skip to main content
10.1145/2872518.2890097acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Understanding the Competitive Landscape of News Providers on Social Media

Published:11 April 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Social media has emerged as a mechanism for online news propagation. This in turn has changed the competitive landscape of news providers, a landscape that was previously partitioned based on the traditional channels of news dispersion. The channels of news distribution refer to - television, newspaper, magazine, radio, news agency and online only. In this paper, we examine similarities and differences in news propagation patterns on social media based on the primary channel of a news provider. We collected news article propagation activity data from Twitter for 32 news providers over a three-week period and analyzed their propagation networks. Our analysis shows that the structural properties of the propagation networks are statistically different based on the type of primary channel. Our study has useful implications for understanding the competition between news providers in an online environment.

References

  1. 2016. News media. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. An, J., Quercia, D., and Crowcroft, J., 2014. Partisan sharing: facebook evidence and societal consequences. In Proceedings of the ACM conference on Online social networks (Dublin, Ireland, October 2014), ACM, 2660469, 13--24. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2660460.2660469. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bandari, R., Asur, S., and Huberman, B.A., 2012. The pulse of news in social media: Forecasting popularity. arXiv preprint arXiv:1202.0332.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., and Jacomy, M., 2009. Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In Proceedings of International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (San Jose, California, USA, May 17 - 20, 2009), 8, 361--362.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhattacharya, D. and Ram, S., 2012. News article propagation on Twitter based on network measures - An exploratory analysis. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Information Technology and Systems (Orlando, Florida, USA, December 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhattacharya, D. and Ram, S., 2012. Sharing News Articles Using 140 Characters: A Diffusion Analysis on Twitter. In Proceedings of IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (Istanbul, Turkey, August 2012),966--971. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2012.170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Bhattacharya, D. and Ram, S., 2013. Community Analysis of News Article Sharing on Twitter. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Information Technology and Systems (Milan, Italy, December 2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Bhattacharya, D. and Ram, S., 2015. RT@News: An Analysis of News Agency Ego Networks in a Microblogging Environment. ACM Trans. Manage. Inf. Syst. 6, 3, 1--25. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2811270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Chan, J.K.-C. and Leung, L., 2005. Lifestyles, reliance on traditional news media and online news adoption. New Media & Society 7, 3, 357--382.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Dimmick, J., Chen, Y., and Li, Z., 2004. Competition between the Internet and traditional news media: The gratification-opportunities niche dimension. The Journal of Media Economics 17, 1, 19--33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Filloux, F., 2012. News providers should not like Facebook all the time Guardian Media Group, The Guardian.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Lerman, K. and Ghosh, R., 2010. Information Contagion: An Empirical Study of the Spread of News on Digg and Twitter Social Networks. In Proceedings of International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (Washington, D.C., USA, May 23 - 26, 2010), 90--97.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Newman, M.E., 2003. The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM review 45, 2, 167--256.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Newman, M.E., 2006. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103, 23, 8577--8582.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Nguyen, A. and Western, M., 2005. The complementary relationship between the Internet and traditional mass media: the case of online news and information. Information Research 11, 3, 8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Porter, M.E., 1979. How competitive forces shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 21--38.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Saez-Trumper, D., Castillo, C., and Lalmas, M., 2013. Social media news communities: gatekeeping, coverage, and statement bias. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management (San Francisco, USA, October 2013) ACM, 1679--1684. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Understanding the Competitive Landscape of News Providers on Social Media

              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
              • Published in

                cover image ACM Other conferences
                WWW '16 Companion: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web
                April 2016
                1094 pages
                ISBN:9781450341448

                Copyright © 2016 Copyright is held by the International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2)

                Publisher

                International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee

                Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland

                Publication History

                • Published: 11 April 2016

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • abstract

                Acceptance Rates

                WWW '16 Companion Paper Acceptance Rate115of727submissions,16%Overall Acceptance Rate1,899of8,196submissions,23%

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader