科學(xué)60秒:人氣王主導(dǎo)網(wǎng)絡(luò)論壇
來源：滬江聽寫酷
2011-08-22 10:00
When the internet first ___1___, some scholars of democracy and civil society thought that online discussions could create what they called a “___2___”: an ongoing town hall without bricks and mortar. But the internet may not be as democratic as they'd imagined, according to a study in the journal Communication Research. ["Civil Society and Online Political Discourse: The Network Structure of Unrestricted Discussions"]
Researcher Itai Himelboim gathered eight million messages posted to 35 political and philosophical newsgroups—like —over a six-year period. And he analyzed the connections among the messages. Turns out that 50 percent of all replies were ___3___ just 2 percent of people who started threads, and who thus came to control the discussion. And the larger the newsgroup, the more ___4___ this effect became.
But these newsgroup dominators weren't posting much original content. Sixty percent of their posts were just content ___5___ traditional news sources like the New York Times. Which is good news for the news business, the author says. Because it means people still want someone else to search out information and deliver it. After all, isn't that one reason why you listen to this podcast?
【視聽版科學(xué)小組榮譽(yù)出品】
Researcher Itai Himelboim gathered eight million messages posted to 35 political and philosophical newsgroups—like —over a six-year period. And he analyzed the connections among the messages. Turns out that 50 percent of all replies were ___3___ just 2 percent of people who started threads, and who thus came to control the discussion. And the larger the newsgroup, the more ___4___ this effect became.
But these newsgroup dominators weren't posting much original content. Sixty percent of their posts were just content ___5___ traditional news sources like the New York Times. Which is good news for the news business, the author says. Because it means people still want someone else to search out information and deliver it. After all, isn't that one reason why you listen to this podcast?
【視聽版科學(xué)小組榮譽(yù)出品】
got kicking
conversational democracy
directed at
polarized
lifted from
網(wǎng)絡(luò)剛出現(xiàn)如火如荼的勢頭，部分民主派及民間團(tuán)體人士就認(rèn)為網(wǎng)絡(luò)討論將營造出所謂的“言論民主”： 虛擬市政辦公廳。但《傳播研究》上的一篇研究報告表明，事實(shí)上，網(wǎng)絡(luò)并沒有他們想象中那么民主。
伊泰?希梅爾博耗費(fèi)6年時間，從35個政府、哲學(xué)新聞討論小組（如）收集了八百萬份信息，并且分析了這些信息的內(nèi)在聯(lián)系。結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)，50%信息都是回復(fù)給其中2%的人的，而這2%，就是高人氣的討論主導(dǎo)者。討論組規(guī)模越大，主導(dǎo)現(xiàn)象就越明顯。
但是，這些人氣王發(fā)布的信息很多都不是原創(chuàng)觀點(diǎn)，其中60%的信息是轉(zhuǎn)載自《紐約時報》等傳統(tǒng)新聞線索。報告作者認(rèn)為這對新聞界來說不失為一件好事，因?yàn)檫@表明還是人們還是希望有人能發(fā)現(xiàn)新聞、傳播新聞的。不然，你也不會來聽科學(xué)60秒了吧~
