Cited by 80Social Media and PoliticsMisinformation and Its ImpactsMedia Influence and Politics

Disinformation, social media, bots, and astroturfing: the fourth wave of digital democracy

Open access
García-Orosa, Berta·2021·El Profesional de la información

Abstract

This article reflects on the conceptualization and the salient features of the ecology of e-democracy. The authors identify four distinct waves marked by technological innovations and studied under the control–participation dichotomy. In the first wave, during the 1990s, political actors begin to establish their online presence but without any other notable changes in communication. The second wave takes place from 2004 to 2008 and features the consolidation of social networks and the increasing commodification of audience engagement. The third wave begins to take shape during Obama’s 2008 election campaign, which featured micro-segmentation and the use of big data. The fourth wave, starting in 2016 with the Brexit campaign and the Cambridge Analytica scandal, has been defined by the front and center use of Artificial Intelligence. Some recent phenomena that challenge or buttress the make-up of critical public opinion are the following: a) digital platforms as political actors; b) the marked use of Artificial Intelligence and big data; c) the use of falsehoods as a political strategy, as well as other fake news and deep fake phenomena; d) the combination of hyperlocal and supranational issues; e) technological determinism; f) the search for audience engagement and co-production processes; and g) trends that threaten democracy, to wit, the polarization of opinions, astroturfing, echo chambers and bubble filters. Finally, the authors identify several challenges in research, pedagogy and politics that could strengthen democratic values, and conclude that democracy needs to be reimagined both under new research and political action frameworks, as well as through the creation of a social imaginary on democracy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3145/epi.2021.nov.03

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • Disinformation and astroturfing both mislead the public and can negatively affect public debates, which thereby lose authenticity, but the two phenomena are not intrinsically and systematically linked.

    “Disinformation and astroturfing both mislead the public (Chen et al., 2021) and can negatively affect public debates (García-Orosa, 2021;Schoch et al., 2022), which thereby lose authenticity (Al-Rawi & Rahman, 2020;Chan, 2022;Lits, 2021a;Lock & Seele, 2017), but it does not follow that the two phenomena are intrinsically and systematically linked.”
  • In the literature, astroturfing is often associated with the intention to create the illusion of grassroots public support and backing that exceeds its actual scale.

    “astroturfing is often associated with the intention to create the illusion of grassroots public support and backing that exceeds its actual scale”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
García-Orosa, B.
Affiliations
Universidad de Santiago de Compostela
Venue
El Profesional de la información
Published
2021-10-28
ISSN
  • 1386-6710 (ISSN-L)
  • 1699-2407
OpenAlex
W3210485234
Cited by
80
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 7
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • El Profesional de la Informacion (publishedVersion)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (RTI2018-093346-B-C33, RTI2018)
  • European Regional Development Fund (RTI2018, RTI2018-093346- B-C33)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
Keywords
digital democracy, disinformation, social media, political bots, astroturfing, artificial intelligence in politics, big data, fake news, deepfakes, Cambridge Analytica, audience engagement, political polarization, echo chambers, technological determinism, democratic values

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