IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i2p21582440241256438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Politics on YouTube: Detecting Online Group Polarization Based on News Videos’ Comments

Author

Listed:
  • Raghvendra Mall
  • Mridul Nagpal
  • Joni Salminen
  • Hind Almerekhi
  • Soon-gyo Jung
  • Bernard J. Jansen

Abstract

Technology-mediated group toxicity polarization is a major socio-technological issue of our time. For better large-scale monitoring of polarization among social media news content, we quantify the toxicity of news video comments using a Toxicity Polarization Score. For polarizing news videos, our premise is that the comments’ toxicity approximates either an “M†or “U†shaped distribution—that is, there is unevenly balanced toxicity among the comments. We evaluate our premises through a case study using a dataset of ~180,000 YouTube comments on ~3,700 real news videos from an international online news organization. Toward polarization-mitigating information systems, we build a predictive machine learning model to score the toxicity polarization of news content even when its comments are disabled or not available, as it is a current trend among news publishers to disable comments. Findings imply that the most engaging news content is also often the most polarizing, which we associate with increasing research on clickbait content and the detrimental effect of attention-based metrics on the health of online social media communities, especially news communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Raghvendra Mall & Mridul Nagpal & Joni Salminen & Hind Almerekhi & Soon-gyo Jung & Bernard J. Jansen, 2024. "Politics on YouTube: Detecting Online Group Polarization Based on News Videos’ Comments," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:2:p:21582440241256438
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241256438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241256438
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241256438?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ana L. Schmidt & Antonio Peruzzi & Antonio Scala & Matteo Cinelli & Peter Pomerantsev & Anne Applebaum & Sophia Gaston & Nicole Fusi & Zachary Peterson & Giuseppe Severgnini & Andrea F. Cesco & Davide, 2020. "Correction: Measuring social response to different journalistic techniques on Facebook," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-1, December.
    2. Wei, Pengfei & Lu, Zhenzhou & Song, Jingwen, 2015. "Variable importance analysis: A comprehensive review," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 399-432.
    3. Ana L. Schmidt & Antonio Peruzzi & Antonio Scala & Matteo Cinelli & Peter Pomerantsev & Anne Applebaum & Sophia Gaston & Nicole Fusi & Zachary Peterson & Giuseppe Severgnini & Andrea F. Cesco & Davide, 2020. "Measuring social response to different journalistic techniques on Facebook," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-7, December.
    4. Peters, Kay & Chen, Yubo & Kaplan, Andreas M. & Ognibeni, Björn & Pauwels, Koen, 2013. "Social Media Metrics — A Framework and Guidelines for Managing Social Media," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 281-298.
    5. Chipidza, Wallace, 2021. "The effect of toxicity on COVID-19 news network formation in political subcommunities on Reddit: An affiliation network approach," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. David Hartmann & Sonja Mei Wang & Lena Pohlmann & Bettina Berendt, 2025. "A systematic review of echo chamber research: comparative analysis of conceptualizations, operationalizations, and varying outcomes," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 1-59, May.
    2. Asma Shaheen & Javed Iqbal, 2018. "Spatial Distribution and Mobility Assessment of Carcinogenic Heavy Metals in Soil Profiles Using Geostatistics and Random Forest, Boruta Algorithm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    3. Yadav, Manjit S. & de Valck, Kristine & Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten & Hoffman, Donna L. & Spann, Martin, 2013. "Social Commerce: A Contingency Framework for Assessing Marketing Potential," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 311-323.
    4. Irina Maiorescu & Mihaela Bucur & Bogdan Georgescu & Daniel Moise & Vasile Alecsandru Strat & Ion Daniel Zgură, 2020. "Social Media and IOT Wearables in Developing Marketing Strategies. Do SMEs Differ From Large Enterprises?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-18, September.
    5. Ponzoa, José M. & Gómez, Andrés & Mas, José M., 2023. "EU27 and USA institutions in the digital ecosystem: Proposal for a digital presence measurement index," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Antoniadis, Konstantinos & Grougiou, Vasiliki & Zafiropoulos, Kostas & Vrana, Vasiliki & Theocharidis, Anastasios Ioannis, 2018. "The use of Facebook and Twitter by DMOs in Europe," MPRA Paper 98936, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Shang, Xiaobing & Su, Li & Fang, Hai & Zeng, Bowen & Zhang, Zhi, 2023. "An efficient multi-fidelity Kriging surrogate model-based method for global sensitivity analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    8. Isaac Taberner & Albert Juncà, 2021. "Small-Scale Sport Events as Place Branding Platforms: A Content Analysis of Osona’s Projected Destination Image through Event-Related Pictures on Instagram," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    9. Tuleu Daniela, 2015. "Antecedents Of Customer Relationship Management Capabilities," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 1285-1294, July.
    10. Matteo Rucco & Giovanna Viticchi & Lorenzo Falsetti, 2020. "Towards Personalized Diagnosis of Glioblastoma in Fluid-Attenuated Inversion Recovery (FLAIR) by Topological Interpretable Machine Learning," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-27, May.
    11. Yun, Wanying & Lu, Zhenzhou & Feng, Kaixuan & Li, Luyi, 2019. "An elaborate algorithm for analyzing the Borgonovo moment-independent sensitivity by replacing the probability density function estimation with the probability estimation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 99-108.
    12. Mohamed Zine & Fouzi Harrou & Mohammed Terbeche & Mohammed Bellahcene & Abdelkader Dairi & Ying Sun, 2023. "E-Learning Readiness Assessment Using Machine Learning Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Masayoshi Mase & Art B. Owen & Benjamin B. Seiler, 2021. "Cohort Shapley value for algorithmic fairness," Papers 2105.07168, arXiv.org.
    14. Cheng, Kai & Lu, Zhenzhou, 2018. "Sparse polynomial chaos expansion based on D-MORPH regression," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 323(C), pages 17-30.
    15. Pilar, Ladislav & Balcarova, Tereza & Rojik, Stanislav & Ticha, Ivana & Polakova, Jana, 2018. "Customer experience with farmers’ markets: what hashtags can reveal," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(6), July.
    16. Thomas Wozniak & Brigitte Stangl & Roland Schegg & Andreas Liebrich, 2017. "The return on tourism organizations’ social media investments: preliminary evidence from Belgium, France, and Switzerland," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 75-100, March.
    17. Wenxuan Wang & Hangshan Gao & Pengfei Wei & Changcong Zhou, 2017. "Extending first-passage method to reliability sensitivity analysis of motion mechanisms," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 231(5), pages 573-586, October.
    18. Ivanete Schneider Hahn & Flavia Luciane Scherer & Kenny Basso & Marindia Brachak dos Santos, 2016. "Consumer Trust in and Emotional Response to Advertisements on Social Media and their Influence on Brand Evaluation," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 13(4), pages 49-71, July.
    19. Masayoshi Mase & Art B. Owen & Benjamin B. Seiler, 2022. "Variable importance without impossible data," Papers 2205.15750, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    20. Tonino Pencarelli & Maria Gabriella Mele, 2019. "A systematic literature review on social media metrics," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2019(1), pages 15-38.

    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:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:2:p:21582440241256438. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.