Mapping the Australian political blogosphere

Network crawling and visualisation tools and other datamining systems are now advanced enough to provide significant new impulses to the study of cultural activity on the Web. A growing range of studies focus on communicative processes in the blogosphere – including for example Adamic & Glance’s 2005 map of political allegiances during the 2004 U.S. presidential election and Kelly & Etling’s 2008 study of blogging practices in Iran. There remain a number of significant shortcomings in the application of such tools and methodologies to the study of blogging; these relate both to how the content of blogs is analysed, and to how the network maps resulting from such studies are understood. Our project highlights and addresses such shortcomings.

Media scepticism, media diets and media landscapes: A consideration of US versus Australian political information environments

The range of political information sources available to modern Australians is greater and more varied today than at any point in the nation’s history, incorporating print, broadcast, Internet, mainstream and non-mainstream media. In such a competitive media environment, the factors which influence the selection of some information sources above others are of interest to political agents, media institutions and communications researchers alike. A key factor in information source selection is credibility. At the same time that the range of political information sources is increasing rapidly, due to the development of new information and communication technologies, audience research suggests that trust in mainstream media organisations in many countries is declining. So if people distrust the mainstream media, but have a vast array of alternative political information sources available to them, what do their personal media consumption patterns look like? How can we analyse such media consumption patterns in a meaningful way? In this paper I will briefly map the development of media credibility research in the US and Australia, leading to a discussion of one of the most recent media credibility constructs to be shown to influence political information consumption, media scepticism. Looking at the consequences of media scepticism, I will then consider the associated media consumption construct, media diet, and evaluate its usefulness in an Australian, as opposed to US, context. Finally, I will suggest alternative conceptualisations of media diets which may be more suited to Australian political communications research.

Confrontation and cooptation : a brief history of Australian political blogs

The history of political blogging in Australia does not entirely match the development of blogospheres in other countries. Even at its beginning, blogging was not an entirely alternative endeavour – one of the first news or political blogs was Margo Kingston’s Webdiary, hosted by the Sydney Morning Herald. In the United States, whose political blogosphere has been examined most comprehensively in the literature (see e.g. Adamic & Glance, 2005; Drezner & Farrell, 2008; Shaw & Benkler, 2012; Tremayne, 2007; Wallsten, 2008), blogging had a clear historical trajectory from alternative to mainstream medium. The Australian blogosphere, by contrast, has seen early and continued involvement from representatives of the mainstream media, blogging both for their employers and independently (Garden, 2010). Coupled with the incorporation of blog-like technologies into news websites, as well as with obvious differences in the size of the available talent pool and potential audience for political blogging in Australia, this recognition of blogging by the mainstream media may be one reason why, in political and news discussions at least, Australian bloggers did not bring about their own, local equivalents to the resignations of Dan Rather or Trent Lott in the U.S. –events which were commonly attributed in part to the work of bloggers (Simons, 2007). However, the acceptance of the blogging concept by the mainstream media has been accompanied by a comparative lack of acceptance towards individual bloggers. Analyses and commentary published by bloggers have been attacked by journalists, creating an at times antagonistic relationship between the mainstream media and bloggers (Flew & Wilson, 2010; Young, 2011). In this article, we examine the historical development of blogging in Australia, focussing primarily on political and news blogs. In particular, we review who the bloggers are and how the connections between different blogs and other titles have changed over the past decade. The paper tracks the evolution of individual and group blogs, independent and mainstream media-hosted opinion sites, and the gradual convergence of these platforms and their associated contributing authors. We conclude by examining the current state of the Australian blogosphere and its likely future development, taking into account the rise of social media, and in particular Twitter, as additional spaces for public commentary.

Constructions of asylum seekers and refugees in Australian political discourse

Immigration to Australia has long been the focus of negative political interest. In recent times, the proposal of exclusionary policies such as the Malaysia Deal in 2011 has fuelled further debate. In these debates, Federal politicians often describe asylum seekers and refugees as ‘illegal’, ‘queue jumpers’, and ‘boat people’. This paper investigates how the political discourse constructs asylum seekers and refugees during debates surrounding the Malaysia Deal in the Federal Parliament of Australia in 2011. Hansard Parliamentary debates were analysed to identify the underlying themes and constructions that permeate political discourse about asylum seekers and refugees. This paper argues that a dichotomous characterisation of legitimacy pervades their construction with this group constructed either as legitimate humanitarian refugees or as illegitimate ‘boat arrivals’. These constructions result in the misrepresentation of asylum seekers as illegitimate, undermining their right to protection under Australia’s laws and international obligations. This construction also represents a shift in federal political discourse from constructing asylum seekers as a border or security threat, towards an increasing preoccupation with this categorisation of people as legitimate, or illegitimate.

National and state-level politics on social media : Twitter, Australian political discussions, and the online commentariat

This paper examines the use of Twitter for long-term discussions around Australian politics, at national and state levels, tracking two hashtags during 2012: #auspol, denoting national political topics, and #wapol, which provides a case study of state politics (representing Western Australia). The long-term data collection provides the opportunity to analyse how the Twitter audience responds to Australian politics: which themes attract the most attention and which accounts act as focal points for these discussions. The paper highlights differences in the coverage of state and national politics. For #auspol, a small number of accounts are responsible for the majority of tweets, with politicians invoked but not directly contributing to the discussion. In contrast, #wapol stimulates a much lower level of tweeting. This example also demonstrates that, in addition to citizen accounts, traditional participants within political debate, such as politicians and journalists, are among the active contributors to state-oriented discussions on Twitter.

Engaging, persuading, and entertaining citizens : mediatization and the Australian political public sphere

This paper draws upon public sphere theories and the “mediatization of politics” debate to develop a mapping of the Australian political public sphere, with particular reference to television. It discusses the concept of a “political public sphere,” and the contribution of both non-traditional news media genres, such as satirical television and infotainment formats, to an expanded conception of the political public sphere. It considers these questions in the context of two case studies: the Q&A program on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), and its uses of social media and interactive formats to engage citizens, and the comedy program Gruen Nation, also on the ABC, which analyzed the use of political advertising to persuade citizens during the 2013 Australian Federal election.

Religious Political Parties and the Limits of Political Liberalism

Political parties have only recently become a subject of investigation in political theory. In this paper I analyse religious political parties in the context of John Rawls’s political liberalism. Rawlsian political liberalism, I argue, overly constrains the scope of democratic political contestation and especially for the kind of contestation channelled by parties. This restriction imposed upon political contestation risks undermining democracy and the development of the kind of democratic ethos that political liberalism cherishes. In this paper I therefore aim to provide a broader and more inclusive understanding of ‘reasonable’ political contestation, able to accommodate those parties (including religious ones) that political liberalism, as customarily understood, would exclude from the democratic realm. More specifically, I first embrace Muirhead and Rosenblum’s (Perspectives on Politics 4: 99–108 2006) idea that parties are ‘bilingual’ links between state and civil society and I draw its normative implications for party politics. Subsequently, I assess whether Rawls’s political liberalism is sufficiently inclusive to allow the presence of parties conveying religious and other comprehensive values. Due to Rawls’s thick conceptions of reasonableness and public reason, I argue, political liberalism risks seriously limiting the number and kinds of comprehensive values which may be channelled by political parties into the public political realm, and this may render it particularly inhospitable to religious political parties. Nevertheless, I claim, Rawls’s theory does offer some scope for reinterpreting the concepts of reasonableness and public reason in a thinner and less restrictive sense and this may render it more inclusive towards religious partisanship.

Politics in extraordinary times : a study of the reaction of political parties and elites to terrorism

Cette thèse porte sur le comportement des élites politiques durant les périodes de crise nationale et plus particulièrement sur leurs réactions aux attentats terroristes. Elle démontre que les crises terroristes sont tout comme les conflits militaires ou diplomatiques propices aux unions nationales et notamment aux ralliements des partis d’opposition auprès du gouvernement. L’analyse statistique d’actes terroristes s’étant produits dans cinq états démocratiques (Allemagne, Espagne, États-Unis d’Amérique, France et Royaume-Uni) entre 1990 et 2006 révèle que l’ampleur d’un attentat en termes de pertes humaines ainsi que la répétition de ces attentats influencent dans une large mesure la réaction des élites politiques. Ainsi plus l’ampleur d’un attentat est élevée, plus la probabilité d’un ralliement est grande. En revanche, la multiplication des attentats augmente la possibilité de dissension entre l’opposition et le gouvernement. Par ailleurs, l’opposition est plus susceptible de se rallier au gouvernement lorsque l’attentat est perpétré par des terroristes provenant de l’étranger. L’analyse quantitative indique également que l’existence d’un accord formel de coopération dans la lutte antiterroriste entre le gouvernement et l’opposition favorise l’union des élites. Enfin, les données analysées suggèrent que la proportion des ralliements dans les cinq pays est plus importante depuis les attentats du 11 septembre 2001. Une analyse qualitative portant exclusivement sur la France et couvrant la période 1980-2006 confirme la validité des variables identifiées dans la partie quantitative, mais suggère que les élites réagissent au nombre total de victimes (morts mais aussi blessés) et que la répétition des actes terroristes a moins d’impact lors des vagues d’attentats. Par ailleurs, les analyses de cas confirment que les élites politiques françaises sont plus susceptibles de se rallier quand un attentat vise un haut-fonctionnaire de l’État. Il apparaît également que les rivalités et rancœurs politiques propre à la France (notamment suite à l’arrivée de la gauche au pouvoir en 1981) ont parfois empêché le ralliement des élites. Enfin, cette analyse qualitative révèle que si l’extrême gauche française soutient généralement le gouvernement, qu’il soit de gauche ou de droite, en période de crise terroriste, l’extrême droite en revanche saisit quasi systématiquement l’opportunité offerte par l’acte terroriste pour critiquer le gouvernement ainsi que les partis de l’establishment. La thèse est divisée en sept chapitres. Le premier chapitre suggère que le comportement des élites politiques en période de crises internationales graves (guerres et conflits diplomatiques) est souvent influencé par la raison d’État et non par l’intérêt électoral qui prédomine lors des périodes plus paisibles. Le second chapitre discute du phénomène terroriste et de la littérature afférente. Le troisième chapitre analyse les causes du phénomène d’union nationale, soumet un cadre pour l’analyse de la réaction des élites aux actes terroristes, et présente une série d’hypothèses. Le quatrième chapitre détaille la méthodologie utilisée au cours de cette recherche. Les chapitres cinq et six présentent respectivement les résultats des analyses quantitatives et qualitatives. Enfin, le chapitre sept conclut cette thèse en résumant la contribution de l’auteur et en suggérant des pistes de recherche.

Political Parties and Foreign Aid

The influence of partisan politics on public policy is a much debated issue of political science. With respect to foreign policy, often considered as above parties, the question appears even more problematic. This comparison of foreign aid policies in 16 OECD countries develops a structural equation model and uses LISREL analysis to demonstrate that parties do matter, even in international affairs. Social-democratic parties have an effect on a country's level of development assistance. This effect, however, is neither immediate nor direct. First, it appears only in the long run. Second, the relationship between leftist partisan strength and foreign aid works through welfare state institutions and social spending. Our findings indicate how domestic politics shapes foreign conduct. We confirm the empirical relevance of cumulative partisan scores and show how the influence of parties is mediated by other political determinants.