The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Social media and populism: an elective affinity?
Open accessAbstract
Since the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States, an intense debate has developed around the connection between social media and populist movements. In this article, I put forward some theses about the reasons for the apparent ‘elective affinity’ between social media and populism. I argue that the match between social media and populist politics derives from the way in which the mass networking capabilities of social media, at the time of a ‘mass web’ involving billions of people worldwide, provide a suitable channel for the mass politics and the appeals to the people typical of populism. But this affinity also needs to be understood in light of the rebellious narrative that has come to be associated with social media at times in which rapid technological development has coincided with a profound economic crisis, shaking the legitimacy of the neoliberal order. This question is explored by examining the role acquired by social media in populist movements as the people’s voice and the people’s rally, providing, on the one hand, with a means for disaffected individuals to express themselves and, on the other hand, with a space in which disgruntled Internet users could gather and form partisan online crowds.
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
Cites
Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci
Gramsci, A., Hoare, Q., & Nowell‐Smith, G. (2015) · Cited by 6,310
Mudde, C. (2004) · Government and Opposition · doi:10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x · Cited by 5,286
(2011) · Cited by 4,430
Laclau, E. (2005) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,662
Castells, M. (2009) · Cited by 2,619
Müller, J.-W. (2016) · doi:10.9783/9780812293784 · Cited by 2,219
The crowd: A study of the popular mind.
Le Bon, G. (1908) · T Fisher Unwin eBooks · doi:10.1037/10878-000 · Cited by 2,025
Riesman, D., Glazer, N., & Denney, R. (1950) · Cited by 1,257
Rich media, poor democracy: communication politics in dubious times
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.38-0115 · Cited by 1,197
Populism and the mirror of democracy
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.43-3063 · Cited by 1,147
Cited by
Ethical implications of text generation in the age of artificial intelligence
Illia, L., Colleoni, E., & Zyglidopoulos, S. (2023) · Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility · doi:10.1111/beer.12479 · Cited by 128
Browsing with Alexa: interrogating the impact of voice assistants as web interfaces
Natale, S., & Cooke, H. (2021) · Media, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0163443720983295 · Cited by 76
The Rise of Germany's AfD: A Social Media Analysis
Serrano, J. C. M., Shahrezaye, M., Papakyriakopoulos, O., & Hegelich, S. (2019) · Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Social Media and Society · doi:10.1145/3328529.3328562 · Cited by 62
Schumann, S., Boer, D., Hanke, K., & Liu, J. (2021) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2019.1668455 · Cited by 38
Berti, C. (2021) · Media, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0163443720957564 · Cited by 37
Metadata
- Authors
- Gerbaudo, P.
- Venue
- Media, Culture & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2018-05-08
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 745-753
- ISSN
- 0163-4437 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-3675
- OpenAlex
- W2799739577
- Cited by
- 533
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 180.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social media and populism: an elective affinity? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0163443718772192
- The paper
- Gerbaudo, P. (2018). Social media and populism: an elective affinity? Media, Culture & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443718772192
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.