ECREA16-Abstract_book

541 / 658

539
Saturday, November 120 9 : 0 0 – 1 0 : 3 0
POL14 Social Media: Campaigning and Effects
PP 517 Uncovering Successful Communication Styles of Political Actors on Social Media Platforms
T.R. Keller1, K. Kleinen-von Königslöw1
1 University of Zurich, IPMZ – Institute of Mass Communication and Media Research, Zurich, Switzerland
Facebook andTwitter have by now become established tools for political actors to reach out to citizens. However, political actors rarely exploit the interactive
possibilities of these social media platforms, they mostly treat them as yet another channel for distributing information (e.g. Jackson & Lilleker, 2009). And
yet, they receive a lot of resonance on their informational posts, causing their messages to successfully spread through these networks – even reaching
people not even interested in politics (Vaccari & Valeriani, 2015). We assume that – due to the unique characteristics of these platforms – certain commu‑
nication styles of political actors which are already being used outside of social media platforms, e.g. populist (Cranmer, 2011), emotional (Imhof, 2015),
personal (Karvonen, 2010), or private style (van Aelst et al., 2012), are especially effective on these platforms. These styles generate more communicative
success (by generating resonance) and, in the end, may lead to more political success (in terms of votes in a national election, see Gibson & McAllister,
2015). Also, political actors adapt their communication styles to the particular characteristics of these platforms. RQ1: Do political actors use different
communication styles on different social media platforms? H1a: A populist communication style (= addressing citizens) is more often used in successful
posts on Facebook than on Twitter. H1b: An emotional communication style is more often used in successful posts on Facebook than on Twitter. RQ2: Which
communication styles lead to more resonance on social media platforms? H2a: Addressing citizens (a“populist”style) leads to more communicative success
on Facebook and Twitter. H2b: An emotional communication style to more resonance on Facebook and Twitter. Using R, we automatically downloaded all
posts of all 246 members of the Swiss parliament and all twelve parties represented therein for Facebook and Twitter (34’983 posts in total) from 1 April to
28 October 2015 (national election day: 18 October). For the standardized content analysis, our sample consists of those 20 posts per political actor and per
platformwhich generated the most resonance (likes, shares, comments respectively likes (favorites), retweets, @messages). We analyzed these 3’966 posts
for content-related (e.g. emoji, “likes”, topical focus) and style variables (e.g. emotional, personal). First results indicate that differences of these platforms
are reflected in the content of successful share of addressed citizens is significantly higher on Facebook (39%) than onTwitter (29%) and the share
of addressed media actors is higher on Twitter (15%) than on Facebook (0,1%) – both results supporting hypothesis 1a. Controlling for the number of fans
and followers (and other controls), not only impolite, personal, and private posts as well as exaggerated tweets improve chances of more resonance sig‑
nificantly, but emotional posts contribute as well on both platforms. Therefore, hypothesis 2b cannot be falsified. Surprisingly, even though personal and
private posts improve the probability for more resonance on Facebook, these communication styles reduce the chances for high resonance on Twitter. Ergo,
political actors need to adapt established communication styles for each platform to reach as many citizens as possible.
PP 518 Make Way for Social Media! Strategy, Perception and Evaluation of Social Media During the Danish General Election of 2015
S. Schwartz1, M. Hjelholt1
1 IT University of Copenhagen, DISCO, København S, Denmark
This paper explores how the social media managers in the political parties approach social media strategically during the Danish general election of 2015.
Social media has clearly become an important part of the Danish campaign mix since 2011 (Hoff, Jensen, Klastrup, Schwartz, & Brügger, 2013; Skovsgaard
& Van Dalen, 2013). New social media logic increasingly converge with traditional mass media logic in a complex hybrid media system (Chadwick, 2013).
The political parties have to adjust to how social media is shaping political communication by e.g. increasing personalization and individualization (Enli
& Skogerbø, 2013). Social media also introduces public interaction with citizens. This two-way relationship potentially changes the way political commu‑
nication is defined and conducted even though politicians historically have been using social media more as traditional one-way communication tools
(Stromer-Galley, 2000; Jackson & Lilleker, 2009; Enli & Skogerbø, 2013). This study examines whether the political parties have clear strategies and a sense
of best practice towards social media use in 2015. All the Danish parties are now drawing from many years of experience including the general election
campaign in 2011. A group of researchers conducted individual interviews with each social media manager or head of communication of the nine political
parties competing during the Danish general election of 2015. Interviews were conducted before and repeated again after the election campaign with
the same people, resulting in two times nine interviews (18 in total). The purpose was to compare the initial strategy before the election and afterwards
to discuss the evaluation of their strategies based on concrete practice and experience. Our study concludes with a list of general trends in social media
strategies but also with a variety of examples of different strategies and evaluation criteria.There are some overlap in the general perception of the strategic
value and affordances of social media platforms. Twitter is clearly defined as an elitist sphere to stay in contact with reporters and other politicians. Social
media managers perceive Facebook to be closer related to citizen contact. Most parties agree that Facebook is the most important social media platform,
but there are signs of fatigue related to the complications from interactions with citizens and time-consuming moderation processes. Overall the parties
have varying opinions on who their primary audience is on Facebook and the main purpose of the platform e.g. interaction, agenda setting or mobilization
of supporters. This is also related to available resources in each political party. However, most parties generally prioritize some level of interaction with
citizen on social media. Twitter on the other hand seems to be a much more straightforward platform that social media managers used for agenda-setting
and more traditional strategic communication and PR relation. Lastly each party had very different opinions on the value of social media platforms such as
Instagram, Periscope and Snapchat. However, everyone agreed that Facebook, and to some extend Twitter, were key strategic communication platforms
during the 2015 election campaign.