Yeni Medya'da Çerçeveleme Dinamikleri

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1, 485 - 503, 30.01.2023

M. Salih Güran Hüseyin Özarslan

https://doi.org/10.17680/erciyesiletisim.1189877

Öz

İletişim çerçeveleri medya yoluyla iletişimde mesajın içeriğini oluşturan ögeleri yani konusunu, sorunsal niteliğini, atıfta bulunduğu toplumsal sorumluluk ilişkilerini, yargılamayı, çözüm önerisini içeren retorik sistemini oluşturmaktadır. Buna göre kültüre yerleşmiş çerçeveler iletişimde bağlam özeti ve etiketi olarak okur/izleyici ile medya çalışanı ve yöneticisi arasında kararlaştırılmış kodlardan oluşmaktadır. Medya çerçeveleri üzerinde sahip oldukları denetimle ana akım medya kurumları ve aktörleri kamusal iletişim üzerinde çok önemli gündem kurma ve kamuoyu hâkimiyeti kurmuştur. Ancak Internet çağının başlangıcından itibaren ortaya çıkan Yeni Medya; iletişimcileri ve kullanıcıları, yeni iletişim sistemini farklı temel dinamikler üzerine inşa etmeye çalışmaktadırlar.
Diğer yandan yeni medyanın geleneksel medyayla kurduğu karma medya sistemi eski toplumsal iletişim yapılarının işlevlerini sürdürmelerine de yardımcı olmuştur. Kamusal iletişim ile kişiler arası iletişimin iç içe girdiği bu alanda medya çerçeveleri ile okur çerçeveleri tanımı, sosyal medyada çerçeve kurma süreçleri, yayılan çerçevelerin yaşam döngüsü, yeni medya ile ana akım haber medyası arasındaki çerçeveleme etkileşimleri vb. gibi tartışma konuları araştırılmaktadır. Literatür taramamızda yeni medyada çerçeveleme teorisinin kullanıldığı bu yeni boyutlar sistematik olarak incelenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Çerçeveleme, yeni medya, sosyal medya, sanal topluluklar, karma medya sistemi., Framing, social media, new media, virtual communities, hybrid media system..

Destekleyen Kurum

yok

Proje Numarası

yok

Teşekkür

yok

Framing Dynamics In New Media

Öz

Frames of communication are culturally defined conventions, codes between the communicator and the receiver/reader that include the theme of the communication context, referenced social responsibility relations, judgements, solution proposals etc.. In the realm of traditional mainstream media system, media frames gave very important agenda setting and public opinion forming powers to media institutions and workers. Yet, with the beginnings of the internet age, new media communicators and users established the new communication system on new fundamental dynamics.
On the other hand, a new hybrid media system developed by the cooperation of the traditional mainstream media and the various new media platforms, that ultimately gave new life to old media while giving credential and wider scope to new media communicators. This established a new field of discussions in framing research that included problem themes like re-defining media frames and audience frames, frame setting processes in the social media, the life-cycles of propagating frames, framing interactions between institutional media and new media etc.. Our review attempts a systematisation of framing related problem areas in the field of new media research.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Framing, new media, social media, virtual communities, hybrid media system.

Proje Numarası

yok

Kaynakça

• Ahmed, S., Cho, J., & Jaidka, K. (2019). Framing social conflicts in news coverage and social media: A multicountry comparative study. International Communication Gazette, 81(4), 346-371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048518775000
• Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of economic perspectives, 31(2), 211-236.
• AlSayyad, N., & Guvenc, M. (2015). Virtual uprisings: On the interaction of new social media, traditional media coverage and urban space during the ‘Arab Spring’. Urban Studies, 52(11), 2018-2034.
• Ayora, V., Horita, F., & Kamienski, C. (2021). Profiling Online Social Network Platforms: Twitter vs. Instagram. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2021.341
• Bateson, G. (t.y.). The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication. 29.
• Bekkers, V., Edwards, A., & de Kool, D. (2013). Social media monitoring: Responsive governance in the shadow of surveillance? Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 335-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.05.024
• Blasco-Duatis, M., Coenders, G., Saez, M., García, N. F., & Cunha, I. F. (2019). Mapping the agenda-setting theory, priming and the spiral of silence in Twitter accounts of political parties. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 1, 4-24.
• Borah, P. (2011). Conceptual Issues in Framing Theory: A Systematic Examination of a Decade’s Literature. Journal of Communication, 61, 246-263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01539.x
• Campbell, H. A., & Hawk, D. (2012). Al Jazeera’s framing of social media during the Arab spring. CyberOrient, 6(1), 34-51.
• Carragee, K. M., & Roefs, W. (2004). The neglect of power in recent framing research. Journal of communication, 54(2), 214-233.
• Castells, M. (2007). Communication, Power and Counter-power in the Network Society. International Journal of Communication, 1(1), Art. 1.
• Chadwick, A., Vaccari, C., & O’Loughlin, B. (2018). Do tabloids poison the well of social media? Explaining democratically dysfunctional news sharing. New media & society, 20(11), 4255-4274.
• Chayko, M. (2015). The first web theorist? Georg Simmel and the legacy of ‘The web of group-affiliations’. Taylor & Francis.
• Domingo, D., & Heinonen, A. (2008). Weblogs and Journalism: A Typology to Explore the Blurring Boundaries. Nordicom Review, 29(1), 3-15. https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2017-0159
• Engesser, S., Ernst, N., Esser, F., & Büchel, F. (2017). Populism and social media: How politicians spread a fragmented ideology. Information, communication & society, 20(8), 1109-1126.
• Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Towards clarification of a fractured paradigm. McQuail’s reader in mass communication theory, 390, 397.
• Entman, R. M., & Usher, N. (2018). Framing in a fractured democracy: Impacts of digital technology on ideology, power and cascading network activation. Journal of communication, 68(2), 298-308.
• Ernst, N., Engesser, S., Büchel, F., Blassnig, S., & Esser, F. (2017). Extreme parties and populism: An analysis of Facebook and Twitter across six countries. Information, Communication & Society, 20(9), 1347-1364.
• Feezell, J. T. (2018). Agenda Setting through Social Media: The Importance of Incidental News Exposure and Social Filtering in the Digital Era. Political Research Quarterly, 71(2), 482-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912917744895
• Fukuyama, F., Richman, B., & Goel, A. (2021). How to save democracy from technology: Ending big tech’s information monopoly. Foreign Aff., 100, 98.
• Fulton, J. (2015). Are you a journalist? New media entrepreneurs and journalists in the digital space. Javnost-The Public, 22(4), 362-374.
• Gamson, William A., & Modigliani, Andre. (1989). Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach. American journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1-37.
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Harvard University Press.
• Grabowicz, P. A., Ramasco, J. J., Moro, E., Pujol, J. M., & Eguiluz, V. M. (2012). Social features of online networks: The strength of intermediary ties in online social media. PloS one, 7(1), e29358.
• Hamdy, N., & Gomaa, E. H. (2012). Framing the Egyptian Uprising in Arabic Language Newspapers and Social Media. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 195-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01637.x
• Hameleers, M., Bos, L., & de Vreese, C. H. (2016). The Netherlands: A heartland full of insights into populist communication. İçinde Populist political communication in Europe (ss. 138-150). Routledge.
• Harlow, S., Brown, D. K., Salaverría, R., & García-Perdomo, V. (2020). Is the Whole World Watching? Building a Typology of Protest Coverage on Social Media From Around the World. Journalism Studies, 21(11), 1590-1608. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1776144
• Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (2010). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. Random House.
• Hon, L. (2016). Social media framing within the Million Hoodies movement for justice. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 9-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.11.013
• Hopke, J. E., & Hestres, L. E. (2018). Visualizing the Paris climate talks on Twitter: Media and climate stakeholder visual social media during COP21. Social Media+ Society, 4(3), 2056305118782687.
• Jansson, A. (2002). The mediatization of consumption: Towards an analytical framework of image culture. Journal of consumer culture, 2(1), 5-31.
• Johnston, J. (2015). ‘Loose tweets sink fleets’ and other sage advice: Social media governance, policies and guidelines. Journal of Public Affairs, 15(2), 175-187.
• Just, N., & Latzer, M. (2017). Governance by algorithms: Reality construction by algorithmic selection on the Internet. Media, Culture & Society, 39(2), 238-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443716643157
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341
• Karakter sınırı artınca Twitter kullanıcıları nasıl değişti? (2018, Kasım 1). Habertürk.
• Lears, T. J. (1985). The concept of cultural hegemony: Problems and possibilities. The American Historical Review, 567-593.
• Linke, A., & Zerfass, A. (2013). Social media governance: Regulatory frameworks for successful online communications. Journal of Communication Management.
• Loader, B. D., & Mercea, D. (2011). Networking democracy? Social media innovations and participatory politics. Information, communication & society, 14(6), 757-769.
• López-Rabadán, P. (2021). Framing Studies Evolution in the Social Media Era. Digital Advancement and Reorientation of the Research Agenda. Social Sciences, 11(1), 9.
• Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of computer-mediated communication, 17(3), 337-353.
• Manor, I., & Crilley, R. (2018). Visually framing the Gaza War of 2014: The Israel ministry of foreign affairs on Twitter. Media, War & Conflict, 11(4), 369-391.
• Messner, M., & Distaso, M. W. (2008). The Source Cycle. Journalism Studies, 9(3), 447-463. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700801999287
• Most viewed YouTube videos worldwide 2022. (t.y.). Statista. Geliş tarihi 06 Kasım 2022, gönderen https://www.statista.com/statistics/249396/top-youtube-videos-views/
• Napoli, P. M. (2015). Social media and the public interest: Governance of news platforms in the realm of individual and algorithmic gatekeepers. Telecommunications Policy, 39(9), 751-760.
• NW, 1615 L. St, Washington, S. 800, & Inquiries, D. 20036 U.-419-4300 | M.-857-8562 | F.-419-4372 | M. (t.y.). Social Media Fact Sheet. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. Geliş tarihi 06 Kasım 2022, gönderen https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/
• Obar, J. A., & Wildman, S. S. (2015). Social media definition and the governance challenge-an introduction to the special issue. Obar, JA and Wildman, S.(2015). Social media definition and the governance challenge: An introduction to the special issue. Telecommunications policy, 39(9), 745-750.
• Pang, A., Hassan, N. B. B. A., & Chong, A. C. Y. (2014). Negotiating crisis in the social media environment: Evolution of crises online, gaining credibility offline. Corporate communications: An international journal.
• PRICE, V., TEWKSBURY, D., & POWERS, E. (1997). Switching Trains of Thought: The Impact of News Frames on Readers’ Cognitive Responses. Communication Research, 24(5), 481-506. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365097024005002
• Qin, J. (2015). Hero on Twitter, traitor on news: How social media and legacy news frame Snowden. The international journal of press/politics, 20(2), 166-184.
• Reisach, U. (2021). The responsibility of social media in times of societal and political manipulation. European Journal of Operational Research, 291(3), 906-917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.09.020
• Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of communication, 49(1), 103-122.
• Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of communication, 57(1), 9-20.
• Scott, K. (2018). “Hashtags work everywhere”: The pragmatic functions of spoken hashtags. Discourse, context & media, 22, 57-64.
• Snow, D. A., Vliegenthart, R., & Ketelaars, P. (2018). The framing perspective on social movements: Its conceptual roots and architecture. The Wiley Blackwell companion to social movements, 392-410.
• Snow, D., & Benford, R. (1988). Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197-217.
• Snow, D., Benford, R., McCammon, H., Hewitt, L., & Fitzgerald, S. (2014). The Emergence, Development, and Future of the Framing Perspective: 25+ Years Since “Frame Alignment”. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 19(1), 23-46. https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.19.1.x74278226830m69l
• Stevens, T. M., Aarts, N., Termeer, C., & Dewulf, A. (2018). Social media hypes about agro-food issues: Activism, scandals and conflicts. Food Policy, 79, 23-34.
• Stohl, C., Etter, M., Banghart, S., & Woo, D. (2017). Social media policies: Implications for contemporary notions of corporate social responsibility. Journal of business ethics, 142(3), 413-436.
• Teriö, K., & Berg, M. (2010). Personfied Brands: Identity Projects in Social Media.
• Tewksbury, D., & Riles, J. M. (2018). Framing in an interactive news environment. Doing News Framing Analysis II, 137-162.
• Tuchman, G., & Tuchman, B. W. (1978). MAKING NEWS: A STUDY IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF REALITY. Free Press.
• Twenge, J. M., Krizan, Z., & Hisler, G. (2017). Decreases in self-reported sleep duration among US adolescents 2009–2015 and association with new media screen time. Sleep medicine, 39, 47-53.
• Vaccari, C., Valeriani, A., Barberá, P., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. A. (2016). Of echo chambers and contrarian clubs: Exposure to political disagreement among German and Italian users of Twitter. Social media+ society, 2(3), 2056305116664221.
• VALKENBURG, P. M., SEMETKO, H. A., & DE VREESE, C. H. (1999). The Effects of News Frames on Readers’ Thoughts and Recall. Communication Research, 26(5), 550-569. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365099026005002
• Vasterman, P. L. (2005). Media-hype: Self-reinforcing news waves, journalistic standards and the construction of social problems. European Journal of Communication, 20(4), 508-530.
• Waters, R. D., & Feneley, K. L. (2013). Virtual stewardship in the age of new media: Have nonprofit organizations’ moved beyond Web 1.0 strategies? International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 18(3), 216-230.
• Westerman, D., Spence, P. R., & Van Der Heide, B. (2014). Social Media as Information Source: Recency of Updates and Credibility of Information. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(2), 171-183. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12041
• Williams, B. A., & Delli Carpini, M. X. (2004). Monica and Bill all the time and everywhere: The collapse of gatekeeping and agenda setting in the new media environment. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(9), 1208-1230.
• Yang, J. (2003). Framing the NATO air strikes on Kosovo across countries: Comparison of Chinese and US newspaper coverage. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands), 65(3), 231-249.