implications for our understanding of news organizations’ roles and how they attain authority in the digital age.

Suggested Citation

  • Sílvia Majó-Vázquez & Ana S. Cardenal & Oleguer Segarra & Pol Colomer de Simón, 2020. "Media Roles in the Online News Domain: Authorities and Emergent Audience Brokers," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 98-111.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:98-111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/2741
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mansell, Robin, 2004. "Political economy, power and new media," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 762, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/52cps7rdns8iv8fr3f1kqm7iuv is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Guess, Andrew M., 2015. "Measure for Measure: An Experimental Test of Online Political Media Exposure," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 59-75, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ramón Salaverría, 2020. "Exploring Digital Native News Media," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 1-4.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gonçalves, Vânia & Evens, Tom & Alves, Artur Pimenta & Ballon, Pieter, 2014. "Power and control strategies in online video services," 25th European Regional ITS Conference, Brussels 2014 101438, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Erik Peterson & Shanto Iyengar, 2021. "Partisan Gaps in Political Information and Information‐Seeking Behavior: Motivated Reasoning or Cheerleading?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 133-147, January.
    3. Sendhil Mullainathan & Andrei Shleifer, 2005. "The Market for News," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1031-1053, September.
    4. Anders Henten & Reza Tadayoni, 2011. "Digitalization," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse (ed.), A Handbook of Cultural Economics, Second Edition, chapter 27, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Birochi, Renê & Pozzebon, Marlei, 2016. "Aprimorando a inclusão financeira: rumo a um quadro teórico de educação financeira crítica," RAE - Revista de Administração de Empresas, FGV-EAESP Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo (Brazil), vol. 56(3), May.
    6. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," NBER Working Papers 23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Cristian Vaccari & Augusto Valeriani, 2018. "Digital Political Talk and Political Participation: Comparing Established and Third Wave Democracies," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(2), pages 21582440187, June.
    8. Ryan C. Moore & Ross Dahlke & Jeffrey T. Hancock, 2023. "Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2020 US election," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1096-1105, July.
    9. Sharma, Ravi & Fantin, Arul-Raj & Prabhu, Navin & Guan, Chong & Dattakumar, Ambica, 2016. "Digital literacy and knowledge societies: A grounded theory investigation of sustainable development," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 628-643.
    10. Gregory Eady & Jonathan Nagler & Andy Guess & Jan Zilinsky & Joshua A. Tucker, 2019. "How Many People Live in Political Bubbles on Social Media? Evidence From Linked Survey and Twitter Data," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    11. Anastasia VENETI & Achilleas KARADIMITRIOU, 2013. "Policy and Regulation in the Media Landscape: the Greek Paradigm Concentration of Media Ownership Versus the Right to Information," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 1(3), pages 439-457, December.
    12. Evens, Tom, 2010. "Challenging content exclusivity in network industries: the case of digital broadcasting," 21st European Regional ITS Conference, Copenhagen 2010: Telecommunications at new crossroads - Changing value configurations, user roles, and regulation 12, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:98-111. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.