Keeping channels open or screening out? The digital practices of Baltic Russian-speakers during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12977792 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jānis Juzefovičs (0000-0001-7285-1806, University of Tartu, corresponding author), Triin Vihalemm (0000-0001-6773-1332, University of Tartu) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 262-283 |
| Publication date | 2020-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Russian Journal of Communication (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1940-9427 • E-ISSN: 1940-9419 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/19409419.2020.1851454 |
| OpenAlex | W3111559552 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 37 |
Inspired by Couldry’s conceptualisation of media-related practices, the authors investigate the ways Baltic Russian-speakers manage their digital information-seeking (sources of news) practices and interaction (communication partners). Amidst the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the ensuing tensions between Russia and the West, we consider how these digital practices lead to ideological heterogeneity or homogeneity. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has put the transnational affiliations and practices of Baltic Russophones under pressure. This paper therefore asks how the polarised political environment and securitisation of the cross-border media practices of Baltic Russian-speakers by the national political elite has shaped how individuals respond by keeping channels open or screening content out. Based on a mixed-method study of the digital practices of Russian-speakers living in Estonia and Latvia, the authors argue that practices supporting digital homophily and digital heterophily are not mutually exclusive but appear in specific configurations. The avoidance of counter-oppositional views (screening out) is not absolute but rather mixed with practices that open channels from time to time
Digital media · Elite · Ideology · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies · Law · Media Studies and Communication · Social Media and Politics
The Necessary Future of the Audience … and how to Research it
Why Voice Matters
The Reception of Fake News
Arrested war
The echo chamber is overstated
A parallel yet divided information space
Digital Technologies and Selective Exposure
Nothing Is True? The Credibility of News and Conflicting Narratives during “Information War” in Ukraine
Conceptualizing News Avoidance
Analyzing change in network polarization
News comes across when I’m in a moment of leisure”
Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis
Media audience homophily
News media repertoires and strategic narrative reception
Theorising media as practice
Minority Reconsidered
The “Boomerang Effect” of Kin-state Activism
Echo-chambers in online news consumption
Influence in the political Twitter sphere
Four facets of critical news literacy in a non-democratic regime
Identity and Media-use Strategies of the Estonian and Latvian Russian-speaking Populations Amid Political Crisis
Sense-making of conflicting political news among Baltic Russian-speaking audiences
Checking, Sharing, Clicking and Linking
Red state, purple town
Angry, frustrated, and overwhelmed
Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption
The viewers
How Many People Live in Political Bubbles on Social Media? Evidence From Linked Survey and Twitter Data
Factors Motivating Customization and Echo Chamber Creation Within Digital News Environments
The Myth of Partisan Selective Exposure
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,25 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |