Politicians are always looking for ways to connect with the electorate. The rise of the internet not only allows for distribution of campaign ideas but new ways of voter feedback that was previously unavailable including online fund-raising, and voter mobilization. The internet has the ability to shape the political landscape.
The internet was first used to a limited extent during the 1992 election by the Clinton campaign using email, bulletin boards and discussion groups(Wagner, & Gainous, 2009). “The discussion group 'alt.politics.Clinton' received approximately 800 postings a day at the height of the campaign”(Wagner, & Gainous, 2009). The internet first became important in the 1996 election with each major candidate running for president created their own website(Johnson, Braima, & Sothirajah, 1999). These websites have changed from basic information sites “brochure-ware” to large-scale feedback based fund-raising enterprises(Trammell, Williams, Postelnicu, & Landreville, 2006). These changes have mirrored the advancement and sophistication of the internet itself. Much like the internet, online campaigning has moved from novelty to necessity; This is true at the national level as well as the local level. A Pew Research Center study showed that during the “2008 election 74% of internet users went online to take part in, or get news and information about the campaign, representing 55% of the entire adult population” (Smith 2009); This use is expected to grow into the future. This study used telephone interviews conducted November 20 to December 4, 2008 among a sample of 2,254 adults, 18 and older. The sample used a random digit sample from telephone exchanges in the continental United States.
Fund-raising is the...
... middle of paper ...
...ternet & American Life Project. Retrieved from
http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/6--The-Internets-Role-in-Campaign-2008.aspx
Trammell, K.D., Williams, A.P., Postelnicu, M., & Landreville, K.D. (2006). Evolution of online campaigning: Increasing interactivity in candidate web sites and blogs through text and technical features. Mass Communication & Society, 9(1), 21-44.
Xenos, M., & Moy, P. (2007). Direct and differential effects of the internet on political and civic engagement. Journal of Communication, 57(4), 704-718.
Wagner, K.M., & Gainous, J. (2009). Electronic grassroots: Does online campaigning work?. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 15(4), 502-520.
Wattal, S., Schuff., D., Mandviwalla, M., & Williams, C.B. (2010). Web 2.0 and politics: The 2008 U.S. presidential election and an e-politics research agenda. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 669-688.
The purpose of this article is to persuade the reader that social media is the new alternative to mainstream big money ads for politicians. Cary’s intended audience is politicians, political campaign managers and politically engaged citizens. The tone of this article is informative but slightly opinionated. While Cary does back up her claims with notable quotes and statistics the main support for her argument is her professional opinion. Cary was formerly the
In Nicholas Carr’s article “How Social Media Is Ruining Politics”, Carr writes about the effects that social media has on politics. In his article, Carr focuses more on the negative effect that social media has when it comes to politics. Some points that he makes about social media include specific examples like the recent presidential campaigns, how other technological advances over the years have effected politics, and the effectiveness that social media has on politics
...om the comfort of their home or even from a dorm room seven states away, the possibilities of Internet voting are not being even remotely utilized. States should begin to offer Internet voting and registration as a supplement to already existing options. For those that do not own a computer, vote by mail can also be a plausible and indispensable alternative.
In the current time, it seems like one cannot go a day without using at least one social media website. This might be especially true among groups of teenagers and young adults. Social media became a vital part of daily life that feeds people with several types of information constantly. Political news is a type of information that can reach the people through the means of social media. Since presidents are constantly seeking new strategies to increase their communication with the public in order to spread their political message, they utilize the different social media websites. Hence, social media became a platform to spread political message. It is not surprising that now the majority of political officials and candidates have social media accounts more than ever before, such as a Twitter account.
As stated by Tim Highfield “whereas in 2004 the Howard Dean campaign for the Democratic nomination for that year’s US Presidential election was a novelty in some regards for its internet strategy […], politicians and candidates having a social media presence is now more expected and mundane” (2016, p.123). With this is mind, the following essay will aim to describe and explain Dr. Kellie Leitch’s use of social media between April 20th, 2017 and April 23rd, 2017—just a little over a month before the Conservative party’s leadership race’s elections (Leblanc, & Stone, 2017). It will focus mainly on her choice of communication channels—with an emphasis on Facebook— as well as the key messages Leitch used. Communications Channel and Types of Messages
...urself (and Others): How YouTube and Blogging have Changed the Rules of the Campaign. HINCKLEY JOURNAL OF POLITICS , 75-85.
During the United States Presidential Elections we are inundated with propaganda that insists we carry out our civic duty and cast a ballot which will help to determine who our nation’s next leader will be. The President of the United States is undoubtedly the most influential individual in our country so, of course, citizens must take the election process very seriously. Yet, how much influence do the voters of this democratic nation truly have on such an important decision? Unfortunately, many people are unaware of a voting process that takes place during each election. This process does not necessarily include the citizens of the United States and is known as Electoral College. It is the Electoral College that impedes on our nation’s democratic presidential election process and challenges its integrity as well.
The aim of this paper is to look at the relationship between the mass media, specifically television, and presidential elections. This paper will focus on the function of television in presidential elections through three main areas: exit polls, presidential debates, and spots. The focus is on television for three reasons. First, television reaches more voters than any other medium. Second, television attracts the greatest part of presidential campaign budgets. Third, television provides the candidates a good opportunity to contact the people directly. A second main theme of this paper is the role of television in presidential elections in terms of representative democracy in the United States.
Schweitzer, E. J. (2012) The Mediatization of E-Campaigning: Evidence From German Party Websites in State, National, and European Parliamentary Elections 2002-2009, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17: 283-302.
However, grassroots include everyone – both the “powerful” and “common” people. The main objective of grassroots activism is to “increase the publicity of, and most importantly the support for your cause” (Watson, 2005). This can be carried out in a number of ways. For example, individuals participating in this type of activism can; “make phone calls, label envelopes, knock on doors, organize their friends and relatives, march, put up yard signs, rally, volunteer, write letters, distribute petitions and donate money” (RenewAmerica, n.d.). The larger the movement, the more successful grassroots activism is.
The main aim of this report is to analyze the impacts of changes in the media concerning the societal and individual view of politics and politicians. The report also describes significant milestones in mass media since the year 1960 and examines the impact of mass media on how people think politically. The report then considers the effect of technological advancements in mass media and the effect on the results of elections. The use of mass media has increased over the last fifty years in that it is a primary medium through which supporters of various campaigners share their ideas and views concerning politicians and different political parties. Through social media, behaviors and performance of several activists have brought
The researchers present findings that indicate that a politician’s popularity in the voting booth may be related to the frequency with which the candidate is talked about on social media. The researchers goes on to discuss how further research may conclude that social media has a bigger impact on voting outcomes than traditional forms of media, and how that could potentially shape the future of voting.
As the times change, so does the latest technology. In the mid-1900's it was the television, before that the radio, and now in the late-20th and 21st century we have the internet. With the coming of every new media outlet audiences and media moguls migrate. Along with the migrations are the politicians who try to use the new form of media to more easily reach the public. It's come to the point where the internet increasingly work with democracy directly; some elections in the United States even going so far as to hold online polling in a general election. "Online voting is increasingly making its way int our political process," writes Vote.com President Dick Morris, "the 2000 Arizona Democratic Primary tallied 39,942 online votes," (Morris 1034). However, should the internet really be used to such degrees in the case of democracy? There is an ongoing debate among scholars on the topic. One thing to consider is whether or not the many accusations stating that the internet is an aid to terrorism outweigh the positive effects of how the internet has strengthened democracy and has had a crucial part in turning oppressed nations into less oppressed, democratic states. On the subject of terrorism being aided by the internet, making it easier for terrorist factions leaders to inform their people, could it not be argued that these factions leaders could use other means of communication, maybe only a little less effectively and therefore nullifying the accusation that the internet is the culprit? After extensive research, it's clear that the internet does not harm democracy; on the contrary, the internet strengthens it in a way that no other form of media has done before.
Social media including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, Flicker, internet websites, and blogs are becoming mainstream attracting a younger more technology savvy voter. Many candidates in the last elections learned to use these mediums so not to overlook tech savvy voters and learned how to use these to their advantage. Candidates took to the internet to raise awareness, state views, and even successfully raised donations. Social media was able to provide instant feedback on the standing of a candidate often days or weeks sooner than a more traditional poll.
Prior, Markus. "News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout." American Journal of Political Science. 49.3 (2005): 577-592. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.