Skip to main content

In Social Media We Distrust: Investigating Users’ Hostile Media Perception of Facebook News Content

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Cross-Cultural Design. Applications in Business, Communication, Health, Well-being, and Inclusiveness (HCII 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13313))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1335 Accesses

Abstract

The majority of internet users today find their news on social media (Gil de Zúñiga et al. 2017), however, media trust, and especially trust in social media is low. (Edelman 2019) In growing political polarization the effects of perceived media hostility are also gaining more importance. In this research internet users of international news participated in an online experiment to assess how issue involvement on the 2020 military conflict between the United States and Iran correlates with general trust in the media and with the credibility of the largest social media network, Facebook, as a news source. The current research investigated whether the hostile media effect still occurs in a purely social media context and results showed that partisans (those with a strong supporting or opposing opinion on the military conflict) perceive news content on Facebook as hostile along the same lines as they do in a traditional media context. Current study fills the literature gap of the hostile media effect in a social media context. Findings may also have implications for the news industry as to how journalist roles influence users’ perceptions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nixon, B.: The business of news in the attention economy: audience labor and MediaNews Group’s efforts to capitalize on news consumption. Journalism 21(1), 1–22 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884917719145

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Thorson, K., Wells, C.: Curated flows: a framework for mapping media exposure in the digital age. Commun. Theory 26(3), 309–328 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gallup. Media Use and Evaluation (2019). https://news.gallup.com/poll/1663/media-use-evaluation.aspx

  4. Fawzi, N.: Untrustworthy news and the media as “enemy of the people?” How a populist worldview shapes recipients’ attitudes toward the media. Int. J. Press/Polit. 24(2), 146–164 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161218811981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Edelman: 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer Global Report (2019). https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2019-02/2019_Edelman_Trust_Barometer_Global_Report.pdf

  6. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., Nielsen, R.K.: Reuters digital news report 2019. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Schaeffer, K.: Far more Americans see ‘very strong’ partisan conflicts now than in the last two Presidential Election years. Pew Research Center (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gil de Zúñiga, H., Weeks, B., Ardèvol-Abreu, A.: Effects of the news-finds-me perception in communication: social media use implications for news seeking and learning about politics. J. Comput.-Mediated Commun. 22(3), 105–123 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12185

  9. Oeldorf-Hirsch, A.: The role of engagement in learning from active and incidental news exposure on social media. Mass Commun. Soc. 21(2), 225–247 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2017.1384022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shin, J., Thorson, K.: Partisan selective sharing: the biased diffusion of fact-checking messages on social media. J. Commun. 67(2), 233–255 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Vallone, R.P., Ross, L., Lepper, M.R.: The hostile media phenomenon: biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 49(3), 577–585 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Perloff, R.M.: A three-decade retrospective on the hostile media effect. In: Advances in Foundational Mass Communication Theories, pp. 196–224. Routledge (2018). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315164441-12

  13. Gunther, A.C., Schmitt, K.: Mapping boundaries of the hostile media effect. J. Commun. 54(1), 55–70 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02613.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gunther, A.C., Liebhart, J.L.: Broad reach or biased source? Decomposing the hostile media effect. J. Commun. 56(3), 449–466 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00295.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Christen, C.T., Kannaovakun, P., Gunther, A.C.: Hostile media perceptions: partisan assessments of press and public during the 1997 united parcel service strike. Polit. Commun. 19(4), 423–436 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600290109988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Choi, J., Yang, M., Chang, J.J.: Elaboration of the hostile media phenomenon. Commun. Res. 36(1), 54–75 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208326462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gunther, A.C., Christen, C.T., Liebhart, J.L., Chia, S.: Congenial public, contrary press, and biased estimates of the climate of opinion. Public Opin. Q. 65(3), 295–320 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Arpan, L.M., Raney, A.A.: An experimental investigation of news source and the hostile media effect. Journal. Mass Commun. Q. 80(2), 265–281 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900308000203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hansen, G.J., Kim, H.: Is the media biased against me? A meta-analysis of the hostile media effect research. Commun. Res. Rep. 28(2), 169–179 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.565280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Matthes, J.: The affective underpinnings of hostile media perceptions. Commun. Res. 40(3), 360–387 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211420255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Johnson, B.T., Eagly, A.H.: Involvement and persuasion: types, traditions, and the evidence. Psychol. Bull. 107(3), 375–384 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.3.375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tsfati, Y., Cohen, J.: Perceptions of media and media effects: the third person effect, trust in media and hostile media perceptions. In: Valdivia, A.N. (ed.) The International Encyclopedia of Media Studies. Wiley-Blackwell (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tajfel, H., Turner, J.C.: The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: Political Psychology, pp. 276–293. Psychology Press (2004). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16

  24. Hartmann, T., Tanis, M.: Examining the hostile media effect as an intergroup phenomenon: the role of ingroup identification and status. J. Commun. 63(3), 535–555 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tsfati, Y.: Hostile media perceptions, presumed media influence, and minority alienation: the case of Arabs in Israel. J. Commun. 57(4), 632–651 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00361.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Duck, J.M., Terry, D.J., Hogg, M.A.: Perceptions of a media campaign: the role of social identity and the changing intergroup context. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24(1), 3–16 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167298241001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ariyanto, A., Hornsey, M.J., Gallois, C.: Group allegiances and perceptions of media bias. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 10(2), 266–279 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207074733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bolsen, T., Druckman, J.N., Cook, F.L.: The influence of partisan motivated reasoning on public opinion. Polit. Behav. 36(2), 235–262 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-013-9238-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Reid, S.A.: A self-categorization explanation for the hostile media effect. J. Commun. 62(3), 381–399 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01647.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Schmitt, K.M., Gunther, A.C., Liebhart, J.L.: Why partisans see mass media as biased. Commun. Res. 31(6), 623–641 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650204269390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Giner-Sorolla, R., Chaiken, S.: The causes of hostile media judgments. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 30(2), 165–180 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Barnidge, M., Rojas, H.: Hostile media perceptions, presumed media influence, and political talk: expanding the corrective action hypothesis. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 26(2), 135–156 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edt032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Tsfati, Y., Cohen, J.: The influence of presumed media influence on democratic legitimacy: the case of Gaza settlers. Commun. Res. 32(6), 794–821 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gunther, A.C.: Biased press or biased public? Attitudes toward media coverage of social groups. Public Opin. Q. 56(2), 147–167 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1086/269308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Klinger, U., Svensson, J.: The emergence of network media logic in political communication: a theoretical approach. New Media Soc. 17(8), 1241–1257 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Weeks, B.E., Kim, D.H., Hahn, L.B., Diehl, T.H., Kwak, N.: Hostile media perceptions in the age of social media: following politicians, emotions, and perceptions of media bias. J. Broadcast. Electron. Media 63(3), 374–392 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Noelle-Neumann, E.: The spiral of silence: public opinion–our social skin. University of Chicago Press (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Gaziano, C.: How credible is the credibility crisis? Journal. Q. 65(2), 267–278 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908806500202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wanta, W., Hu, Y.-W.: The effects of credibility, reliance, and exposure on media agenda-setting: a path analysis model. Journal. Q. 71(1), 90–98 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909407100109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Hovland, C.I., Weiss, W.: The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opin. Q. 15(4), 635–650 (1951). https://doi.org/10.1086/266350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Gaziano, C., McGrath, K.: Measuring the concept of credibility. Journal. Q. 63(3), 451–462 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908606300301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Shearer, E., Matsa, K.E.: News use across social media platforms 2018. Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project (2018). https://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/

  43. Flanagin, A.J., Metzger, M.J.: Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journal. Mass Commun. Q. 77(3), 515–540 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kiousis, S.: Public trust or mistrust? Perceptions of media credibility in the information age. Mass Commun. Soc. 4(4), 381–403 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0404_4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Schmierbach, M., Oeldorf-Hirsch, A.: A little bird told me, so i didn’t believe it: Twitter, credibility, and issue perceptions. Commun. Q. 60(3), 317–337 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2012.688723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Westerman, D., Spence, P.R., Van Der Heide, B.: A social network as information: the effect of system generated reports of connectedness on credibility on Twitter. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28(1), 199–206 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Deuze, M.: What is journalism? Journalism 6(4), 442–464 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884905056815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Hedman, U., Djerf-Pierre, M.: The social journalist. Digit. Journal. 1(3), 368–385 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2013.776804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Van der Wurff, R., Schoenbach, K.: Civic and citizen demands of news media and journalists: what does the audience expect from good journalism? Journal. Mass Commun. Q. 91(3), 433–451 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Tsfati, Y., Meyers, O., Peri, Y.: What is good journalism? Comparing Israeli public and journalists’ perspectives. Journalism 7(2), 152–173 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884906062603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Lasorsa, D.L., Lewis, S.C., Holton, A.E.: Normalizing Twitter. Journal. Stud. 13(1), 19–36 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670x.2011.571825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Singer, J.B.: The political j-blogger: ‘normalizing’a new media form to fit old norms and practices. Journalism 6(2), 173–198 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Nah, S., Chung, D.S.: When citizens meet both professional and citizen journalists: social trust, media credibility, and perceived journalistic roles among online community news readers. Journalism 13(6), 714–730 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911431381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Hanitzsch, T., Vos, T.P.: Journalism beyond democracy: a new look into journalistic roles in political and everyday life. Journalism 19(2), 146–164 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916673386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Schudson, M.: The objectivity norm in American journalism. Journalism 2(2), 149–170 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1177/146488490100200201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Janowitz, M.: Professional models in Journalism: the gatekeeper and the advocate. Journal. Q. 52(4), 618–626 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1177/107769907505200402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Charles, M.: Advocacy journalism. In: Vos, T.P., Hanusch, F., Dimitrakopoulou, D., Geertsema-Sligh, M., Sehl, A. (eds.) The International Encyclopedia of Journalism Studies. Wiley (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Fisher, C.: The advocacy continuum: towards a theory of advocacy in journalism. Journalism 17(6), 711–726 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884915582311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Crowley, M., Eric, H., Schmitt, E.: U.S. Strike in Iraq kills qassim suleimani, commander of Iranian forces. The New York Times, 2 January 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/world/middleeast/qassem-soleimani-iraq-iran-attack.html

  60. Facebook: How Facebook’s fact-checking program works. Facebook (2019). https://www.facebook.com/journalismproject/programs/third-party-fact-checking/how-it-works

  61. Kim, Y.: The contribution of social network sites to exposure to political difference: the relationships among SNSs, online political messaging, and exposure to cross-cutting perspectives. Comput. Hum. Behav. 27(2), 971–977 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Kim, Y., Hsu, S.-H., de Zúñiga, H.G.: Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: the moderating role of personality traits. J. Commun. 63(3), 498–516 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Bakshy, E., Messing, S., Adamic, L.A.: Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science 348(6239), 1130–1132 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  64. Bail, C.A., et al.: Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115(37), 9216–9221 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Costera Meijer, I.: The paradox of popularity. Journal. Stud. 8(1), 96–116 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700601056874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Mull, I.R., Lee, S.E.: “PIN” pointing the motivational dimensions behind Pinterest. Comput. Hum. Behav. 33, 192–200 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Gunther, A.C.: The persuasive press inference. Commun. Res. 25(5), 486–504 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1177/009365098025005002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Feldman, L.: Partisan differences in opinionated news perceptions: a test of the hostile media effect. Polit. Behav. 33(3), 407–432 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9139-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Watts, M.D., Domke, D., Shah, D.V., Fan, D.P.: Elite cues and media bias in presidential campaigns. Commun. Res. 26(2), 144–175 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1177/009365099026002003

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yi-Hsing Han .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Csarnó, H.G., Han, YH., Hsu, SH. (2022). In Social Media We Distrust: Investigating Users’ Hostile Media Perception of Facebook News Content. In: Rau, PL.P. (eds) Cross-Cultural Design. Applications in Business, Communication, Health, Well-being, and Inclusiveness. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13313. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06050-2_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06050-2_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-06049-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-06050-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics