The politics of think tanks in social media
Faes, YouTube and free-market ideology
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12878013 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Antonio Pineda (0000-0002-3767-8590, corresponding author), Antonio Pineda Cachero (0000-0002-0249-1881, Universidad de Sevilla, corresponding author), Víctor Hernández‐Santaolalla (0000-0002-2207-4014, Universidad de Sevilla), Cristina Algaba (0000-0001-8555-849X, Universidad Loyola Andalucía), Ana I Barragán-Romero (0000-0002-4285-9038, Universidad de Sevilla) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 3-25 |
| Publication date | 2019-03-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1740-8296 • E-ISSN: 2040-0918 |
| Publisher | Intellect (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1386/macp.15.1.3_1 |
| OpenAlex | W2941426337 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
Communication and the media stand out among the means think tanks employ to shape public opinion, influence political cultures and spread ideologies. More specifically, both traditional and new media stand out as resources for the advocacy performed by right-leaning think tanks. While the use of traditional media has been well studied, little research has focused on think tanks’ online message content. This article focuses on the social media communication of one of the main think tanks in Spain: FAES. The YouTube videos of this research institution are content analysed in light of (1) free-market ideology and (2) the specific philosophical tenets of two American think tanks: the conservative Heritage Foundation and the libertarian Cato Institute. Results indicate that free-market ideology is communicated throughout FAES’s videos. However, neither Heritage-type conservatism nor Cato-type libertarianism are conveyed. Our study shows that an economic right-wing discourse is finding a new outlet on social media, and sheds light on how FAES’s use of the web relates to the political context
Conservatism · Context (archaeology · Ideology · Institution · Media studies · Political science · Politics · Public opinion · Public relations · Social media · Sociology · History · Law · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2022 - 2025 (4) |
| Highly cited | No |