Agenda-Setting Theory on Social Media: Does the Algorithm Control Information?
Abstract
In modern society, which witnesses an expansive increase of digital technologies in everyday life, digital literacy has become almost essential for the functioning of individuals, communities, institutions, states, and interpersonal relationships. The transmission of information, once dominated by traditional media such as newspapers and television, has largely been replaced by social networks, online portals, and trends that emerge on the Internet as a result of commentary on current topics by public figures—so called influencers—and other prominent online personalities, or through the collective interest of digitally connected communities in particular issues. In 1972, Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw introduced the agenda-setting theory, which suggests the manipulation of public opinion through the media, and they substantiated this by researching the relationship between current topics in the media and the issues that people consider important. Today, when social networks increasingly play the role of media, this theory takes on a different form. By examining content on TikTok, current topics, popular people, hashtags, and global events, it becomes evident that social networks indeed exert a significant influence on public opinion.
However, content on social networks can be created and published by anyone, and such content does not undergo verification, which allows individuals to disseminate information, opinions, advice, or claims. This, however, does not mean that everything on social networks is true, especially if we take into account the possibilities of paid advertising, the virality of content, the influence of algorithms, and the control of censorship exercised by these platforms. The greatest attention is typically directed toward content that accumulates the highest number of likes, views, comments, or sparks discussions, thereby achieving popularity. By analyzing past and current conflicts in the world, it can be concluded that social networks may also serve as tools of online warfare—a phenomenon previously unknown in conflicts until recently—while today they even provide live broadcasts from battlefields. Considering that both the percentage of social media users and the time spent on social platforms are increasing daily, users must remain vigilant and aware of the potential for manipulation. It is therefore essential to cultivate a critical stance toward social media content and to carefully examine claims before accepting them as true.
References
Јевтовић, З. и Петровић, Р. (2013). Дигитални полис – оаза демократије или сајбер утопија. Култура, 138, 340–356. https://doi.org/10.5937/kultura1338340J
Милашиновић, С. и Јевтовић, З. (2017). „Лажне вести” на друштвеним мрежама као чиниоци кризних ситуација. У: У. Шуваковић, В. Чоловић и О. Марковић Савић (прир. и ур.), Глобализација и глокализација (стр. 497–510). Косовска Митровица: Филозофски факултет.
Поповић, М. (2016). Интернет и млади (необјављени мастер рад). Правни факултет, Ниш.
Hook, A. [@alexhook2302]. (2022, February 28). pov: Россия захватывает пол-Украины. Украинские солдаты в это время: [Video]. TikTok. https://www.tiktok.com/@xx_kizo_xx/video/7068600742596168962?lang=en
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social networks sites: definition, history and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 210–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
Čejko, M. (2018). Superpovezani: internet, digitalni mediji i tehno-društveni život. Beograd: CLIO.
Gillespi, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media. New Heaven—London: Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300235029
HRW. (2023). Meta’s Broken Promises: Systemic Censorship of Palestine Content on Instagram and Facebook. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/12/21/metas-broken-promises/systemic-censorship-palestine-content-instagram-and
Kastel, M. (2000). Uspon umreženog društva. Zagreb: Zlatni marketing.
Kastel, M. (2018). Mreže revolta i nade: društveni pokreti u doba interneta. Beograd: Službeni glasnik.
Maad, A., Audureau, W., & Forey, S. (2024). 40 Beheaded Babies: Deconstructing the Rumor at the Heart of the Information Battle Between Israel and Hamas. Paris: Le Monde.
Magdy, W., Mubarak, H., & Salminen, J. (2025). Who should set the standards? Analysing censored Arabic content on Facebook during the Palestine-Israel conflict. In: N. Yamashita, V. Evers, K. Yatani, X. Ding, B. Lee, M. Cheety, & P. Toups-Dugas (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Article No. 178). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713150
Matviienko, S. (2021). Інтернет нарешті ідеальний для кібервійни — дослідниця медіа Світлана Матвієнко. https://web.archive.org/web/20210827143631/https://hromadske.ua/posts/svitlana-matviienko-internet-nareshti-idealnyi-dlia-kiber-viiny
McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/267990
Medijska pismenost. (2022). Oblici manipulacija i kome se obratiti ako ih uočite. https://medijskapismenost.raskrinkavanje.ba/oblici-manipulacija-i-kome-se-obratiti-ako-ih-uocite/koji-sve-oblici-medijskih-manipulacija-postoje/
Owen Jones, M. (2022). The two faces of digitalization in politics: the role of social networks in political mobilizations and the threat of “Digital authoritarianism” in the MENA Region. IEMed. https://www.iemed.org/publication/the-two-faces-of-digitalization-in-politics-the-role-of-social-networks-in-political-mobilizations-and-the-threat-of-digital-authoritarianism-in-the-mena-region/
Petrović, D. (2013). Društvenost u doba interneta: studija komunikacione upotrebe interneta u Srbiji. Novi Sad: Akademska knjiga.
Radojković, M. (2017). Digitalni mediji u Srbiji: Koristi i opasnosti. Politeia, 7 (13), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.5937/pol1713015R
Radojković, M. i Miletić, M. (2006). Komuniciranje, mediji i društvo. Нови Сад: Stylos.
Rogers, A. (2015). The science of why no one agrees on the color of this dress. Wired. https://www.wired.com/2015/02/science-one-agrees-color-dress/
RT Balkan. (2023). Kako funkcioniše ukrajinska propagandna mašinerija. https://lat.rt.rs/svet/35936-ukrajinski-propagandni-rat/
Saković, R. i Terzić, M. (2018). Upotreba društvenih mreža u hibridnom ratovanju. Vojno delo, 7, 318–334. https://doi.org/10.5937/vojdelo1807318R
Scot, L. (2023) Digitalni front ukrajinske borbe protiv Rusije. Glas Amerike. https://www.glasamerike.net/a/rat-u-ukrajini-ukrajina-rusija-lazne-vesti-digitalni-front-internet-propaganda-raskrinkavanje/6982056.html
Singer, P. W. (2022). Opininon: how Ukraine won the #LikeWar. Politico. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/03/12/ukraine-russia-information-warfare-likewar-00016562
Wallish, P. (2023). We finally know why people saw „the Dress” differently. Slate. https://slate.com/technology/2017/04/heres-why-people-saw-the-dress-differently.html
The details about the publication policy, including copyright and licensing, are available at:
