Could Twitter have changed the election?

By DANICA FELLOWS
THE Australian federal election resulted in a hung Parliament. Perhaps better use of social media by political communicators could have changed a crucial few thousand votes and have prevented this.

This essay seeks to examine the role of social media in two major elections, the American 2008 general election and the Australian 2007 federal election. It will also analyse how social media is being used in the political communication process for the Australian 2010 federal election. It will conclude with an assessment of the effectiveness of the use of social media in the Australian 2010 federal election.

The Obama campaign in the United States’s 2008 general election is seen as a landmark use of social media for political campaigning (Granfield, 2009; Metzgar and Maruggi, 2009). The Obama strategy involved effectively using social media to organise grassroots support for the campaign on a large scale. The Obama team used Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, as well as a custom made social media site ‘my.barackobama.com’ (Granfield, 2009). It has been acknowledged that the result was a groundswell of support for Obama, as well as considerable financial contributions from those supporters.

However, this does not mean the role of traditional media was usurped or unused. Metzgar and Maruggi (2009) conclude that the election issues represented and discussed in social media were a reflection of those discussed in traditional media, and importantly, the opposite was also the case. Both kinds of media were setting agenda and continuing discussion on issues, and they fed back into each other. Social media was in this case not the driving force of change but augmenting traditional media. It added a new dimension to political communication, away from the top-down approach of one-directional messages to a more interactive discussion.

The Australian 2007 federal election has been seen as another good example of the use of social media in political campaigning (Sprokkreeff, 2010). Sprokkreeff (2010) has said that the Kevin 07 digital campaign was well planned and effective in using social media to get their message out to voters. He has further argued that the message was interactive, “we talk and listen,” but that this interactivity has been missing from the 2010 election.

The 2010 Australian federal election has been different again in terms of social media use. Bella Counihan (2010) claims that social media is not being used as effectively during this election despite its hailed effectiveness in 2007. Indeed, the two major parties this election – Labor and the Coalition– have had a presence on social media sites, but whether they have been used to their maximum potential is questionable.

The government and opposition have both been pushing their leaders as the main focus of the social media interactivity. Both party websites contain links to the leader’s facebook, twitter, flickr pages, with Gillard also having a myspace page and Abbott linking to the Liberal party youtube channel.

In regards to facebook, the two leaders both have pages, however Abbott’s presence is also supported by a dedicated Liberal party page, although Labor appears to be lacking one. Their use of it is also different, with Abbott’s page merely full of campaign photos, whereas Gillard makes updates and links to other pages.

In terms of Twitter usage, Gillard and Abbott differ noticeably. Gillard’s twitter feed shows responses to people’s tweets, in comparison to Abbott’s who makes only announcements. Also, Abbott’s twitter use is far less frequent than Gillard’s has been.

Yet, Abbott’s use of only broadcasting messages via twitter is in the same style of use as the Obama campaign (Granfield, 2009). As he cannot physically reply to all tweets, Granfield judged it better to use twitter as a broadcasting tool, rather than offend some people by not responding. On the other hand, Gillard’s responses on twitter and though facebook seem to be the only case of social media interactivity of the two leaders, even if its formal repetition of party policy.

In terms of Labor imitating the Obama campaign strategy, uniquely they have created a private social media site called ‘Labor Connect’, which echoes the Obama ‘my.barackobama.com’ site. However, where ‘my.bo’ was simple and community-centred, Labor Connect has drawn criticism for being complicated for users and overly restrictive (Papworth, 2010).

While effective use of social media by the two leaders has been doubtful, some commentators are claiming that the 2010 election was in part the twitter election (Counihan, 2010; Adams, 2010). Unexpectedly, it’s not the politicians, but the journalists and bloggers who are seen to be changing the flow of information.

Journalists and citizens are able to report as well as comment on Twitter in real-time during the campaign. It is especially the beat journalists on the campaign trail who can provide insights into political speeches and events and have allowed greater interactivity from voters in the process (Adams, 2010). Twitter has also featured in traditional media outlets as it breaks stories, as well as tweets being broadcast live during political debates and discussions on television (Counihan, 2010).

What has changed here significantly is that the social media commentary now coincides instantly with traditional media broadcasting, and has altered the way issues are viewed, and how the media agenda is set (Metzgar and Maruggi, 2009).

Overall during the 2010 election, there has been an interesting revelation as to the potential of social media sites. Political parties have been shown to be reluctant to change their campaign strategy in terms of using social media differently to traditional media. Perhaps if during the 2010 election they had, a few more voters may have changed their minds.

In the end, the biggest surprise was that twitter, as used by journalists and citizens, has created a new way for audiences to engage with the election process. It has been effective in redefining issues, setting the agendas and through this may influenced voters.

References
• Adams, D. (2010) “The twitter election. Or is it?” ZDNet – Software – News http://www.zdnet.com.au/the-twitter-election-or-is-it-339304662.htm Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Australian Labor (2010) “Connect with Julia”
http://www.alp.org.au/julia-gillard/ Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Counihan, B. (2010) “The twitter election” smh.com.au http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/our-twitter-election-20100827-13vgp.html Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Granfield, M. (2009) “How social media won Obama the US Election” marketingmag.com.au http://www.marketingmag.com.au/blogs/view/how-social-media-won-obama-the-us-election-865 Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Julia Gillard (2010) “Julia Gillard Prime Minister” https://twitter.com/JuliaGillard Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Liberal Party (2010) “Abbott Team – Candidates” http://www.liberal.org.au/Abbott-Team.aspx Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Metzgar, E. and Maruggi, A. (2009) “Social Media and the 2008 Presidential Election” Journal Of New Communications Research Vol. 4, Issue 1. From Comunication and Mass Media Complete EBSCOhost. Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Papworth, L. (2010) “Election 2.0 – List of social media election sites to watch.” Laurel Papworth: The Business of Social Media, Online Communities and Social Networks http://laurelpapworth.com/election-2-0-10-election-sites-to-watch-social-media-2010/ Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Sprokkreef, P. (2010) “What if? The Australian election online”
Webprofits http://www.webprofits.com.au/blog/australian-election-online/ Accessed: 5/09/2010

• Tony Abbott (2010) “Tony Abbott MHR” http://twitter.com/tonyabbottmhr Accessed: 5/09/2010