This dissertation applied mass communication theory and the interdisciplinary theory of social network analysis to the networked political blogosphere and its relationship to mass media. Utilizing such mass communication theories as agenda setting, the two-step flow, and gatekeeping, this study examined eighteen political blogs across the political spectrum (left-leaning, right-leaning, and moderate blogs), two elite mass media outlets (the New York Times and the Washington Post), and two elite mass media blogs (political blogs from the New York Times and the Washington Post), using both hyperlink analysis as well as textual content analysis. Hyperlinking provided information on gatekeeping and the social network connections between blogs and mass media and among the different ideological political blog networks. Content analysis conducted at the issue and the issue attribute level provided a second layer of evidence to analyze how agendas are formed, framed, and transferred in the emerging new media environment. All the both levels of textual content analysis and hyperlink analysis, this dissertation found solid support for the operation of both mass media agenda setting and social network influence at both the issue and the attribute level. Though the agenda setting function of the press is still a tenable assumption, blogs from all ideological spectrums were able to set the mass media's agenda. The issue agendas of blogs of shared partisan perspective, particularly the agenda of the left-leaning blogosphere, provided strong evidence of homogenous issue adoption by blogs of the same partisan network neighborhood or social network. At the attribute level, strong correlations between the agendas of blogs and media, and among the agendas of blogs that share ideological perspectives, highlight the need for deeper analysis at causation to determine whether the media or blogs set each other's agenda. This dissertation contributes to mass communication studies and political communication through its identification of political social networks as a complementary and competitive agenda setting force in the context of the US political blogosphere. These findings call for a revision of the relationship between agenda setting and the twostep flow theory towards an acknowledgement of how they work in both complementary and competitive ways to redefine the role of the press and social influence in networked political environments. These findings also highlight the significance of social network analysis as a methodology to explain how agendas are formed and framed in the emerging new media environment.

Blogging continues to get attention in the field of communication studies for reasons such as its differences with traditional media and its various effects in societies. The first part of this dissertation provides the reader with a background of the use of the Internet in Zimbabwe highlighting how it has offered individuals a platform to publish their own content, thus increasing the documentation of the 2008 Zimbabwean elections. This research analyses how national identity and the construction thereof emerges from online personal narratives. The research also investigates the discourses shaping the country‘s identities such as humanitarian, anti-Mugabe and democratic discourses that emerge from the blogs and how these blogs communicate events that occurred during the polls. This dissertation is primarily concerned with how citizens have arguably become recognized as sources of information and how Zimbabwe is perceived. Finally, the blogs are critically examined for how they create spaces of resistance. I argue that the blogs challenged and destabilized the older patterns of identity creation within Zimbabwe. Whereas national identity constructions have been largely a result of the majority or ruling class, the production of counter discourses in the blogs suggests that at an individual level, citizens use the Internet as a platform to express their dissent and do not automatically internalize these projected national identities. / Thesis (M.A.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2011.

This thesis analyzes how the news blogs Daily Kos and Power line construct news presented from an ideological viewpoint. Specifically the types of evidence used by the blogs to assert their viewpoints and their intended audiences were analyzed. This thesis utilized theory from Jean Francois Lyotard to explain how images and text were used by the blogs to legitimate their ideological narrative. Edwin Black's theory of second . ' persona was used to analyze the intended audience of the blogs. The ideology of the two blogs was described by the political spectrum developed by Barry Clark. The analysis of the two blogs found that both blogs utilized various sources to legitimize their narratives. The two blogs constructed news stories in stylistically similar manners. News constructed in this manner reinforces ideological viewpoints and manifests itself in a partisan electorate and partisan politicians unwilling to be flexible with their political positions. This inflexibility is not beneficial in a democracy that needs compromise in order to function.

Communication technologies have altered the way people engage in political discourse. In recent years the internet has played a significant role in changing the way people receive political information, news and opinion. Perhaps the most significant difference as a result of advancements in communication and internet technology is how people participate in discussions and deliberate issues that are important to them. The 2005 New Zealand General Election fell at a time when functionality and access to fast and affordable internet allowed people to develop their own information channels and also determine how, where and to what level they participated in debate and commentary on election issues. The aim of this thesis is to examine how blogs were used to discuss political issues during the 2005 New Zealand General Election campaign period through the use of three inter-related methodologies. The methodologies used in the research are content analysis, interviews and a case study. Four blogs and the comments sections are analysed by way of content analysis for adherence to the rules of communicative interaction within the public sphere. Interviews were conducted with a number of people who blogged during the 2005 election campaign, to develop an understanding of their experiences and perceptions of the role blogging played in the election. A case study of politician and blogger Rodney Hide examines the role blogs play as a communication tool for politicians and the how they change the relationship between politician and voter. An explosion of academic literature in recent years has looked at the participative and deliberative nature of the internet and blogs as having opened new spaces and what implications that may have for democracy. Jurgen Habermas' seminal book, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, provides the theoretical basis for this thesis and the foundation for academic writing in this area. Habermas developed the normative notion of the public sphere as a part of social life where citizens exchanged views and opinions on matters of importance to the common good, so that wider public opinion can be formed.

Concerns about the feasibility of the Internet as an appropriate venue for deliberation have emerged based on the adverse effects of depersonalization, anonymity, and lack of accountability on the part of online discussants. As in face-to-face communication, participants in online conversations are best situated to determine for themselves what type of communication is appropriate. Earlier research on Usenet groups was not optimistic, but community-administered moderation may provide a valuable tool for online political discussion groups who wish to support and enforce deliberative communication among a diverse or disagreeing membership. This research examines individual comments and their rating and moderation within a week-long "Pie Fight" discussion about community ownership and values in the Daily Kos political blog. Specific components of deliberation were identified and a content analysis was conducted for each. Salient issues included community reputation, agreement and disagreement, meta-communication, and appropriate expression of emotion, humor, and profanity. Data subsets were analyzed in conjunction with the comment ratings given by community members to determine what types of interaction received the most attention, and how the community used the comment ratings system to promote or demote specific comment types. The use of middle versus high or low ratings, the value of varied ratings format, and the use of moderation as a low-impact means of expressing dissent were also explored. The Daily Kos community members effectively used both comments and ratings to mediate conflict, assert their desired kind of community, demonstrate a deliberative self-concept, and support specific conditions of deliberation. The moderation system was used to sanction uncivil or unproductive communication, as intended, and was also shown to facilitate deliberation of disagreement rather than creating an echo chamber of opinion.