Revista de comunicación política iberoamericana

No. 61 (2025): An X-ray of Brazil in the Context of Political Communication
Articles

Informational Inequalities: Media consumption habits of Brazilians and the influence of gender, income, age, race, and political orientation

PDF (Español (España))
DOI: https://doi.org/10.56151/maspoderlocal.284
Rodrigo Carreiro
Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia em Democracia Digital
Maria Paula Almada
Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia em Democracia Digital
Nina Santos
Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia em Democracia Digital
Lizete Nóbrega
Aláfia Lab
Ellen Cerqueira
Aláfia Lab
Matheus Cruz
Aláfia Lab
Vivian Patricia Peron Vieira
Aláfia Lab

Keywords

  • consumo de informação,
  • redes sociais,
  • mídia
  • information consumption,
  • social network sites,
  • media

How to Cite

Carreiro, R., Almada, M. P., Santos, N., Nóbrega, L., Cerqueira, E., Cruz, M., & Peron Vieira, V. P. (2025). Informational Inequalities: Media consumption habits of Brazilians and the influence of gender, income, age, race, and political orientation. Más Poder Local, (61), 90–110. https://doi.org/10.56151/maspoderlocal.284

Copyright (c) 2025 Of the author or authors

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This article aims to assess the main media consumption habits of Brazilians, with an emphasis on the influence of factors such as gender, income, age, race, and political orientation. We understand that the composition of this informational basket certainly has a personal dimension, based on individual interests, choices, and preferences. However, there are also two other dimensions that directly impact how people shape these habits: the structure and dynamics of digital platforms, and relevant sociodemographic factors such as gender, age, income, race, and political positioning. Our research focuses on the structures and dynamics of platforms, with the aim of understanding through which means people usually get their information, which social media platforms are most used, which media outlets are most consumed, and what habits are related to messaging apps, among other aspects. The results are based on a nationwide survey conducted in October 2024, which interviewed 1,549 Brazilians from across the country. Among the main findings, we highlight the centrality of social media and television as sources of information, the significant differences in the most used social networks for information by men (preference for YouTube) and women (preferente for Instagram), the variations in user profiles across different platforms, and the reflection of political polarization in the choice of information sources.

PDF (Español (España))

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Anderson, M. e Kumar, M. (2019): Digital divide persists even as lower-income Americans make gains in tech adoption. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
  2. Araujo, W. F. e Karhawi, I. (2023): «Todo mundo pode ser famoso com o algoritmo do TikTok’: Imaginários e saberes sobre eficiência algorítmica e potência viral». Anais do 46º Congresso Brasileiro de Ciências da Comunicação – Intercom 2023, PUC-Minas.
  3. Berzal, C. (2024): «Narrativas Políticas Transmedia como herramientas de comunicación gubernamental: Caso «Argentina Unida»». Revista Más Poder Local, (58): 70–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56151/maspoderlocal.191
  4. Bokase, M. (2023): «Exploring the Transformative Impact of Social Media on Behavior in Contemporary Society». Interdisciplinary Journal Papier Human Review, 4(1), 10-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47667/ijphr.v4i1.231
  5. CGI.BR – Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil (2023): Sistematização das Contribuições à Consulta sobre Regulação de Plataformas Digitais. São Paulo. Disponível em: https://cgi.br/media/docs/publicacoes/1/20231213081034/sistematizacao_consulta_regulacao_plataformas.pdf (Último acesso em 12 de março de 2025).
  6. Chadwick, A. (2013): The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Fletcher, R.; y Nielsen, R. K. (2017): «Are news audiences increasingly fragmented? A cross-national comparative analysis of cross-platform news audience fragmentation and duplication». Journal of Communication, 67(4): 476-498. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12303
  8. Goyanes, M. (2020): «The sociology of news consumption: A review of the literature». Sociology Compass, 14(3): e12765. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12765
  9. Lynch, C. e Cassimiro, P. H. (2022): O populismo reacionário: ascensão e legado do bolsonarismo. São Paulo: Editora Contracorrente.
  10. Newman, N.; Fletcher, R.; Schulz, A.; Andi, S. e Nielsen, R. K. (2020): Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
  11. NIC.br - Núcleo de Informação e Coordenação do Ponto BR (2024): Conectividade significativa: propostas para medição e o retrato da população no Brasil (en línea). Disponível em: https://cetic.br/media/docs/publicacoes/7/20240415183307/estudos_setoriais-conectividade_significativa.pdf (Último acesso em 14 de março de 2025).
  12. Nunes, F. e Traumann, T. (2023): Biografia do abismo. Río de Janeiro: Harper Collins.
  13. Oliveira Filho, J. I. D. (2024): Os primórdios do bolsonarismo: a utopia regressiva dos redpills. [Tese (Doutorado em Sociologia)] - Programa de Pós-Graduação em Sociologia, Centro de Humanidades, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza.
  14. Pennycook, G.; Rand, D. G. (2019): «Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality». Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(7): 2521–2526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1806781116
  15. Pew Research Center (2018): «News Use Across Social Media Platforms 2018». Recuperado de: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/
  16. Pew Research Center (2019): «Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins». Disponível em: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/01/17/where-millennials-end-and-generation-z-begins (Último acesso em 11 de fevreiro de 2025).
  17. Reuters (2024): Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2024. Disponível em: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2024-06/RISJ_DNR_2024_Digital_v10%20lr.pdf (Último acesso em 12 de março de 2025).
  18. Santos, N.; Chagas, V. e Marinho, J. (2022): «De onde vem a informação que circula em grupos bolsonaristas no WhatsApp». Intexto, (53): 123603. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19132/1807-8583202253.123603
  19. Singh, S. (2023): «Demographic variations in media consumption: a comparative analysis». ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 4(2): 2109–2117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v4.i2.2023.3351
  20. Strömbäck, J.; Djerf-Pierre, M. e Shehata, A. (2018): «The dynamics of political interest and news media consumption: A longitudinal perspective». International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(1): 1-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/eds018
  21. Stroud, N. J. (2010): «Polarization and partisan selective exposure». Journal of Communication, 60(3): 556-576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.x
  22. Tsfati, Y. e Cappella, J. N. (2005): «Why do people watch news they do not trust? The need for cognition as a moderator in the association between news media skepticism and exposure». Media Psychology, 7(3): 251-271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0703_2
  23. Van Zoonen, L. (1998): «A professional, unreliable, heroic marionette (M/F): Structure, agency and subjectivity in contemporary journalisms». European Journal of Cultural Studies, 1(1): 123–143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13675494980010010