Lin explores the changes in the relationship between social media and mass media regarding election campaigns since Facebook has risen to popularity. He explored the effect Facebook has had on election campaigns using the 2012 Taiwan elections as an example. Using the concepts of framing and Habermas’ communicative active theory, he proves that social media is becoming a significant part of campaigns. Lin discusses how candidates are now accepting social media as an intermediary they can use to network during political campaigns without intervention from mass media. He explores the measures journalists are now taking to cover the news they used to handle directly. He found that many candidates would still inform journalists of their upcoming Facebook posts so they could achieve maximum media exposure. This provides valuable insights into how a political candidate may use Facebook and other forms of social media to influence voters and their political opinions. Lin provides some examples of how Facebook may be used by the candidate and how audiences may interact with that information. He uses different concepts used throughout the course to expand on how audience interactions with the posts may benefit a candidate’s campaigns.
Casteltrione states that the link between decline in political participation and the rise of the Internet perhaps have no more connection than bad timing. This would mean Facebook use is not at fault for the decline of political engagement. He suggests that the Internet has become more popular at the time of a ‘democratic deficit,’ a time where people just so happen to have become dissatisfied with the democratic process. Casteltrione outlines three main schools of thought regarding the link between Internet and political participation: optimists, pessimists, and normalizers. He uses these to describe the different outlooks academics have had about the effects of social media on political participation. He focuses on the stance of the normalizer to contrast negative and positive outlooks on the situation. He uses a mixed-methods study that focuses on Italy and the United Kingdom to explore how the contribution of Facebook to political participation varies in relation to the level of participation already found among citizens. He found that people who already have a political interest engaged strongly with politics through Facebook and while Facebook alone was not enough to make politically apathetic people engage, less politically active people do often use Facebook for their political information. This information is useful because although it does state that Facebook won’t convince users to engage with political discussion, it does reach less politically engaged users and can in the long run provide them with information that may make them consider engaging.
Theocharis and Quintelier discuss how new forms of social media have enabled young people to engage with social and political issues through new participatory media. This study focuses on the properties embedded in social media that make them relevant for the civic and political participation of youth. They state their belief that new media have provided teens with new ways to read and discuss sources of interest as well as providing them with spaces for creative production and political socialization. They use a two-wave panel survey of 15 and 16 year olds in Belgium to examine how Facebook use affects different modes of civic and political engagement. They believe the three mechanisms affecting engagement are: providing information, introducing social pressure, and enhancing discussion among peers. All of which can trigger one’s political interest and from there trigger civic and/or political engagement. After conducting their study, they conclude that youth are more interested in online acts that involve entertainment or a self-expressive component, and although that doesn’t constitute political participation, they are believed to have democratic value because they have the potential to facilitate forms of civic expression that can lead to further engagement with social and political issues offline and online. This could be beneficial to proving that Facebook is a positive influence toward political participation because it states that while it may not have a direct link in some cases, it influences traits that could later result in an increase of political engagement.
Bene begins by stating the fact that since Obama won the 2008 U.S. presidential election, social media, and Facebook in particular, have been widely recognized as tools in modern day political campaigning. He references a comparative study across 12 European countries which reinforces this statement. He explains that while many believe politicians spreading their message through Facebook is “preaching to the converted,” in actuality it is “preaching through the converted” as their interactions with the post will spread the message further. Bene examines the Facebook posts of candidates from single-member districts in the Hungarian general elections of 2014 to discover which methods of Facebook use receive most interaction in social media communication. He examines how politicians interact with their voters and states that the strategic goal of political communication on Facebook should be to induce reactions because it will persuade their voters to communicate with more disengaged voters. Bene states that posts made by political candidates using one of the rhetorical devices (ethos, pathos, logos) were more largely interacted with by followers. He then goes further in depth about what effects each interaction on Facebook would have for the political candidate. He concludes that while the private reactions of citizens to political information used to be less important, they are now on a larger scale with the use of Facebook and thus become an important resource of political communication. This is beneficial to proving that Facebook is a positive impact on political engagement because it provides insight on why Facebook is beneficial to not only the audience but also to the political candidate.
Bosch begins by stating the concern academics hold about low voter turnout and declining membership of political organizations. She then uses South African youth as an example of how political participation and involvement have been declining since the emergence of social media such as Facebook. She discusses how youth engagement in news and politics had already been decreasing since the post-apartheid era, but Facebook had the potential to engage youth in political debate again. Bosch uses quantitative surveys and focus groups of South African youth (ages 15 to 30) to explore the use of Facebook for political participation. Many young people in South Africa use Facebook for primarily entertainment and although many do ‘like’ the pages of political candidates, they don’t engage much with them past that. Bosch is providing many examples of how Facebook decreases political engagement among South African youth. While the attempt at engaging youth in political discussion through Facebook is proving to be unsuccessful, in her piece she states that youth use Facebook to engage in activism through social movements. It was also stated that many of them do not engage in news regarding politics because they don’t feel it is relevant to them as youth. While Bosch is arguing that Facebook use negatively impacts political engagement, these facts could be relevant to the opposing argument. Youth may not be engaging in political discussion through Facebook but they are engaging in discussion about social issues which could later become a part of political discussion. They aren’t engaging as much as hoped for in politics but many do follow the pages of political candidates and they don’t feel they say anything relevant to youth. The issue is perhaps not that they aren’t engaged but that candidates are not trying to engage that age group.
Lee and Campbell explore the role of digital media in election campaigns. They believe that many academics have overlooked the examination of visual symbols and have instead concentrated on text rather than images. They examine this overlooked topic by getting a better understanding of online political posters. Online political posters are images that are designed to be shared over digital social networks. They are used by many political parties in many countries. These signs used to be posted in people’s yards but since the transition to digital media, they have become more popular on Facebook. The authors attempt to examine what, if any, strategic functions these posters aid with. They are a stepping stone for political parties to get towards a more digital environment with their campaigning, as many of them were stuck in the pre-digital age. OPPs provided parties with a way to spread their posters to a larger audience, faster than lawn posters would have done. They conducted a study concerned with OPPs produced by seven parties in the United Kingdom and what extent political parties made of OPPs on Facebook. They did conclude that OPPs are now a permanent feature of party communication however when looking at how many times they had been liked or shared, they do not receive the kind of viral transmission they were intended for. This is a good example of how Facebook sourced political campaigning may not be a positive impact on political engagement. It is a good example because audience engagement seems to be relatively low among this form of posting with very few exceptions. If posts like OPPs, which are intended to get many audience interactions, are receiving very few, then how beneficial can Facebook campaigning really be?