iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

That means that negative campaigning is not just louder—it’s also safer. Not only are attack messages more likely to get media coverage (as previous research has shown), they are also less likely to be reinterpreted critically by journalists. 8/8

000

Negative attacks on opponents are framed neutrally—whether they come from populists or mainstream parties, incumbents or challengers. Journalists may be skeptical of some actors, but their response depends more on message type than sender. 7/8

100

In contrast, negative campaign messages are not more likely to trigger journalistic criticism. When politicians act as critics, journalists step aside—but when politicians praise themselves, the media steps in. The press plays devil’s advocate only when no one else does. 6/8

100

According to the results, all types of self-promotional messages are more likely to be negatively framed by journalists—especially those focusing on the politician’s character, and less so those centered on policy issues. 5/8

100

We answered this question using data from the Comparative Campaign Dynamics dataset, based on manual content analysis of 16 election campaigns across 10 countries. 4/8

100

To explore this question, we used Benoit’s typology to distinguish six types of campaign messages and analyzed how journalists frame each of them. 3/8

100

🗞️ Journalists’ negative framing can reshape how voters perceive campaign messages—so it’s crucial for political actors to know which messages are more media-proof, and which are more exposed to criticism. 2/8

100

New publication – “Go negative to be on the safe side! A 10-country investigation of the link between journalists’ negative framing and political actors’ strategic communication” – PRiSMa

🆕 New pub co-authored w/ Xénia Farkas in Journalism on which campaign messages are more likely to be negatively framed by journalists. 💡 Findings: Negative messages are reported neutrally, while self-promotion is more often challenged. 📖 Blog summary here: tinyurl.com/574eppu5 📌Key takeaways in 👇1/8

tinyurl.com

130

False sense of security and a flurry of misplaced trust: the construction of trust in and by Facebook

These findings suggest that Facebook users may be operating under a false sense of security. They trust a platform with a questionable track record and overestimate their own ability to stay safe—creating a potentially fragile foundation for digital trust. 9/9 www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

tandfonline.com

In this research, we highlight the fundamental forces that shape the dynamics of trust in the digital society by examining how platform-specific and platform-mediated trust is constructed on Facebo...

000

These sources of trust don’t replace each other. Rather than one pillar compensating for another, they reinforce each other. Trust is strongest when users believe in both Facebook’s safeguards and their own ability to manage risks. 8/9

Belief in government regulation doesn’t significantly affect trust. Users don’t seem to associate platform safety with external oversight. 7/9

A secondary factor is users’ self-confidence. Those who believe they can manage risks—by recognizing and avoiding manipulation—report higher trust. Interestingly, merely identifying risks doesn’t boost trust; it’s action and perceived ability that matter more than vigilance. 6/9

The strongest factor influencing trust is the perceived effectiveness of Facebook’s self-regulation. When users believe the platform actively protects them—through moderation or algorithmic controls—their trust increases significantly. 5/9

Users who perceive high risk are less likely to trust Facebook as a platform—but this distrust doesn't extend to other users or to the content. People tend to blame the company, yet still trust what they see and who they interact with. 4/9

To answer this, we conducted a large-scale survey in 2022 across seven European countries: Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Portugal, and the Netherlands. 3/9

100

In this paper, we investigated how trust on Facebook is influenced by users' perceptions of risk and three potential "pillars" of trust: (1) confidence in their own ability to recognize and avoid harm, (2) belief in Facebook’s self-regulation, and (3) belief in state regulation. 2/9

100

Márton Bene @martonbene.bsky.social · 10/04/2025

New publication in Information, Communication & Society with Balázs Bodó and Zsolt Boda on how trust is constructed on social media! 🔗 Blog summary: prisma-rg.hu/new-publicat... 🧵 Key takeaways below 1/9

163

Check out this great poster from @favstats.eu on our study of bias in how political ads are delivered!

021

Márton Bene @martonbene.bsky.social · 04/04/2025

My research group is excited to host international postdocs through this fellowship opportunity!

000

Reposted by Márton Bene

PRiSMa - Political Representation in the Age of Social Media @prisma-hungary.bsky.social · 03/04/2025

Argumentative fallacies outsourced to astroturf influencers? New PRiSMa publication by Vanessza Juhász on the rhetorical strategies of pro-government influencers and political actors. The article is in Hungarian, but a brief overview is available here: 🔗 prisma-rg.hu/new-prisma-p...

prisma-rg.hu

New PRiSMA Publication – “Influential Politicians and Political Influencers: The Argument Analysis of Megafon’s Negative Campaign” – PRiSMa

011

Márton Bene @martonbene.bsky.social · 01/04/2025

What a wonderful feeling to finally close a book manuscript. It’s been a long journey—but it’s officially submitted! #NetworkedLocality #polcomm

030

Márton Bene @martonbene.bsky.social · 28/03/2025

We’ve just launched the Bluesky profile of our new research group—come follow us! bsky.app/profile/pris... You can also check out our website to learn more about who we are and what we do! prisma-rg.hu

050

Based on the theory of monitorial citizens, political distrust does not necessarily lead to heightened news consumption but makes people less likely to turn away from the news entirely. As Schudson argues monitorial citizens "are not gathering information; they are keeping an eye on the scene.” 7/7

010

In contrast, this sense of civic duty is not activated for those who trust political elites: civic supervision is not necessary when political actors are believed to be good-willing. It is not the sense of civic duty to keep informed but the civic duty to monitor the processes that matter here. 6/7

100

We also demonstrate that political distrust decreases intentional news avoidance since it turns on a monitoring attitude, a sort of sense of civic duty to keep at least “approximately” informed as a tool of civic control over untrustworthy political elites to prevent serious abuse of power. 5/7

100

One key reason often cited for news avoidance is perceived negativity in news. Our findings show that its deterrent effect varies by political orientation: left-leaning voters are more likely to turn away, while negativity aligns better with the worldview and psychology of right-leaning voters. 4/7

100

In our study, we emphasize the need to consider political factors more deeply when explaining news avoidance, as news consumption is a form of political engagement. We examined two key factors: ideology as a moderator of the impact of news negativity and the role of political trust. 3/7

100

Intentional news avoidance is a major problem in contemporary society. Most studies show that a significant portion of voters intentionally avoid news, and, over the last decades, the share of news avoiders has been progressively increasing in many liberal democracies. 2/7

100

Márton Bene @martonbene.bsky.social · 02/12/2024

Thrilled to announce our new publication with Manuel Goyanes in the International Journal of Public Opinion Research! Using a two-wave Spanish survey, we examine how news avoidance connects with perceived news negativity and political trust. Details below! 👇1/7 academic.oup.com/ijpor/articl...

100

I'm thrilled to announce that as of Jan 1, I've been appointed as a professor at the HUN-REN, Institute for Pol. Science—becoming, to my knowledge, the youngest to hold this position in its history! I'm incredibly grateful for this milestone and for everyone who supported me along the way.

4120

While effect sizes are small, findings indicate: people can be made angrier with talking about economy, energy and foreign policy, but more enthusiastic with the topic of environment. These patterns are independent of party type (but depend prob. on the way they are discussed)5/5

000

we found: economy: less love and more angry energy: less love and more angry environment: more love (not in Hungary) foreign policy: more angry (not in Norway) social policy: no effect These effects are largely uniform across party types! Issue ownership does not matter... 4/5

100

To test the direct and conditional effects of issues communicated by political actors on Facebook and the love and angry reactions they trigger, we conducted a content analysis in three countries. This way we could also uncover the role of party- and country-level moderators 3/5

100

While both policy issues and emotions are key parts of campaigns,the link between issues and “emotional reactions” is largely unexplored. This is important from a strategic perspective since issue strategies can be shaped by considerations of their emotion-provoking potential 2/5

100