<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="en">
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>Political Discourse on Social Media: Echo Chambers, Gatekeepers, and the Price of Bipartisanship</title>
        <author>Kiran Garimella</author>
        <author>Gianmarco De Francisci Morales</author>
        <author>Aristides Gionis</author>
        <author>Michael Mathioudakis</author>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt>
        <p>Tag layer of the DHSS Meta-Tagging Project. The article text is reproduced from the
           staged copy named in sourceDesc and is not altered; the tags are held separately in
           standOff so that overlapping and nested spans are preserved.</p>
      </publicationStmt>
      <sourceDesc>
        <bibl>
          <title>Political Discourse on Social Media: Echo Chambers, Gatekeepers, and the Price of Bipartisanship</title>
          <date>2018</date>
          <publisher>The Web Conference (WWW)</publisher>
          
          <idno type="arXiv">1801.01665</idno>
          <idno type="record">garimella2018-political-discourse</idno>
          <note type="staged-file">garimella2018-political-discourse.txt, the project's staged copy</note>
          <note type="text-sha1">17d685c94d8864aba216889be5e80f6087d06c21</note>
          <note type="rights">arxiv-open</note>
        </bibl>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
    <profileDesc>
      <textClass><keywords><term>political-science</term></keywords></textClass>
      <particDesc>
        <person xml:id="paper"><p>the paper's own words</p></person>
        <person xml:id="tagger"><p>the tag layer; a sentence written by the tagger about the
          paper, always anchored to a quotation but not itself a quotation</p></person>
      </particDesc>
    </profileDesc>
    <revisionDesc>
      <change when="2026-10-06"
              who="build_paper_edition.py">0 spans located by searching the stored text for the quote's exact words, allowing any whitespace between them</change>
    </revisionDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <standOff>
    <spanGrp type="tags">
      <span xml:id="t0" type="claim_type" ana="#claim_type" resp="#paper">
        <label>existence</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t1" type="phenomenon" ana="#phenomenon" resp="#paper">
        <label>political echo chambers on social media</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t2" type="method" ana="#method" resp="#paper">
        <label>observational-study</label>
        <term>observational-study</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t3" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>content and network are measured JOINTLY at the level of the individual user, rather than content consumption alone, and the authors state that as the study&#x27;s distinguishing move</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t4" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>POLITICAL LEANING IS NOT INFERRED FROM THE TEXT AT ALL: scoring short snippets is called very challenging, so the leaning is inherited from an externally supplied per-domain ground truth of news organisations</term>
        <note>about this quote: 2026-08-16: THIS QUOTE IS TRUNCATED MID-SENTENCE BECAUSE THE FILE INTERRUPTS IT. The staged text continues &quot;...news organizations with 6https://en.wikipedia.org/... 7http://www.bbc.com/... 8https://www.nytimes.com/...&quot; - three footnote URLs are spliced between &#x27;with&#x27; and the rest of the clause, which resumes as &#x27;a presence on social media obtained from Bakshy et al.&#x27; The span stops at the last word before the splice. The sentence is not quotable in full from this file without quoting three URLs in the middle of it.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t5" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>and that borrowed score has a stated meaning of its own - the FRACTION OF FACEBOOK USERS VISITING A DOMAIN WHO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AS CONSERVATIVE ON THEIR PROFILE - which the authors read as the domain having a conservative or liberal bent in its coverage</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t6" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>the measurement is deliberately restricted to what can be scored: only tweets carrying a link to a news organisation with a known and independently derived leaning are counted at all</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t7" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[4]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>CONSUMPTION IS DEFINED THROUGH THE NETWORK: a user&#x27;s produced content is the tweets they post, and their consumed content is the tweets posted by the accounts they follow</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t8" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[5]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>partisanship is given a PARAMETERISED definition rather than a threshold - a user is delta-partisan when their production polarity lies within delta of either extreme - and the authors state the nesting property that follows, so a claim at one delta implies the claim at every larger one</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t9" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[6]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>VARIANCE IS MEASURED ALONGSIDE THE MEAN over the same set of tweets, with the stated objective of quantifying the RANGE of opinions a user&#x27;s produced content covers</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t10" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[7]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>FIVE NON-POLITICAL DATASETS ARE COLLECTED AS A BASELINE for the political ones - tbt, ff, gameofthrones, love, foodporn - each built from one hashtag by parsing an archive, filtering to users with at least five tweets, and then taking all of those users&#x27; tweets</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t11" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[8]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>automated accounts are excluded by minimum AND maximum thresholds on tweets per day, followers and friends, together with a requirement that the account be at least one year old at collection time</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t12" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[9]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>the paper STIPULATES &#x27;gatekeeper&#x27; against the established sense and says so: in communication studies the term names news media sources acting as filters, and here it names an individual user who receives content from both leanings but produces only one</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t13" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>political leaning is measured only from tweets that link to news sources of known, independently-derived leaning, not the message content itself</label>
        <note>what this limits: every political-leaning measurement in the study: WE CONSIDER ONLY MESSAGES THAT CONTAIN A LINK TO AN ONLINE NEWS ORGANIZATION WITH A KNOWN AND INDEPENDENTLY DERIVED POLITICAL [leaning] - users without such links are unmeasured</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t14" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>All data come from Twitter and are only a sample of social-media discussion.</label>
        <note>what this limits: the generalisation to political discourse at large: all data come from Twitter and are only a sample of social-media discussion</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t15" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Results are drawn from politically-savvy users and should not be assumed to generalise to the general public.</label>
        <note>what this limits: the network measured: the analysis rests on the retweet and follow graph available through the API, not on the full communication structure</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t16" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>The polarity measures depend on externally supplied political labels for news sources.</label>
        <note>what this limits: every polarity score: OUR PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION SCORES RELY ON EXTERNAL LABELING OF NEWS SOURCES ALONG A POLITICAL AXIS</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t17" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[4]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Following is used as a proxy for actual consumption; users may not read everything their neighbours post.</label>
        <note>what this limits: every consumption measure: OUR ANALYSIS ASSUMES THAT EACH USER CONSUMES ALL CONTENT PRODUCED BY ALL THEIR NEIGHBORS - following stands in for reading</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t18" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[5]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Some articles from the scored news domains may not be political.</label>
        <note>what this limits: the political-content assumption: NOT ALL NEWS ARTICLES FROM THE NEWS SOURCES WE BASE THE POLARITY MEASURES [on] ARE POLITICAL</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t19" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[6]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>The causal relations between selective exposure, biased assimilation, algorithmic filtering and echo chambers are not addressed.</label>
        <note>what this limits: any causal reading of echo chambers: UNDERSTANDING HOW ALL THESE PHENOMENA INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER AND THE PRECISE CAUSALITY RELATIONS IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS PAPER</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t20" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[7]" resp="#tagger" cert="1.0">
        <label>The literature has no consensus definition of the paper&#x27;s central term, so the authors chose one.</label>
        <note>what this limits: the finding that echo chambers are prevalent: the authors state there is no consensus on a formal definition of an echo chamber in the literature and opt for their own, under which an echo chamber exists when the leaning of content a user receives agrees with the leaning of what they share</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t21" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[8]" resp="#tagger" cert="1.0">
        <label>A term is borrowed from another field with its unit of analysis changed, which the authors state.</label>
        <note>what this limits: any comparison with the gatekeeping literature: in media and communication studies gatekeepers are media sources acting as filters, whereas here they are individual users identified by their joint consumption and production leaning</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t22" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[9]" resp="#tagger" cert="1.0">
        <label>A second definition of the same category was tested and its results not presented.</label>
        <note>what this limits: the gatekeeper results reported here: the authors also tested a different definition - high consumption variance with low production variance - found the results almost identical, and did not present them explicitly</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t23" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[10]" resp="#tagger" cert="1.0">
        <label>What the identified users are actually doing is left open by the authors.</label>
        <note>what this limits: any interpretation of the gatekeeper class: the authors say it is not clear from their analysis what such users are doing, so the label marks a position on two measures and not a motive</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t24" type="controls" ana="#controls[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>ten-fold cross-validation of the partisan and gatekeeper classification model</label>
        <note>eliminates: an accuracy figure earned on the same data the classifier was fitted to · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t25" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[0]" resp="#paper">
        <label>echo chamber</label>
        <term>echo chamber</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t26" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[4]" resp="#paper">
        <label>gatekeeper</label>
        <term>gatekeeper</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t27" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[5]" resp="#paper">
        <label>media sources</label>
        <term>media sources</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t28" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[6]" resp="#paper">
        <label>leaning</label>
        <term>leaning</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t29" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[7]" resp="#paper">
        <label>consumption variance</label>
        <term>consumption variance</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t30" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[8]" resp="#paper">
        <label>price of bipartisanship</label>
        <term>price of bipartisanship</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t31" type="unhoused_relations" ana="#unhoused_relations[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>follow → content consumption</label>
        <note>THE INDEXING / PROXY RELATION - &#x27;from&#x27; STANDS IN FOR &#x27;to&#x27;. We have no type for it: &#x27;causes&#x27; asserts production, and &#x27;operationalised-as&#x27; says the authors CHOSE a measure, whereas a proxy claim says THIS STANDS IN FOR WHAT WE ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT AND WE KNOW IT IS NOT THE SAME THING. Measured at 8% of papers. A measurement substitution stated plainly: &#x27;we use the “follow” relationship as a proxy for the actual content consumption&#x27;. The word &#x27;actual&#x27; is doing the same work as amodei2016&#x27;s &#x27;really care about&#x27; - the authors marking the distance between what they measured and what they meant.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t32" type="senses" ana="#senses[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="1.0">
        <label>an echo chamber - AS AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO PER-USER SCORES: it exists, for this paper, when the leaning of the content a user receives agrees with the leaning of what they share; not a group, not a network structure, not an isolation measure, but a correlation computed per user - and the authors adopt it because the literature offers no consensus formal definition to inherit</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t33" type="senses" ana="#senses[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="1.0">
        <label>a gatekeeper - AN INDIVIDUAL USER, NOT A MEDIA SOURCE: communication studies gives the word to institutions that filter what passes into a channel, and this paper reassigns it to a person at a particular position on two scores, stating the earlier sense and supplying a bridging argument - that such users block information from one side, and hence can be considered gatekeepers</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t34" type="senses" ana="#senses[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="1.0">
        <label>leaning - A STIPULATED SCORE, WITH ITS OWN SYNONYMS NAMED IN THE FOOTNOTE THAT STIPULATES IT: the authors define it as a score quantifying alignment with one political side and list the terms the literature uses for the same thing, so four words - leaning, ideology, polarity, ideological stance - are declared interchangeable by the paper itself</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t35" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>extends → the study of political polarization and echo chambers</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t36" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>builds-on → the latent space model of Barberá et al. [7]</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t37" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>builds-on → the news-source leaning scores and hard/soft news classifier of Bakshy et al. [4]</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t38" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>replicates → Barberá [6] on higher polarization of retweet networks for political topics</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t39" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[4]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>extends → prior echo-chamber studies that measure either content or network alone</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t40" type="concept_edges" ana="#concept_edges[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>echo chamber —operationalised-as→ leaning</label>
        <term>echo chamber</term>
        <term>leaning</term>
        <note>strength of the relation: 1</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t41" type="concept_edges" ana="#concept_edges[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>gatekeeper —contrasted-with→ media sources</label>
        <term>gatekeeper</term>
        <term>media sources</term>
        <note>strength of the relation: 1
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span defines gatekeepers differently in media studies and in this study; contrasted-with is a loose reading.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t42" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Twitter users mostly see political opinions matching their own.</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t43" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Engagement is measured as all content that a user clicks.</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t44" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.variables[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>political leaning</label>
        <term>political leaning</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t45" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>echo chamber</label>
        <term>echo chamber</term>
        <note>about this quote: QUOTE REPAIRED: the extractor split a hyphen-space and the quote was recorded faithfully with the damage in it, which made it unanchorable. The repaired string is an EXACT SUBSTRING of the staged text - that is why it was accepted, not because a rule produced it. The text as originally recorded is kept in evidence as extracted.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t46" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>production</label>
        <term>production</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t47" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>consumption</label>
        <term>consumption</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t48" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[4]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>engagement</label>
        <term>engagement</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t49" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>correlation</label>
        <term>correlation</term>
        <note>about this quote: QUOTE RECOVERED FROM THE PAPER&#x27;S OWN CHARACTERS. The recorded quote was LETTERS-ONLY IDENTICAL to this stretch of the staged text but not an exact substring of it - spaces, hyphens, ligature glyphs or mathematical operators differed, so it could never anchor. This is the file&#x27;s own text between the same two letters: not produced by a rule about the damage, copied out of the file. Round-trip checked (the recovered span is letters-only equal to the original) and length-checked. The text as originally recorded is kept in evidence as extracted.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t50" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>effect-size</label>
        <term>effect-size</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t51" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>p-value</label>
        <term>p-value</term>
        <note>about this quote: QUOTE RECOVERED FROM THE PAPER&#x27;S OWN CHARACTERS. The recorded quote was LETTERS-ONLY IDENTICAL to this stretch of the staged text but not an exact substring of it - spaces, hyphens, ligature glyphs or mathematical operators differed, so it could never anchor. This is the file&#x27;s own text between the same two letters: not produced by a rule about the damage, copied out of the file. Round-trip checked (the recovered span is letters-only equal to the original) and length-checked. The text as originally recorded is kept in evidence as extracted.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t52" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[4]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>statistical-significance</label>
        <term>statistical-significance</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
    </spanGrp>
  </standOff>
  <text>
    <body>
      <p><note type="rights">The full text of this article is not redistributable, so it is
      not included here. The evidence sentences are withheld with it; the tag layer and its
      grounding status remain. The article itself is at https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.01665.</note></p>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI>
