Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook Twitter y opinión pública. Una perspectiva crítica para un horizonte educativo

Vicent GOZÁLVEZ,‌ PhD. Associate Professor. Universitat de València ([email protected]). Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ‌, PhD. Visiting Lecturer. Universidad Espíritu Santo, Ecuador ([email protected]). Camilo LARREA-OÑA‌. Consultant. Instituto de Altos Estudios Nacionales, Ecuador ([email protected]).

Abstract: ter as a platform for public opinion also aims year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 In this article we reflect, from a the- to provide the keys to building an educational oretical and critical perspective, on how outlook, understanding that one of the pur- public opinion is currently shaped by social poses of this area in a democracy is to educate networks, focusing on the case of Twitter. citizens about digitally formed currents of Going beyond a purely sociological or fac- opinion, especially those supporting populist tual concept of public opinion, we will offer political movements and aggravated by the

arguments for expanding its meaning while spread of fake news. After delving into the revista española de pedagogía proposing a model of deliberative democracy. socio-political dimension of social networks In order to do so, we use some well-known such as Twitter, we conclude by proposing a constructs from the field of social communi- normative concept of interactive public opin- cation, such as the spiral of silence or digital ion, a proposal that will be specified in a set niches, which provide a referent for interpret- of educational competences at the epistemo- ing the phenomenon of social networks from logical and civic ethical level relating to the a critical hermeneutics. The analysis of Twit- democratic use of social media.

Revision accepted: 2018-10-20. This is the English version of an article originally printed in Spanish in issue 274 of the revista española de pedagogía. For this reason, the abbreviation EV has been added to the page numbers. Please, cite this article as follows: Gozálvez, V., Romero-Rodríguez, L. M., & Larrea-Oña, C. (2019). Twitter y opinión pública. Una perspectiva crítica para un horizonte educativo | Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 77 (274), 403-419. doi: https://doi.org/10.22550/REP77-3-2019-04 https://revistadepedagogia.org/ ISSN: 0034-9461 (Print), 2174-0909 (Online) 403 EV Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA

Keywords: public opinion, social media, de opinión pública pretende ofrecer las claves Twitter, democracy, interactivity, citizenship, para construir un horizonte educativo, enten- educational competences. diendo que uno de los fines de la educación en democracia es el de formar a la ciudada- nía en relación con las corrientes de opinión Resumen: digitalmente conformadas, especialmente las En este artículo reflexionamos, desde una que sustentan movimientos políticos de corte perspectiva teórica y crítica, sobre el modo en populista y agravadas por la propagación de que la opinión pública es configurada actual- noticias falsas (fake news). Tras ahondar en la mente por las redes sociales, centrándonos en dimensión sociopolítica de redes sociales como el caso de Twitter. Más allá de un concepto Twitter, en el presente texto concluimos pro- puramente sociológico o fáctico de opinión pú- poniendo un concepto normativo de opinión blica, aportaremos argumentos para ampliar pública interactiva, propuesta que se concre- su significado en defensa de un modelo de de- tará en un conjunto de competencias educa- mocracia deliberativa. Para ello, nos servimos tivas a nivel epistemológico y ético-cívico en de algunos constructos reputados en el ámbito relación con el uso democrático de las redes de la comunicación social, como el de la es- sociales. piral del silencio o el de los nichos digitales, los cuales ayudan a interpretar el fenómeno Descriptores: opinión pública, redes sociales, de las redes sociales desde una hermenéutica Twitter, democracia, interactividad, ciudada- crítica. El análisis de Twitter como plataforma nía, competencias educativas.

perceived role of social media in these po- 1. Introduction. Social networks, litical processes is changing as a result of public opinion and new populism Donald Trump becoming president of the In our communicative environment, USA, especially given his intensive use the impact of social media in creating cur- of Twitter (@realDonaldTrump) in the rents of socio-political opinion or, to put it electoral campaign and in his presidential another way, on shaping a social state of communiqués with a national and inter- opinion with strong repercussions in the national reach (52.033.110 followers and field of institutional politics, is ever more 37.575 tweets as of May 2018). revista española de pedagogía revista 403-419 2019, September-December 274, n. 77, year apparent. Perhaps the first international confirmation of the importance of social The case of Trump is not an isolated media in democratic elections occurred phenomenon, as Europe has also under- in the campaign that first took Barack gone similar political trends with a digital Obama to the White House. However, the impact on public opinion, from the rise 404 EV Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook of xenophobic nationalism in France (@ consumed by audiences more than any FN_officiel) to the campaign for and tri- other conventional type of media when ob- umph of Brexit in the United Kingdom taining political information. (@BrexitCentral), or the emergence of independence movements in Spain (@in- Social media are a paradigmatic and dependencia; @DUI, etc.), with a populist highly-celebrated model of horizontal style of political communication, that is to communication, and have been present say, communication that exalts a homog­ in many social and political citizen move- eneous and closed “us”, moving towards a ments in recent years (Ibarra, Martí, & discourse based on hatred of what is differ- Gomà, 2002; Dahlgren, 2005; Hindman, ent (Jagers & Walgrave, 2007). 2008; Castells, 2009; Basave, 2013; Baek, 2015). There is ample proof for their edu­ Circumstances like these invite us to cational potential as a space for finding reconsider the meaning and scope of the and sharing information, or for collab- expression public opinion, a revision that orating interactively in the construc- leads to an exploration of the different cur- tion of knowledge (Gozálvez, 2013; Tur, rent models of democracy and representa- Marín, & Carpenter, 2017; Vázquez-Ca- tion (MacPherson, 2003; Camps, 2004; no, López Meneses, & Sevillano García, Greppi, 2012). In other words, what is 2017). Twitter is used as an interactive year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 the path of current democratic systems in platform to channel and organise collec- which the acts of online public opinion are tive movements that undoubtedly help as intense as they are new in the political empower citizens­ (Saura, Muñoz-Moreno, history of modern societies? Luengo-Navas, & Martos, 2017) and allow direct participation in public matters of Talking about public opinion on so- national and international interest (Kah-

cial media is not limited to discussion of ne, Lee, & Feezell, 2012; Castells, 2008). revista española de pedagogía shifts in opinion on Twitter. However, as Anstead and O’Loughlin note (2015), But with the emergence of political Twitter is an especially interesting tool leaders with a strong social media pres- for measuring public opinion given that ence and clear ability to manipulate them this platform’s microblogging format al- in their favour, networks like Twitter can lows data of socio-political importance to stop being technologies for parallel connec- be easily accessible on a massive scale and tivity that help deepen democracy. Twitter immediately. can become a new medium for the segmen- tation of opinions with a strong emotional Indeed, some research — including component (Cortina, 2016), making little pieces by Barberá, Jost, Nagler, Tucker, contribution to the democratic regenera- & Bonneau (2015), Conover et al. (2011), tion of a society, especially if social media Gruzd & Roy (2014), Hong & Kim (2016), enters into the dynamic of the “spiral of and Lee, Shin, & Hong (2017) — concludes silence”. But what is the scope and signifi- that social media, especially Twitter, are cance of this hypothesis? 405 EV Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA

In this article we will analyse this informed, and in which citizens engage and other questions, using a critical her- (participate) in dialogue concerning the meneutics methodology (Arteta, 2016; questions that affect the community Habermas, 2010; Conill, 2008), based on (Habermas, 1994; Dahlgreen, 2005). The the interpretation and rereading of texts second, as a social phenomenon that reacts in accordance with practical criteria (so- to psychological dynamics such as fear of cial, ethical, and political), and with a dual solitude or exclusion (Noëlle-Neumann, objective: (1) investigating the new rela- 1984), or instead responds to fluctuating tionship between social media (especially interests only worth recording through Twitter) and public opinion; (2) offering polling techniques, such as the famous a valid theoretical framework for educa- Gallup (1939) and Allport (1937). As well tional action relating to social media and as this taxonomy of public opinion, there networks such as Twitter, an action that are other views worth considering, such as is key for public deliberation in hyper-con- that of Luhmann (2000), for whom com- nected societies like contemporary ones. municative structures and social interac- tion map out themes (the factual level) that serve as a framework for political dis- 2. Public opinion online: a new cussion based on the establishment of mat- tyranny of the masses? ters of common interest (normative level), One of the main pitfalls in any re- or that of Kuran (1995) with his model of search into public opinion is finding a the prudential lie according to which we widely-accepted definition for such a either openly state our opinion or we lie clearly controversial and polysemic con- prudently in a tension between dissidence cept (Price, 1994; Monzón, 2006). This and conformity, between open discussion can partly be explained by the complexity and self-censorship, which explains the of the link between the realm of the opin- constant movement of reconfiguration of ion (individual, subjective, uncertain) and the thinking and feelings of society. that of the public (which relates to the collective, universal, and rational). It is In recent years, such a concept has over half a century since a famous study moved towards a more empirical or factual by Childs (1965) found around fifty defi- definition: public opinion is what surveys nitions of the expression public opinion in say about what society thinks in relation the history of Western thought, although to a topic of social significance (Capellán, all of them, as Noëlle-Neumann (1984) 2008), surveys which are often used to suggests, can be grouped into two main justify political power of a populist nature categories: rationalist approaches, rooted (Sampedro, 2000). However, we believe revista española de pedagogía revista 403-419 2019, September-December 274, n. 77, year in the Enlightenment, and sociological or that narrowing the notion of public opin- psychological ones. The first group tends ion in an empirical and instrumental way to regard public opinion as a process of does not adequately solve the problem of shaping the public sphere through de- its complex role in a democracy, where the bate or free deliberation, in order to be public’s deliberative processes are vital 406 EV Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook and where, in the absence of such delib- In contrast, opinions that have few sup- eration, the danger of a subtle tyrannical porters or are penalised lose support and imposition of certain socially powerful intensity as they are seen to be unpopular. opinions remains alive. When describing As a result of this mechanism, opinions un- this sort of danger, in this section we will dergo a process of social homogenisation. provide a deliberative and interactive vi- sion of public opinion in the new setting However, this concern with the “domi­ of social media, with the ultimate aim of nant majority” is nothing new. As long finding pathways to strengthen. ago as the treatise Democracy in America (2018, originally published in 1835), Alexis Indeed, one of the fundamental works de Tocqueville warned of a sort of soft des- in the history of public opinion is E. potism which develops from what he called Nöelle-Neumann’s well-known thesis on the tyranny of the majority, referring to the spiral of silence (1984). What this ba- what for him was one of the greatest dan- sically states is that in any society, public gers of the USA’s nascent democracy. He opinion is the opinion with the greatest believed the exacerbation of popular opin- social presence, and can elevate or remove ion could lead to tyranny by imposing a any leader. Social opinions circulate in a single way of thinking as the very notion spiral pattern, creating an effective move- of the majority prevents any debate and, year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 ment that concentrates the most wide- worse still, sends dissenting individuals ly-followed positions at its centre and or non-aligned minorities into social exile. expels or silences minority opinions. Ac- In this regard, John Stuart Mill warned cording to this theory, people speak more 25 years later (1859), in On liberty, that freely and defend their opinions more individual liberty cannot be alienated in boldly when they perceive that these repre- favour of the social majority, and so the in-

sent the majority perspective, the common dividual cannot become a social prisoner of revista española de pedagogía view and what is socially accepted; in con- dominant opinions (Mill, 1859). trast, they tend to keep quiet when they see there is little support for their opinion A century later, the two step theory and they sense it will lead to social rejec- developed by Katz (1957) and Katz and tion. It is not so much a question of what Lazarsfeld (1966) established that flows will or will not happen after they express of communication follow a logic of indirect these opinions, but rather their perception replication starting from opinion passed of the predictable social impact, the feeling through the media — in that era, only of what might happen in the public sphere. through the mass media — and necessari- ly passed through opinion leaders to create As a result of the spiral of silence, the effective influence. opinions that circulate or spread without impediment or obstacles gradually become Nowadays, the blogosphere and the stronger and more intense, in other words, digital sphere of social media can consol- their perceived social legitimacy increases. idate this way of understanding public 407 EV Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA

opinion and the way in which it is shaped. But shifts in opinion through social me- According to Miyata, Yamamoto, and dia it appears do not just match the spiral Ogawa (2015), Twitter offers an especial- of silence model. Alternative voices, the ly favourable setting for testing the spiral infinity of online perspectives, can be seg- of silence model on the Internet. After the mented in accordance with another theo- earthquake, tsunami and subsequent nu- retical model, which is as interesting as it clear disaster on 11 March 2011 in Japan is worrying in terms of democratic partici- (Fukushima), these researchers observed pation: the digital niches or echo chambers a positive correlation between individu- model formulated by Sunstein (2009). als’ perception that their opinion repre- sented the majority sentiment, and the number of times (tweets) they expressed 3. Strengthened digital niches themselves and spoke clearly online, and fake news: the limits of social something that contributed to the grad- media and a practical approach to ual homogenisation of opinions about nu- interactive public opinion clear power. At a socio-political level, social media can act as a spiral mechanism, but what So, on the one hand, Twitter has happen in the new politics, the one based become an open network since it has on using social media to shape opinions? an enormous power to spread informa- In this sense, networks like Twitter still tion widely and immediately, but, on the have to be observed insofar as they con- other hand, this has not necessarily led tribute to a new version of manufacturing to real diversity owing to the clear risk consent (Lippmann, 2003; Camps, 2004). of homogenisation: “Twitter accelerates the Spiral of Silence and strengthens Social networks like Twitter can be a convergence toward the opinion of the stimulus for troubled political communica- majority because it encourages selective tion, especially when faced with evidence exposure” (Miyata, Yamamoto, & Ogawa, of microblogging practices based on fake 2015, p. 1138). news, shocking but unfounded rumours in unverified tweets, statements that This finding is not an isolated phenom- are grandiose but doubtful if not clearly enon. Other authors have investigated untrue, but which take shape as reality (as the relationship between the perceived truth) as they appear and circulate widely climate of opinion and expressing per­ online (Vosoughi, Roy, & Aral, 2018; Lazer sonal opinions on the Internet (Price, Nir, et al., 2018), above all because they say & Cappella, 2006; Woong Yun, & Park, what many users want to hear. revista española de pedagogía revista 403-419 2019, September-December 274, n. 77, year 2011), finding that the climate of opinion stimulates a predisposition to speak out The current communication ecosystem or remain quiet online, or to speak in one and the information consumption, pro- term or another, following the indications duction, and dissemination habits have of the Nöelle-Neumann model (1984). increased the spectrum, occurrence, and 408 EV Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook efficacy of this disinformation by main- chambers where we only hear what we streaming lines of thinking that unfold in have selectively chosen in advance to hear digital channels, easily becoming matrices does no more than reinforce a cognitive for effective opinion (Tandoc, Wei Lim, & bias that is very much present in everyday Ling, 2017). reasoning: myside-bias (Baron, 1998).

The bandwagon effect adds to this com- The creation of public opinion through plex scenario. In this effect, users, in an direct online communication, which is un- attempt to filter information emotionally filtered, apparently truer, more intense, and owing to the effect of the economy of and more democratic, might in the end connection time, often pay attention to, reinforce digital niches where millions of interact with, and share the information user-voters submerge themselves in a dis- that is most popular, giving it more credi­ course they previously tuned into. One of bility without examining it fully (Sundar, the latest innovations on Twitter, in use 2008; Thorson, 2008; Bakir & McStay, since the summer of 2016, is the ability to 2017), thus feeding new spirals of silence. filter the notifications you wish to read. All Furthermore, the algorithms of the most you have to do is turn on the “Only peo- popular social media networks (Facebook, ple you follow” filter. Is this an advance Twitter, and Instagram) give greater in better personalisation and control over year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 prominence to information that receives content, or an intensification of currents of more frequent social interactions, some- opinion in which users cocoon themselves? thing that ipso facto creates an automatic and algorithmic bandwagon effect, isolat- Sunstein (2009), in Republic.com 2.0, ing dissenting voices. provided an interesting reflection on the effects of the digital sphere in the politi-

On this point it is worth considering cal landscape. He warned of the dangers of revista española de pedagogía the approach of Kahneman (2015) con- the Internet which, rather than contribut- cerning the ease with which a judgement ing to a broad and democratically-healthy is created regarding a given piece of “in- public debate, could create niches of opin- formation”: context and truthfulness are ion in which the public forms into groups of little or no importance so long as the according to taste and previous perspec- information makes it possible to reach an tives, expressing views that people know immediate conclusion, without more in- will be well-received in the particular vir- depth analysis. This trend corresponds to tual community, or that generate in others the WYSIATI formula (What You See Is what one hopes to hear in the online niche. All There Is), a cognitive barrier that, in Rather than deepening democracy, the In- this case, smooths the path for the social ternet could impoverish it if the trend de- media user to emit a personal opinion or tected by Sunstein flourishes (op. cit.). The to receive another from someone else with blogosphere and social networks could further reflection. The movement against make a major contribution to the segmen- reason and towards digital niches or echo tation of society into echo chambers or 409 EV Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA

communication capsules (Barberá et al., Kim, 2016). This leads to intensified suspi- 2015), in which each individual listens to cions of homogenisation polarised or seg- herself through the reflection of those who mented as a result of social media. think, feel, and opine in the same way or very similar ways online. This trend would Admittedly, the positioning of certain eventually undermine one of the founda- topics on social media does not necessarily tions of democracy, namely the possibility correspond with the interest of most of the of hearing things one does not expect to public in a given moment, or the public im- hear in the framework of the diversity of portance of such questions. The primarily views of public affairs: a space of politically commercial (or, in general, proselytising) enriching shared plurality as a condition use of the hashtag, as well as the use of for respectful but critical debate. ploys such as bot programs dedicated to promoting topics, supporting publications, Some authors are currently question- or disseminating topics, could increase the ing the political representativeness of distance between the parallel worlds of what happens on social media (Mellon social media and tangible reality. Nonethe- & Prosser, 2017; Whitman Cobb, 2015; less, their influence cannot be ignored. Greppi, 2012). But going beyond repre- sentativeness, there is an underlying prob- Even in these early stages, the way we lem relating to how opinions are formed on use social media is instilling suspicions social media, especially on Twitter. What disguised as absolute certainties, that first stands out is the brevity imposed by could undoubtedly become uncontrollable the network when expressing informa- floods. Nor can we ignore the stratagem of tion and opinions. The famous initial 140 framing, which makes it possible to shape characters, now 280, require a very useful and design perceptions and opinions, po- practise of summarising for interactions to sitioning them in real public debate and be effective and dynamic. But this aspect opinion (Parenti, 2001). does not undermine suspicions regarding the communicative quality of messages on The definition of the term “public opin- Twitter from a political perspective. To ion” is a matter we would like to examine put it another way, there are good reasons again and it is present in the background for asking ourselves whether the intense of this whole discussion. From a more publication and exchange of tweets is a re- practical viewpoint (ethical, political, and action to a debate or argument for quality educational), it is worth reformulating public discussion, or if instead it feeds on the definition of public opinion to pursue superficial statements of a few characters an authentic “interactive public opinion” revista española de pedagogía revista 403-419 2019, September-December 274, n. 77, year containing simplistic opinions and feelings in which the vector for interaction also that are liable to circulate energetically includes normative elements. A strictly online. In addition, Twitter’s polarising socio­logical approach to this concept is in- effect on public debate should be men- sufficient in the framework of an educa- tioned (Lee, Shin, & Hong, 2017; Hong & tional and civic epistemology, especially if 410 EV Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook we still accept that one of the major aims John Dewey (2004, originally published in of education in communicative and dem- 1927), already advanced in age, answered ocratic settings is to encourage responsi- Lippmann’s proposal (2003, originally ble autonomy and critical understanding published in 1922) in which five years ear- in relation to the media (see Masterman, lier he had depicted the public as a mass in 1985; Gozálvez & Aguaded, 2012; Buck- an elitist model of democracy. In Dewey’s ingham, 2014), as well as active partic- view, however, we should speak of citizens ipation by the public in the interest of a who construct and test their opinions in a deliberative and educated public opinion democracy through social action, debate, (Habermas, 1994; Gozálvez & Contre- and collaboration within the community, ras-Pulido, 2014). Knowing what is going the true heart of an active public life. If we on, being sensitive to what is happening accept Dewey’s proposal, one of the major online, observing trending topics on social educational challenges in our technologi- media, is just a step or a phase. Education cal and liquid modernity (Bauman, 2006) also means promoting transformational is to educate a plural, socially responsible, activity (interaction) based on an ethically and morally autonomous public opinion, valid normative outlook. It entails training that can, among other things, intervene in more civic and sensible communicative critically when it encounters the spread actions (from a position of critical respect, of lies or false information that muddy year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 we repeat) when the public visit Twitter the waters of rational deliberation in a and “speak and listen” online. demo­cracy. Similarly, education in the new media must be established as an antidote It is vital that we do not lose sight of to the fragmented homogenisation or po- the fact that, while social networks enable larised uniformity of public opinion as a immediate, almost urgent, exchange of result of spiral of silence processes in con-

opinions between users in a virtually hori- junction with the creation of online digital revista española de pedagogía zontal way, this supposed equidistance niches, processes that undermine a shared disappears immediately when we turn our ethos from the plurality of life options. gaze towards the physical world, and so it is necessary to act on both sides of the mirror with the same coherency and conscience of 4. Conclusion: competences for mutual respect, of recognising the other as an interactive public opinion in a valid interlocutor in the way upheld by democratic societies discourse ethics (Habermas, 2002; Elster, After this analysis of social media and 2001; MacPherson, 2003; Cortina, 1985) their incursion into processes of shaping and more recently by the ethics of recipro- public opinion, a radical question aris- cal otherness (Conill, 2006; 2010). es, which goes to the root of the issue: do social media really contribute to the cre- In this redefinition of public opinion, ation of an “interactive public opinion” it is necessary to return to one of the which is deliberative in nature and pro- great philosophers of education. Indeed, foundly democratic? 411 EV Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA

The media, governed by the principle promoted by media education is not one of transparency and publicising social that derives from opinion surveys and and political actions, have been a vital el- statistics monitoring what is imposed and ement in modern states governed by the produced on social media. Instead, there rule of law (Habermas, 1994; 2002). But should be support for interactive and in- the media have undergone a major pro- formed public opinion, a public opinion cess of change in the last decade, rein- which is a fundamental social and politi- venting their methods and revolutionising cal institution in a democracy and which their forms in favour of an intense hori- requires participants who are educated zontal and interactive communication, a and committed, participants who will not hyper-fragmented and changeable mass settle for simple vertiginous exchange self-communication (Castells, 2009), fol- of liquid opinions (Bauman, 2006) but lowing the appearance of social media. instead aspire to public deliberation based on communicative reasoning, as Nonetheless, this transformation is not cur­rently promoted by institutions like free from socio-political risks that require the CDD (Centre for Deliberative Demo­ educational attention. Recent research cracy) at the Department of Communica- shows that, faced with a socially or poli­ tion at Stanford University (http://cdd. tically important question appearing on stanford.edu), or the DDC (Deliberative Twitter, young people participate in the Democracy Consortium), a platform from social media network, albeit in a more the USA of civic and academic organisa- playful than ideological way, something tions for public engagement, participa- that reinforces the need for civic media tion, and deliberation (http://delibera- edu­cation to increase their capacities tive-democracy.net). (Torrego-González & Gutiérrez-Martín, 2016). In effect, it is not enough to take This is one of the basic functions of ed- note: as educators we must recognise re- ucation today: to teach people about the ality to transform it from valid regulative paths we have followed to get where we are benchmarks. and, from there, invite new generations­ to enjoy those radically democratic­ values Social media networks have enor- that are perfectly desirable and applicable mous potential for redefining the concept in the online or digital setting: freedoms of public opinion, not in a sociological or based on civic responsibility, the equal factual way, but in a dynamic way, based dignity and consideration we deserve as on rational, prudent, critical, and consi­ interlocutors, the value of dialogue, active dered online participation. Participation respect and supportive commitment to revista española de pedagogía revista 403-419 2019, September-December 274, n. 77, year which, from an ethical-political perspec- present and future generations (Gracia tive, builds bridges between what is & Gozálvez, 2016). Accordingly, it is vi- given and what is deserved (the humanly tal to combat the notion of technological dignified). In the new digital setting, the determinism and any tendency towards version of public opinion that should be cyber-utopia (Morozov, 2011), recognising 412 EV Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook and reclaiming the fundamental role the ries of digital niches, a proposal in line human being plays in building social rela- with the latest reports by UNESCO tionships through the Internet. Like any (2015), and it is interested in the inter- other medium for social communication, national movement in favour of media the Internet and social media do not in- and information literacy (or MIL) led by herently have a positive or negative moral the United Nations (goo.gl/uEJ5tp). burden; it is their users and content crea­ tors that, depending on their intentions Therefore, public opinion must not and values, shape the type of online par- only be considered in its factual or socio­ ticipation. logical dimension, defined as the set of feelings, preferences, tastes, and opin- The acceleration of communicative ex- ions of the members of a society. In de- change, the explosion and trivialisation of mocracies, and through the Internet, messages, rampant consumerism, and the interactive public opinion has to deploy instrumentalization of relationships are its ethical and political dimension, which undoubtedly risk factors that, in a digi- relates to the public use of deliberative tal setting, can make us insensitive to the reasoning in the pursuit of the common problems of others, thus submerging us good from a multitude of shared refer- in a sort of technologically boosted moral ents. When more dialogic methods are year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 blindness (Bauman & Donskis, 2015). used to detect public opinion, such as These are obvious risks in our liquid mo- deliberative polling, it is noticeable that dernity, in the face of which educational people state their opinions more openly agents cannot remain impassive. and the volume of polarised or biased opinions expressed falls (Fishkin & Pedagogically speaking, we cannot Luskin, 2005), something that cannot be

just be mouthpieces for trends that ignored from a practical and pedagogical revista española de pedagogía impose themselves by being loudest and viewpoint. retweeted the most; instead, we should critically re-examine what has the high- From these premises, it is possible to est profile to avoid dangers such as the develop a proposal for educational compe- spiral of silence that tends towards ho- tences that help strengthen deliberative mogenisation of political ideas in a so­ and interactive public opinion in the digital ciety, with the risk of becoming a new context of social media. Starting from the form of domination (Pettit, 1999). Ed- idea of competences as structures and pro- ucation, as a brake on such a trend, is cesses that people put into action to solve especially interested in training in civic problems in everyday life to construct and virtues for a democratic ethos, always transform reality (Jover, Fernández-Sa- starting from a diversity of options, es- linero, & Ruiz-Corbella, 2005), we offer pecially those that are of interest to the this proposal to expand on the media com- public, are underpinned by solid argu- petences formulated by Ferrés and Pis- ments, and break through the bounda- citelli (2012). 413 EV Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA

Firstly, it is important to educate in: Secondly:

1. Epistemological competences (relating to 2. Ethical-civic and political competences knowledge of the Internet and networks), (referring to moral values and demo- among which we particularly note: cratic participation):

1.1. The ability to distinguish between the 2.1. The competence to evaluate social popular and the public, between what problems from the axiological circulates as a fashionable topic on- foundations of democracies. The line (Luhmann’s thematic structures, capacity for critical autonomy that can handle and distinguish 2000) and what is public in a nor- good arguments, but also empa- mative and ideal sense (Habermas, thise with the other, recognising 2002), in other words, the intricate its dignity beyond its particular but necessary space of the common circumstances. good and public and collective inter- 2.2. The capacity to produce messages ests at a social and universal level. and interact with a sense of respon- 1.2. The competence to analyse the sibility, gauging the consequences interests underlying online mes­ for oneself and for others of what sages, reframing the relationship is published on social media. between public and private inter- 2.3. The competence to overcome social ests, to understand the dialectic labels when taking a stance on a relationship between the personal controversial issue, to overcome and the social, between the particu- conventional views or seek simple lar interests of companies or politi- group approval or recognition, to cal parties and the public interests detect and question clichés spread to which these messages should online. Using the Internet to supposedly and additionally point. propel oneself towards the general- 1.3. The capacity to be open to diversity, ized other (Mead, 2009) regarding community and postconventional seeking and testing evidence when responsibility (Kohlberg, Power, & faced with the emergence of fake news Higgins, 2009) and a broad moral and online news that exploits network sensibility, akin to civil rights or users by detecting previous majority human rights, but also regarding preferences and tastes (the popular). care based on individual situations 1.4. The ability to break out of echo cham- in their real existence and difficulty revista española de pedagogía revista 403-419 2019, September-December 274, n. 77, year bers and leave digital niches for open (Levinas, 2014; Noddings, 2002). conversations rich in nuances, evi- 2.4. Online intercultural competence: dence, and reasoning, going beyond using social media as a new public polarised visions and trends as simplis- space to enable intercultural di- tic as they are overwhelming online. alogue (Pérez-Tornero & Varis, 414 EV Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook

2012; Innerarity, 2006), which, media can provide a forum for debate and without denying the value of col- exchange of ideas, or, in contrast, they can lective culture and group iden­ be an ideal place for spreading untruths, tity, seeks agreements or common rumours, and opinions extracted from sys- ground with people from other tems for detecting what it is socially profit- cultural or social backgrounds or able to say. Faced with this, the worsening with different worldviews, with of people’s “suspicions and cynicism, as the aim of promoting human de- revealed by the unfounded rumours that velopment (Nussbaum, 2012) circulate online” (Ibid.) is to be expected. which is socially sustainable (UNESCO, 2015). Knowledge does not derive from the accumulation of information (information In the new digital setting it is not just overload), but from how it is selected and important to educate for fragmented interpreted, in accordance with thought- masses, but also for a public body trained ful and valid criteria. Hence the need for in seeking and producing good interpre- a humanistic education which, along with tations of social and political phenome- scientific and technological culture, is vi- na. In other words, proven, prudent, and tal for training in these criteria, from a well-considered interpretations, that ac- broad view of social and historical reality. year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 cept alternative nuances and perspectives. Participation­ (online) in the absence of Deliberative and interactive public opinion quality information or good interpretative starts from the principle of publicness in frameworks, is sterile or hollow, democrat- its dual meaning (Habermas, 1994): partic- ically speaking. ipation by the public and transparency of these governing, power groups, and opinion

leaders. Hence the importance of compar- References revista española de pedagogía ing online opinion and participation trends Allport, F. (1937). Toward a science of public opi- with the voices of opinion leaders from oth- nion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1 (1), 7-23. er media, with reputed specialists in dif- Anstead, N., & O’Loughlin, B. (2015). Social me- dia analysis and Public Opinion: The 2010 UK ferent subjects, and above all to compare General­ Election. Journal of Computer-Media- through dialogue or face-to-face encoun- ted Communication, 20, 204-220. ters, in groups of friends, family events, civ- Arteta, M. (2016). La hermenéutica crítica de Ha- ic associations, or neighbourhood groups. bermas: Una profundización de la hermenéu- tica gadameriana. Contrastes. Revista Interna- As Sampedro warned (2000), “without cional de Filosofía, 21 (2), 27-39. Baek, Y. M. (2015). Political Mobilization through encouraging online community relation- Social Networks Sites: The Mobilizing Power of ships, discussion forums, and collective Political Messages Received from SNS friends. real (not virtual) actions, we will frag- Computer in Human Behavior, 44, 12-15. ment civic participation even further. In- Bakir, V., & McStay, A. (2017). Fake News and the dividualised in front of screens, the public Economy of Emotions. Digital Journalism, 6 will lack a meeting place” (p. 188). Social (2), 154-175. 415 EV Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA

Baron, J. (1998). Thinking and Deciding. New Cortina, A. (1985). La ética discursiva. In V. Camps York: Cambridge University Press. (Ed.), Historia de la Ética (pp. 532-576). Barce- Barberá, P., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J. A., lona: Crítica. & Bonneau, R. (2015). Tweeting from left to Cortina, A. (2008). Ética aplicada y democracia ra- right: Is online political communication more dical. Madrid: Tecnos. than an echo chamber? Psychological Science, Cortina, A. (2016). El triunfo de populistas como 26 (10), 1531-1542. Trump se debe al auge de emociones. Re- Basave, A. (2013). Del 11-MM al #YoSoy132: cró- trieve from https://www.eldiario.es/cultura/ nica de un movimiento denunciado. In J. Buj populistas-Trump-emociones-Adela-Corti- (Ed.), Universidad desbordada: jóvenes, educa- na_0_579892342.html (Consulted on 2016-11-13). ción superior y política. México D.F.: Universi- Dahlgreen, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres dad Iberoamericana. and politican communication. Dispersion and Bauman, Z. (2006). Vida líquida. Barcelona: Paidós. Deliberation. Political Communication, 22 (2), Bauman, Z., & Donskis, L. (2015). Ceguera moral: 147-162. la pérdida de sensibilidad en la modernidad lí- Dewey, J. (1927/2004). La opinión pública y sus quida. Barcelona: Paidós. problemas. Madrid: Morata. Buckingham, D. (2014). Media education. Literacy,­ Elster, J. (Ed.) (2001). La democracia deliberativa. learning and contemporary culture. Polity Bardelona: Gedisa. press: Cambridge. Ferrés, J., & Piscitelli, A. (2012). La competencia Camps, V. (2004). Opinión pública, libertad de ex- mediática: propuesta articulada de dimensio- presión y derecho a la información. In J. Conill nes e indicadores. Comunicar, 19, 75-82. & V. Gozálvez (Eds.), Ética de los medios. Una Fishkin, J. S., & Luskin, R. C. (2005). Experimen- apuesta por la ciudadanía audiovisual (pp. 33- ting with a democratic ideal: deliberative poll­ 50). Barcelona: Gedisa. ing and public opinion. Acta Politica, 40 (3), Capellán, G. (2008). Opinión pública: Historia y 284-298. presente. Madrid: Trotta. Gallup, G. H. (1939). Public opinion in a demo­ Castells, M. (2003). La galaxia Internet. Barcelona: cracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Debolsillo. Gozálvez, V., & Aguaded, I. (2012). Educación para Castells, M. (2008). The New Public Sphere: Global la autonomía en sociedades mediáticas. Anàli- Civil Society, Communication Networks, and si, 45, 1-14. Global Governance. The Annals of the Ameri- Gozálvez, V. (2013). Ciudadanía mediática. Una can Academy of Political and Social Science, mirada educativa. Madrid: Dykinson. 616 (1), 78-93. Gozálvez, V., & Contreras-Pulido, P. (2014). Empo- Castells, M. (2009). Comunicación y poder. Madrid: derar a la ciudadanía mediática desde la educo- Alianza. municación. Comunicar, 42, 129-136. Childs, H. L. (1965). Public Opinion. Nature, For- Gracia, J., & Gozálvez, V. (2016). Justificación filo- mation and Role. Princeton: Van Nostrand. sófica de la educación en valores éticos y cívicos Conill, J. (2006). Ética hermenéutica. Crítica desde en la educación formal. Análisis crítico de la la facticidad. Madrid: Tecnos. LOMCE. Teoría de la Educación, 28 (1), 83-103. Conill, J. (2008). Hermenéutica crítica desde la fac- Greppi, A. (2012). La democracia y su contrario. ticidad de la experiencia. Convivium, 21, 31-40. Representación, separación de poderes y opi- Conill, J. (2010). La alteridad recíproca y la expe- nión pública. Madrid: Trotta. riencia del reconocimiento. Investigaciones fe- Gruzd, A., & Roy, J. (2014). Investigating political

revista española de pedagogía revista 403-419 2019, September-December 274, n. 77, year nomenológicas, 2, 61-76. polarization on Twitter: A Canadian perspec­ Conover, M., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M. R., tive. Policy & Internet, 6 (1), 28-45. Gonçalves, B., Menczer, F., & Flammini, Habermas, J. (1994). Historia y crítica de la opi- A. (2011). Political polarization on twitter. nión pública. La transformación estructural de ICWSM, 133, 89-96. la vida pública. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.

416 EV Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook

Habermas, J. (2002). Conciencia moral y acción co- Lee, C., Shin, J., & Hong, A. (2017). Does Social Me- municativa. Barcelona: Península. dia Use Really Make People Politically Polar­ Habermas, J. (2010). Teoría de la acción comunica- ized? Direct and Indirect Effects of Social Media tiva. Madrid: Trotta. Use on Political Polarization in South Korea. Hindman, M. (2008). The Myth of Digital Demo­ Telematics and Informatics, 35 (1), 245-254. cracy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Levinas, E. (2014). Alteridad y trascendencia. Ma- Hong, S., & Kim, S. H. (2016). Political polarization drid: Arena Libros. on Twitter: Implications for the use of social Lippmann, W. (2003). La opinión pública. Madrid: media in digital governments. Government In- Cuadernos de Langre. formation Quarterly, 33 (4), 777-782. Ibarra, P., Martí, S., & Gomà, R. (Eds.) (2002). Luhmann, N. (2000). La realidad de los medios de Creadores de democracia radical. Movimientos masas. Barcelona: Anthropos. sociales y redes de políticas públicas. Barcelo- MacPherson, C. B. (2003). La democracia liberal y na: Icaria. su época. Madrid: Alianza. Innerarity, D. (2006). El nuevo espacio público. Ma- Masterman, L. (1985). Teaching the Media. drid: Espasa. London: Comedia Publishing. Jagers, J., & Walgrave, S. (2007). Populism as poli- Mead, G. H. (2009). Escritos políticos y filosóficos. tics communication style. European Journal of Buenos Aires: FCE. Political Research, 46 (3), 319-345. Mellon, J., & Prosser, C. (2017). Twitter and Face- Jover, G., Fernández-Salinero, C., & Ruiz-Corbella, book are not representative of the general pop­ M. (2005). El diseño de titulaciones y progra-

ulation: Political attitudes and demographics of year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 mas ante la convergencia europea. In V. Es- British social media users. Research & Politics, teban Chapapría (Ed.), El espacio europeo 4 (3), 1-9. de educación superior (pp. 27-93). Valencia: Mill, J. S. (1859). On liberty. London: John W. Editorial de la Universidad Politécnica de Va- Parker & Son. lencia. Kahne, J., Lee, N. J., & Feezell, J. T. (2012). Digi- Miyata, K., Yamamoto, H., & Ogawa, Y. (2015). tal Media Literacy Education and Online Civic What affects the spiral of silence and de hard and Political Participation. International Jour- core on Twitter? An analysis of the nuclear power issue in Japan. American Behavioral nal of Communication, 6, 1-24. revista española de pedagogía Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Scientist, 59 (9), 1129-1141. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Monzón, C. (2006). Opinión pública, comunicación Katz, E. (1957). The Two-Step Flow of Commu- y política. Madrid: Tecnos. nication: An Up-To-Date Report on an Hypo- Morozov, E. (2011). The net delusion: The dark side thesis. Political Opinion Quarterly, 21 (1), of Internet freedom. New York: Public Affairs. 61-78. Noddings, N. (2002). Educating Moral People. New Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1966). Personal In- York: Teachers College Press. fluence, the Part Played by People in the Flow of Noelle-Neumann, E. (1984): La espiral del silencio. Mass Communications. London: Transaction Opinión pública: nuestra piel social. Barcelona: Publishers. Paidós. Kohlberg, L., Power, F. C., & Higgins, A. (2009). La educación moral según L. Kohlberg. Barcelona: Nussbaum, M. (2012). Crear capacidades. Pro- Gedisa. puesta para el desarrollo humano. Barcelona: Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, Paidós. A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F, … Zittrain, Parenti, M. (2001). Monopoly Media Manipulation. J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2x9fusy (Consul- 359 (6380), 1094-1096. ted on 2018-02-12). 417 EV Vicent GOZÁLVEZ, Luis Miguel ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ and Camilo LARREA-OÑA

Pérez-Tornero, J. M., & Varis, T. (2012). Alfabetiza- Vázquez-Cano, E., López Meneses, E., & Sevillano ción mediática y nuevo humanismo. Barcelona: García, M. L. (2017). La repercusión del movi- UOC-UNESCO. miento MOOC en las redes sociales. Un estudio Pettit, Ph. (1999). Republicanismo. Una teoría so- computacional y estadístico en Twitter | The bre la libertad y el gobierno. Barcelona: Paidós. impact of the MOOC movement on social ne- Price, V. (1994). La opinión pública. Esfera pública tworks. A computational and statistical study y comunicación. Barcelona: Paidós. on Twitter. revista española de pedagogía, Price, V., Nir, L., & Capella, J. N. (2006). Normative 75 (266), 47-64. doi: https://doi.org/10.22550/ and informational influences in online political REP75-1-2017-03 discussions. Communication Theory, 16 (1), 47-74. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359 Sampedro, V. (2000). Opinión pública y democracia (6380), 1446-1151. deliberativa. Madrid: Istmo. Whitman Cobb, W. N. (2015). Trending now. Using Santos, E. (2016). Las cifras de Twitter en su dé- big data to examine public opinion of space cimo aniversario. Retrieved from https:// policy. Space Policy, 32, 11-16. www.huffingtonpost.es/2016/03/21/cifras-twit- Woong Yun, G., & Park, S. (2011). Selective pos- ter_n_9496074.html (Consulted on 2018-02-24). ting: Willingness to post a message online. Saura, G., Muñoz-Moreno, J. L., Luengo-Navas, J., Journal of Computer-Mediated Communica- & Martos, J. M. (2017). Protestando en Twit- tion, 16, 201-227. ter: ciudadanía y empoderamiento desde la educación pública. Comunicar, 25 (53), 39-48. Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN Model: A Heu- Authors’ biographies ristic Approach to Understanding Technology Vicent Gozálvez has a PhD in Philo­ Effects on Credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. sophy and Educational Science and a J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital Media, Youth, and Master’s in Psycho-Ethics for Civic-Moral Credibility,­ 73-100. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Edu­cation from the Universidad de Va- Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Republic.com 2.0. Revenge lencia. He is Associate Professor in the of the Blogs. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Department of Theory of Education at Tandoc, E. C., Wey Lim, Z., & Ling, R. (2017). De- the Universidad de Valencia and Editor in fining “Fake News”. Digital Journalism, 6 (2), Chief of the journal SOPHIA. Colección de 137-153. Filosofía de la Educación. Thorson, E. (2008). Changing Patterns of News Consumption and Participation. Information, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7952-8347 Communication and Society, 11 (4), 473-489. Tocqueville (de), A. (2018). La democracia en Amé- rica. Madrid: Trotta. Luis M. Romero-Rodríguez holds Torrego-González, A., & Gutiérrez-Martín, A. a Doctorate in Communication with an (2016). Ver y tuiterar. Reacciones de los jóvenes international doctorate award and a spe- ante la representación mediática de la resisten- cial doctorate prize from the Universidad cia. Comunicar, 24 (47), 9-17. de Huelva. He has a Master’s in Social Tur, G., Marín, V. I., & Carpenter, J. (2017). Uso Communication from the Universidad de revista española de pedagogía revista 403-419 2019, September-December 274, n. 77, year de Twitter en Educación Superior en España Almería. He is Associate Editor of Revista y Estados Unidos. Comunicar, 25 (51), 19-28. UNESCO (2015). Rethinking education. Towards Comunicar and editor in chief of the jour- a global common good? Retrieve from https:// nal Retos. He is visiting Professor at the unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232555 ESAI Business School, Universidad Es- (Consulted on 2018-05-20). píritu Santo (Ecuador) and postdoctoral­ 418 EV Twitter and public opinion. A critical view for an educational outlook fellow at the Tecnológico de Monterrey a Senior Specialist in Constitutional Law (Mexico). (Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar). He is a member of the International Board of https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3924-1517 Reviewers for the journal SOPHIA. Colec- ción de Filosofía de la Educación and an Camilo Larrea-Oña holds a Masters advisor to the Instituto de Altos Estudios in Ethics and Democracy from the Uni- Nacionales (Ecuador). versidad de Valencia. He is a lawyer and has a degree in Legal Sciences (Pontificia http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4490-3178 Universidad Católica del Ecuador). He is year 77, n. 274, September-December 2019, 403-419 revista española de pedagogía

419 EV