A Tale of Two Houses: The House of Commons, the Big Brother House and the People at Home
Abstract
This article examines two houses, next door to each other but almost on different planets. The first is the Big Brother House, which appears to reflect the lives of ordinary people and as a result attracts large audiences with its appearance of authenticity. The second, the House of Commons, appears remote, buttoned-up and insulated from the concerns of the electorate which it is supposed to represent. It reflects on the social characteristics, perceptions, and beliefs of two ‘tribes’: the Big Brother viewers on the one hand and the Political Junkies or House of Commons watchers on the other. It discusses why there is such a gulf between these two tribes and how that might be bridged in the future.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Pariser and Sunstein fail to recognise that their experience of online and social media diverges considerably from social media users who are not 'political junkies'.
“authors like Pariser and Sunstein who genuinely are deeply engaged in political debates, but who fail to recognise that their experience of online and social media therefore diverges considerably from social media users who are not 'political junkies' (Coleman, 2003).”
From Filter bubble (2019) · cites this paper as Coleman, 2003
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bruns, A. (2019) · Internet Policy Review · doi:10.14763/2019.4.1426 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
- Authors
- Coleman, S.
- Corresponding author
- Coleman, S.
- ORCID
- Coleman, S.
- Venue
- Parliamentary Affairs
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-10-01
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 733-758
- ISSN
- 0031-2290 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2030193324
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 31.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Parliamentary Affairs (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Media Studies and Communication
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Keywords
- House of Commons, Big Brother, reality television, media representation of politics
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
