Volume 17, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1569-2159
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9862
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


This article analyses the impact of “super-participants” – people who create lots of content, set the agenda, or moderate debates – on everyday online political talk in a non-political online discussion forum – or “third space”. The article finds that there was extensive evidence of super-participation in the forum, and that they did impact the nature of political talk.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Benedictus, Leo
    2016 “Invasion of the troll armies.” The Guardian, November06 2016 https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/06/troll-armies-social-media-trump-russian
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Chen, Cheng , Kui Wu , Venkatesh Srinivasan and Xudong Zhang
    2011 “Battling the Internet Water Army: Detection of Hidden Paid Posters.” Social and Information Networks, 18thNovember 2011 arxiv.org/pdf/1111.4297.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cho, Charles H. , Martin L. Martens , M. Hakkyun Kim and Michelle Rodrigue
    2011 “Astroturfing Global Warming: It Isn’t Always Greener on the Other Side of the Fence.” Journal of Business Ethics104: 571–587. doi: 10.1007/s10551‑011‑0950‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0950-6 [Google Scholar]
  4. Cohen, Joshua
    1997 “Deliberation and democratic legitimacy.” InDeliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics, ed. by James Bohman and William Rehg , 67–92. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Coleman, Stephen , and Jay G. Blumler
    2009The Internet and Democratic Citizenship: Theory, Practice and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511818271
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511818271 [Google Scholar]
  6. Crawford, Kate , and Tarleton Gillespie
    2016 “What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint.” New Media & Society18 (3): 410–428. doi: 10.1177/1461444814543163
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814543163 [Google Scholar]
  7. Dahlberg, Lincoln
    2001 “Computer-Mediated Communication and The Public Sphere: A Critical Analysis.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication7 (1). doi: 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2001.tb00137.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2001.tb00137.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Edwards, Arthur
    2002 “The Moderator as an Emerging Democratic Intermediary: The Role of the Moderator in Internet Discussions about Public Issues.” Information Polity7 (1): 3–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Graham, Todd , Daniel Jackson and Scott Wright
    2016 “We need to get together and make ourselves heard’: everyday online spaces as incubators of political action.” Information, Communication & Society19 (10): 1373–1389. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1094113
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1094113 [Google Scholar]
  10. Graham, Todd , and Scott Wright
    2014a “Discursive Equality and Everyday Talk Online: the impact of “Super-Participants.”Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication19 (3). doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12016
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12016 [Google Scholar]
  11. Graham, Todd , and Wright, Scott
    2014b “‘Super-participation’ in Third Spaces: volume and impact on political argument.” InAnalysing Social Media Data and Web Networks, ed. by Rachel K. Gibson , Stephen Ward and Marta Cantijoch , 197–215. Basingstoke: Palgrave. 10.1057/9781137276773
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137276773 [Google Scholar]
  12. Himelboim, Itai , Eric Gleave and Marc Smith, M.
    2009 “Discussion catalysts in online political discussions: Content importers and conversation starters.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication14 (4): 771–789. doi: 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2009.01470.x.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01470.x [Google Scholar]
  13. King, Gary , Jennifer Pan and Margaret E. Roberts
    2017 “How the Chinese Government Fabricates Social Media Posts for Strategic Distraction, not Engaged Argument.” American Political Science Review111 (3): 484–501. doi: 10.1017/S0003055417000144
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055417000144 [Google Scholar]
  14. Knight, Jack and James Johnson
    1997 “What sort of political equality does deliberative democracy require?.” In: Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics, ed. by James Bohman and William Rehg , 279–319. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Kollanyi, Bence , Philip N. Howard and Samuel C. Woolley
    2016 “Bots and Automation over Twitter during the U.S. election.” Data Memo, Oxford, UK: Project on Computational Propaganda, 17November 2016 politicalbots.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Data-Memo-US-Election.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Oldenburg, Ray
    1999The Great Good Place. Marlow: New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Rheingold, Howard
    2000The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier, 2nd edition , Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Schuler, Doug
    1996New Community Networks. New York: ACM Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Shaw, Aaron , and Benjamin M. Hill
    2014 “Laboratories of Oligarchy? How the Iron Law Extends to Peer Production”. Journal of Communication64 (2): 215–238. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12082
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12082 [Google Scholar]
  20. Soukup, Charles
    2006 “Oldenburg’s Great Good Places on the World Wide Web Computer-Mediated Communication as a Virtual Third Place”. New Media & Society8 (3): 421–440. doi: 10.1177/1461444806061953
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444806061953 [Google Scholar]
  21. Van Dijck, Jose
    2013The Culture of Connectivity: A critical history of social media, Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970773.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970773.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  22. Wright, Scott
    2002 “Dogma or Dialogue? The Politics of the Downing Street website”. Politics22 (3): 135–142. doi: 10.1111/1467‑9256.00168
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9256.00168 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2006 “Government-run online discussion fora: moderation, censorship and the shadow of control.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations8 (4): 550–568. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑856X.2006.00247.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2006.00247.x [Google Scholar]
  24. 2007 “A Virtual European public sphere? The Futurum discussion forum.” Journal of European Public Policy14 (8): 1167–1185. doi: 10.1080/13501760701656403
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760701656403 [Google Scholar]
  25. 2008 “Language, Communication and the Public Sphere”. In: The Handbook of Applied Linguistics: language, communication and the public sphere, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Veronika Koller , 21–44. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 2012a “Politics as Usual? Revolution, normalization and a new agenda for online deliberation.” New Media & Society14 (2): 244–261. doi: 10.1177/1461444811410679
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811410679 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2012b “From ‘third place’ to ‘Third Space’: everyday political talk in non-political online spaces”. Javnost19 (3): 5–20. doi: 10.1080/13183222.2012.11009088
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2012.11009088 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2012c “Assessing (e-)Democratic Innovations: “democratic goods” and Downing Street E-petitions”. Journal of Information Technology & Politics9 (4): 453–470. doi: 10.1080/19331681.2012.712820
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2012.712820 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2015 “Populism and Downing Street E-petitions: Connective action, hybridity and the changing nature of organizing”. Political Communication32 (3): 414–433. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2014.958256
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2014.958256 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2016 “‘Success’ and on Online Political Participation: the case of Downing Street E-petitions”, Information, Communication & Society19 (6): 843–857. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1080285
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1080285 [Google Scholar]
  31. Wright, Scott and John Street
    2007 “Democracy, Deliberation and Design: the case of government-run online discussion forums”. New Media & Society9 (5): 849–869. doi: 10.1177/1461444807081230
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807081230 [Google Scholar]
  32. Wright, Scott , Todd Graham , Yu Sun , Wilfred Yang Wang , Xiantian Luo and Andrea Carson
    2016b “Analysing everyday online political talk in China: Theoretical and methodological reflections.” Communication, Politics & Culture49 (1): 41–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Wright, Scott , Todd Graham and Daniel Jackson
    2016a “Third Spaces and Everyday Political Talk”. InRoutledge Companion to Social Media and Politics, ed. by Axel Bruns , Eli Skogerbø , Christian Christensen , Anders-Olof Larsson and Enli Gunn , 74–88. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Wright, Scott , William Lukamto and Verity Trott
    . In Press. “The 2016 Australian Election Online: debate, support, community”. InThe 2016 Australian Federal Election ed. by Anika Gauja and Peter Chen . Canberra: ANU Press.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error