The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mass media and the concept of interactivity: an exploratory study of online forums and reader email
Abstract
Lack of interaction between the mass media and their audiences has always been a target for media criticism. While the Internet provides a potential for more interactive communication, one wonders how much this opportunity is taken up. The traditional mass media do not seem to become obsolete. Their function as providers of a shared lifeworld might become even more important. Besides their traditional formats, mass media are well represented on the World Wide Web, but it is not clear yet how interactive they will be in the online environment. The article first goes over theoretical implications, taking the perspective of the current Frankfurt School and the American movement of public journalism. Then it identifies concrete settings and levels of interactivity in online journalism. Finally, an exploratory study of New York Times journalists and forum participants helps illustrate chances and problems of mass media 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Gaudenzi, S. (2013) · Goldsmiths, University of London · doi:10.25602/gold.00007997 · Cited by 132
The agenda setting hypothesis in the new media environment
Aruguete, N. (2016) · Comunicación y Sociedad · doi:10.32870/cys.v0i28.2929 · Cited by 72
Metadata
- Authors
- Schultz, T.
- Venue
- Media, Culture & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2000-03
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 205-221
- ISSN
- 0163-4437 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-3675
- OpenAlex
- W2139382174
- Cited by
- 279
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 36.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.