TALLER DOCTORAL I: CRITICAL READING FOR ACADEMIC PURPOSES

Commented bibliography about Twitter and journalism

Mara de los Angeles Miranda Bustamante
July 31
st
, 21!
1" #oguera, J"M" $213%" &ow open are journalists on Twitter' Trends towards the
(nd-user journalism)" Communi*ation + ,o*iety, 2- $1%, .3-11!"
Jos/ Manuel #oguera 0i1o, is a 2o*tor in Communi*ation and 3ro4essor o4
5n4ormation Te*hnology in 6ni1ersidad Cat7li*a ,an Antonio, in Mur*ia, ,pain" &e
argues that Twitter is *hanging journalism, allowing users to *ollaborate in the
news *onstru*tion"
#oguera points out that end8user journalism should be transparent in order to
re1eal all the news produ*tion stages, that in the past were hidden 4rom the publi*"
The author *onsiders that journalism in digital plat4orms *laims a rede4inition o4 the
traditional wor9 routines"
&e uses a :uantitati1e *ontent analysis to measure the openness in 2; spanish
journalists< tweets" A**ording to his indi*ators, end8user journalism must only use
mentions, e=ternal lin9s, hashtags and re:uests o4 in4ormation to the a**ount
4ollowers" But *ollaborati1e journalism is not only using these plat4orm resour*es"
#oguera doesn<t analy>e the deep *ontent o4 tweeted news and its relationship
with amateur users *omments" &is results don?t in*lude data, opinions and
suggestions pro1ided by the publi*"
5n addition, the resear*her doesn<t analy>e i4 the tweets pro1ided by the publi*
generate a dis*ussion with media a**ounts, in order to modi4y the journalisti*
spee*h or agenda" That debate might lead to a real end8user journalism, in own
#oguera<s terms"
#e1ertheless, this paper opens an important topi* 4or dis*ussion in so*ial
*ommuni*ation 4ield and summari>es re*ent *urrent s*ienti4i* studies o4 news in
Twitter" Also, #oguera<s de4inition o4 end8user journalism is use4ul in *ollaborati1e
news debate" 5n the *onte=t o4 web 2", users want to parti*ipate in news
*onstru*tion and the press must lead this pro*ess"
2" 2oughty, M", @owland, 2", + Aawson, ," $212, July%" Bho is on your so4a'C T0
audien*e *ommunities and se*ond s*reening so*ial networ9s" 3ro*eedings o4 the
1th (uropean *on4eren*e on 5ntera*ti1e t1 and 1ideo, 1, D.8E-"
The three authors are pro4essors at the ,*hool o4 Computer ,*ien*e o4 the
6ni1ersity o4 Ain*oln, in 6nited Fingdom" They ha1e de1eloped resear*hes about
te*hnology, so*ial networ9s and users beha1ior"
5n this paper, they analy>e the nature o4 networ9s 4ormed by users in Gse*ond
s*reening) intera*tions, that is, wat*hing a T0 show and *ommenting it in Twitter at
the same time"
6sing so*ial networ9s analysis te*hni:ues, they measure the number o4
*onne*tions, users, mentions and retweets and draw a map where they show the
intera*tions between Twitter users in two di44erent T0 shows"
They *on*lude that people display di44erent beha1iors in se*ond s*reening
e=perien*es" ,ome users *onne*t *elebrities in order to in*rease their own
personal reputation in the networ9" Hthers message their 4riends or li9e8minded
1iewers and in1ite them to wat*h the show and initiate a *on1ersation about it"
The study analy>es two *ompletely di44erent T0 shows" BBC Iuestion Time is a
politi*al debate and ,tri*tly Come 2an*ing is a li1e broad*asting, where *elebrities
dan*e and *ompete to stay one more wee9 in show" Also tweeters *an 1ote 4or
their 4a1orite stars"
That *an e=plain that, during ,tri*tly Come 2an*ing ,how, the 4ollowers usually
mention and message the *elebrities in a one8way *on1ersation" 5nstead, the users
1iewing the debate show pre4er to dis*uss in Twitter with their *lose *ir*les"
@esear*h 4indings might be more a**urate i4 the authors had ta9en two similar
programs"
Also, the paper doesn<t *onsider the promotion o4 hashtags by the T0 presenters
during the two shows" &ashtags are e=pli*it in1itations to dis*uss the T0 *ontent
and they 4o*us the *on1ersation in Twitter, so that is a *ru*ial in4ormation"
2espite this, the resear*h addresses se*ond s*reening beha1iors, an issue rarely
analy>ed in so*ial *ommuni*ation area" 5ndeed, digital networ9s promote a
*on1ergen*e *ulture, where users wat*h more than one media at a time" Twitter
and tele1ision *ombination opens a new way o4 users parti*ipation"
5n this arti*le the authors des*ribe with detail the data gathering and sample
sele*tion, so this resear*h *ontributes to test the :uality o4 *urrent so*ial networ9s
analysis te*hni:ues and to re1eal its limitations"
3" Fwa9, &", Aee, C", 3ar9, &", + Moon, ," $21%" Bhat is Twitter, a so*ial networ9
or a news media'" 3ro*eedings o4 the 1.th international *on4eren*e on Borld wide
web, 1., ;.18-"
The authors are part o4 a spe*iali>ed resear*h group in Forea Ad1an*ed 5nstitute o4
,*ien*e and Te*hnology, Faist"
This is a *omprehensi1e analysis, whose goal is to study Twitter as a whole
phenomenon and to determine its *hara*teristi*s as a new medium o4 in4ormation
sharing" The resear*hers say that, to the best o4 their 9nowledge, this is the 4irst
:uantitati1e study on the entire twittersphere" ,o they e=pe*t that their *on*lusions
are 1alid 4or the entire Twitter networ9, despite the *ountries and *ultures"
The huge sample in*ludes !1,D million o4 twitter user pro4iles, !"2-2 trending topi*s
and 1- millions o4 tweets" The :uantitati1e analysis mainly *on*luded that
4ollower84ollowing dynami* in Twitter bro9e the traditional human so*ial networ9s
rules" Jor e=ample, Ghomophily) is a pro1en tenden*y in non8digital relationships,
whereby a *onta*t between similar people is more li9ely that a *onta*t between
dissimilar people" #e1ertheless, the study demonstrates that in Twitter, users with
more than 2, re*ipro*al relationships 4re:uently *onta*t with dissimilar users,
who li1e in another *ontinent"
The arti*le de1elops interesting data gathering te*hni:ues and tools, li9e Twitter
,ear*h A35" Though it returns only 1"; tweets per :uery, the authors repeated
the :uery e1ery ; minutes inter1al to enlarge the results" They used this same tool
in order to identi4y and *olle*t the trending topi*s, getting a representati1e *orpus
o4 issues that interested Twitter users"
5n journalism 4ield, they dis*o1ered that o1er E;K o4 topi*s are headlines or
persistent news, so tweeters tend to tal9 about headline news and respond to 4resh
news" This *on4irms that the majority part o4 Twitter *on1ersation has a publi*
nature" ,o, in 4a*t, this digital plat4orm is *hanging old journalism"
As a *omprehensi1e study, this paper is not a deep analysis" But, published in
21, this arti*le was one o4 the 4irst that e=plored Twitter as a new media and
today is still a 1alid re4erent in digital *ommuni*ation resear*h"
!" Murthy, 2" $211%" TwitterC Mi*rophone 4or the masses' Media, Culture and
,o*iety, 33 $;%, DD.8DE."
2hiraj Murthy is a pro4essor in the 2epartment o4 ,o*iology in Bowdoin College,
Brunswi*9, 6nited ,tates" 5n this arti*le, he analy>es Twitter and *iti>en journalism
relationship" The *ore :uestion is i4 this digital plat4orm has really allowed ordinary
people to *onstru*t their own news, or rather they only *onsume them" &e ta9es
two brea9ing news e1ents in whi*h an ordinary Twitter user was the 4irst to report
them"
5n the 4irst *ase, the Mumbai bomb blasts in 2E, tweeters published li1e
des*riptions, widely disseminated in twittersphere" 5n the se*ond e1ent, the 6,
Airways 4light *rash in 2., a person too9 a pi*ture o4 the jet 4loating in the
&udson ri1er and published it in Twitter be4ore the journalists *ame"
#e1ertheless, Murthy *on*ludes that twittering *iti>en journalists are ephemeral,
sin*e the publi* is interested not in the original sour*es o4 in4ormation, but in
stories" A4ter the 4irst *iti>en tweet, pro4essional news media will ta9e a leading role
in press *o1erage"
There4ore, Twitter, and not ordinary users, is a power4ul tool to pro1ide brea9ing
news to traditional media, so the in4luen*e o4 *iti>en journalists in Twitter is 1ery
relati1e"
This arti*le is not a s*ienti4i* in1estigation, but just an essay" The two *ases *ited
here are only shallow des*riptions o4 ane*dotal 4a*ts in Twitter history, and the
author ne1er uses methodologi*al tools, li9e *ase study, 4or e=ample"
But, e1en as a mere essay, Murthy doesn<t o44er his own point o4 1iew" &e just
synthesi>es di44erent opinions in the debate about Twitter and journalism and he
doesn<t say i4 Twitter a*tually is a mi*rophone 4or the masses or not, as the title
suggests"
5n *on*lusion, the arti*le doesn<t answer a :uestion" 5t only pro1ides an o1er1iew o4
di44erent arguments about the alleged e=isten*e o4 *iti>en journalism 1ia Twitter,
that might be use4ul to 4uture s*ienti4i* resear*hes"
;" &imelboim, 5", M*Creery, ,", ,mith, M" $213%" Birds o4 a 4eather tweet togetherC
5ntegrating networ9 and *ontent analyses to e=amine *ross8ideology e=posure on
Twitter" Journal o4 Computer8Mediated Communi*ation, 1E, 1;!81D!"
5tai &imelboim and ,tephen M*Creery are both pro4essors o4 Lrady College o4
Journalism and Mass Communi*ation in 6ni1ersity o4 Leorgia" Mar* ,mith wor9s
at the Conne*ted A*tion Lroup in Belmont"
The resear*hers attempt to answer i4 Twitter users are really e=posed to *ross8
ideologi*al politi*al 1iews in this plat4orm or i4 they pre4er to 4ollow only to their
partisans"
The in1estigation is based on :uantitati1e methodology allowing to analy>e the
design o4 the networ9 and, at the same time, the *ontent o4 tweets" They *on*lude
that Gbirds o4 a 4eather 4lo*9 together), that is, users tend to share politi*al
*omments only with li9e8minded people, so tweeters usually are not e=posed to
*ross8ideologi*al *ontent"
The main strength o4 this wor9 is sampling design" 5n order to 1isuali>e and analy>e
so*ial networ9, the authors don<t apply traditional sampling te*hni:ues, and they
use, instead, the #odeMA appli*ation" This tool *an draw the *omplete networ9 o4
users that published tweets *ontaining one o4 the 1 sele*ted 9eywords that were
related to some o4 the most important topi*s in politi*al debate in the 6nited ,tated
during the summer o4 21"
The resear*hers *hoose 4ollowing relationships in Twitter as the better indi*ator o4
e=posure to *ross8ideologi*al *ontent, instead o4 retweeting and replies" That is an
inno1ation in traditional ways to measure the in4luen*e on Twitter" &owe1er,
4ollowing a Twitter user doesn<t guarantee a real e=posure to their messages, or at
least i4 the 4ollowers a*tually read and understand the *ontent" There4ore, it might
be interesting to in*lude indi*ators li9e the *ontent o4 replies and number o4
retweets and mentions, that *an a**urately ensure a real e=posure to messages"
Though this paper proposes inno1ations in sampling te*hni:ues applied to Twitter
study, their results are not new" 5ndeed, they are *onsisting with pre1ious
in1estigations in this area" 5n sum, it *on*ludes that the 4reedom to e=press politi*al
opinions not ne*essarily produ*es an open politi*al debate in Twitter" @ather, the
members o4 a *luster are politi*ally homogenous" These 4indings raises new
:uestions regarding the *ause o4 this so*ial beha1ior that re4le*ts an a1ersion to
argue about one?s politi*al leaning"
-" Aarsson, A" $213%" Tweeting the 1iewer8use o4 Twitter in a tal9 show *onte=t"
Journal o4 Broad*asting + (le*troni* Media" ;D $2%, 13;81;2"
The author is a postdo*toral 4ellow at the 2epartment o4 Media and Communi*ation
in 6ni1ersity o4 Hslo, and a resear*her in so*ial media area"
The aim o4 this paper is to des*ribe journalistNaudien*e intera*tion on Twitter, in the
*onte=t o4 the ,wedish tal9 show &Obinette, where the host inter1iewed a series o4
di44erent guests"
The sample in*ludes all the eight episodes o4 the 4irst season and *olle*ted 2"31!
tweets *ontaining the hashtag Phubinette, that was suggested in the o44i*ial web
site o4 the program"
The :uantitati1e analysis measures the number o4 retweets, mentions and tweets
using this hashtag" The paper *on*ludes that Twitter a*ti1ity was rather rea*ti1e,
be*ause the audien*e is not 4urther in1ol1ed in pro4ound dis*ussions" The publi*
merely retweets a 4ew messages posted by the host, Farin &Obinette, during the
broad*asting timing" That seems to *orroborate the *ru*ial role o4 the journalists in
Twitter *on1ersation"
The main wea9ness o4 this arti*le is data *olle*tion" The author only analy>es the
tweets *ontaining the hashtag proposed by the show, so he doesn<t *onsider other
9eywords that would be related with the topi*s addressed during the show or the
mentions o4 the names o4 the guests" Thus, he lea1es out the sample other
potential *on1ersations generated by users, that might be more ri*h and a*ti1e"
This redu*ed sample *ondu*ts to a sel484ul4illing prophe*y, be*ause the study
states that the journalists ha1e a dominant role, but it only analy>es the
*on1ersations that 4ollow journalists rules, that is, the use o4 the hashtag proposed
by the show team" Be ignore i4 the audien*e generated another *on1ersations on
Twitter to re4er to the program topi*s, using other hashtags"
5n addition, the resear*h is 4o*used in one show, in one spe*i4i* *ountry" That might
redu*e its generability" But, as a *ase study, it lea1es open :uestions and 4indings
to be tested in other T0 genres and *ountries"
5n sum, the paper suggests that Twitter o44er a huge possibility 4or
journalistsNaudien*e intera*tion, but it is still too soon to 9now how this plat4orm will
*hange traditional patterns in journalisti* pra*ti*es"
D" @ossi, A" y Magnani, M" $212%" Con1ersation 3ra*ti*es and #etwor9 ,tru*ture
in Twitter" ,i=th 5nternational AAA5 Con4eren*e on Beblogs and ,o*ial Media, -,
;-38;--
Au*a @ossi wor9s at the 2epartment o4 Communi*ation ,tudies at 6ni1ersity o4
6rbino Carlo Bo, in 5taly, and Matteo Magnani is a pro4essor at the 2epartment o4
Computer ,*ien*e in Aarhus 6ni1ersity, in 2enmar9"
The authors e=plore the relationships between the Twitter networ9, made o4 users
and their 4ollowers, and the topi*al networ9, that in*ludes all the issues and
potential *on1ersations that might be started in all twittersphere" The :uestion is
how the list o4 4ollowers is a44e*ted by the parti*ipation in the same hashtag or
trending topi*"
The in1estigators *olle*ted all tweets using the o44i*ial hashtag PMJ;, during the
4i4th season o4 the show GM Ja*tor 5talia)" They dete*ted a rate o4 one tweet per
se*ond, during - hours o4 broad*asting" 6sing a :uantitati1e analysis, they identi4y
retweets, replies and lin9s posted during the show" Then they draw the stru*ture o4
*on1ersation and how the networ9 has *hanged a4ter the hashtag *on1ersation"
They *on*lude that the most addressed users are three o44i*ial a**ounts o4 the
show, so the ordinary users only parti*ipate by addressing the *omment o4 a
prominent user" There4ore, the *on1ersation is 4o*used on the identity o4 the user,
not on the *ontent" &owe1er, both ordinary and prominent users gained new
4ollowers as a result o4 their parti*ipation during the hashtag *on1ersation"
The study also points out that the numbers o4 posted tweets is not rele1ant in new
4ollowers a*:uisition" The 9ey 4a*tor in gaining more Twitter *onta*ts is the
parti*ipation in the same hashtag based *on1ersation and sharing a *ommon
interest, so8*alled homophily"
This arti*le ma9es inno1ati1e *ontributions to the study o4 Twitter *ommuni*ation,
but a *ontent8*entered methodology is needed to identi4y the 4a*tors that determine
in4luen*e on Twitter" &omophily is produ*ed not only by using a same hashtag, but
also by the possibility o4 users to Gtune) their opinions, re1ealed in the *ontent o4
the posts" 5n this *ase o4 study, it might be possible to analy>e QTwitter sentimentQ
on the posts generated with the same hashtag, in order to identi4y the a44inities that
moti1ate the 4ollowedN4ollower relationships"
The in1estigation is based on two important le1els o4 Twitter intera*tionsC the
4ollowedN4ollower dynami* and the potential world wide *on1ersation, that is
possible sin*e on Twitter a user doesn<t need to 4ollow an a**ount to read the posts
o4 other user"
This paper is a 4irst approa*h in the analysis o4 the intera*tions on this plat4orm" 5t
o44ers a solid base 4or 4uture resear*hes, be*ause it demonstrates that there are
many intera*tions between these two parallel dimensions o4 the Twitter
phenomenon"
E" Meeyoung, Ch", &addad, &, Ben1enuto, J, and Lummadi, F" $21%" Measuring
in4luen*e in TwitterC The million 4ollower 4alla*y" 5nternational AAA5 Con4eren*e on
Beblogs and ,o*ial Media 6ser, 1, 181D"
The 4our authors are resear*hers in three di44erent uni1ersities and *ountries"
Meeyoung is a pro4esor at Ma= 3lan*9 5nstitute 4or ,o4tware ,ystems, in LermanyR
&adadd and Ben1enuto are in1estigators at 6ni1ersity o4 Aondon, in 6nited
Fingdom, and Lummadi wor9s at Jederal 6ni1ersity o4 Minas Lerais, in Bra>il"
The arti*le dis*usses the problem o4 in4luen*e in Twitter and tries to des*ribe the
stru*ture o4 users reputation on this digital plat4orm" 5n the theoreti*al debate, there
are two opposed 1isions" Hne o4 them argues that there are a 4ew users, *alled
in4luentials, who are more persuasi1e and e44e*ti1e in *hanging others? opinions
and beha1iors" Hn the other hand, the se*ond theory proposes that in4luen*e
depends on the relationship among users and the openness o4 a spe*i4i* *ulture to
adopt a *hange" The aim o4 this wor9 is empiri*ally demonstrate whi*h o4 these two
ideas is *orre*t"
The sample is hugeC it *onsiders a total o4 1,D billion tweets and ;! millions users"
5n this :uantitati1e study, the in1estigators apply three traditional Twitter in4luen*e
indi*atorsC indegree $number o4 4ollowers o4 a user, that determines the si>e o4 his
audien*e%, retweet in4luen*e $number o4 retweets *ontaining the username o4 an
a**ount, that indi*ates the 1alue o4 the *ontent 4or other users% and mentions
$messages posted by other users, *ontaining the name o4 the a**ount, that shows
the ability to in1ol1e another users in *on1ersation%"
Comparing these indi*ators in the top in4luentials list, they 4ind that more *onne*ted
people are not ne*essarily the more in4luential in retweets and mentions" ,o they
*on*lude that indegree or ha1ing a million 4ollowers on Twitter indi*ates popularity,
but not ne*essarily more in4luen*e"
&owe1er, measuring the in4luen*e in topi* *on1ersation, they 4ind that popular
users *an spread their *ontents in subje*ts outside their area o4 e=pertise" Bhile
ordinary users must wor9 hard to in*rease their in4luen*e on Twitter, dedi*ating
their posts to a spe*i4i* topi*"
The main *ontribution o4 this in1estigation is the attempt to pro1e *omple= and
abstra*t theories about so*ial inno1ation" #e1ertheless, the readiness o4 a so*iety
to adopt *hanges is a di44i*ult *on*ept to operationali>e and this study a1oids this
tas9"
5n addition, the *on*lusions are not re1olutionaryC the paper demonstrates that, as
many traditional s*holars thin9, *elebrities and media are more li9ely to be
in4luential than *ommon users" And these 4indings are reliable, *onsidering the big
si>e o4 the sample and the stringen*y in the methodology applied in the study"
A**ordingly to these *on*lusions, mar9eting, politi*s and journalism must in1ol1e
popular users in their *ampaigns in order to in*rease their in4luen*e" The other
option is to *reate more attra*ti1e and inno1ati1e strategies"
." &ermida, A" $212%" Tweets and truthC Journalism as a dis*ipline o4 *ollaborati1e
1eri4i*ation" Journalism 3ra*ti*e, - $;8-%, -;.8--E"
Al4red &ermida is an asso*iate 3ro4essor o4 Journalism, at the 6ni1ersity o4 British
Columbia, in Canada" &is area o4 e=pertise in*ludes journalism, te*hnology,
inno1ation, so*ial media and Twitter"
This paper is not a s*ienti4i* in1estigation, but an essay about how Twitter is
reshaping the so*ial role o4 journalism" The autor argues that journalism has the
traditional duty o4 1eri4ying so*ial 4a*ts to be presented to the publi*, but so*ial
media ha1e *hanged this asimmetri*al relationship"
&ermida points out that today there is an Qambient journalismQ, where the
in4ormations are e1erywhere and the data 4low are 4ed with *ontributions o4 both
journalists and amateurs" 5n this *onte=t, *olle*ti1e intelligen*e, that is the *rowd o4
indi1idual users, must separate the 4a9e and irrele1ant news 4rom important and
authenti* ones "
&ermida shares the *on*ept o4 openness in journalismC the news produ*tion must
be transparent, so he suggests a li1e and publi* 1eri4i*ation system, where
pro1isional in4ormations are posted, so Twitter users *an *ontribute and e1en
*orre*t the *ontent o4 in4ormations"
&owe1er, this proposal 4orgets that, as @odrigo Alsina $1.E.%
1
says, journalism is
still the more reliable a*tor in so*ial *onstru*tion o4 reality" 5n a *onte=t o4 e=*ess o4
in4ormation, and a*9nowledging journalism limitations, pro4essional media are a
sour*e o4 organi>ed, sele*ted and interpreted in4ormation, espe*ially when ordinary
users don<t ha1e dire*t a**ess to all publi* 4a*ts and they are so busy to read and
understand them"
@e*ent in1estigations related to Twitter indi*ate that, *ontrary to some predi*tions,
traditional media a**ounts on Twitter ha1e a leading role as in4ormation outlets"
2espite these *riti*isms and *on*erns, this arti*le is right in emphasi>ing the
importan*e o4 users parti*ipation, *onsisting in noti4ying brea9ing news,
*ommenting the 4a*ts and super1ising the a**ura*y o4 pro4essional media" 5t is
interesting the mi=ed solution *ommented by the autor, that is, publishing li1e
1
@odrigo, M" $1.E.%" Aa *onstru**i7n so*ial de la noti*ia" Bar*elona, (spaSaC 3aid7s"
a**ounts with *iti>ens *ontributions and also o44i*ial a**ounts with pro4esional
news *ontent"
1" 2a1is, B" $213% &ashtag politi*sC The polyphoni* re1olution o4 PTwitter,
3epperdine Journal o4 Communi*ation @esear*h, 1, 1-822"
Bud 2a1is is the 4ounder and editor8in8*hie4 o4 the 3epperdine Journal o4
Communi*ation @esear*h at the 3epperdine 6ni1ersity in Cali4ornia, 6nited ,tates"
5n this paper, he tra*es the e1olution o4 politi*al messages on Twitter, *omparing
the last two presidential ele*tions at the 6nited ,tates, in 2E and 212" &e
argues that, though Twitter uses a singular and 4ragmented language, the posts
are always dialogi*, be*ause their meanings are *onne*ted with other short
messages"
The autor ta9es the *on*ept o4 interte=tuality to des*ribe the su**ession o4 related
tweets, o4ten in1ol1ed in a same hashtag" Thus, users *an see9 spe*i4i* 9eywords
that organi>e this burst o4 *haoti* in4ormation around only one topi* o4
*on1ersation"
5n this essay, 2a1is proposes that in Twitter there is a polyphony o4 1oi*es
*ompeting in spreading 1iews and in4ormations" 5n this s*ene, he *riti*i>es some
mar9eting strategies that *reate G*ommodi4ied identities) that people just *onsume"
Bith these te*hni:ues, dialogue is not allowed"
The author states that *iti>en journalists must per*olate politi*ians? spee*hes on
Twitter and lead them to dis*uss the 1oters? agenda"
&owe1er, this 1ision seems too optimisti*" ,*ienti4i* in1estigations ha1e pro1en that
prominent users, li9e poli*yma9ers, ha1e more in4luen*e on Twitter that the
majority o4 *ommon users" That assymetri* position gi1es them an ad1antage in
Twitter debate about publi* issues"
5n addition, other studies demonstrated that popular users rarely establish
re*ipro*al relationships with their Twitter 4ollowers" They usually ne1er answer their
:uestions and they ne1er 4ollow them ba*9" ,o 2a1is< good intentions are li9ely to
be an uthopy, at least 4or now"
But the appli*ation o4 interte=tuality might be interesting 4or Twitter analysis i4 it is
applied to *on1ersations or replies se:uen*es" #ot all posted messages are in a
dialogi* *onte=t" That depends on the in4luen*e o4 the users, that is, his number o4
4ollowers, retweets and mentions and also the nature and *reati1ity o4 his *ontent"
@ather, it is possible to say that tweets are potentially dyadi*"