Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 142Social Media and PoliticsPolitical Theory and DemocracyNews Media Framing and Political Communication

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

From “Third Place” to “Third Space”: Everyday Political Talk in Non-Political Online Spaces

Open access
Wright, Scott·2012·Javnost - The Public
DOI 10.1080/13183222.2012.11009088
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article takes forward a “new” agenda for online deliberation (Wright 2012), by setting out in detail the concept of third space: non-political online spaces where political talk emerges. The concept of third space is heavily influenced by, but ultimately grounded in a critique of, Oldenburg’s (1999) concept of the third place. Rather than thinking about what virtual equivalents of a third place might look like, this article reconsiders the concept in the context of the Internet and thus differs in several of its conclusions. First, the article sets out the case for studying informal political talk in third spaces. It is argued that this necessitates broad definitions of the political and inclusive definitions of deliberation. Second, each of Oldenburg’s core characteristics of third place are presented, critiqued, and, where necessary, reformulated for the online context. In so doing, the article provides a theoretically informed framework that can be used to study third spaces while also contributing to the broader debates about the nature of political debate online.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13183222.2012.11009088

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Habermas, Jürgen. 1992. Further Reflections on the Public Sphere. In C. Calhoun (ed.),Habermas and the Public Sphere, 421-461. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
  2. Hauben, Michael and Ronda Hauben. 1997.NetizensLondon: Wiley/IEEE Computer Society Press.
  3. Hope, Wayne. 1996. Mass Media, Information Technology and the Reconstruction of Critical Theory. In M. Peters, W. Hope, J. Marshall and S. Webster (eds.),Critical Theory, Poststructuralism and the Social Context, 57-81. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.
  4. Oates, Sarah. 2010. From Parent to Protestor on the Post-Soviet Internet: Locating and Evaluating Political Web Spaces for Families of Children with Genetic Disabilities in Russia,APSA Political Communication Pre-Conference.
  5. Schuler, Doug. 1996.New Community Networks. New York: ACM Press.
  6. Scullion, Richard, Dan Jackson and Mike Molesworth. 2010. What’s Politics Got to Do with It? The Dynamics of Everyday Online Political Talk. Paper presented atIPSA Political Communication Conference, Loughborough.
  7. Sunstein, Cass. 2001.Republic.com. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
  8. Van Zoonen, Liesbet. 2010. Innovative Methods in Studying Media and Religion. Presentation for the AHRC PhD Training Seminar Innovative Methods in the Study of Religion. Oxford, September10, 2010.
  9. Wellman, Barry. 1998. The Privatization of Community: From Public Groups to Unbounded Networks. In J. Abu-Lughod (ed.),Millennial Milestone: A “Switching Crisis” in Sociology, 89-104. Barcelona: International Sociological Association.

Cited by

See all 142

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wright, S.
Affiliations
University of Leicester (GB)
Corresponding author
Wright, Scott
ORCID
Wright, Scott
Venue
Javnost - The Public
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2012-01
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
5-20
ISSN
  • 1318-3222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1854-8377
DOI
10.1080/13183222.2012.11009088
OpenAlex
W2016572267
Cited by
142
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 2
FWCI
25.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Javnost - The Public (publishedVersion)
  • Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Communication › News Media Framing and Political Communication
Keywords
third space, third places, online deliberation, online political debate, public sphere, virtual public space

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.