Lucas Santos De Oliveira
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Politicians need to decide how to communicate with their voters to build their reputations. This problem is especially complicated during important political events such as the elections when politicians must decide whether to confront and share their thoughts about controversial topics or to simply communicate non-political messages. Aware of these communication behaviors, our goal is to analyze how politicians present themselves in the digital environment and how the public reacts to them. We also investigate whether they change their communication and if there is a typical pattern that is chosen by the majority of politicians over time. To address these problems, we collected 751,117 public tweets of 692 Brazilian deputies from October 2013 to October 2015. Furthermore, we propose a methodology for identifying Twitter messages about political issues at a large scale. We use this methodology to characterize the communication behavior of Brazilian congresspeople in a 2-year span. We found that Brazilian congresspeople changed their communication behavior as the election approached and as they were elected or not. Moreover, we showed that although most of the politicians increased the number of non-political messages during elections, the audience tends to favorite and retweet political messages more.
- Marcelo Santos Amaral and José Antônio Gomes de Pinho. 2016. Tuitando por votos: Congressistas brasileiros e o uso do Twitter nas eleies de 2014. In Proceedings of the XL Encontro da Anpad. 1--19.Google Scholar
- Pablo Barberá and Thomas Zeitzoff. 2018. The new public address system: Why do world leaders adopt social media?International Studies Quarterly 62, 1 (2018), 121--130. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqx047Google Scholar
- Yoshua Bengio, Réjean Ducharme, Pascal Vincent, and Christian Janvin. 2003. A neural probabilistic language model. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3 (2003), 1137--1155.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alexandre Bovet, Flaviano Morone, and Hernán A. Makse. 2018. Validation of Twitter opinion trends with national polling aggregates: Hillary Clinton vs Donald Trump. Scientific Reports 8, 1 (2018), 1--16. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26951-yGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Roberta Bracciale and Antonio Martella. 2017. Define the populist political communication style: the case of Italian political leaders on Twitter. Information, Communication 8 Society 20, 9 (2017), 1310--1329.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joseph N. Cappella. 2017. Vectors into the future of mass and interpersonal communication research: Big data, social media, and computational social science. Human Communication Research 43, 4 (2017), 545--558. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12114Google ScholarCross Ref
- John M. Carey. 2007. Competing principals, political institutions, and party unity in legislative voting. American Journal of Political Science 51, 1 (Jan. 2007), 92--107. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00239.xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Meeyoung Cha, Hamed Haddadi, Fabricio Benevenuto, and P. Krishna Gummadi. 2010. Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy. In Proceedings of the 4th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM’10), 10–17.Google Scholar
- Eric C. C. Chang and Miriam A. Golden. 2007. Electoral systems, district magnitude and corruption. British Journal of Political Science 37, 1 (Jan. 2007), 115--137. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123407000063Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Conover, J. Ratkiewicz, and M. Francisco. 2011. Political polarization on Twitter. In Proceedings of the 5th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM’11), Vol. 133. 89–96. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1021/ja202932eGoogle Scholar
- Jan Deriu, Valeria De Luca, Simon Müller, Thomas Hofmann, and Martin Jaggi. 2017. Leveraging large amounts of weakly supervised data for multi-language sentiment classification. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’17). 1045–1052. http://papers.www2017.com.au.s3-website-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/proceedings/p1045.pdf.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Joseph DiGrazia, Karissa McKelvey, Johan Bollen, and Fabio Rojas. 2013. More tweets, more votes: Social media as a quantitative indicator of political behavior. PLoS One 8, 11 (2013), 1--5. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079449Google ScholarCross Ref
- Elizabeth Dubois and Grant Blank. 2018. The echo chamber is overstated: The moderating effect of political interest and diverse media. Information Communication and Society 21, 5 (2018), 729--745. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1428656Google ScholarCross Ref
- John Duchi, Elad Hazan, and Yoram Singer. 2011. Adaptive subgradient methods for online learning and stochastic optimization. Journal of Machine Learning Research 12 (2011), 2121--2159. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.2012.6426698Google ScholarDigital Library
- Eleições Sem Fake 2018. Eleições Sem Fake. Retrieved December 19, 2019 from http://www.eleicoessemfake.dcc.ufmg.br.Google Scholar
- Sven Engesser, Nicole Ernst, Frank Esser, and Florin Büchel. 2017. Populism and social media: How politicians spread a fragmented ideology. Information Communication and Society 20, 8 (2017), 1109--1126. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1207697Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gunn Enli. 2017. Twitter as arena for the authentic outsider: Exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. European Journal of Communication 32, 1 (2017), 50--61. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116682802Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lauren Feiner. 2019. Twitter Bans Political Ads after Facebook Refused to Do so. Retrieved August 15, 2020 from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/30/twitter-bans-political-ads-after-facebook-refused-to-do-so.html.Google Scholar
- Michelle C. Forelle, Philip N. Howard, Andres Monroy-Hernandez, and Saiph Savage. 2015. Political bots and the manipulation of public opinion in Venezuela. SSRN Electronic Journal. Retrieved August 15, 2020 from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2635800.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jason Gainous and Kevin M. Wagner. 2014. Tweeting to Power: The Social Media Revolution in American Politics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Lei Gao, Alexis Kuppersmith, and Ruihong Huang. 2017. Recognizing explicit and implicit hate speech using a weakly supervised two-path bootstrapping approach. arxiv:1710.07394.Google Scholar
- Kiran Garimella, Gianmarco De Francisci Morales, Aristides Gionis, and Michael Mathioudakis. 2018. Political discourse on social media: Echo chambers, gatekeepers, and the price of bipartisanship. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’18). 913–922. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3178876.3186139 arxiv:1801.01665Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nabeel Gillani, Ann Yuan, Martin Saveski, Soroush Vosoughi, and Deb Roy. 2018. Me, my echo chamber, and I. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’18). ACM, New York, NY, 823--831. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3178876.3186130 arxiv:1803.01731Google ScholarDigital Library
- Matthew Eric Glassman, Jacob R. Straus, and Colleen J. Shogan. 2010. Social Networking and Constituent Communications: Member Use of Twitter during a Two-Month Period in the 111th Congress. Congressional Research Service. Available at https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41066.pdf.Google Scholar
- Jennifer Golbeck, Justin M. Grimes, and Anthony Rogers. 2010. Twitter use by the US Congress. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 61, 8 (2010), 1612--1621.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yoav Goldberg. 2016. A primer on neural network models for natural language processing. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 57, 1 (2016), 345--420.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yoav Goldberg. 2017. Neural Network Methods for Natural Language Processing. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies. Morgan 8 Claypool. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2200/S00762ED1V01Y201703HLT037Google Scholar
- A’ndre Gonawela, Joyojeet Pal, Udit Thawani, Elmer van der Vlugt, Wim Out, and Priyank Chandra. 2018. Speaking their mind: Populist style and antagonistic messaging in the tweets of Donald Trump, Narendra Modi, Nigel Farage, and Geert Wilders. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 27 (2018), 293–326. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-018-9316-2Google ScholarDigital Library
- Todd Graham, Marcel Broersma, and Karin Hazelhoff. 2013. Closing the gap? Twitter as an instrument for connected representation. In The Media, Political Participation and Empowerment, R. Scullion, D. Gerodimos, D. Jackson, and D. Lilleker (Eds.). Routledge Research in Political Communication. Routledge, 71–88.Google Scholar
- Will J. Grant, Brenda Moon, and Janie Busby Grant. 2010. Digital dialogue? Australian politicians’ use of the social network tool Twitter. Australian Journal of Political Science 45, 4 (2010), 579--604. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2010.517176Google ScholarCross Ref
- Didier Grimaldi. 2019. Can we analyse political discourse using Twitter? Evidence from Spanish 2019 presidential election. Social Network Analysis and Mining 9, 1 (2019), 49.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Keith N. Hampton, Inyoung Shin, and Weixu Lu. 2017. Social media and political discussion: When online presence silences offline conversation. Information Communication and Society 20, 7 (2017), 1090--1107. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1218526Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zellig S. Harris. 1954. Distributional structure. Word 10 (1954), 146--162.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nathan Hartmann, Erick Fonseca, Christopher Shulby, Marcos Treviso, Jessica Rodrigues, and Sandra Aluisio. 2017. Portuguese word embeddings: Evaluating on word analogies and natural language tasks. arxiv:1708.06025.Google Scholar
- William B. Heller and Carol Mershon. 2005. Party switching in the Italian chamber of deputies, 1996–2001. Journal of Politics 67, 2 (May 2005), 536--559. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2005.00328.xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Libby Hemphill, Jahna Otterbacher, and Matthew Shapiro. 2013. What’s Congress doing on Twitter? In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW’13). ACM, New York, NY, 877--886. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441876Google Scholar
- Allen Hicken and Joel W. Simmons. 2008. The personal vote and the efficacy of education spending. American Journal of Political Science 52, 1 (Jan. 2008), 109--124. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00302.xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long short-term memory. Neural Computation 9, 8, 1735--1780. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735Google ScholarDigital Library
- Philip N. Howard, Saiph Savage, Claudia Flores Saviaga, Carlos Toxtli, and Andrés Monroy-Hemández. 2016. Social media, civic engagement, and the slacktivism hypothesis: Lessons from Mexico’s “El Bronco.” Journal of International Affairs 70, 1 (2016), 55--73. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812452411.4Google Scholar
- Sungwook Hwang. 2013. The effect of Twitter use on politicians’ credibility and attitudes toward politicians. Journal of Public Relations Research 25, 3 (2013), 246--258. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2013.788445Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nigel Jackson and Darren Lilleker. 2011. Microblogging, constituency service and impression management: UK MPs and the use of Twitter. Journal of Legislative Studies 17, 1 (2011), 86--105.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ian T. Jolliffe. 1986. Principal component analysis and factor analysis. In Principal Component Analysis. Springer, 115--128.Google Scholar
- Armand Joulin, Edouard Grave, Piotr Bojanowski, and Tomas Mikolov. 2016. Bag of tricks for efficient text classification. arxiv:1607.01759.Google Scholar
- Andreas Jungherr. 2016. Twitter use in election campaigns: A systematic literature review. Journal of Information Technology 8 Politics 13, 1 (Jan. 2016), 72--91. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2015.1132401Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rune Karlsen and Bernard Enjolras. 2016. Styles of social media campaigning and influence in a hybrid political communication system: Linking candidate survey data with Twitter data. International Journal of Press/Politics 21, 3 (2016), 338--357.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Yoon Kim. 2014. Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP’14). 1746--1751. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/D14-1181Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ulrike Klinger. 2013. Mastering the art of social media: Swiss parties, the 2011 national election and digital challenges. Information Communication and Society 16, 5 (2013), 717--736. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.782329Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Richard Landis and Gary G. Koch. 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33, 1 (1977), 159. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310Google ScholarCross Ref
- Eun Ju Lee and Soo Yun Shin. 2014. When the medium is the message: How transportability moderates the effects of politicians’ Twitter communication. Communication Research 41, 8 (2014), 1088--1110. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650212466407Google ScholarCross Ref
- CNN Library. 2019. Jair Bolsonaro Fast Facts. Retrieved August 15, 2020 from https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/29/americas/jair-bolsonaro-fast-facts/index.html.Google Scholar
- Haiko Lietz, Claudia Wagner, Arnim Bleier, and Markus Strohmaier. 2014. When politicians talk: Assessing online conversational practices of political parties on Twitter. In Proceedings of the 8th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM’14). 285--294.Google Scholar
- Cheng Ying Liu, Ming Syan Chen, and Chi Yao Tseng. 2015. IncreSTS: Towards real-time incremental short text summarization on comment streams from social network services. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 27, 11 (2015), 2986--3000. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2015.2405553Google ScholarDigital Library
- Caio Machado, Beatriz Kira, Gustavo Hirsch, Nahema Marchal, Bence Kollanyi, Philip N. Howard, Thomas Lederer, and Vlad Barash. 2018. News and political information consumption in Brazil: Mapping the first round of the 2018 Brazilian presidential election on Twitter. Computational Propaganda Project. Retrieved August 15, 2020 from http://blogs.oii.ox.ac.uk/comprop/wp-content/uploads/sites/93/2018/10/brazil_supplement.pdf.Google Scholar
- Scott Mainwaring. 2001. Sistemas partidários em novas democracias: o caso do Brasil. Mercado Aberto.Google Scholar
- Francisco Paulo Jamil Marques and Camila MontÁlverne. 2016. How important is Twitter to local elections in Brazil? A case study of Fortaleza City Council. Brazilian Political Science Review. Epub ahead of print. December 12, 2016. http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext8pid=S1981-382120160003002058nrm=iso.Google Scholar
- Christopher M. Mascaro and Sean P. Goggins. 2011. Brewing up citizen engagement: The coffee party on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Communities and Technologies (C8T’11). 11. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2103354.2103357Google Scholar
- Tomas Mikolov, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv:1301.3781v3.Google Scholar
- Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS’13). 3111--3119.Google ScholarDigital Library
- José Álvaro Moisés. 2011. O desempenho do congresso nacional no presidencialismo de coalizão (1995-2006). In O papel do Congresso Nacional no presidencialismo de coalizão.Google Scholar
- Lucas S. Oliveira, Pedro Vaz de Melo, Marcelo Amaral, and José Antônio Pinho. 2018. When politicians talk about politics: Identifying political tweets of Brazilian congressmen. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM’18).Google Scholar
- Michael A. Oren and Stephen B. Gilbert. 2011. Framework for measuring social affinity for CSCW software. In CHI EA’11: CHI’11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1387--1392. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1979742.1979779Google Scholar
- Paromita Pain and Gina Masullo Chen. 2019. The president is in: Public opinion and the presidential use of Twitter. Social Media + Society 5, 2 (2019), 205630511985514. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119855143Google Scholar
- Joyojeet Pal. 2015. Banalities turned viral: Narendra modi and the political tweet. Television and New Media 16, 4 (2015), 378--387. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476415573956Google ScholarCross Ref
- Debjyoti Paul, Feifei Li, Murali Krishna Teja, Xin Yu, and Richie Frost. 2017. Compass: Spatio temporal sentiment analysis of US election. In Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD’17). ACM, New York, NY, 1585--1594. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3097983.3098053Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher Manning. 2014. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP’14). 1532--1543.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Torsten Persson, Guido Tabellini, and Francesco Trebbi. 2001. Electoral Rules and Corruption. Technical Report. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3386/w8154Google Scholar
- Philip Pond and Jeff Lewis. 2019. Riots and Twitter: Connective politics, social media and framing discourses in the digital public sphere. Information Communication and Society 22, 2 (2019), 213--231. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1366539Google ScholarCross Ref
- Raquel Recuero, Felipe Bonow Soares, and Anatoliy Gruzd. 2020. Hyperpartisanship, disinformation and political conversations on Twitter: The Brazilian presidential election of 2018. Ted Rogers School of Management, 3 Social Media Lab 1, 2 (2020), 569--578.Google Scholar
- Gustavo Resende, Johnnatan Messias, Philipe Melo, Marisa Vasconcelos, Fabrício Benevenuto, Hugo Sousa, and Jussara M. Almeida. 2019. (Mis)information dissemination in WhatsApp: Gathering, analyzing and countermeasures. In Proceedings of the World Wide Web Conference (WWW’19), Vol. 2. 818--828. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3308558.3313688Google Scholar
- Lamprini Rori and Barry Richards. 2017. Understanding online political networks: The case of the far right and far left in Greece Pantelis. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10540. Springer, 162–177. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67256-4Google Scholar
- Alfredo Saad-Filho. 2013. Mass protests under ‘left neoliberalism’: Brazil, June-July 2013. Critical Sociology 39, 5 (2013), 657--669.Google Scholar
- Jorge Saldivar, Florian Daniel, Luca Cernuzzi, and Fabio Casati. 2019. Online idea management for civic engagement: A study on the benefits of integration with social networking. ACM Transactions on Social Computing 2, 1 (2019), 1--29. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3284982Google ScholarDigital Library
- David J. Samuels. 1999. Incentives to cultivate a party vote in candidate-centric electoral systems: Evidence from Brazil. Comparative Political Studies 32, 4 (1999), 487--518.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David J. Samuels and Cesar Zucco. 2014. Lulismo, petismo, and the future of Brazilian politics. Journal of Politics in Latin America 6, 3 (2014), 129–158.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Savage and A. Monroy-Hernandez. 2015. Participatory militias: An analysis of an armed movement’s online audience. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW’15). 724--733. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675295Google Scholar
- Dhavan V. Shah, Joseph N. Cappella Ramesh, and W. Russell Neuman. 2015. Big data, digital media, and computational social science: Possibilities and perils. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 659, 1 (2015), 6--13. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716215572084Google ScholarCross Ref
- Matthew A. Shapiro and Libby Hemphill. 2017. Politicians and the policy agenda: Does use of Twitter by the U.S. Congress direct New York Times content? Policy 8 Internet 9, 1 (2017), 109--132. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.120Google Scholar
- Tian Shi, Kyeongpil Kang, Jaegul Choo, and Chandan K. Reddy. 2018. Short-text topic modeling via non-negative matrix factorization enriched with local word-context correlations. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’18). ACM, New York, NY, 1105--1114. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3178876.3186009Google Scholar
- Jae Hyeok Shin. 2017. The choice of candidate-centered electoral systems in new democracies. Party Politics 23, 2 (March 2017), 160--171. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068815581539Google ScholarCross Ref
- Márcio Silva, Lucas Santos de Oliveira, Athanasios Andreou, Pedro Olmo Vaz de Melo, Oana Goga, and Fabricio Benevenuto. 2020. Facebook Ads Monitor: An independent auditing system for political ads on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’20). ACM, New York, NY, 224--234. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3366423.3380109Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bernard W. Silverman. 2018. Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Tamara A. Small. 2010. Canadian politics in 140 characters: Party politics in the Twitterverse. Canadian Parliamentary Review 33, 3 (2010), 39--45.Google Scholar
- Mehmet Zahid Sobaci and Naci Karkin. 2013. The use of Twitter by mayors in Turkey: Tweets for better public services? Government Information Quarterly 30, 4 (2013), 417--425. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.05.014Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joseph Turian, Lev Ratinov, and Yoshua Bengio. 2010. Word representations: A simple and general method for semi-supervised learning. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL’10).Google ScholarDigital Library
- Voz Ativa. n.d. Home Page. Retrieved December 19, 2019 from http://www.vozativa.org.Google Scholar
- Jonathan Watts. 2016. Dilma Rousseff Impeachment: What You Need to Know—The Guardian briefing. Retrieved August 15, 2020 from https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/aug/31/dilma-rousseff-impeachment-brazil-what-you-need-to-know.Google Scholar
- Felix Ming Fai Wong, Chee Wei Tan, Soumya Sen, and Mung Chiang. 2013. Quantifying political leaning from tweets and retweets. In Proceedings of the 7th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM’13).Google Scholar
- Wenpeng Yin, Katharina Kann, Mo Yu, and Hinrich Schütze. 2017. Comparative study of CNN and RNN for natural language processing. arxiv:1702.01923.Google Scholar
- Ho Young Yoon and Han Woo Park. 2014. Strategies affecting Twitter-based networking pattern of South Korean politicians: Social network analysis and exponential random graph model. Quality and Quantity 48, 1 (2014), 409--423. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-012-9777-1Google ScholarCross Ref
- Qingyuan Zhao, Murat A. Erdogdu, Hera Y. He, Anand Rajaraman, and Jure Leskovec. 2015. SEISMIC: A self-exciting point process model for predicting tweet popularity. arxiv:1506.02594.Google Scholar
Index Terms
-
Do Politicians Talk about Politics? Assessing Online Communication Patterns of Brazilian Politicians
-
Recommendations
-
Twitter use by politicians during social uprisings: an analysis of Gezi park protests in Turkey
dg.o '15: Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government ResearchSocial uprisings clearly show that social media tools, especially Twitter, help news spread more than the press does recently. In some cases Twitter substitutes traditional media if censorship is enlarged to such a level that the mainstream media ...
-
Who Tweets About Politics?: Political Participation of Twitter Users During the 2011Gubernatorial Elections
Twitter has been lauded for its potential political value by academics, journalists, and politicians; yet, we know little about the citizenry's use of Twitter to engage in politics. Under the backdrop of the 2011 gubernatorial elections, we observed ...
-
The 2014 Indian elections on Twitter
The study examines Twitter political campaigns in the 2014 Indian general election.It also examines the role of internet and first time voters in electoral success.New-and-upcoming parties used Twitter for self-promotion and media validation.The winning ...
Comments