| Summary: | <p>The precise mechanisms through which social media affects democratic political discourse are academically underexplored, but pertinent given evidence that the online information environment is characterised by increasing polarisation, factual relativity, incivility, and disengagement. This thesis contributes to scholarly understanding of the implications of social media as a forum for public debate in advanced democracies, and tests the mediating role of issue salience on these effects. To do this, it employs two identically-structured experiments on issues of contrasting current salience in Britain (Brexit and poverty) using Twitter, a prominent social media platform for public debate. The experiments seek to measure the attitudinal effects of exposure to civil and uncivil debate on Twitter for political engagement and trust, focussing on the contrasting reactions of partisans and passive observers. Results indicate that civility in online political debate can significantly improve levels of trust and engagement, particularly for those with low political interest who are unsure of their political orientation. Interestingly, these findings are most consistent in the poverty-related condition and corresponding negative impacts of incivility are not as prominent in either experiment. Concerningly, this implies that incivility is becoming normalised on Twitter and that polarised issue contexts inhibit the ameliorating value of civility. Implications of these findings are discussed with reference to existing literature, and the thesis concludes that attempts to diffuse polarised topics offline while cultivating norms of civility online could help to recast social media as platforms for the inclusion of currently disengaged voices and a force for democratic stability.</p>
|
|---|