skip to main content
research-article

The Dynamics of Peer-Produced Political Information During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Campaign

Published:07 November 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Wikipedia plays a crucial role for online information seeking and its editors have a remarkable capacity to rapidly revise its content in response to current events. How did the production and consumption of political information on Wikipedia mirror the dynamics of the 2016 U.S. Presidential campaign? Drawing on systems justification theory and methods for measuring the enthusiasm gap among voters, this paper quantitatively analyzes the candidates' biographical and related articles and their editors. Information production and consumption patterns match major events over the course of the campaign, but Trump-related articles show consistently higher levels of engagement than Clinton-related articles. Analysis of the editors' participation and backgrounds show analogous shifts in the composition and durability of the collaborations around each candidate. The implications for using Wikipedia to monitor political engagement are discussed.

References

  1. Hunt Allcott and Matthew Gentzkow. 2017. Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Working Paper 23089. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w23089Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Samuel Barbosa, Dan Cosley, Amit Sharma, and Roberto M. Cesar, Jr. 2016. Averaging Gone Wrong: Using Time-Aware Analyses to Better Understand Behavior. In Proc. WWW 2016 .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Yochai Benkler. 2006. The Wealth of Networks. New Haven, CT, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Yochai Benkler, Aaron Shaw, and Benjamin Mako Hill. 2015. Peer production: A form of collective intelligence. Handbook of collective intelligence, Vol. 175 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Samuel J. Best, Kristin Johnson, and Brian S. Krueger. 2012. Americans' Interest and Enthusiasm in Election Campaigns. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 76, 4 (2012), 783--814.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. John Borland. 2007. See Who's Editing Wikipedia -- Diebold, the CIA, A Campaign. WIRED (2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Sarah Boxer. 2004. Mudslinging Weasels Into Online History. The New York Times (Nov. 2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Adam R. Brown. 2011. Wikipedia as a Data Source for Political Scientists : Accuracy and Completeness of Coverage. PS: Political Science & Politics, Vol. 44, 2 (2011), 339--343. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096511000199Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Philip Bump. 2017. Assessing a Clinton Argument That the Media Helped to Elect Trump. The Washington Post (2017). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/09/12/assessing-a-clinton-argument-that-the-media-helped-to-elect-trump/?utm_term=.1aa449cc7c64Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Noam Cohen. 2007. Chinese Government Relaxes Its Total Ban on Wikipedia. The New York Times (2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Noam Cohen. 2008. Don't Like Palin 's Wikipedia Story ? Change It. The New York Times (Aug. 2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Eve Fairbanks. 2008. Wiki Woman. The New Republic (April 2008). https://newrepublic.com/article/63288/wiki-womanGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Robert Faris, Hal Roberts, Bruce Etling, Nikki Bourassa, Ethan Zuckerman, and Yochai Benkler. 2017. Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation : Online Media and the 2016 U .S. Presidential Election. Technical Report. Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Emilio Ferrara, Onur Varol, Clayton Davis, Filippo Menczer, and Alessandro Flammini. 2016. The Rise of Social Bots. Comm. ACM, Vol. 59, 7 (June 2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2818717Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Michaela Ferron and Paolo Massa. 2014. Beyond the Encyclopedia: Collective Memories in Wikipedia. Memory Studies, Vol. 7, 1 (Jan. 2014), 22--45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698013490590Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Daniel Gayo-Avello. 2013. A Meta -Analysis of State -of-the-Art Electoral Prediction From Twitter Data. Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 31, 6 (Dec. 2013), 649--679. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439313493979Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. R. Stuart Geiger. 2014. Bots, Bespoke, Code and the Materiality of Software Platforms. Information, Communication & Society, Vol. 17, 3 (March 2014), 342--356. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.873069Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Sascha Göbel and Simon Munzert. 2017. Political Advertising on the Wikipedia Marketplace of Information. Social Science Computer Review (May 2017), 1--19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317703579Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Robert Gorwa. 2017. Twitter Has a Serious Bot Problem and Wikipedia Might Have the Solution. Quartz (Oct. 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Shane Greenstein and Feng Zhu. 2012. Is Wikipedia Biased - American Economic Review, Vol. 102, 3 (May 2012), 343--348. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.3.343Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Shane Greenstein and Feng Zhu. 2017. Do Experts or Crowd -Based Models Produce More Bias - Evidence from Encyclopaedia Britannica and Wikipedia. Management Information Systems Quarterly (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Aaron Halfaker, Aniket Kittur, Robert Kraut, and John Riedl. 2009. A Jury of Your Peers : Quality, Experience and Ownership in Wikipedia. In Proc. WikiSym '09. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1641309.1641332Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Eszter Hargittai and Aaron Shaw. 2015. Mind the skills gap: the role of Internet know-how and gender in differentiated contributions to Wikipedia. Information, Communication & Society, Vol. 18, 4 (2015), 424--442.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Mary Harris. 2016. A Media Post -Mortem on the 2016 Presidential Election textendash mediaQuant. https://www.mediaquant.net/2016/11/a-media-post-mortem-on-the-2016-presidential-election/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Benjamin Mako Hill and Aaron Shaw. 2013. The Wikipedia gender gap revisited: characterizing survey response bias with propensity score estimation. PloS one, Vol. 8, 6 (2013), e65782.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Benjamin Mako Hill and Aaron Shaw. 2014. Consider the Redirect: A Missing Dimension of Wikipedia Research. In Proc. OpenSym '14. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2641580.2641616Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Benjamin Mako Hill and Aaron Shaw. 2015. Page Protection: Another Missing Dimension of Wikipedia Research. In Proc. OpenSym 2015. ACM, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/2788993.2789846Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Seth J. Hill. 2014. A Behavioral Measure of the Enthusiasm Gap in American Elections. Electoral Studies, Vol. 36 (Dec. 2014), 28--38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2014.06.012Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. J. D. Hunter. 2007. Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. Computing in Science & Engineering, Vol. 9, 3 (2007), 90--95. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2007.55Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Dariusz Jemielniak. 2014. Common knowledge?: An ethnography of Wikipedia .Stanford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Eric Jones, Travis Oliphant, Pearu Peterson, et almbox. 2001--. SciPy: Open source scientific tools for Python. http://www.scipy.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. John T. Jost, Mahzarin R. Banaji, and Brian A. Nosek. 2004. A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo. Political Psychology, Vol. 25, 6 (2004), 881--919. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467--9221.2004.00402.xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Andreas Jungherr, Harald Schoen, Oliver Posegga, and Pascal Jürgens. 2016. Digital Trace Data in the Study of Public Opinion An Indicator of Attention Toward Politics Rather Than Political Support. Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 35, 3 (Feb. 2016), 336--356. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439316631043Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Joshua L. Kalla and Peter M. Aronow. 2015. Editorial Bias in Crowd -Sourced Political Information. PLoS One, Vol. 10, 9 (Sept. 2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136327Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Aaron C. Kay, Maria C. Jimenez, and John T. Jost. 2002. Sour Grapes, Sweet Lemons, and the Anticipatory Rationalization of the Status Quo. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 28, 9 (2002), 1300--1312. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672022812014Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Brian Keegan. 2013. A History of Newswork on Wikipedia. In Proc. WikiSym '13. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2491055.2491062Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Brian Keegan. 2015. Emergent Social Roles in Wikipedia's Breaking News Collaborations. In Roles, Trust, and Reputation in Social Media Knowledge Markets. Springer, 57--79.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Brian Keegan and Jed R. Brubaker. 2015. `Is' to `Was': Coordination and Commemoration in Posthumous Activity on Wikipedia Biographies. In Proc. CSCW '15. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675238Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Brian Keegan, Darren Gergle, and Noshir Contractor. 2011. Hot off the Wiki: Dynamics, Practices, and Structures in Wikipedia's Coverage of the T=ohoku Catastrophes. In Proc. WikiSym '11. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2038558.2038577Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Brian Keegan, Darren Gergle, and Noshir Contractor. 2013. Hot Off the Wiki: Structures and Dynamics of Wikipedia's Coverage of Breaking News Events. American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 57, 5 (2013), 595--622. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764212469367Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Srijan Kumar, Robert West, and Jure Leskovec. 2016. Disinformation on the Web : Impact, Characteristics, and Detection of Wikipedia Hoaxes. In Proc. WWW '16. 591--602. https://doi.org/10.1145/2872427.2883085Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Drew B. Margolin, Sasha Goodman, Brian Keegan, Yu-Ru Lin, and David Lazer. 2016. Wiki-Worthy: Collective Judgment of Candidate Notability. Information, Communication & Society, Vol. 19, 8 (Aug. 2016), 1029--1045. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1069871Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Wes McKinney. 2011. pandas: a foundational Python library for data analysis and statistics. Python for High Performance and Scientific Computing, Vol. 14 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Amanda Menking, David W. McDonald, and Mark Zachry. 2017. Who Wants to Read This ?: A Method for Measuring Topical Representativeness in User Generated Content Systems. In Proc. of CSCW '17. ACM, 2068--2081. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998254Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Panagiotis T. Metaxas and Eni Mustafaraj. 2012. Social Media and the Elections. Science, Vol. 338, 6106 (2012), 472--473. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230456Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Jessica J. Neff, David Laniado, Karolin E. Kappler, Yana Volkovich, Pablo Aragón, and Andreas Kaltenbrunner. 2013. Jointly They Edit : Examining the Impact of Community Identification on Political Interaction in Wikipedia. PLOS ONE, Vol. 8, 4 (April 2013). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060584Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Sabine Niederer and José van Dijck. 2010. Wisdom of the Crowd or Technicity of Content? Wikipedia as a Sociotechnical System. New Media & Society, Vol. 12, 8 (Dec. 2010), 1368--1387. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365297Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Oded Nov. 2007. What Motivates Wikipedians? Commun. ACM, Vol. 50, 11 (2007), 60--64. https://doi.org/10.1145/1297797.1297798Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Mike Pearl. 2016. A Wikipedian Explains How Wikipedia Stays Reliable in the Fake News Era. Vice (Nov. 2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Christian Pentzold. 2009. Fixing the Floating Gap: The Online Encyclopaedia Wikipedia as a Global Memory Place. Memory Studies, Vol. 2, 2 (Jan. 2009), 255--272. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698008102055Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Jacob Ratkiewicz, Michael Conover, Mark R. Meiss, Bruno Gonc calves, Alessandro Flammini, and Filippo Menczer. 2011. Detecting and Tracking Political Abuse in Social Media. In Proc. ICWSM '11. AAAI .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Joseph Michael Reagle. 2010. Good faith collaboration: The culture of Wikipedia .MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Aaron Shaw and Benjamin M. Hill. 2014. Laboratories of Oligarchy? How the Iron Law Extends to Peer Production. Journal of Communication, Vol. 64, 2 (2014), 215--238. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12082Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Herbert A. Simon. 1954. Bandwagon and Underdog Effects and the Possibility of Election Predictions. The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 18, 3 (1954), 245--253.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Kate Starbird. 2017. Examining the Alternative Media Ecosystem Through the Production of Alternative Narratives of Mass Shooting Events on Twitter.. In Proc. ICWSM '17. AAAI .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Maxwell Tani. 2015. Meet the guy who has protected Hillary Clinton's Wikipedia page for almost a decade. Business Insider (May 2015). http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-hillary-clintons-wikipedia-editor-2015--5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Jennifer Thom, Dan R. Cosley, and Geri Gay. 2009. What's Mine Is Mine : Territoriality in Collaborative Authoring. In Proc. CHI '09. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518925Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Zeynep Tufekci and Christopher Wilson. 2012. Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of communication, Vol. 62, 2 (2012), 363--379.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Marlon Twyman, Brian Keegan, and Aaron Shaw. 2017. Black Lives Matter in Wikipedia: Collective Memory and Collaboration Around Online Social Movements. In Proc. CSCW '17. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998232Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Claudia Wagner, David Garcia, Mohsen Jadidi, and Markus Strohmaier. 2015. It's a man's Wikipedia? Assessing gender inequality in an online encyclopedia. In Ninth international AAAI conference on web and social media .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Morten Warncke-Wang, Vivek Ranjan, Loren G. Terveen, and Brent J. Hecht. 2015. Misalignment Between Supply and Demand of Quality Content in Peer Production Communities.. In Proc. ICWSM '15. AAAI .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Heng-Li Yang and Cheng-Yu Lai. 2010. Motivations of Wikipedia content contributors. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 26, 6 (2010), 1377--1383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.04.011Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Taha Yasseri and Jonathan Bright. 2016. Wikipedia Traffic Data and Electoral Prediction: Towards Theoretically Informed Models. EPJ Data Science, Vol. 5, 1 (June 2016), 1--15. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0083--3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. The Dynamics of Peer-Produced Political Information During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Campaign

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in

            Full Access

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader
            About Cookies On This Site

            We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

            Learn more

            Got it!