The Impact of Social Media on Political Narratives

  • Authors

    • Thomas Fischer Senior Manager, Bosch, Germany Author
    • Anna Schmidt Product Director, BMW Group, Germany Author

    DOI:

    https://doi.org/10.67228/30715636/IJETMR-2020PI7U4I

    Published 04-05-2020

  • Social Media, Political Narratives, Algorithmic Amplification, Digital Democracy, Political Communication, Misinformation, Sentiment Analysis, Network Analysis, Polarization, Computational Social Science

    Issue

    Vol. 3 No. 1 (2020)

    Section

    Articles

    How to Cite

    [1]
    T. Fischer and A. Schmidt, “The Impact of Social Media on Political Narratives”, IJETMR, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 01–16, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.67228/30715636/IJETMR-2020PI7U4I.

  • Abstract

    The rapid growth of social media has transformed political communication by decentralizing information flows and replacing traditional gatekeeping with algorithm-driven content distribution. This shift has significantly influenced democratic participation, opinion formation, electoral mobilization, polarization, and information integrity. This study examines how political narratives are created and amplified through user-generated content, algorithmic curation, and network dynamics. Using a hybrid methodology—combining content analysis, sentiment modeling, network centrality measures, and engagement metrics—the research proposes computational indicators such as the Narrative Amplification Index (NAI), Sentiment Dominance Ratio (SDR), and Polarization Coefficient (PC) to measure narrative influence. Analysis of social media posts during a major electoral cycle reveals that algorithmic amplification strengthens ideological homogeneity and increases cross-group polarization. Approximately 68% of highly engaged political posts contained emotionally charged framing, highlighting the role of affective language in narrative virality. Coordinated networks also contributed significantly to rapid narrative diffusion. The findings demonstrate that social media platforms actively shape political discourse through engagement-driven algorithms, prioritizing emotionally intense and polarizing content. The study provides computational insights into digital political ecosystems and offers implications for policymakers and platform regulators seeking to balance free expression with information integrity

  • References

    [1] Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.

    [2] Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Harvard University Press.

    [3] Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.

    [4] Iyengar, S. (1991). Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. University of Chicago Press.

    [5] McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187.

    [6] Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707–731.

    [7] Prior, M. (2007). Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. Cambridge University Press.

    [8] Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton University Press.

    [9] Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin Press.

    [10] Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132.

    [11] Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151.

    [12] Tufekci, Z. (2015). Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent challenges of computational agency. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13, 203–218.

    [13] Newman, M. E. J. (2010). Networks: An Introduction. Oxford University Press.

    [14] Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993–1022.

    [15] Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2013). Emotions and information diffusion in social media—Sentiment of microblogs and sharing behavior. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(4), 217–248.

  • Downloads