This article takes up the popular argument that much online discussion is toxic and hence harmful to democracy, and argues that the pervasiveness of incivility is not incompatible with democratically relevant political talk. Instead of focusing on the tone of political talk, scholars interested in understanding the extent to which digital platforms threaten democratic values should focus on expressions of intolerance. I demonstrate the validity of this conceptual model by investigating the discursive and contextual features associated with incivility and intolerance online in the context of public comments in two different platforms—news websites and Facebook. Results show that incivility and intolerance occur in meaningfully different discussion settings. Whereas incivility is associated with features that reveal meaningful discursive engagement, such as justified opinion expression and engagement with disagreement, intolerance is likely to occur in homogeneous discussions about minorities and civil society—exactly when it can hurt democracy the most.
AmsalemE.NirL. (2019). Does interpersonal discussion increase political knowledge? A meta-analysis. Communication Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219866357
2.
AndersonA. A.BrossardD.ScheufeleD. A.XenosM. A.LadwigP. (2014). The “nasty effect”: Online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12009
3.
AndersonA. A.YeoS. K.BrossardD.ScheufeleD. A.XenosM. A. (2018). Toxic talk: How online incivility can undermine perceptions of media. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(1), 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edw022
4.
AnspachN. M. (2017). The new personal influence: How our Facebook friends influence the news we read. Political Communication, 34(4), 590–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2017.1316329
5.
BarberB. (2003). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age (20th ed.). University of California Press.
6.
BarnidgeM. (2017). Exposure to political disagreement in social media versus face-to-face and anonymous online settings. Political Communication, 34(2), 302–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1235639
BejanT. M. (2017). Mere Civility: Disagreement and the Limits of Toleration. Harvard University Press.
9.
BensonT. W. (2011). The rhetoric of civility: Power, authenticity, and democracy. Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, 1(1), 22–30.
10.
BerryJ. M.SobierajS. (2016). The outrage industry: Political opinion media and the new incivility (Reprint ed.). Oxford University Press.
11.
BorahP. (2014). Does it matter where you read the news story? Interaction of incivility and news frames in the political blogosphere. Communication Research, 41(6), 809–827. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650212449353
12.
BrooksD. J.GeerJ. G. (2007). Beyond negativity: The effects of incivility on the electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 1–16.
13.
BurnapP.WilliamsM. L. (2015). Cyber hate speech on Twitter: An application of machine classification and statistical modeling for policy and decision making. Policy & Internet, 7(2), 223–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.85
14.
ChenG. M. (2017). Online incivility and public debate: Nasty talk (1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
15.
ChenG. M.NgY. M. M. (2016). Third-person perception of online comments: Civil ones persuade you more than me. Computers in Human Behavior, 55(Part B), 736–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.10.014
16.
ChenG. M.NgY. M. M. (2017). Nasty online comments anger you more than me, but nice ones make me as happy as you. Computers in Human Behavior, 71(Suppl. C), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.010
17.
CoeK.KenskiK.RainsS. A. (2014). Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 658–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12104
DavidsonT.WarmsleyD.MacyM.WeberI. (2017). Automated Hate Speech Detection and the Problem of Offensive Language. ArXiv:1703.04009 [Cs]. http://arxiv.org/abs/1703.04009
EllisonN. B.boydd. (2013). Sociality through social network sites. In DuttonW. H. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of internet studies (1st ed., pp. 151–172). Oxford University Press.
22.
ElSheriefM.KulkarniV.NguyenD.WangW. Y.BeldingE. (2018). Hate lingo: A target-based linguistic analysis of hate speech in social media (ArXiv:1804.04257). http://arxiv.org/abs/1804.04257
23.
EvelandW. P.HivelyM. H. (2009). Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x
24.
FreelonD. G. (2010). Analyzing online political discussion using three models of democratic communication. New Media & Society, 12(7), 1172–1190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809357927
25.
FriessD.EildersC. (2015). A systematic review of online deliberation research. Policy & Internet, 7(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.95
26.
GervaisB. T. (2015). Incivility online: Affective and behavioral reactions to uncivil political posts in a web-based experiment. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 12, 167–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2014.997416
27.
GibsonJ. L. (1992). The political consequences of intolerance: Cultural conformity and political freedom. The American Political Science Review, 86(2), 338–356. https://doi.org/10.2307/1964224
28.
GibsonJ. L. (2007). Political intolerance in the context of democratic theory. In DaltonR.KlingermannH.-D. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political behavior (pp. 323–341). Oxford University Press.
29.
Gil de ZúñigaH.MolyneuxL.ZhengP. (2014). Social media, political expression, and political participation: Panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 612–634. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12103
30.
GillespieT. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press.
31.
HabermasJ. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. MIT Press.
32.
HalpernD.GibbsJ. (2013). Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.008
33.
HerbstS. (2010). Rude democracy: Civility and incivility in American politics. Temple University Press.
34.
HesterJ. B.DougallE. (2007). The efficiency of constructed week sampling for content analysis of online news. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(4), 811–824. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900708400410
35.
HmielowskiJ. D.HutchensM. J.CicchirilloV. J. (2014). Living in an age of online incivility: Examining the conditional indirect effects of online discussion on political flaming. Information, Communication & Society, 17(10), 1196–1211. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.899609
36.
HonnethA. (1996). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts. MIT Press.
HurwitzJ.MondakJ. J. (2002). Democratic principles, discrimination and political intolerance. British Journal of Political Science, 32(1), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123402000042
39.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística [Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics]. (2018). Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios: Acesso à internet e à televisão e posse de telefone móvel celular para uso pessoal: 2017.
40.
JamiesonK. H.VolinskyA.WeitzI.KenskiK. (2017). The political uses and abuses of civility and incivility. In JamiesonK. H.KenskiK. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political communication (pp. 205–218). Oxford University Press.
41.
JungerJ.KeylingT. (2019). Facepager was made for fetching public available data from Facebook, Twitter and other JSON-based APIs [Python]. https://github.com/strohne/Facepager/. (Original work published 2012)
42.
KenskiK.CoeK.RainsS. A. (2017). Perceptions of uncivil discourse online: An examination of types and predictors. Communication Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650217699933
43.
LiuX.FahmyS. (2011). Exploring the spiral of silence in the virtual world: Individuals’ willingness to express personal opinions in online versus offline settings. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 3(2), 45–57.
44.
MaiaR. C. M.RezendeT. A. S. (2016). Respect and Disrespect in Deliberation Across the Networked Media Environment: Examining Multiple Paths of Political Talk: Disrespect in deliberation across digital settings. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(2), 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12155
45.
MansbridgeJ. (1999). Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In MacedoS. (Ed.), Deliberative politics: Essays on democracy and disagreement (pp. 1–211). Oxford University Press.
46.
MarkhamA.BuchananE. (2012). Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (Version 2.0). Association of Internet Researchers.
47.
MeltzerK. (2015). Journalistic concern about uncivil political talk in digital news media: Responsibility, credibility, and academic influence. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 20(1), 85–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161214558748
48.
MoyP.GastilJ. (2006). Predicting deliberative conversation: The impact of discussion networks, media use, and political cognitions. Political Communication, 23(4), 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600600977003
49.
MuddimanA. (2017). Personal and public levels of political incivility. International Journal of Communication, 11, 3182–3202.
50.
MutzD. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press.
51.
MutzD. C. (2016). In-your-face politics: The consequences of uncivil media. Princeton University Press.
52.
MutzD. C.ReevesB. (2005). The new videomalaise: Effects of televised incivility on political trust. The American Political Science Review, 99(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055405051452
53.
NeuendorfK. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook (1st ed.). SAGE.
54.
NobataC.TetreaultJ.ThomasA.MehdadY.ChangY. (2016). Abusive language detection in online user content. In Proceedings of the 25th international conference on World Wide Web—WWW ‘16 (pp. 145–153). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2872427.2883062
55.
PapacharissiZ. (2004). Democracy online: Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups. New Media & Society, 6(2), 259–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804041444
56.
ParkinsonJ.MansbridgeJ. J. (2012). Deliberative systems: Deliberative democracy at the large scale. Cambridge University Press.
57.
ProchazkaF.WeberP.SchweigerW. (2018). Effects of civility and reasoning in user comments on perceived journalistic quality. Journalism Studies, 19(1), 62–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1161497
58.
RossiniP.Stromer-GalleyJ. (2019). Citizen deliberation online. In SuhayE.GrofmanB.TreselA. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of electoral persuasion. Oxford University Press.
59.
RoweI. (2015). Civility 2.0: A comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion. Information, Communication & Society, 18(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.940365
60.
SantanaA. D. (2014). Virtuous or vitriolic: The effect of anonymity on civility in online newspaper reader comment boards. Journalism Practice, 8(1), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2013.813194
61.
ScheufeleD. A.HardyB. W.BrossardD.Waismel-ManorI. S.NisbetE. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 728–753. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00317.x
SobierajS.BerryJ. M. (2011). From incivility to outrage: Political discourse in blogs, talk radio, and cable news. Political Communication, 28(1), 19–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2010.542360
64.
Stromer-GalleyJ. (2007). Measuring deliberation’s content: A coding scheme. Journal of Public Deliberation, 3(1), 12.
65.
Stromer-GalleyJ.BryantL.BimberB. (2015). Context and medium matter: Expressing disagreements online and face-to-face in political deliberations. Journal of Public Deliberation, 11(1), 1.
66.
StroudN. J.ScaccoJ. M.MuddimanA.CurryA. L. (2014). Changing deliberative norms on news organizations’ Facebook sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20, 188–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12104
SunsteinC. R. (2009). Going to extremes: How like minds unite and divide. Oxford University Press.
70.
SydnorE. (2018). Platforms for incivility: Examining perceptions across different media formats. Political Communication, 35(1), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2017.1355857
71.
SydnorE. (2019). Disrespectful democracy: The psychology of political incivility. Columbia University Press.
72.
ThorsonK.VragaE.EkdaleB. (2010). Credibility in context: How uncivil online commentary affects news credibility. Mass Communication and Society, 13(3), 289–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205430903225571
73.
ValenzuelaS.KimY.Gil de ZúñigaH. (2012). Social networks that matter: Exploring the role of political discussion for online political participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24(2), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edr037
74.
ValerianiA.VaccariC. (2018). Political talk on mobile instant messaging services: A comparative analysis of Germany, Italy, and the UK. Information, Communication & Society, 21, 1715–1731. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1350730
WiseK.HammanB.ThorsonK. (2006). Moderation, response rate, and message interactivity: Features of online communities and their effects on intent to participate. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(1), 24–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00313.x
77.
WojcieszakM. (2011). Pulling toward or pulling away: Deliberation, disagreement, and opinion extremity in political participation*. Social Science Quarterly, 92(1), 207–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00764.x
78.
ZerilliL. M. G. (2014). Against civility: A feminist perspective. In SaratA. (Ed.), Civility, legality, and justice in America (pp. 107–131). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107479852.005
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
