Miloni Vadratsikas Papa

PAPER

‘Their two cents worth’: A content analysis of online readers’ comments in mainstream news outlets

Author: Dr. Dimitra Milioni (PhD)

Mailing Address: Cyprus University of Technology,

P.O. box: 50329

3603 Lemesos, Cyprus

Email: [email protected]

Telephone number: 00357 25 00 24 47

Co-Author: Konstantinos Vadratsikas (MA)


P.O. box: 50329




Co-Author: Venia Papa (MA)


P.O. box: 50329





Authors: Dimitra Milioni, Konstantinos Vadratsikas, Venia Papa

Department of Communication and Internet Studies, Cyprus University of Technology, Cyprus

New online technologies have created countless opportunities for citizen participation in the public debate and a potential to influence public opinion. Web 2.0 environments allow mass media audiences to publish their own content, creating a new paradigm of “produsage” with significant consequences on social practices, media and democratic society itself. This study is concerned with user‐generated content that takes the form of readers’ comments in popular Greek online professional news websites. Our aim is to explore whether user‐generated content broadens mass media agendas, enriches mass media content and diversifies the public space. By the use of content analysis of users’ comments to journalistic articles about immigration, the study’s findings are reported regarding the extent to which readers raise new issues, provide additional information, and challenge journalistic opinions. Observed differences are assessed in terms of the characteristics of the journalistic texts that trigger audience responses, and the political orientation of news outlets.

Keywords: User-generated content, Citizen Journalism


INTRODUCTION

Within the last decade, developments in online interactive communication and their potential impact on public opinion, public debate and journalism, have attracted the attention of scholars from various disciplines and fields of social sciences. More specifically, the emergence of Web 2.0 technologies, which allow users to produce and publish their own content online, has triggered much academic discussion and growing research regarding the potential of these new modes of communication to challenge the domination of established mass media in providing information to the public and shaping the public opinion.

Several scholars have celebrated the development of communication technology as a means to strengthen and broaden democracy. Communication technology enthusiasts contend that the internet can transform democracy by increasing the information flows and allowing individuals to formulate better-informed opinions (Castells, 2001; Katz, 1998; Poster, 1997; Rheingold, 2002), while it also facilitates the creation of discursive spaces where the public can exchange opinions and engage in public deliberation (Dahlberg, 2001). On the other hand, many scholars take a critical stance towards the internet’s democratizing potential, arguing that, despite its free and open nature, it leads to a fragmented public space where individual freedom of expression results in polarized and extreme opinions, rather than a public opinion formed according to Habermasian criteria of the critical-rational speech (Sunstein, 2007).

Recently, many researchers have turned their focus to the emergence of user generated content and its democratizing potential. Bruns (2007) argues that the introduction of Web 2.0 technologies signifies a paradigm shift, where production and usage occur simultaneously and could better be studied under the new hybrid concept of produsage. A wide array of scholars (Singer & Ashman, 2008; Paulussen & Ugile, 2008; Neuberger & Nuernbergk, 2010) focus on the effects of user generated content on mass media and journalism, as a multiplicity of opportunities for audience participation are increasingly becoming available to users of mass media websites. As internet users engage more actively in content production and alternative journalism practices, an increasing number of researchers focus on the implications of citizen journalism and the effects of user-generated content production on established journalistic practices. Nevertheless, most of those studies focus solely on the availability of features for audience participation or examine user generated content in terms of a power struggle between journalists and users (Milioni et al. 2011); so far, only a few attempts have been made to study the actual content produced by the users and its implications on the processes by which mass media shape public opinion.

This paper aims at exploring the ways in which the content of online mass media is modified by users’ contributions in media websites. A content analysis of users’ comments is undertaken in order to investigate whether user generated content expands or changes media agendas and challenge opinions expressed by news workers in traditional media organizations. Our assumption is that, to some extent, internet users utilize the space provided to them by the mass medium in order to assume new roles, such as changing the agenda, disseminating new information to the public and interpreting the news, which were traditionally performed by professional journalists. This paper’s main objective is to develop a better understanding

concerning the empirically underexplored area of user generated content and gain some insights regarding its potential to transform public communication. FROM INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION OF SYMBOLIC CONTENT TO “PRODUSAGE”: A POWER SHIFT?

The emergence of digital interactive technologies has fired up a – still ongoing – debate about the potential transformation of the audience’s role, as well as the well-established notions of “producer”/“consumer” and “active participant”/ “passive recipient”. Many theorists have been hasty to declare a shift in power to the benefit of users and the rise of a new “participatory culture” (Jenkins, cited in Van Dijck, 2009, p. 42 - 43), in which the boundaries between production and usage become blurry and porous. Bruns (2007) argues that the development of blogs, wikis, social networking websites, citizen journalism and other interactive tools and applications signify an ongoing paradigm shift, where notions such as “production” need to be conceptualized outside the industrial socio-economic models. Bruns suggests a hybrid model of “produsage”, in which “the production of ideas takes place in a collaborative, participatory environment which breaks down the boundaries between producers and consumers and instead enables all participants to be users as well as producers of information and knowledge” (2007: p.2).

However, other theorists remain skeptical regarding the efficiency of bipolar terms, like production-use, in describing complex issues such as user agency. Van Dijck (2009) argues that in order to understand user agency, it is essential “to account for the multifarious roles of users in a media environment where the boundaries between commerce, content and information are currently being redrawn” (p. 42). He suggests that user agency in digital media involves various levels of engagement and diverse types of communities, ranging from groups resembling grassroots movements to consumer groups. Thus, Van Dijck (2009) calls for a multidisciplinary approach, which accounts for the multiple roles assumed by the users, as well as for the online features which play a significant role in steering users’ actions and shaping the characteristics of online communities.

Nevertheless, despite the diversity of approaches and expectations concerning UGC applications, many scholars recognize a wider trend towards the adoption of user-led technologies, as well as the importance of outlining their main characteristics (Schweiger & Quiring, 2005; Paulussen & Ugile, 2008; Ornebring, 2008). The professional news media are no exception, as they are also increasingly providing opportunities for their audiences to participate. Many researchers have turned to the study of the phenomenon of citizen journalism, which is closely associated to user-generated content and its potential implications on professional mass media. According to Bowman and Willis (2003) “citizen journalism”, refers to individuals’ active role in the elaboration and distribution of news content. In the same vein, Bruns (2007) argues that citizen journalism is not only discursive and deliberative, but that it can also be understood as a form of collaborative filtering of information and interpretations, challenging the role of the established mass media in disseminating and interpreting the news.

USER GENERATED CONTENT IMPACT ON JOURNALISM Generating mass media content with the help of media audiences has a longstanding tradition. Readers’ letters to the editor are the most common example of audience participation opportunities offered by the mass media, as an early type of user generated content, before the emergence of digital media. However, the development of digital media has signaled a new era in audience participation– one that is interactive and more accessible – due to “to the availability of cheap and easy-to-use digital technologies… but a more important driver is the many internet channels, particularly UGC sites, that allow for do-it-yourself distribution” (Van Dijck, 2009: p. 44). Established mass media organizations increasingly incorporate UGC applications in their websites, inviting users to create their own blog, submit videos and pictures and to rate, post or comment on news articles.

These developments and their potential impact on journalism, the mass media and public opinion, have attracted many scholars’ attention who have attempted to record and analyze several aspects of this phenomenon. Some researchers have focused on recording the various types of opportunities for content generation which are available to users, and to analyze the multiple levels of user participation in content production (Neuberger & Nuernbergk, 2010; Domingo et al., 2008; Ornebring, 2008; Hong et al., 2008). Their findings suggest that a variety of features for audience participation are available, enabling users to engage in multiple ways and levels, while websites features have been found to differ in terms of the offered types for user engagement, the type of content produced, as well as the degree of interactivity allowed to users. This multiplicity of features and opportunities for audience participation further complicates the task of understanding its potential effect on journalism and the public sphere.

Much research has been conducted concerning the effects of user generated content on professional journalistic norms and practices. Most of these studies suggest that journalists are aware of and concerned about the growing importance of user generated content in the newsroom. Paulussen and Ugile’s (2008) findings suggest that media professionals recognize the growing importance of user generated content for journalists’ everyday work routines. However, they are concerned about how time-consuming handling UGC is; they also worry that amateur journalism may not correspond to professional journalistic standards of credibility, objectivity and accountability. Similarly, Singer and Ashman (2009) present evidence that “journalists are struggling with how to ethically accommodate the opportunities for freedom and dialogue presented by UGC while safeguarding their credibility and sense of responsibility” (Singer & Ashman, 2008: p. 18). On the other hand, Neuberger & Nuernbergk (2010), having surveyed media professionals employed in web media newsrooms, found that editors and journalists perceive user generated content as additional sources which could complement professional media, rather than as competitors or as a threat to their profession.

Overall, most researchers conclude that there is no actual boundary shift between journalists and their audience as users still maintain the role they already had in traditional media. However, as Neuberger & Nuernbergk (2010) argue, higher levels of audience participation remain to be achieved, as user participation is still at its very beginning. Goode contends that UGC “growth rates allow us to speculate on but not to assume a more popular uptake and mainstream engagement in the coming few years” (2009: p. 1292). Nevertheless, existing analyses of UGC’s impact on journalism have mostly been based on journalists’ self-reported accounts, while the nature and effects of the actual content users produce remain an underexplored aspect of UGC.

USER GENERATED CONTENT ROLE VIS-À-VIS CORE JOURNALISTIC FUNCTIONS

Few attempts have been made to record and analyze the role of user generated content on mass media websites vis-à-vis the journalistic functions and its potential impact on the public sphere and public opinion. Despite the fact that much theoretical discussion is carried out regarding the potential effects of users’ contributions, empirical accounts, based on the study of the actual content users produce, have so far been scarce.

Singer (2009) applied content analysis on users’ comments posted on the websites of three Scottish newspapers, aiming at understanding the characteristics of the political communities formed in these spaces, as well as its effect on the political discourse occurring within these online environments. Her findings suggest that these discursive spaces perform a bridging function, as users from remotely located spaces can come together and debate issues of common interest, while at the same time serve as channels for social interaction and community building. However, Singer’s study makes no attempt to examine how users’ comments may challenge mass media in their core journalistic functions.

On the contrary, Karlsson (2010) focused on how users’ comments posted on four Swedish newspapers framed news reports related to the swine flu. His findings suggest that users’ contributions challenged the dominant media frame, and took a critical stance towards mass media coverage of the issue. Similarly, Robinson (2009) compared how professional and amateur journalists covered the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina in 2006. The most significant finding is that in several occasions users challenged the newspapers’ version of the story and expressed anti-media feelings, or considered themselves as collaborators with journalists. These two studies suggest that users’ contributions broaden the public sphere, while they also challenge mass media’s role as gatekeepers.

A common argument for the importance of the mass media is that professional journalists and editors possess the necessary expertise to select which stories make the news. The term “gatekeeper” is used to describe the role of journalists in deciding what the public needs to know, as well as when and how such information should be provided. Goode (2009) criticizes the established mass media for non-transparent and over-determined story selection processes, which cannot be questioned by the public. As Domingo et al. (2010) discuss, contemporary media critics have called for a more reciprocal relationship between media and their audiences. Several authors have discussed UGC’s potential to challenge the role of the established media as gatekeepers and to offer alternative news accounts, in parallel to professional journalism. Goode (2009) argues that the democratizing force of citizen journalism lies within its potential to bring citizens into the agenda-setting process. The emergence of new interactive media challenges the term “gatekeeper” itself, as audiences are most often “publicizing rather than controlling information under conditions of information abundance in contrast to the scarcity of the pre-digital age” (p. 1295). Such a user practice could also have potential implications on the agenda-setting process, which has traditionally been a task performed by the mass media. In the same vein, Domingo (2010) argues that “in certain spheres, alternative agenda-setting actors do exist, and they are producing news themselves” (p. 2), although he admits that the mass media still dominate the public space as agenda-setters. Still, the effects of user generated content on news-making and its impact on the formation of public opinion remain an understudied area.

In summary, the open and interactive nature of UGC applications has led many scholars to assume that audience-generated content in mass media websites have the potential to complement journalistic content, broaden the public sphere and challenge the mass media monopoly of news-making and influencing public opinion. User generated content in media organizations websites takes many forms and involves diverse levels of engagement. Some of these features allow users to get involved in several stages of the news making process (Domingo et al., 2010), although current research has shown that most users have not yet assumed new roles, apart from the

ones they had before the emergence of digital media (Neuberger & Nuernbergk, 2010). Nevertheless, as audiences get more engaged in content production, several scholars assume that UGC will transform the role of the mass media. UGC applications allow users to get involved in the processes of selecting, distributing, prioritizing and interpreting news stories and challenges media professional’s monopoly in setting the news agenda, framing, priming and acting as watchdogs of information.

This paper’s objective is to provide insights about the nature of UGC and the ways in which UGC alters mass media content. The introduction of user-generated content, and its attachment to the journalistic content, produces a new hybrid text, comprised by professional news content and the contributions of the audience. This study inquires how this hybrid content is different from the original professional text, as well as whether and how user-generated content broadens media agendas, enriches their content and challenges journalistic opinions. In order to achieve this objective, this study draws from empirical data aiming to answer the following research questions:

RQ1: Does UGC broaden mass media agendas, by raising new issues of public concern? RQ2: Does UGC enrich mass media content, by providing additional information on reported news? RQ3(a): Do users utilize the space provided by the mass media to express their opinions on issues of public interest? RQ3(b): Do users challenge journalistic opinions by airing oppositional views?

Methodology This article draws on a content analysis of users’ comments attached to 174

articles, posted on three (3) Greek newspapers’ and five (5) news portals’ websites. Papacharisi (2009) argues that the structure and rules of a website affect the ways in which users engage in online discussions. Thus, our sample was drawn from multiple sources in order to capture a general picture of users’ comments, since focusing solely on a single website might produce misleading results due to biases caused by website-specific characteristics and content biases of the various news outlets.

Since our study is primarily concerned with the ways in which users’ contributions alter the content of the online mass media spaces in which they appear, our paper focuses on the study of the actual content generated by internet users. Our primary goal is to explore whether UGC expands the public debate to topics and interpretations that were originally excluded by the mass media.

The decision to focus on the actual content produced by users, was made after an extensive review of current literature on user generated content (Milioni et. al. 2011) revealed a severe gap in citizen journalism research. In fact, a thorough examination of relevant literature suggested that although several scholars have discussed the role of UGC for journalism, the majority of those studies either provide theoretical accounts on user generated content (for example, Schweiger & Quiring, 2005; Bruns, 2007) or their findings are based on journalists’ and editors’ self-reported assessments on UGC (for example, Thurman, 2008; Paulussen & Ugille, 2008).

Although these accounts offer important insights regarding the role of UGC in the news-making process, they fail to produce empirical evidence to assess how users’ comments contribute to the depiction of the social world. In other words, treating “user-generated content solely in terms of a power struggle between journalists and

users misses an important point: the understanding of user agency and the various meanings of participation in the novel media environment” (Milioni et. al. 2011: p. 8). Thus, the main objective of this paper is to assess the influence of users’ contributions on the journalistic product, by examining the ways in which user generated content complements or differentiates the meaning and interpretations journalists choose to communicate.

Study design Due to the fact that UGC applications are a recent and ongoing development in

mass media websites, UGC remains an understudied domain of online communication. Therefore, our first task was to locate media websites, which allow content generation by users, and to record the features available for users’ participation. This resulted in a detailed record of the types of audience participation opportunities found in the most prominent Greek media websites1. Table 1 summarizes the results of this record, indicating the types of UGC features that are available for each medium. The growing importance of UGC applications for the Greek mass media is supported by the fact that only three (3) out of twenty-eight (28) media websites did not contain any type of UGC features.

Although user generated content constitutes a recent development in online communication, scholars have already attempted to develop typologies to categorize the multiplicity of websites’ features, which allow users to introduce their own content on mass media websites. Nevertheless, due to the dissimilarity of the typologies used, an overall conclusion is difficult to reach. Domingo et al. (2008) and Karlsson (2010) defined three categories: news-production related spaces (e.g. features for submitting, selecting or prioritizing content), commentary and debate spaces (e.g. comments, forums, polls), and social networking features (e.g. karma systems, promotion of content on social media). These opportunities were further categorized into five news production stages: access/observation, selection/filtering, processing/editing, distribution, and interpretation. Another important distinction between different types of UGC production is drawn from Ornebring’s (2008) typology referring to the level of users’ involvement in content generation. Ornebring distinguishes between customization (e.g. RSS feed, grade/mark, interface customization), which is considered as ‘low user involvement’ compared to the actual content production (textual, audio, and video, such as blogs, comments, news items) (Ornebring, 2008)2. Table 1 demonstrates how the UGC types found in Greek media websites are categorized according to these typologies3.

The next stage of the study design involved selecting websites and types of UGC that would be included in content analysis. Since our primary concern was to investigate the content of users’ contributions, we decided to focus on users’ comments attached to journalistic articles and investigate whether they modify the daily media agenda and enrich journalistic texts, by raising topics and offering interpretations that are ignored by professional journalists and the mass media.

1 For more information regarding the state of online news media in Greece, see Spyridou & Veglis (2008) 2 Ornebring (2008) classifies direct comment on articles as customization features and comments on forums as production features (p. 774) – a distinction generally not adopted in other studies. 3 See also Schultz (2000): differences between interactive and reactive communication. (p.210)

In that respect, websites that did not provide space for users’ comments were eliminated from the content analysis sample. The selected websites were chosen on the basis of their popularity within the Greek population of internet users, based on Alexa.com ranking of the 100 most visited websites in Greece. Moreover, websites qualified for analysis were required to adhere to professional journalistic standards, to publish articles by professional journalists and to contain open and visible commenting for all users. In that respect, we excluded from the selection process all websites allowing commenting only to subscribers, as well as blogs and news aggregating websites which were simply republishing stories from various sources.

Sampling After selecting the websites for analysis, a random stratified sample of four

constructed weeks was created, for a five month interval, from October 2010 to February 2011. All websites were examined for the selected days in order to identify the articles that contained users’ comments. At this stage, an initial question that emerged was whether every article including comments should be analyzed or a selection of articles concerning a particular topic should be preferred. We opted for the latter option for the following reasons: first, the analysis of texts (journalistic articles and users’ comments) referring to the same topic would allow direct comparisons between different online media outlets, since different topics are often subjected to different treatment in media coverage. Second, it would provide a sample of conceptual coherence that would allow also framing analysis of the texts (not included in this paper). Two major issues dominated media coverage and public discussion in Greece during this period: financial crisis and immigration. Considering the former too extensive and diverse, the issue of immigration was selected. According to Roberts et al. (2002), immigration is among public issues that exhibit significant agenda-setting effects on the internet. Furthermore, a series of important immigration-related events4 occurred during the selected period, which attracted significant media coverage and triggered a controversial debate on the issue.

Based on the above criteria, all websites were examined and 174 immigration-related stories were identified. All articles were published on randomly selected dates and included from 1 to 305 user comments. Overall, the sample included 174 articles and 3.202 comments (mean = 18.8 comments per article). Data related to both articles and user comments were downloaded and logged to excel files in order to facilitate the coding process.

Variables and coding Prior to the coding process, three coders participated in training sessions,

conducting numerous pilot content analyses of articles and comments that were not

4 The main events, related to immigration issues, that occurred during the selected interval and attracted much media coverage were:

Occupation of a law school building in Athens by 300 immigrants, who protested against government’s delay to provide them with work and residence permits. (January 2011)

Governments’ announcement of its intention to build a fence on the Greek-Turkish borderline in order to prevent immigrants of entering the country illegally.(December, 2010)

Members of the left-wing party SYRIZA were attacked, while campaigning for the municipal elections, by groups protesting against the increasing number of immigrants in Aghios Panteleimonas, a neighbourhood close to Athens city centre. (October, 2010)

included in the sample, in order to firm up coding definitions and coding scheme. Next, a content analysis of 1094 comments (a part of the total 3.202 comments in the sample) was conducted by two coders, using the single comment as the unit of analysis. Comments were coded according to four variables, which correspond to the four research questions of the study.

First, to determine whether UGC broadens mass media agendas by raising new issues of public concern (RQ1), comments were coded as changing the agenda, when they introduced new issues that were not raised by the journalistic article and were not directly related to immigration. A significant extent of an agenda-changing activity would suggest that users utilize the public space provided to them not to follow the media-defined issue hierarchy but to broach different issues that are of concern to them.

When comments included links to other websites, the main text of the linked website was content analyzed. In cases where change of topic was recorded, coders also recorded the new topic giving a brief description of it. Comments were coded as “not applicable” in terms of topic change, when the comment did not make sense (incomprehensible), when users commented on the terms of the discussion (metacommunication) or communicated with each other about private issues (personal communication). Additionally, comments were coded as “not applicable” when they referred to other users’ comments, when they included artistic content such as poems, songs or links to music videos and movies, as well when users’ comments aimed at maintaining and strengthening personal relationships built within the commenting forum (phatic communication, Jakobson, 1981).

Second, to explore whether UGC enriches mass media content by providing additional information on reported news (RQ2), a variable was introduced that inquired whether comments added new information to the topic in question. Given that mass media have been criticized for heavily relying on a limited range of official sources to communicate the facts (Dilevko, 1998), it is assumed that the inclusion of ‘ordinary people’ in the news production process could yield new information usually overlooked or excluded by mass media – drawn from everyday experiences and the lifeworld (e.g. eyewitness accounts, information from interpersonal sources and communities, alternative media, unofficial online sources etc.). Well-known facts distributed by mainstream media or information deriving from users’ shared cultural heritage (e.g. historical facts, poems, songs) were not coded as new information.

Third, we were interested in investigating whether users engage in commenting activity in order to express an opinion regarding issues, or their comments are of factual nature (RQ3a). Comments were coded as expressing opinion when users explicitly expressed support for some particular position or a position was implicitly supported by use of particular wording.

A fourth variable recorded users’ attitudes towards immigration, in order to explore whether users tend to challenge journalistic viewpoints (RQ3b). Coders coded such attitudes as positive, when users chose to defend immigrants’ rights, negative, when users’ comments were directed against immigration, and mixed or unclear, when users recognized the validity of arguments both for and against immigration or when users’ stance towards the issue was not obvious.

An additional set of variables are related to characteristics of the journalistic article, to which comments are attached. Since no previous study has looked into the relation between the journalistic and users’ texts in hybrid textual environments, such as commenting systems in mainstream media websites, this inquiry is of explorative nature. Our assumption is that certain characteristics of the original, journalistic text

(such as its factual or interpretive character, the episodic or thematic coverage of issues, and positive or negative valence) may be related to the activity of commenting by the readers, in terms of the attention of the commenters (number of comments), the expression of opinion or the stance taken by the commenters toward the issue in question. Thus, coders were asked to determine whether: a. to the article primarily expressed an opinion regarding immigration-oriented problems (explicitly or implicitly through the selection of sources and wording) or presenting factual information; b. presented information in a thematic or an episodic manner; third, whether there was a positive, negative or neutral/mixed stance towards immigration or whether the stance was unclear. To ensure reliability, two coders coded independently all articles and comments. The reliability scores were between 91% and 100% for the variables that referred to journalistic articles and between 93% and 97% for the variables that referred to comments (simple agreement).

Findings Analysis of journalistic articles Our first set of data refers to the main characteristics of the journalistic articles,

to which the analyzed users’ comments were attached. Table 2 shows findings for the type of articles, the type of coverage and the article valence towards the immigration problem. The overwhelming majority of news stories covering immigration-related issues take the form of event-driven, factual articles, while only 5% of the examined news stories express an opinion towards immigration. Similarly, in most occasions journalists chose to focus on presenting the facts in an episodic way, without providing any background information concerning the nature and the deeper roots of the problem. In fact, only 1 out of the 57 immigration-related news stories covered the event in a thematic manner, providing background information to readers, essential for understanding the complexity of the immigration problem. Finally, 33% of the articles took a neutral, mixed or unclear stance towards immigration. Most articles (44%) assumed a positive standpoint towards immigrants, while almost 23% took a negative stance.

Analysis of users’ comments The second set of data focuses on the analysis of the actual content produced by

the users. Our first research question (RQ1) examines whether users broaden the public agenda through their comments, by raising new issues of public concern. As indicated on Table 3, almost 74% of the users’ posts commented on the topic of the original journalistic text. Only a few occasions were noted where users chose to discuss a new topic, not debated by the articles’ editor. More specifically, in around 8% of the comments new issues are raised that are not directly related to immigration, such as left-wing party politics, the rise of extreme right-wing groups and the globalization of the capitalist system. Commenting on an article discussing the protest and hunger strike of 300 illegal immigrants, posted on the website of “Proto Thema” newspaper, a user argues:

“If Hrisi Avgi [extreme-right wing party] succeeded in electing a member in the municipal council during the last elections, next time they will elect a member of the parliament !!!!!!!!!!!” (commenter, Proto Thema, [28/01/2011 17:24])

Some users introduced topics which were totally unrelated to immigration, such as the government’s decision to take hard austerity measures, the financial crisis or the mass media system. Posting on an article regarding immigrants’ right to vote in national elections, a user states:

“What business? The only ones surviving today are the ones exporting products abroad. My best man is an engineer and he has not been paid for 2 years. He is in debt and he is still waiting for his money. Only the private sector can save the economy, particularly exporting trade. But the people have woken up. What is the point of exporting goods when they tax you by 40%? Those thieves in the government have not realized that yet” (commenter, TVXS, [02/02/2011 17:08]).

One interesting finding of this analysis is that a significant percentage of the

analyzed comments did not discuss any issue of public concern. Rather, these debated the nature and the rules of the discussion or the actions of the websites’ moderators. For instance, a user comments concerning other users’ lack of argumentation and the expression of racist opinions:

“… some commentators’ lack of critical thinking is evident by the quality of their speech. The lack of arguments and the absence of an immigration policy that shows respect for basic human rights, results in this kind of patriotism. However, we demonstrate out patriotism every day by our political, social and cultural choices, and not by violence and such (racist) comments” (commenter, Proto Thema, [02/02/2011 17:32].

An exemplary case of comments that were coded as “metacommunication” was

found in several articles posted in TVXS website (an alternative news portal) during January-February 2011. Several users protested against the decision of the website’s moderators to erase some users’ accounts (for reasons that were not made clear to the authors) by posting “no comment” in several discussion threads. This extraordinary protest on the one hand exemplifies how users perceive the space provided to them by the mass medium as their own, while on the other hand it provides insights regarding the relationships within the communities formed in these spaces.

In other cases, users used the public space provided to them to discuss personal issues, to comment on other users’ personality or identity or to maintain personal relationship (phatic functions). Also, some users chose to express themselves by the use of aesthetic codes, such as music videos, movies or poems.

Our second research question (RQ2) asked whether users’ comments enrich mass media content by providing additional information on reported news. In their comments, users occasionally shared information drawn from the mass media or commonly known facts (e.g. historical information) which could be useful for better understanding some aspects of the immigration problem. However, there is no evidence of a strong ‘citizen journalism’ activity, since users do not tend to utilize the comments’ space to publicize original information, drawn from their everyday life sources and social experiences, outside the circuit of journalistic sources. As shown on Table 3, only 3% of the comments in our sample provided readers with new information that could be considered “news”. For example, commenting on a news story regarding the occupation of a university building by immigrant protesters, a user

offers his eyewitness account and discusses some details that had been excluded from the mass media reports:

“The building, where the immigrants set up their protest, is an old building on Solonos street which is under renovation. The university lectures are not being obstructed in any way… no damage was done in the building. On the contrary, I personally assisted cleaning the building from garbage. We cleaned the toilets and they are fully functional again. We’ve been working all day long on Saturday. There was no intrusion in the building. Everyone involved knew about the planned protest” (commenter, [TA NEA], [25/1/2011 16:22]).

Our third research question (RQ3a) investigated whether users express their

opinions on public issues, through their comments. Table 3 demonstrates that expressing opinion is the core function of comments (98%).

The fourth research question (RQ3b) asked whether users challenge journalistic opinions by airing oppositional views. Accordingly, our last variable aimed at recording users’ stance towards immigration. Table 3 shows that most comments (58%) included opinions against immigrants, whereas one in five comments (19%) took a positive stance and as many were unclear in their opinions. Only 3% of the comments assumed a neutral position. Comparing these results with the valence in journalistic articles, it seems that, on the whole, journalists’ and users’ expressed opinions differ: journalists take more often pro-immigrants positions and are, understandably, more neutral in their coverage, whereas users express more often anti-immigrants positions in largely opinionated comments. Taking a closer look at the extent of divergence of opinion between journalists’ and users’ viewpoints within each article and attached comments, it is found that the majority of journalistic articles (57%, n=32 out of 57 articles) attract comments with mostly oppositional views. In contrast, in 32% of the articles, the opinions expressed by users are supportive of the journalist’s viewpoint. This finding suggests that journalists do not seem to ‘set the tone’ of the discussion and that users tend to openly express their dissent5.

Inter-media differences Several scholars of online media have noted the importance of website-specific

characteristics for the attitudes of their users. Papacharissi (2009) examined online discourse on social networking websites and argues that “the primary point here is that technology not only in social networking sites but also in other online social spaces functions architecturally, suggesting particular uses or highlighting technological affordances” (Papacharissi, 2009, p.216). Similarly, in his discussion on user agency, Van Dick (2009) calls for an approach that accounts “for technologies and site operators-owners as actors who steer user agency” (p. 55). Technological factors – such as anonymity, the degree of moderation, restrictions imposed on the extent or the type of the messages and the possibility for direct interaction among

5 Regarding the method used to reach these results, we computed for each journalistic article the percentage of comments that agreed and of those that disagreed with the valence of the journalistic article. When the majority of the comments (>50%) concurred with the journalistic valence, the article was coded as having mainly supporting comments; when the majority of the comments (>50%) diverged from the journalistic valence, the article was coded as having mainly oppositional comments. The percentages change slightly (55% oppositional comments, 42% supportive comments), when articles with less than four comments are excluded from the analysis.

users through threaded discussions, are some features that can affect the content provided by the users. Other factors that can steer user participation or define the characteristics of user communities formed around particular online media are outlet-specific, namely the political orientation of the media outlet, the journalistic values embraced by the outlet (participatory or professional journalism), and the type of the outlet (e.g. online-only news portals or traditional media institutions).

In this paper, we examine differences between media outlets regarding the extent to which users change the agenda by introducing new topics and the stance adopted by commenters towards immigration (Tables 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3). Three points can be made here, all of them concerning the news portal TVXS.gr. Firstly, as can be seen on Table 4.1, there is a notable difference between TVXS and other online media regarding the “change of topic” variable. Almost 40% of users’ comments attached to TVXS articles fall into the not applicable for topic change category, percentage that is much higher than in any other medium. The majority of those comments were coded as referring to metacommunication issues. This difference can be explained with reference to the alternative media philosophy that distinguishes TVXS from all other media outlets of our sample. TXVS is an independent online outlet that does not belong to any large media company and it is co-funded by online subscribers who can also publish their own content. This could be the reason why advertising is notably more limited in tvxs.gr, in comparison to other media outlets. Its owners have given particular emphasis on creating a user community of frequent contributors and commenters. The observation of interactions in the comments’ section of TVXS shows that its users are particularly interested in the rules under which discussion is conducted, they highly value diversity and rational argumentation and have a strong sense of belonging regarding the discussion space they are using, as exemplified by their “no comment” protest described above. This sense of community among TVXS commenters is also supported by their initiative to create their own blog, which is totally independent from TVXS, and where all members of the community can publish and discuss news stories.

The second difference, shown on Table 4.2, concerns the high percentage of comments in TVXS that took a positive stance towards immigrants (54%), compared to much more negative attitudes towards immigrants of commentators in other media. This should be related to the political orientation of the online outlet, since TVXS, together with the long established newspaper Eleftherotypia, are the left-leaning media in our sample. A additional question that emerges is whether the community of users formed around mass media online spaces exhibit ideological homogeneity, aligned with the political or ideological orientation of the media outlet that provides this space (typical cases of Sunstein’s echo chambers), or whether the produced content is characterized by diversity and a variety of different viewpoints. To assess the degree of diversity in comments within each outlet, in terms of expressed positions, we computed the percentage of the majority opinion in the total number of comments for outlets that gathered more than 10 comments (Table 4.3). The results show that the most diverse outlets, in terms of their comments, are TVXS and the news portal in.gr (70% homogeneity). The latter is a well-established and very popular online news portal that belongs to the powerful in the Greek media landscape Lambrakis group, and is a typical example of a strictly factual, objective and detached style of reporting. The reasons why these two outlets of very different reporting styles and media philosophy exhibit the highest diversity are probably different: in TVXS posts are often opinionated and ideologically laden and the discussion is frequently an ideological battleground; the in.gr website, being the most popular news portal,

possibly attracts a wide range of readers and commenters who are likely to hold and express diverse opinions.

Discussion and conclusions This study examines user-generated content on mass media websites, in the

form of comments attached to articles, aiming at understanding the ways in which it affects the production of meaning in the new, hybrid texts in mass media websites and complements journalistic texts. In order to achieve that, the paper draws from a content analysis of users comments focusing on four main issues. First, it examines whether users change the discussion agenda by raising new topics. Second, it investigates whether users provide other readers with news information that is excluded from the mass media. Third, we explore whether users express their opinion on public issues by commenting on related news articles on mass media websites. Finally, we ask whether users challenge journalistic opinions by airing oppositional views.

Our findings suggest low rates of user engagement in raising new issues and providing new information in these commenting spaces, provided by mass media organizations to their audiences. As far as the introduction of new issues by users is concerned, the results of this study largely confirm Schultz’s (2000) assumption that, within discussion spaces “surrounded by the online environment of a mass medium… discussions will be related to the content of the mass medium” (p.214). Almost 8% of the comments discussed issues which were unrelated, or indirectly related, to the original topic of the article and which were not brought up by the journalist. Despite the relatively small percentage of comments changing subject, this phenomenon still constitutes an important innovation in public communication. Considering that before the emergence of digital media, audiences rarely had any opportunity to introduce new topics into the public debate, it is important that even a small percentage assumes this role which was traditionally attributed to media professionals.

Similarly, our findings have shown that very few users utilize these online discussion spaces to disseminate newsworthy information. The results of the content analysis show that only 2% of the comments included information that could be considered as news. Rather, users tend to limit themselves in expressing their opinions on public issues, without interfering with the journalistic functions – confirming the famous journalistic maxim that “comment is free, but facts are sacred”. It is evident, then, that this type of online spaces is not accommodating (yet?) the development of citizen journalism, at least as a means of disseminating unreported news. Nevertheless, as noted above, several comments provided information that, although did not fulfill the narrow criteria of our coding definitions, included important background information that could facilitate readers in developing a better understanding of the immigration problem. Evidence from political psychology suggests that many people find it hard to understand political news because “the political world depicted by news media, which are the public main sources of current information, often lucks sufficient details to allow audiences to capture the messages’ connotations” (Graber, 2001 p. 22). Therefore, although only a few comments include newsworthy information, it is likely that they complement the journalistic product in several other ways. On the other hand, it was found that in most threaded comments users challenge journalists’ viewpoints and express openly their dissent. The potential implications of this trend for the formation of public opinion are far-reaching, as professional news no

longer have a monopoly over the production of meaning for public issues, as they blend with users’ perspectives in new, hybrid texts. However, the extent of and the conditions under which such influence can take place – for instance, the degree of perceived reliability of user-generated content compared to journalistic products – should be explored by future research.

Shortcomings and suggestions for future research As discussed in the introductory parts of this article, content analysis of the

comments generated by users in mass media websites has been scarce. This explorative analysis has certain limitations. One of the most significant stems from our decision to use the single comment, as the unit of analysis. Although this strategy has been successfully followed in past research attempts (e.g. Singer, 2009), coders came across several cases where information was lost, in order to stay in line with coding definitions. For example, in several comments that were coded as not changing topic, users discussed other issues before they eventually commented on the news article. Future attempts to apply content analysis on user-generated content should take into consideration the unusual nature of users’ comments, compared to conventional types of texts. Similarly, as noted above, several comments provided information which could be valuable to other readers’ efforts to interpret the news story, although it did not fit the definition of “original news”. Bearing in mind that the majority of the analyzed articles covered the stories in an episodic manner, it is important that future research examines the ways in which users thematize news stories through their comments. Lastly, the choice to focus on news articles and comments on a specific issue (immigration) limits this study’s potential for generalization, since certain characteristics of the user comments may be issue-specific.

Future research needs to address the interpretation and framing of the news, as well as the potential impact of user generated content on readers’ perceptions of public issues. In that respect, it is essential that more research is conducted on the ways in which users frame news stories, the diversity of the applied frames and their relationship with the dominant frames of the mass media. In addition, in order to develop a better understanding of how user-generated content affects public opinion, it is necessary to investigate how readers perceive user-generated content and whether user-generated information affects their perception of public issues.

Finally, we need to develop a better understanding regarding the multiple modes of expression employed by talking audiences, by analyzing the various ways of opinionation and the multiple levels of argumentation users apply as they are engaged more and more in production of content (and meaning) in the public arenas of online mass media spaces.

References Bowman, S., Willis, C. (2002) “We media : how audiences are shaping the future of

news and information”, Reston, VA: The media center at the American Press Institute,

Bruns, A. (2007) ‘Produsage: Towards a Broader Framework for User-led Content Creation’, Creativity and Cognition: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI conference on Creativity & cognition,13-15 June 2007

Castells, Manuel (2001) The Internet Galaxy. Reflections on the Internet, Business and Society. Oxford University Press

Dahlberg, L. (2001) “Democracy via Cyberspace: Mapping the Rhetorics and Practices of Three Prominent Camps”. Media, Culture & Society 3(2): 157-177

Dilevko J. (1998) “Teaching news media practices in bibliographic instruction classes: A strategy involving framing and sourcing theory” Research Strategies 16(1): 53-69

Domingo, D., Quandt, T., Heinonen, A., Paulussen, S., Singer, J. & Vujnovic, M. (2008). “Participatory journalism practices in the media and beyond: An international comparative study of initiatives in online newspapers”. Journalism Practice, 2(3), 326-342.

Goode, L. (2009) “Social news, citizen journalism and democracy”. New Media & Society 11(8): 1287-1305.

Graber, D.A. (2001). “Processing Politics: Learning from Television in the Internet Age”. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Hong, M.; McClung, S.; Park, Y. (2008) “Interactive and Cultural Differences in Online Newspapers”. Cyberpsychology & Behavior 11(4): 505-509.

Jakobson, R. (1981). Poetry of Grammar and Grammar of Poetry (Vol. 3). The Hague, Mouton.

Karlsson, M.B. (2010). “Participatory Journalism and Crisis Communication: A Swedish Case Study of Swine Flu Coverage”. Observatorio 4(1), 201-220.

Katz, Jon (1998) "The Netizen: Birth of a Digital Nation" in Holeton, Richard (eds.) Composing Cyberspace. Identity, Community and Knowledge in the Electronic Age. McGraw Hill, Boston: 214-225

Milioni, D.; Papa, V.; Vadratsikas, K. (2011) " User-Generated Content in online print journalism: Literature review and suggestions for a new research agenda” Paper presented at Diversity of Journalisms, Shaping complex media landscapes Ecrea Journalism Studies and International Communication Section: Pamplona 4-5 July 2011

Neuberger,C. and Nuernbergk, C. (2010). “Competition, Complementarity or integration? The relationship between professional and participatory media”. Journalisme Practice, 4(3), 319-332

Örnebring, H.,(2008). “The producer as consumer – of what? User-generated tabloid content in The Sun (UK) and Aftonbladet (Sweden)”. Journalism Studies, 9 (5), 771-785.

Papacharisi, Z. (2009) “The virtual geographies of social networks: a comparative analysis of Facebook, LinkedIn and ASmallWorld”. New Media & Society 11(1-2), 199- 220

Paulussen, S. and Ugille, P. (2008). “User generated content in the Newsroom: Professional and Organisational Constraints on Participatory Journalism”. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture, 5(2), 24-41. Retrieved from

http://www.westminster.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/20021/WPCC-Vol5-No2-Paulussen_Ugille.pdf

Poster, Mark (1997) "Cyberdemocracy: Internet and the Public Sphere" in Holmes, David (eds.) Virtual Politics. Identity and Community in Cyberspace. Sage Publications, London: 212-228

Rheingold, H. (2002) “Smart Mobs: The next Social Revolution” Basic Books Roberts, M.; Wanta, W.; Dzwo, TH. (2002) “Agenda Setting and Issue Salience

Online”. Communication Research 29 (4) 452-465 Robinson, S. (2009). “‘If you had been with us’: mainstream press and citizen

journalists jockey for authority over the collective memory of Hurricane Katrina”. New Media and Society, 11(5), 795-814.

Schultz, T. (2000). “Mass media and the concept of interactivity: an exploratory study of online forums and readers email”. Media Culture and Society, 22: 205-221.

Singer, J.B. (2009). “Separate Spaces Discourse About the 2007 Scottish Elections on a National Newspaper Web Site”. The International Journal of Press/Politics.20 (10), 1-21.

Singer, J.B &. and Ashman, I. (2009). “Comment Is Free, but Facts Are Sacred: user-generated content and ethical constructs at the Guardian”. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 24(1), 3-21.

Sunstein, Cass R. (2007) “Republic.com 2.0” Princeton: Princeton University Press Schweiger, W. and Quiring, o. (2005). User-generated content on Mass media

Websites: Just a Kind of interactivity or Something Completely Different? Conference Papers – International Communication Association 2005, 23. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?hid=7&sid=cbae6efb-b58f-46eb-807c-86aea420bf6c%40sessionmgr13&vid=1&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=ufh&AN=18655988

Spyridou, P.L., Veglis, A. (2008) “Exploring structural interactivity in online newspapers: A look at the Greek Web landscape”. First Monday 13 (5), 5 May 2008

Thurman, N. (2008). Forums for citizen journalists? Adoption of user generated content initiatives by online news media. New Media Society 10(1), 139-157. DOI: 10.1177/1461444807085325\

Tsaliki, L. (2002) “ Online Forums and the enlargement of the public space: Research finding from a European Project” The Public 9(2), 95-112.

Van Dijck, J. (2009) “Users like you? Theorizing agency in user-generated content”. Media, Culture & Society 31(1): 41-58.

19

TABLES Table 1 UGC features on Greek media websites

1 User recommendation

(articles)

2 User evaluation (articles)

3 User production

4 User recommendation

(comments)

5 User evaluation

(comments)

6 Online polls

7 Comment 8 Discussion,

Forum 9 Share article

Level of user involvement low involvement low involvement

high involvement

low involvement low

involvement low

involvement high

involvement high

involvement low

involvement

Type of space for content production

news production news production news production commentary and

debate commentary and debate

commentary and debate



social networking

Stage of news production Selection/Filtering Interpretation All 5 stages Interpretation Interpretation Interpretation

Processing/ Editing,

Interpretation Interpretation Distribution

TRADITIONAL PRINT NEWSPAPERS Adesmeftos Typos X X Free Sunday X X X Real News X X X Α1 Ethnos X X Εleftheri Ora X X X X X X X X Εleftheros Typos X X X Εleftherotypia X X X X X* X X Avgi X X Kathimerini X* X Niki Naftemporiki X X X X** X Proto Thema X X X X X X Rizospastis X Sto Karfi Ta Nea X X X X X X X To Vima X X** X To Pontiki X X X X X Espresso X X

20

ONLINE NEWS Νewspost X X X X X fimotro X X tromaktiko X zougla X X X X X*** X X Newsbeast X X X X X X X X TVXS X X X X X X X Newsit X X X X X X X in.gr X X X X* X news247 X X X X X X Pathfinder X X X X X X X X Notes 1 User recommendation for articles (most recently read, most read, most popular, most e-mailed, most shared, most commented) 2 User evaluation of articles (rate, like, dislike article) 3 Submit 4 User recommendation for comments (most recent, most recently read, most popular) 5 User evaluation of comments (rate, like, dislike comment) 6 Online polls 7 Comment on article 8 Threaded discussion, Forum 9 Email article, share in social media (Facebook, Twitter, other) X* Commenting available only in selected articles X** Commenting available only to subscribers X*** Commenting available only in users’ blog posts

21

Table 2 Analysis of journalistic articles

Facts or opinion? Frequency Percent

Factual 54 95%

Opinion 3 5%

Total 57 100% Episodic or thematic?

Episodic 56 98%

Thematic 1 2%

Total 57 100%

Article valence Positive 25 44%

Negative 13 23%

Neutral/mixed/unclear 19 33%

Total 57 100%

Table 3 Analysis of users’ comments

Raise new issues? Frequency Percent

No 808 74%

Yes 89 8%

N/A 197 18%

Total 1094 100% Provide original information?

No 874 97%

Yes 23 3%

Total 897 100%

Express opinion? No 18 2%

Yes 879 98%

Total 897 100%

Stance towards immigration? For 148 19%

Against 463 59%

Neutral 24 3%

Unclear 156 20%

Total 791 100%

Table 4.1 Media outlet * Does the comment raise a new topic? Crosstabulation Does the comment raise a new topic?

Media outlet No Yes Not Applicable

Total

Count 6 0 0 6 Eleftherotypia

% within media outlet 100.0% .0% .0% 100.0%

22

Count 23 0 0 23 in.gr

% within media outlet 100.0% .0% .0% 100.0%

Count 3 0 1 4 News247

% within media outlet 75.0% .0% 25.0% 100.0%

Count 64 0 2 66 Newsbeast

% within media outlet 97.0% .0% 3.0% 100.0%

Count 39 1 5 45 Newsit

% within media outlet 86.7% 2.2% 11.1% 100.0%

Count 228 32 25 285 Protothema


Count 207 42 161 410 TVxs


Count 238 14 3 255 Ta Nea


Count 808 89 197 1094 Total


Table 4.2 Outlet * What stance does the comment take towards immigrants? Crosstabulation

What stance does the comment take towards immigrants? Outlet

For Against Neutral Unclear Total

Count 2 1 2 1 6 Eleftherotypia

% within media outlet 33% 17% 33% 17% 100%

Count 4 14 2 2 22 in.gr


Count 0 1 1 0 2 News247


Count 4 51 0 9 64 Newsbeast


Count 0 29 1 9 39 Newsit


Count 16 184 6 22 228 Proto Thema


Count 104 41 3 46 194 TVxs


Count 18 142 9 67 236 Ta Nea


Count 148 463 24 156 791 Total


23

Table 4.3 Homogeneity/ Diversity of users comments within media outlets

What stance does the comment take towards immigrants? Outlet

For Against Neutral Total Homogeneity (%)

in.gr 4 14 2 20 70%

Newsbeast 4 51 0 55 93%

Newsit 0 29 1 30 94%

Proto Thema 16 184 6 206 89%

TVXS 104 41 3 148 70%

Ta Nea 18 142 9 169 84%

Documents

Miloni Vadratsikas Papa