POLITICIANS IN SOCIAL MEDIA: NEW FORMS OF COMMUNICATION

Transcription

1 POLITICIANS IN SOCIAL MEDIA: NEW FORMS OF COMMUNICATION Andrius Šuminas Vilnius University, Faculty of Communication Tel , ; Internet and social media have become an integral part of daily life for most of us. The development of new technologies transforms ways and forms in which politicians communicate with their electors. The scope of political communication in the interactive space is constantly increasing. Therefore, the research of these processes becomes necessary. This article analyzes the processes of political communication in social media and studies the possibilities and forms of this communication proceeding. The beginning of the article defines the concept of social media, distinguishes different categories of means, and compares social and traditional media. The article minutely analyzes the transformation of political communication that takes place due to social media, reveals the aspects of changes in communication process, and analyzes new possibilities. In addition, the article represents the analysis of the communication of the members of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania in social media. The analysis shows how the politicians of the country communicate with the society in the digital space. Keywords: political communication, social media, social media and traditional media, direct communication. Politicians and political parties try to dominate the common information context so as to increase their popularity and possibilities to win the elections. In order to spread their messages, politicians more frequently add the Internet to the list of their communication channels. In the process of communication, social media becomes more and more important during every election, and sometimes it turns into the main political battle field. Therefore, politicians and political parties try to make use of the possibilities the interactive space provides. According to Department of Statistics to the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, 58,1 % of Lithuanian population used the Internet in This number is increasing annually and approaches the average of the European Union where 64 % of population uses the Internet 1. It is clear that majority of Internet users in Lithuania actively use various means of social media. The number of social media users is also growing rapidly. Social Media Definition The term social media came into wider use in the middle of 2006 and still has no generally accepted and unambiguous definition. Some researchers use this term in parallel with the term Web 2.0 which describes specific way of communication among the users of World Wide Web when service and content control is assigned to the users. This allows them to easily create and share information and data, sometimes even change the structure of the information system. Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein represent this approach and describe social media as a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content 2. Other researchers of the World Wide Web link the term social media to the term social networking emphasizing the dimension of keeping social relations where the main object is social relations among people, reciprocity and intercommunion. John Blossom puts stress on the aspects of social interaction and describes social media as any highly scalable and accessible communications technology or technique that enables any individual to influence groups of other individuals easily 3. In summary, social media describes interactive technologies and ways in which they can be used when individuals interact among themselves sharing the content they generated. Social media can be of various forms including text, sound, photo and video material, various content links and interfaces. In order to reveal the diversity of social media, the means of social media can be divided into the following categories: blogs (e. g. Blogger, Blogas.lt), social networking websites (e. g. Facebook, One.lt), microblogs (e. g. Twitter, Blakė.lt), portals for video sharing (e. g. Youtube, Videogaga.lt), portals for picture sharing (e. g. Flickr, Fotki), Wiki websites (e. g. Wikipedia, PBworks), websites for reviews and opinions (e. g. Epinions.com, Skundai.lt), question and answer websites (e. g. Answers.com, GerasKlausimas.lt), social tagging websites 1 Department of Statistics to the Government of the Republic of Lithuania. Development of information and knowledge society. Statistical index 2009, < Kaplan A., Haenlein M., Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media, Business Horizons, Vol. 53, Issue 1, < Blossom J. Content Nation: Surviving and Thriving as Social Media Changes Our Work, Our Lives, and Our Future. Wiley Publishing, Inc., Indianapolis, 2009, p

2 (e. g. Delicious, Topix.lt), virtual worlds (e. g. Second Life, The Sims Online), and other means of interactive virtual communication. Great diversity of forms of social media means allows every Internet user to choose the most acceptable forms and channels of communication. Moreover, the audience of World Wide Web can choose whether to use interactive means of communication of a general nature that are designed for the general public with no exceptional needs or specialized means of social media that are designed for the societies of individuals with specific needs. When speaking about the changes of information publication on the Internet Dave Evans states that by courtesy of social media the democratization of knowledge and information spread takes place when people become active creators instead of passive users of content. In other words, this is the shift from traditional mechanism of information transmission one to all to the new interactive way of information spread all to all 4. Social media is different from traditional media such as television, radio, newspapers or magazines in many ways. Firstly, the degree of user involvement in the process of communication differs. In the case of traditional media, the users usually stay passive observers while social media allow the users to actively take part, create and share information. Furthermore, the means of traditional media are regulated and controlled by the state or business groups while the tools of social media are accessible to any person and usually for free. And more importantly, the roles of participants of communication through social media are not fixed and strictly determined. Any user of social media can easily change its role, i. e. be messenger and then become a part of the audience whereas in the case of traditional media, the roles of participants of communication are always clearly determined and fixed. More importantly, information and news in social media are presented more interactively and much faster. The means of traditional media are limited by the periodicity cycle of information publicity (e. g. TV news schedule, regularity of newspaper publishing) while information spread and communication through social media can take place in real time. The content of traditional media cannot be altered (e. g. alterations of content in printed newspaper are not possible) while the content in social media can be easily changed and corrected at any time. Social media is sometimes called societal media because the users generate all the content of the means of interactive communication. Furthermore, it is a democratic place of information and content exchange because the audience decide what is interesting and relevant instead of state or power institutions. While the systems of traditional means of communication are basically one-way, social media allows for the real process of communication to take place. This process is based on the interaction of the sender and the receiver when interpreting the message. The increasing importance of social media can be proved by the fact that traditional media indicates the information published in social media as the primary source. However, this process is two-way as the vast majority of topics in social media come from the traditional media. In summary, both the means of social media and traditional media contribute to the development of the public space by defining the most relevant topics. Political Communication in Social Media Internet is frequently called the technology that changed communication the most since Gutenberg invented the printing press. Today global network of networks and social media involve whole spectrum of human communication: from scientific or political topics to personal interaction. When speaking about the role of social media in political communication, Internet means broadened the usual communication channels, provided much wider possibilities for the politicians to reach society and decreased the role of media as intermediate in the processes of political communication. Unlike traditional media where journalists pick out the pieces of information for publishing, Internet provides politicians with the possibility to reach their electors directly 5. Furthermore, means of social media drastically reduced expenditure for the action of political communication because now Internet helps to spread information with minimum costs and this information reaches very high number of individuals 6. Most importantly, Internet provides possibilities for the two-way communication between the politicians and members of the society when politicians can have direct reversible connection and citizens can freely create 4 Evans D. Social Media Marketing: An Hour a Day. Wiley Publishing, Inc., Indianapolis, 2008, p Kim Y.M., Geidner N., Politics as Friendship: The Impact of Online Social Networks on Young Voters' Political Behavior, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, TBA, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, May 22, Kruger B.S., A Comparison of Conventional and Internet Political Mobilization, American Politics Research, Volume 34, Number 6, <

3 and transmit any type of messages to the politicians. World Wide Web reduced time and space barriers; therefore, the electors can not only observe political discussions but can actively take part in political events. In today s world the audience of electors becomes more and more fragmentary and different parts of it demand personal communicative messages that satisfy their interests and new forms of information presentation that are specialized for every individual user. Different communities of social media and groups in those communities represent different and specific parts of electorate. Social media allows the politicians to segment personalize messages at the maximum; therefore, they can customize and transmit their messages directly to the target audience through reasonable forms and channels. This creates a sense of personal communication with the electors. Through social media politicians can reach such audiences that would never search for any information about politicians or politics. One of these audiences that get more difficult to reach is young people. The means of social media are visited by thousands of young and open to innovations people every day. Virtual communication for such people is extremely important; therefore, social media enables the politicians to reach youth through the most acceptable communication channel. One of the main advantages of the Internet and social media to the politicians is the possibility of personal communication with the electors. The communication style in social media is significantly different from the traditional communication through the means of mass communication. Communication in electronic space is informal and immediate, usually spontaneous, sometimes anonymous. In this space distinctive language is used: stiffness and formal sentence structures, complicated words and terms are avoided. Instead, short phrases, corrections, abbreviations, preteritions, bywords, and unofficial vocabulary are used. Because of the personal style of communication social media creates unrestricted discussion spirit when politicians simply become friends with the audience. The content of communication of politicians interacting with the Internet users through social media is not only of political nature. Frequently the politicians share their personal remarks, funny experiences from their daily life, travel impressions, opinions on the books they have read or movies they have seen. This creates immediate and friendly atmosphere where no distance is left between the politicians and the audience and this lets the participants of the process of communication to feel more confident with each other. It is important for the politicians to not only spread their beliefs and ideas as widely as possible but also to influence the potential electors for them to become loyal supporters. Blogs, microblogs, social networks, portals for photo and video sharing provides the politicians with the new possibilities to involve and mobilize their supporters. However, these means decentralize the process of political communication and information spread as the politicians lose the possibility to control and influence the further process of message spread. The diversity and number of easily accessible channels of social media make it difficult for the politicians to form and keep their positive image. Nowadays the politicians can be filmed or photographed at any place at any time and then the movies or pictures can be rapidly spread through the channels of social media. Therefore, as several researchers of politics assume, the interactive means will encourage the politicians to be more honest, behave themselves in public and try not to entangle in ambiguous situations. Anyone can upload any type of information through the means of social media; as a result, the political communication can come into existence that is not for the particular politician but against him or her. In the Internet channels the opponents can publish adverse information which can contravene the reality. Especially as in the interactive space various contents can be published anonymously which makes it impossible to identify who the author or the contracting authority of the communication attack is. Thus with the information they publish through social media, faceless and nameless anonyms can ruin not only the runup to the elections campaign but even the whole political career. However, social media makes it possible to not only organize communication attacks against the opponents but to retaliate in the same manner and through the same channels. Moreover, the means of social media have an information multiplication feature which helps the politicians in the spread of political information. Active Internet users like quoting interesting or controversial information; therefore, if politicians manage to engage the users, the snowball effect starts when the users of social media voluntarily start sharing the links to the content they like. The main disadvantage of the use of social media in political communication is that the older electors, who usually are the most active part of the electorate, use the Internet distantly, do not take part in the discussions in social media, and do not look through the content published in social media. Due to this reason, the politicians cannot totally reject the usual communication through the means of traditional media or direct meetings but interactive means have now become the place where politicians have to be otherwise they lose the possibility to communicate with the active and still increasing audience of social media. 237

4 Lithuanian Politicians in Social Media Having discussed the aspects of the use of social media in the process of political communication, the question arises whether the politicians of the Republic of Lithuania use the channels of social media in communication with their potential electors. In order to find an answer to this question, the research was conducted which analyzes the communication of the country s politicians in the means of social media. The research chooses the following major means of social media in different categories: the largest social network Facebook, the most popular microblog website Twitter, the most attention attracting portal for video sharing Youtube, the most popular website for picture sharing Flickr. The research also analyzes the personal blogs of the politics of Lithuania. The research of political communication in the means of social media has a non-random sample all members of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania. The whole list of 141 member of the Parliament is taken from the official website of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania The political communication in the means of social media was analyzed from January 4 th to 17 th, The following are the results of the research that reveal the peculiarities of communication of Lithuanian politics in different means of social media. Political communication in blogs. The search helped to count the number of members of the Parliament who in January, 2010, had their blogs on the Internet. The total number is 18 which accounts for 12,8 % of all the members of the Parliament. Some parliamentarians have blogs on their personal websites, others use the services of the websites exclusively designed for blogs such as or and the rest use the sections in major news portals for their blogs, for instance, Delfi blogas. The research shows that those parliamentarians of Lithuania who have blogs do not use this means of social media efficiently because new entries in blogs are created irregularly and rarely. Last entries in few blogs of the members of the Parliament were created before the 2008 election which makes it obvious that blogs were only created as a part of run-up to the elections campaign and now are forgotten or simply became the Internet garbage. Political communication in social networking website Facebook. The research shows that 45 members of the Parliament have their descriptions, sites or support groups on the largest social network Facebook. This accounts for 31,9 % of all the members of the Parliament. Moreover, the research calculates that every member of the Parliament on average has 184 friends or supporters on Facebook. These are the people that have a direct connection to the politician and receive all communicative content that is published. Furthermore, all communication between the politician and his/her friends is visible to their friends; therefore, the network of communication participants is broader. After the analysis of political communication in this website of social media, the conclusion can be made that only 11 members of the Parliament communicate with their friends or supporters regularly and actively which means they continually publish their remarks and political comments, share pictures from events, invite friends and supporters to join discussions and meetings. The rest of the parliamentarians who are registered at Facebook are simply existent on the social network but do no active communication. Their presence is only visible when they invite friends to join or agree to become friends or rarely comment under the notes or pictures of the other member of social network. Political communication in microblog website Twitter. Microblog website Twitter is noticeably rare in the use for political communication in comparison with Facebook. Only 6 members of the Parliament have their accounts on Twitter. This accounts to only 4,3 % of all members of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania. Every parliamentarian on Twitter on average has 40,7 followers. These are the individuals who continually receive all short messages that are generated by the parliamentarians. The members of the Parliament share links to other channels with their articles, personal thoughts, and political remarks with their followers on Twitter. However, the messages of all the politicians are irregular and quite fragmentary. Politicians on Lithuania on portal for video sharing Youtube. The research shows that the most popular portal for video sharing Youtube contains at least one video about 94 members of the Parliament which accounts to two thirds (66,7 %) of all parliamentarians. During the research video material with direct tags to the members of the Parliament was searched for. Of 94 politicians who have at least one video about themselves on Youtube, the average number of video for each parliamentarian is 8,7 videos. Some of the members of the Parliament have their own channels on Youtube where they upload their own videos. However, the vast majority of video material related to the parliamentarians is uploaded through the Youtube channels of major political parties of Lithuania. 238

5 Politicians on portal for picture sharing Flickr. The research shows that at least one picture can be found of 17 members of the Parliament on portal for picture sharing Flickr. This accounts for 12,1 % of all members of the Parliament of Lithuania. On average, there are 12,6 pictures of one parliamentarian whose at least one picture can be found on Flickr. No politician has a personal account on portal for picture sharing ,7 % 31,9 % 12,8 % 12,1 % 4,3 % Blogs Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr Figure 1. Members of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania in Social Media (%). Conclusions The number of Internet users in Lithuania is increasing annually. Therefore, it is certain that the World Wide Web will become the main source of information about politics and politicians for more and more individuals. Together with the growing number of Internet users in the country, the user audiences of the means of social media are also increasing. That is why this interactive space becomes more and more important for the politicians who constantly seek for communication to higher number of persons. Communication through the means of social media provides the politicians with inexpensive or usually free possibility to reach the electors directly with no filter of traditional media. Never before politicians had the means to transmit their messages to such number of individuals so rapidly. Nowadays with the help of social media politicians can present huge amounts of miscellaneous information and receive direct feedback from the audience by pressing one button. Social media link the possibilities of mass accessibility and personal communication. With this, the efficiency of the process of political communication increases. Now the users of social media start to select the messages they receive; therefore, the mass audience gets more fragmentary and the connection between the sender and the receiver is strengthened. This personal nature of communication allows for stronger interconnection as politicians and the users of social media in a way become friends, start to trust each other more. However, social media not only opens the new horizons of communication for the politicians but also changes the rules of the process of communication. Politicians and their advisers have to understand that they cannot dominate and control the process of virtual communication. They can try to actively participate in the process of communication and spread their messages and ideas but the Internet is the place for individuals who decide what is interesting and relevant for themselves. It is obvious that the politicians of Lithuania poorly make use of the interactive means in the process of the political communication yet. The presence of the vast majority of the members of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania in social media is limited with no endeavour to communicate with the Internet audience. The majority of blogs of the parliamentarians are updated rarely and irregularly, only few members of the Parliament actively use social networks and portals for content sharing. Nevertheless, it is commendable that the politicians of Lithuania find their way to the Internet space. Therefore, the obvious is that the stream of political communication in social media will grow in the future. References 1. Bimber, Bruce; Davis, Richard. (2003). Campaigning Online: The Internet in U.S. Elections. Oxford University Press, New York. 224 p. ISBN Blossom, John. (2009). Content Nation: Surviving and Thriving as Social Media Changes Our Work, Our Lives, and Our Future. Wiley Publishing, Inc., Indianapolis. 348 p. ISBN

6 3. Compton, Jordan. (2008). Mixing Friends with Politics: A Functional Analysis of 08 Presidential Candidates Social Networking Profiles. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the NCA 94th Annual Convention, TBA, San Diego, CA, Nov 20, 2008 [cited 29/04/2009]. Available at: < >. 4. Development of information and knowledge society. Statistical index Department of Statistics to the Government of the Republic of Lithuania. [cited 04/01/2010]. Available at: < >. 5. Evans, Dave. (2008). Social Media Marketing: An Hour a Day. Wiley Publishing, Inc., Indianapolis. 409 p. ISBN: Gueorguieva, Vassia. (2009). Voters, MySpace, and Youtube: The Impact of Alternative Communication Channels. p Politicking online: the transformation of election campaign communications. Edited by Costas Panagopoulos. Rutgers university press, New Brunswick, New Jersey, London. 302 p. ISBN Gurevitch, Michael; Coleman, Stephen; Blumler, Jay G. (2009). Political Communication Old and New Media Relationships. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2009, 625. [cited 28/10/2009]. Prieiga per internetą: < 8. Howard, Philip N. (2005). Deep Democracy, Thin Citizenship: The Impact of Digital Media in Political Campaign Strategy. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2005, 597. [cited 14/12/2009]. Available at: < >. 9. Kaplan, Andreas M.; Haenlein, Michael. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, Vol. 53, Issue 1. [cited 04/01/2010]. Available at: < >. 10. Kim, Young Mie; Geidner, Nicholas. (2008). Politics as Friendship: The Impact of Online Social Networks on Young Voters' Political Behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, TBA, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, May 22, 2008 [cited 29/04/2009]. Available at: < Krueger, Brian S. (2006). A Comparison of Conventional and Internet Political Mobilization. American Politics Research, Volume 34 Number 6. [cited 27/04/2009]. Available at: < >. 12. Lilleker, Darren G. (2006). Key concepts in political communication. Sage Publications, London. 209 p. ISBN Page, Janis; Duffy, Margaret. (2008). U.S. Presidential Campaign 2008: A Fantasy Theme Analysis of Visual Stories Spun on the Web. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, TBA, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, May 22, 2008 [cited 29/04/2009]. Available at: < 14. Panagopoulos, Costas. (2009). Technology and the Moder Political Communication: The Digital Pulse of the 2008 Campaigns. p Politicking online: the transformation of election campaign communications. Edited by Costas Panagopoulos. Rutgers university press, New Brunswick, New Jersey, London. 302 p. ISBN Smith, Kimberly; Bratt, Erik. (2009). The Obama Playbook: How Digital Marketing and Social Media Won the Election. MarketingProfs. [cited 27/04/2009]. Available at: < >. 16. The list of the Members of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania in alphabetical order Seimas (2010). The Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania. [cited 04/01/2010]. Available at: < >. 17. The top 500 sites on the web (2010). Alexa Internet, Inc. The Web Information Company. [cited 17/01/2010]. Available at: < >. 18. Williams, Christine B; Gulati, Girish J. (2009). The Political Impact of Facebook: Evidence from the 2006 Elections and the 2008 Nomination Contest. p Politicking online: the transformation of election campaign communications. Edited by Costas Panagopoulos. Rutgers university press, New Brunswick, New Jersey, London. 302 p. ISBN