Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 689

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Digital Architectures of Social Media: Comparing Political Campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. Election

Open access
Bossetta, Michael·2018·Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
DOI 10.1177/1077699018763307
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The present study argues that political communication on social media is mediated by a platform’s digital architecture—the technical protocols that enable, constrain, and shape user behavior in a virtual space. A framework for understanding digital architectures is introduced, and four platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat) are compared along the typology. Using the 2016 U.S. election as a case, interviews with three Republican digital strategists are combined with social media data to qualify the study’s theoretical claim that a platform’s network structure, functionality, algorithmic filtering, and datafication model affect political campaign strategy on social media.

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 · 10.1177/1077699018763307

Cites

45 of 45 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

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

Show all 45 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Aldrich J. H., 2012, Before the convention: Strategies and choices in presidential nomination campaigns
  2. Barnard L., 2013, International Journal of Communication, 7, 2046
  3. boyd d., 2011, A networked self: Identity, community, and culture network sites, 39
  4. 10.1080/09644008.2015.1116522 · doi:10.1080/09644008.2015.1116522
  5. 10.18574/nyu/9781479886357.003.0001 · doi:10.18574/nyu/9781479886357.003.0001
  6. Lessig L., 1999, Code and other laws of cyberspace
  7. 10.1177/1461444816669160 · DOI
  8. Mayer-Schönberger V., 2013, Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think
  9. 10.20380/GI2000.24 · doi:10.20380/gi2000.24 · Paper page
  10. Papacharissi Z., 2011, The long history of new media: Technology, historiography, and contextualizing newness, 89
  11. 10.1037/0096-1523.10.5.683 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 689

Metadata

Authors
Bossetta, M.
Venue
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2018-03-28
Volume
95
Issue
2
Pages
471-496
ISSN
  • 1077-6990 (ISSN-L)
  • 2161-430X
DOI
10.1177/1077699018763307
OpenAlex
W2794863590
Cited by
689
References
45
FWCI
113.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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: The Digital Architectures of Social Media: Comparing Political Campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. Election. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1077699018763307
The paper
Bossetta, M. (2018). The Digital Architectures of Social Media: Comparing Political Campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. Election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018763307

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.