Abstract
The study of social problems using the analysis of the public sphere gained scientific legitimacy with the constructivist approach during the era when television was the predominant medium. The advent of social media has transformed the public space, altering the way in which discussions concerning social issues are organized. This article examines the advantages and limitations of constructivism in studying social problems and the elements constituting public discussions on social media. We searched whether analyzing public discourse could reveal the persistence of social issues. To exemplify the use of this method for studying discussions on social media, we analyzed how network users discussed the issue of personnel shortages, from November 2022 to February 2023. During this period, the most pressing issues proved to be shortages of professionals in healthcare, housing and communal services, secondary education, transport, defense industry and IT sectors.
The research indicates that a crucial marker of a persistent social problem in people’s daily lives is the involvement of “ordinary” citizens as speakers who draw significant attention to the issue. This finding corroborates the democratizing impact of social media on the structure of the public sphere.
References
Arendt, J. (2017). Viva Activa, ili O deyatel'noy zhizni. Izdatel'stvo Ad Marginem Press. (In Russian).
Bednarek, M., & Caple, H. (2017). The discourse of news values: How news organizations create «newsworthiness». Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190653934.001.0001
Best, J. (2017). But Seriously Folks: The Limitations of the Strict Constructionist Interpretation of Social Problems. In G. Miller & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Constructionist Controversies (pp. 109–130). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315080505-6
Bodrunova, S. S., Blekanov, I., Smoliarova, A., & Litvinenko, A. (2019). Beyond Left and Right: Real-World Political Polari-zation in Twitter Discussions on Inter-Ethnic Conflicts. Media and Communication, 7(3), 119–132. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1934
Bolee 30% IT-spetsialistov uekhali iz Rossii ili planiruyut relokatsiyu. (2022). Forbes.ru. https://www.forbes.ru/svoi-biznes/477957-bolee-30-it-specialistov-uehali-iz-rossii-ili-planiruut-relokaciu (In Russian).
Bro, P., & Wallberg, F. (2014). Digital Gatekeeping: News media versus social media. Digital Journalism, 2(3), 446–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.895507
Defitsit IT-mozgov: Kak Rossiya reshaet problemu kadrovogo goloda v otrasli. (2022). RBC. https://www.rbc.ru/economics/28/07/2022/62e12c929a794747597da279 (In Russian).
Dubois, E., & Gaffney, D. (2014). The Multiple Facets of Influence: Identifying Political Influentials and Opinion Leaders on Twitter. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(10), 1260–1277. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214527088
Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/466240
Harcup, T., & O’Neill, D. (2017). What is News?: News values revisited (again). Journalism Studies, 18(12), 1470–1488. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1150193
Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (2002). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. Pantheon Books.
Hilgartner, S., & Bosk, C. L. (1988). The Rise and Fall of Social Problems: A Public Arenas Model. American Journal of Sociology, 94(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1086/228951
Judina, D., & Platonov, K. (2019). Newsworthiness and the Public’s Response in Russian Social Media: A Comparison of State and Private News Organizations. Media and Communication, 7(3), 157–166. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1910
Kovic, M., Rauchfleisch, A., Sele, M., & Caspar, C. (2018). Digital astroturfing in politics: Definition, typology, and countermeasures. Studies in Communication Sciences, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.24434/j.scoms.2018.01.005
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/267990
Metzgar, E. T., Kurpius, D. D., & Rowley, K. M. (2011). Defining hyperlocal media: Proposing a framework for discussion. New Media & Society, 13(5), 772–787. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385095
Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere. New Media & Society, 4(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614440222226244
Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin UK. https://doi.org/10.3139/9783446431164
Rossiyane ne idut v stroiteli. (2022). Kommersant. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5692719 (In Russian).
Rostekh zayavil ob ostrom defitsite IT-spetsialistov v Rossii. (2022). TASS. https://tass.ru/ekonomika/15548315 (In Russian).
Schulz, W. (1997). Changes of Mass Media and the Public Sphere. Javnost – The Public, 4(2), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.1997.11008646111
Spector, M., & Kitsuse, J. I. (2001). Constructing social problems. Transaction Publishers.
Trenz, H.-J. (2009). Digital Media and The Return of The Representative Public Sphere. Javnost – The Public, 16(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2009.11008996
Yasaveev I. G. (2004). Konstruirovanie sotsial'nykh problem sredstvami massovoy kommunikatsii. Izdatel'stvo Kazanskogo universiteta. (In Russian).
Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. J., Trilling, D., Möller, J., Bodó, B., De Vreese, C. H., & Helberger, N. (2016). Should we worry about filter bubbles? Internet Policy Review, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.14763/2016.1.401
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.