News Source Bias and Sentiment on Social Media

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2024 Oct 23

PMID 39441772

Authors

Brian Knutson

Tiffany W Hsu

Michael Ko

Jeanne L Tsai

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

As social media becomes a key channel for news consumption and sharing, proliferating partisan and mainstream news sources must increasingly compete for users' attention. While affective qualities of news content may promote engagement, it is not clear whether news source bias influences affective content production or virality, or whether any differences have changed over time. We analyzed the sentiment of ~30 million posts (on twitter.com) from 182 U.S. news sources that ranged from extreme left to right bias over the course of a decade (2011-2020). Biased news sources (on both left and right) produced more high arousal negative affective content than balanced sources. High arousal negative content also increased reposting for biased versus balanced sources. The combination of increased prevalence and virality for high arousal negative affective content was not evident for other types of affective content. Over a decade, the virality of high arousal negative affective content also increased, particularly in balanced news sources, and in posts about politics. Together, these findings reveal that high arousal negative affective content may promote the spread of news from biased sources, and conversely imply that sentiment analysis tools might help social media users to counteract these trends.

References

Van Bavel J, Rathje S, Harris E, Robertson C, Sternisko A . How social media shapes polarization. Trends Cogn Sci. 2021; 25(11):913-916. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2021.07.013. View

Knutson B, Greer S . Anticipatory affect: neural correlates and consequences for choice. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008; 363(1511):3771-86. PMC: 2607363. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0155. View

WATSON D, Clark L, Tellegen A . Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988; 54(6):1063-70. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063. View

Pennycook G, McPhetres J, Zhang Y, Lu J, Rand D . Fighting COVID-19 Misinformation on Social Media: Experimental Evidence for a Scalable Accuracy-Nudge Intervention. Psychol Sci. 2020; 31(7):770-780. PMC: 7366427. DOI: 10.1177/0956797620939054. View

Vosoughi S, Roy D, Aral S . The spread of true and false news online. Science. 2018; 359(6380):1146-1151. DOI: 10.1126/science.aap9559. View

Grinberg N, Joseph K, Friedland L, Swire-Thompson B, Lazer D . Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science. 2019; 363(6425):374-378. DOI: 10.1126/science.aau2706. View

Hsu T, Niiya Y, Thelwall M, Ko M, Knutson B, Tsai J . Social media users produce more affect that supports cultural values, but are more influenced by affect that violates cultural values. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2021; 121(5):969-983. DOI: 10.1037/pspa0000282. View

Rozado D, Hughes R, Halberstadt J . Longitudinal analysis of sentiment and emotion in news media headlines using automated labelling with Transformer language models. PLoS One. 2022; 17(10):e0276367. PMC: 9578611. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276367. View

Bellovary A, Young N, Goldenberg A . Left- and Right-Leaning News Organizations Use Negative Emotional Content and Elicit User Engagement Similarly. Affect Sci. 2021; 2(4):391-396. PMC: 8364833. DOI: 10.1007/s42761-021-00046-w. View

10.

Martel C, Pennycook G, Rand D . Reliance on emotion promotes belief in fake news. Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2020; 5(1):47. PMC: 7539247. DOI: 10.1186/s41235-020-00252-3. View

11.

Rathje S, Van Bavel J, van der Linden S . Out-group animosity drives engagement on social media. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021; 118(26). PMC: 8256037. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2024292118. View

12.

Ferrara E, Yang Z . Measuring Emotional Contagion in Social Media. PLoS One. 2015; 10(11):e0142390. PMC: 4636231. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142390. View

13.

Crockett M . Moral outrage in the digital age. Nat Hum Behav. 2019; 1(11):769-771. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-017-0213-3. View

14.

Brady W, Wills J, Jost J, Tucker J, Van Bavel J . Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017; 114(28):7313-7318. PMC: 5514704. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1618923114. View

15.

Dukes D, Abrams K, Adolphs R, Ahmed M, Beatty A, Berridge K . The rise of affectivism. Nat Hum Behav. 2021; 5(7):816-820. PMC: 8319089. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01130-8. View

16.

Rathje S, Mirea D, Sucholutsky I, Marjieh R, Robertson C, Van Bavel J . GPT is an effective tool for multilingual psychological text analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024; 121(34):e2308950121. PMC: 11348013. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2308950121. View