Showing posts with label political campaigning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political campaigning. Show all posts

Friday, February 04, 2011

Book Review: Politicking Online

The subtitle to this collection of essays, edited by Costas Panagopoulos, is 'The Transformation of Election Campaign Communications'. The book seeks to map out the ways in which the tools facilitated by online technologies are changing political communication and how campaigners are adapting to the online and digital environment. The analysis is purely focused upon U.S. politics, apart from two chapters, one covering Germany and the other Spain; which do not really offer a real comparative element but place developments in the U.S. in the context of global developments. We find offline inequalities prevail between presidential, gubernatorial and house races, with the lower in the political order a candidate is standing the less likely they are to be campaigning online. We also find that campaigning online can matter, though this is mediated by a range of variables and what comes across clearly is that online and offline must work contiguously in order to generate awareness, support and GOTV. In terms of learning how campaigning work, we learn how tools must be used in combination with one another and how the very latest tools can be used both to measure impact as well as gaining support.

The last of the essays provides some evidence of a Facebook effect, though the discussion does temper the findings putting them into a wider context. The fact that the essays look at social networking sites and new and untested shows how fast paced innovations are. Not in terms of innovations in campaigning but in the social uses of online tools which in turn drive campaigning. Despite being published in 2009 the book seems a little dated purely because of Obama, it raises the question whether academia can fully keep up with real world developments their uses within society, business or politics and their impacts. But, as with all good academic works, Panagopoulos leaves us with five lessons that both those engaged in political campaigning as practitioners or researchers should learn. Adaptation is key, he argues, within practice one has to adapt to new social communication styles and use the same tools as those with whom we wish to converse. Equally academia needs to adapt to new theories that help explain these new practices and their impacts. In practice it is key to know the limits, and this equally follows within academic study where we have to understand that new techniques cannot always replace but complement those which are tried and tested. While it seems odd for a study of U.S. campaigning to say look abroad but there are always lessons to be learned and practices to adapt to independent of how superior the developments in the U.S. are due to the resources used within campaigns. Academics also need to map across nations, not simply focusing on single nations; comparative studies offer means to truly understand the nature of evolution and revolution in terms of campaigning practices. The final two lessons suggest we should all stay alert and keep up. Minor developments can be easily overlooked, but turn into key innovations and so both practitioners and academics should look at each other's work more closely in order to understand and reflect upon what can and should be guiding the search for the communicational edge.

This book provides the grounding for these lessons and offers much thought-provoking data. While it may date quickly, as many studies of campaigning do, each essay provides a basis of understanding within one area of campaigning which we can use as basis for comparative work of both a temporal and spatial variety. Hence, this book should really be on the shelf of anyone interested in political campaigning and the impact of new technologies.

Friday, September 12, 2008

it's not about Michael really

So, on the Michael Palin viral video, today I have received the first email from the Michael Palin for President Campaign. I noted that some thought it was a promotional thing for Palin, and the email makes references to all things Python: ENGAGE IN SOCIAL DEBATE by rubbing Fuzzy Things on Republicans. ENGAGE IN CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE by doing Silly Walks in government buildings. But at it's heart it is a pro-Democrat, and for all we know Obama team created, campaign. The killer is the very strange bit that claims as evidence that "Apparently we've hit a nerve". After talking of it being featured on Obama's website the email claims: "Of course the opposition has been heard from as well, offering such insightful and considered political discourse as "If you have a child, I hope he dies in a car fire!" and "F--k your video and f--k you!". I kind of hope if these lines are true reflections of opposition responses then the authors are in no way connected to the campaigns of McCain or Palin. They claim the video has been watched by more than 200,000 people, though it is a couple of thousand less on their Youtube channel.

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Loony Politics

Rosalyn Warner is not a well-known name in politics, her non-de-plume Mad Cow-Girl is however. She has stood at various high profile contests since 1997, and will now stand at Haltemprice and Howden. She is of course the Official Monster Raving Loony Party candidate, a party who have a range of policies, and some past policies such as all-daydrinking are now law, but they are known more for being the one standign out in a silly constume as the Returnign Officer reads the results than anything else.

However Rosalyn has been drawn into the debate that sparked Davis' resignation and the by-election. She states on her website the following:

A vote for the Mad Cow-Girl is a vote for a return to real law & order.

I may be a Loony, but I'm not mad enough to want dangerous people walking free in the name of political correctness.

  • Suspected terrorists should be held until proved safe.
  • Sex offenders should be held in asylums until considered safe (if ever).
  • Antisocial yobs can rot in prison if they can't be sociable.

Why don't decent citizens have a "Human Right" not to be assaulted, blown up or harassed, when the criminals can scream human rights if their handcuffs hurt?

Is this a sharp move to the right or sensible politics from a party whose mission statement seems to be to "make elections more fun, brighter, colourful and humorous"?

Monday, May 05, 2008

A test of personality or governance

Due to the sad death of Gwyneth Dunwoody, 22nd May will see a by-election in the Crewe and Nantwich constituency. It seems fairly safe, Dunwoody enjoyed a 7,078 majority; but support for Labour has been in steep decline since 1997 (majority was 16,000 in 1997, down to 10,000 in 2001). The Conservatives have not to date made great in-roads in terms of vote increase, the decline is more due to reduced turnout than anything else, but this by-election will take place with a very different backdrop to the last two general elections.


The results make it difficult to say if Dunwoody enjoyed a personal vote, support for her as MP as opposed to a loyal Labour support; however Labour seem to be playing on support for her and sympathy in allowing her daughter Tamsin to be candidate. Her Conservative opponent Edward Timpson is stressing his local credentials and in responding to her selection Timpson questioned her understanding of the local area and suggested she would be too loyal to Brown to be a representative. Interesting that one cannot do both, but this relates to an attack on Brown and his tax reforms presenting him as out of touch.


Of the top three Liberal Democrat Elizabeth Shenton is still the only candidate on Facebook, and now has a wall with two supportive comments and imports news items on her and the party and is up to 147 friends. She is also the only one advertising a personal website devoted to her cats. The Liberal Democrats have been gaining support in the last three election contests, but can she make an impact or even win.

(l-r, Dunwoody, Timpson, Shenton)
The contest will be about gaining support, so persuasion to vote for the individual and party, and mobilisation, persuading people to physically go out and vote. Will this be another referendum on an unpopular government, if so it should be Timpson that wins; or will it be a test of personality? In which case will it be the personal and pavement politics approach that the Liberal Democrats employ that is victorious or will a latent support and sympathy for the late Gwyneth secure the seat for her daughter. Politics is never easy is it?