Paper detail

Discovery of the Content and Engagement with the Content

In the second half of the 20th century, Parliament allowed broadcasters to transmit radio and eventually television coverage of debates and meetings of select committees. More recently, in an effort to further improve transparency and citizen engagement, the UK Parliament started publishing videos of these debates and meetings itself, and tweeting details of debates as they happened. In this paper, we attempt to characterise how people engage with video data of Parliamentary debates by using more than two years of Google Analytics data around these videos. We analyse the patterns of engagement - how do they land on a particular video? How do they hear about this video, i.e., what is the (HTTP) referrer website that led to the user clicking on the video? Once a user lands on a video, how do they engage with it? For how long is the video played? What is the next destination? etc. Answering these questions is an important first step towards understanding why and how people use Parliamentary videos, and therefore, how the video delivery platform should be adapted and personalised for the needs of the citizens of the country. Taking inspiration from An, Kwak, and Jansen (2017), we employ Non-Negative Matrix Factorization (NMF) (Lee and Seung, 1999) on the video views matrix to identify different archetypes of users, and identify archetypes. A deeper examination of the archetypes we find reveals that they are primarily distinguished by how they land on the video page: Search (i.e., through a search engine), Referral (i.e., from other Parliamentary websites), Direct (i.e., through a direct link, which is embedded on another website), Social (i.e., through a social platform such as Facebook or Twitter) and Others.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.