Cited by 31Media Studies and CommunicationPublic Relations and Crisis CommunicationMedia and Digital Communication

Round-trip agenda setting: tracking the intermedia process over time in the ice bucket challenge

Jang, S Mo, Park, Yong Jin, Lee, Hoon·2017·Journalism

Abstract

Despite the social media’s agenda-setting power, the literature provides little understanding of how social media agendas survive and last long enough to trigger substantial public discussions. This study investigates this issue by tracking the ice bucket challenge campaign over an 18-week period. This article claims that the pattern of the intermedia process evolves over time along with the issue-attention cycle. We observed a round-trip intermedia agenda setting where the direction is reversed as the agenda waxes and wanes. Both social and mainstream media continued to generate a heightened level of issue attention after the buzz was cooled down.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1464884916665405

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Widely recognized social media challenge examples such as the Ice Bucket Challenge and Neknomination Challenge have attracted hundreds of millions of viewers.

    “Studies highlight the widespread reach of these challenges, with widely recognized examples such as the Ice Bucket Challenge and Neknomination Challenge attracting hundreds of millions of viewers (Burgess et al., 2018;Jang et al., 2016).”
  • While challenges were previously understood as individual or localized activities, the Ice Bucket Challenge demonstrated how they could evolve into large-scale movements, uniting diverse demographics around a shared purpose.

    “While challenges were previously understood as individual or localized activities, this event demonstrated how they could evolve into large-scale movements, uniting diverse demographics around a shared purpose (Brown et al., 2017;Kwon, 2019;Jang et al., 2016;Ni et al., 2014).”
  • The Ice Bucket Challenge rapidly gained global traction as a viral social media phenomenon, transforming the traditional perception of challenges.

    “The Ice Bucket Challenge rapidly gained global traction as a viral social media phenomenon, transforming the traditional perception of challenges.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jang, S. M., Park, Y. J., & Lee, H.
Affiliations
  • University of South Carolina, USA
  • Howard University (US)
  • Kyung Hee University (KR)
Venue
Journalism
Published
2016-08-30
Volume
18
Issue
10
Pages
1292-1308
ISSN
  • 1464-8849 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3001
OpenAlex
W2514812193
Cited by
31
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2
FWCI
13.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journalism (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media Studies and Communication
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
Keywords
Ice Bucket Challenge, agenda setting, intermedia agenda setting, issue-attention cycle, social media, mainstream media, public debate

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