This study tested social influence theories against traditional media attribute agenda setting theory within 18 ideologically diverse political blogs, two elite traditional media entities, and the latter’s 11 political newsroom blogs across three issues in 2007. Results reveal significant correlations in left-leaning network agendas ranging from 0.64 to 0.91 through all issue periods. Social influence did not homogenize interpretative agendas within the right-leaning network through two of the three issue periods. As predicted, partisan blog networks showed insignificant correlations in attribute agendas, and unlike the left-leaning and moderate blog networks, the right-leaning blog network bore little similarity to traditional media’s issue interpretation across two of the three issues.These findings point to two significant trends: the growing power of social influence among partisan blog networks and the weakening influence of elite, traditional media as a singular power in influencing issue interpretation within networked political environments.
Adamic L. and Glance N. ( 2005) The Political Blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. Election: Divided They Blog. HP Labs. Available at: http://www.blogpulse.com/papers/2005/AdamicGlance-BlogWWW.pdf
2.
Anderson C. ( 2006) The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More. New York: Hyperion.
3.
Balkin J. ( 2004) What i learned about blogging in a year. Balkanization. Available at: http://balkin.blogspot.com/2004/01/what-i-learned-about-blogging-in-year.html
4.
Benkler Y. ( 2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
5.
Benton M. and Frazier PJ ( 1976) The agenda setting function of mass media at three levels of information holding. Communication Research3: 261-74.
6.
Berelson BR, Lazarsfeld PF and McPhee WN ( 1954) Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
7.
Bishop B. ( 2008) The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-minded America is Tearing US Apart. Orlando, FL: Houghton Mifflin.
8.
Bowers C. ( 2007) New establishment rising: The end of the flat blogosphere . Journal of Netroots Ideas. Available at: http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=13
9.
Bowman S. and Willis C. ( 2003) We Media: How Audiences are Shaping the Future of News and Information. Available at: http://www.hypergene.net/wemedia/download/we_media.pdf
10.
Bruns A. ( 2005) Gatewatching: Collaborative Online News Production. New York: Peter Lang.
11.
Bruns A. ( 2008) Blogs, Wikipedia, and Second Life: From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang .
12.
Calderone M. ( 2008) Netroots push back against MSM bias. Politico. Available at: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12775.html
13.
Castells M. ( 2000) The Rise of the Network Society. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
14.
Chaudhry L. ( 2006) Can blogs revolutionize progressive politics?Salon. Available at: http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2485/can_blogs_revolutionize_progressive_politics/
15.
Comstock G. and Scharrer E. ( 1999) Television: What’s On, Who’s Watching, and What it Means. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
16.
Cornfield M., Carson J., Kalis A. and Simon E. ( 2005) Buzz, Blogs, and Beyond: The Internet and the National Discourse in the Fall of 2004. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/ppt/buzz_blogs__beyond_final05-16-05.pdf
17.
Craft S. and Wanta W. ( 2004) US public concerns in the aftermath of 9/11: A test of second-level agenda setting. International Journal of Public Opinion Research16(4): 456-63.
18.
Downs A. ( 1972) Up and down with ecology: The ‘issue attention cycle’ . The Public Interest28: 38-50.
19.
eMarketer (2008) The Blogosphere: A Mass Movement from Grassroots. Available at: http://www.emarketer.com/Report.aspx?code=emarketer_2000494
20.
Farrell H., Lawrence E. and Sides J. ( 2008) Self segregation or deliberation: Blog readership, participation, and polarization in American politics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
21.
Fisher C. ( 1982) To Dwell among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
22.
Freeman L. ( 2000) Visualizing social networks. Journal of Social Structure1(1): 4.
23.
Freidson E. ( 1953) Communications research and the concept of the mass. American Sociological Review18(3): 313-17.
24.
Gillmor D. ( 2004) We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
25.
Golan G. and Wanta W. ( 2001) Second-level agenda setting in the New Hampshire primary: A comparison of coverage in three newspapers and public perceptions of candidates . Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly78(2): 247-59.
26.
Granovetter M. ( 1973) The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology78(6): 1360-80.
27.
Granovetter M. ( 1983) The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited . Sociological Theory1: 201-33.
28.
Hargittai E., Gallo J. and Kane M. ( 2008) Cross-ideological discussion among conservatives and liberal bloggers. Public Choice134(1): 67-86.
29.
Hewitt H. ( 2006) Blog: Understand the Information Reformation that’s Changing Your World. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
30.
Huckfeldt R. ( 2001) The social communication of political expertise. American Journal of Political Science45(2): 425-38.
31.
Huckfeldt R. and Sprague J. ( 1987) Networks in context: The social flow of political information . The American Political Science Review81(4): 1197-216.
32.
Huckfeldt R. and Sprague J. ( 1988) Choice, social structure, and political information: The information coercion of minorities. American Journal of Political Science32(2): 467-82.
33.
Huckfeldt R. and Sprague J. ( 1991) Discussant effects on vote choice: Intimacy, structure, and interdependence. The Journal of Politics53(1): 122-58.
34.
Huckfeldt R., Allen Beck P., Dalton RJ, Levine J. and Morgan W. ( 1998) Ambiguity, distorted messages, and nested environmental effects on political communication. The Journal of Politics60(4): 996-1030.
35.
Johnson TJ and Kaye BK ( 2004) Wag the blog: How reliance on traditional media and the internet influence credibility perceptions of weblogs among blog users. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly81 (3): 622-42.
36.
Katz E. and Lazarsfeld PF ( 1955) Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
37.
Kennedy School of Government (2004) ‘Big Media’ Meets the ‘Bloggers’: Coverage of Trent Lott’s Remarks at Strom Thurmond’s Birthday Party. Available at: http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/presspol/Research_Publications/Case_Studies/1731_0.pdf
38.
Kenny C. ( 1994) The microenvironment of attitude change. The Journal of Politics56(3): 715-28.
39.
Lasorsa D. and Wanta W. ( 1990) The effects of personal, interpersonal and media experience on issue salience. Journalism Quarterly67: 804-13.
40.
Lazarsfeld PF and Merton RK ( 1954) Friendship as a social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. In: Berger M, Abel T and Page C (eds) Freedom and Control in Modern Society. New York: Van Norstrand, 18-66.
41.
Lazarsfeld PF, Berelson B. and Gaudet H. ( 1948) The People’s Choice. New York : Columbia University Press.
42.
Leadbeater C. and Miller P. ( 2004). The pro-am revolution. How enthusiasts are changing our economy and society. Demos. Available at: http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/proameconomy
43.
Lee B., Lancendorfer KM and Lee JL ( 2005) Agenda-setting and the internet: The intermedia influence of internet bulletin boards on newspaper coverage of the 2000 general election in South Korea. Asian Journal of Communication15(1): 57-71.
44.
Lippmann W. ( 1997) Public Opinion. New York: Free Press Paperbacks.
45.
Lopez-Escobar E., Llamas PJ, McCombs M. and Lennon FR ( 1998) Two levels of agenda setting among advertising and news in the 1995 Spanish general elections. Political Communication15: 225-38.
46.
MacKuen MB and McCombs M. ( 1981) More than News: Media Power in Public Affairs. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
47.
McCombs M. ( 2004) Setting the Agenda: The Mass Media and Public Opinion . Cambridge: Policy Press.
48.
McCombs M. ( 2005) A look at agenda setting: Past, present, and future. Journalism Studies6: 543-57.
49.
McCombs M. and Ghanem S. ( 2003) The convergence of agenda setting and framing. In: Reese SR, Gandy OH and Grant AE (eds) Framing Public Life: Perspectives on Media and our Understanding of the Social World. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum , 67-81.
50.
McCombs M. and Reynolds A. ( 2002) News influence on our pictures of the world. In: Bryant J and Zillmann D (eds) Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1-16.
51.
McCombs M. and Shaw D. ( 1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly36: 176-87.
52.
McCombs M. and Weaver D. ( 1973) Voters’ need for orientation and use of mass communication . Unpublished paper presented to the 1973 International Communication Association, Montreal, Canada.
53.
McPherson M., Smith-Lovin L. and Cook JM ( 2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology27: 415-44.
54.
Mendelsohn M. ( 1996) The media and interpersonal communication: The priming of issues, leaders, and party identification. The Journal of Politics58(1): 112-25.
55.
Meraz S. ( 2005) Event blogging the 2004 conventions: Media bloggers, non-media bloggers, and their network connections. Paper presented to the annual convention of theAssociation for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, San Antonio, Texas.
56.
Meraz S. ( 2008) The blogosphere’s gender gap: Differences in visibility, popularity, and authority. In: Poindexter P, Meraz S and Schmitz Weiss A (eds) Women, Men, and News . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 129-51.
57.
Merton R. ( 1949) Patterns of influence: A study of interpersonal influence and communications behavior in a local community. In: Lazarsfeld PF and Stanton FN (eds) Communications Research 1948-9. New York: Harper and Brothers, 180-219.
58.
Mutz D. ( 2006) Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
59.
Nooy W., Mrvar A. and Batagelj V. ( 2005) Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek. New York: Cambridge University Press.
60.
O’Reilly T. ( 2004) The Architecture of Participation. Available at: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/articles/architecture_of_participation.html
61.
Robinson JP ( 1976) Interpersonal influence in election campaigns: Two-step flow hypotheses. The Public Opinion Quarterly40(3): 304-19.
62.
Robinson JP and Levy MR ( 1986) Interpersonal communication and news comprehension. The Public Opinion Quarterly50(2): 160-75.
63.
Rosen J. ( 2006) The people formerly known as the audience. Pressthink. Available at: http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2006/06/27/ppl_frmr.html
64.
Scheufele DA, Nisbet MC, Brossard D. and Nisbet E. ( 2004) Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impacts of social setting, network heterogeneity, and informational variables on political participation. Political Communication21: 315-38.
65.
Scott J. ( 2000) Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. London: SAGE.
66.
Semetko HA and Valkenburg PM ( 2000) Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication50(2): 93-109.
67.
Shaw D. and McCombs M. ( 2008) Agenda setting in the new media landscape: Two perspectives and approaches to research. Paper presented to the Colloquium for Philip Meyer , University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
68.
Shaw D., McCombs M., Weaver D. and Hamm B. ( 1999) Individuals, groups, and agenda melding: A theory of social dissonance. International Journal of Public Opinion Research11(1): 2-24.
69.
Shirky C. ( 2008) Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without Organizations. New York: Penguin Press.
70.
Sifry D. ( 2008) State of the blogosphere. Technorati. Available at: http://technorati.com/blogging/state-of-the-blogosphere/
71.
Smith A. and Rainie L. ( 2008) The Internet and the 2008 Election. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/252/report_display.asp
72.
Stoller M. ( 2007) What is this New Movement? TPM Café. Available at: http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/jan/15/what_is_this_new_movement
73.
Sunstein C. ( 2000) Deliberative trouble? Why groups go to extremes. Yale Law Journal110(1): 71-119.
74.
Sunstein C. ( 2001) Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
75.
Sunstein C. ( 2007a) Ideological amplification. Constellations14(2): 273-79.
76.
Sunstein C. ( 2007b) The polarization of extremes. The Chronicle Review54(16): 95.
77.
Sunstein C. ( 2008) How the rise of the Daily Me threatens democracy. Financial Times, 11 January. Available at: http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft?news_id=fto011020081501451514
78.
Takeshita T. ( 1993) Agenda setting effects of the press in a Japanese local election. Studies of Broadcasting29: 193-216.
79.
Takeshita T. and Mikami S. ( 1995) How did the mass media influence the voters’ choice in the 1993 general election in Japan? A study of agenda setting. Keio Communication Review17: 21-41.
80.
Tremayne M., Zheng N., Lee J., and Jeong J. ( 2006) Issue publics on the web: Applying network theory to the war blogosphere. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication12(1). Available at: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/
81.
Troldahl VC and Van Dam R.(1965-6) Face-to-face communication about major topics in the news. The Public Opinion Quarterly29(4): 626-34.
82.
Universal McCann ( 2008) Power to the People. Available at: http://www.universalmccann.com/Assets/wave_3_20080403093750.pdf
83.
Wanta W. and Hu Y. ( 1993) The agenda setting effects of international news coverage: An examination of differing news frames. International Journal of Public Opinion Research5(3): 250-64.
84.
Wanta W. and Wu Y. ( 1992) Interpersonal communication and the agenda setting process . Journalism Quarterly69(4): 847-55.
85.
Wasserman S. and Faust K. ( 1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
86.
Weaver D., Graber D., McCombs M. and Eyal CH ( 1981) Media Agenda-setting in a Presidential Election: Issues, Images, and Interests. New York: Praeger.
87.
Winship S. ( 2006) No end of ideology. The American Prospect . Available at: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=11798
88.
Winter J., Eyal C. and Rogers A. ( 1982) Issue-specific agenda setting: The whole as less than the sum of its parts. Canadian Journal of Communication8(2): 1-10.
89.
Yagade A. and Dozier DM ( 1990) The media agenda-setting effect of concrete versus abstract issues. Journalism Quarterly67: 3-10.
90.
Yang J. and Stone G. ( 2003) The powerful role of interpersonal communication in agenda setting. Mass Communication and Society6(1): 57-74.
91.
Yu J. and Aikat D. ( 2006) News on the web: Agenda setting of online news in the web sites of major newspaper, television, and online news services. Unpublished paper presented to the 2006 annual meeting ofthe International Communication Association, New York.
92.
Xenos M. ( 2008) New mediated deliberation: Blog and press coverage of the Alito nomination. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13: 485-503.
93.
Zhou Y. and Moy P. ( 2007) Parsing framing processes: The interplay between online public opinion and media coverage. Journal of Communication57: 79-98.
94.
Zucker HG ( 1978) The variable nature of news media influence. In: Ruben BD (ed.) Communication Yearbook 2. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 225-40.
