Sunday, September 23, 2012
Internet & Social Media - October 3rd
How are the campaigns and their supporters using the Internet and social media in this campaign and how does it differ from previous campaigns? According to news media coverage, what kind of impact are "new media" having on the 2012 campaign? Be sure to draw on at least one of this week’s readings in addition to your media sources to support your answer.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
While there are many known differences between this 2012 election and others in the past, one difference that has been explored since the start of these elections is each candidate’s use of social media and the Internet. While email was being used for campaigning around the late 1980s, it wasn’t until the early 1990’s that these new technologies really began to change campaigns.
ReplyDelete“In the early days of Internet, campaigns established websites functioning as “virtual billboard,” offering material that would traditionally be printed as leaflets.” It truly was not until the end of the 1990s that the Internet became much more useful with the additions of e-commerce, portals, and search engines. (Trent 366)
When thinking about the first campaign to widely use the Internet, the 1992 Bill Clinton presidential campaign is usually discussed. With the use of simply email, discussion groups, and listserv this campaign was able to target voters and distribute information to them afterwards. (Trent 367) One major change that we do see when looking at the evolution of the use of Internet within campaigns is the use of partisan websites over simply informational ones. An example of this is seen in a website called Project VoteSmart from the early 1990s. This website, “contained candidate profiles, voting records, political philosophies, ad histories.” (Trent 367) Websites like these served as a resource for all voters, they would simply explain the facts without the hidden agenda that we very often see today.
Another major change within the Internet came when candidates began to accept donations for their campaign through their websites and the Internet. This made the ability to connect and contribute to the election and a particular candidate simple and a click away. Even today candidates like Romney and Obama are raising money in the millions with the majority of it being through Internet donations. (Associated Press 1)
The Internet during this time was known for educating citizens on the elections. Because of this, “Opposition groups and third parties utilized websites to mobilize supporters. However, observers argued that the Internet had little impact in influencing voters. Websites served more as an echo chambers where like-minded individuals and partisans were doing most of the interactions.” (Trent 367) Put in different terms, similar to The Republican and Democratic National Conventions, these websites were not changing the minds of the majority of voters but instead they were serving as a place for people of similar views to exchange ideas and knowledge.
An example of how the use of Internet and social media has changed campaigns and elections is with the campaign surrounding Linda McMahon for Senate. During this election many people are taking notice of McMahon’s change in campaign strategy. During the 2010 election, the senate hopeful was seen using more “old school” strategies in excess, for example, television commercials. For this campaign the strategy has clearly changed. McMahon is utilizing resources such as Twitter, Facebook, and even Pinterest to get her views and the views of the Republican Party across. Todd Abrajano, Linda McMahon’s spokesman stated, "We try to keep the message consistent across all platforms,” I believe this is an effect of what the “new media” has done to the campaigns. These changes began in the early 1920s with the utilization of the radio for campaigns. “From the campaign perspective, radio allowed crossing ethnic and geographic boundaries. Politicians were careful to to say one thing in and part of the country and something else in another.” (Falcone 1) If anything the “new media” adds authenticity to our candidates and the campaigns because in many ways they cannot change their ideas or views without voters knowing.
ReplyDeleteWith the example of Linda McMahon at the forefront, I believe the use of “new media” has helped voters see through the candidates if they are not being authentic. I also feel that the use of social media and the Internet is beginning to connect candidates to their voters in different ways.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Falcone, Amanda. "Social Media Now A Must Have In The Political Campaign Toolbox." Courant.com. Hartford Courant, 24 Sept. 2012. Web. 27 Sept. 2012. .
Press, Associated. "Latest Fundraising Reports Show Obama Has More Campaign Money to Spend than Romney." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 20 Sept. 2012. Web. 27 Sept. 2012. .
Matthew Struzzi
ReplyDeleteBlog 4
In this presidential campaign the campaigns and their supporters are using the Internet and social media more than ever before. The campaigns and their supporters are using the internet and social media to reach out to more people (specially young voters) and to give people information on things that are happening right away (like updates and statuses on twitter and facebook). This is unlike previous campaigns, because not only has technology advanced more but it has become more popular such as the Internet and social media websites. This means that the Internet and the social media websites are being used more frequently, more effectively, and are reaching out to more people, and giving those people better and faster information about the campaigns. For instance, the book Political Campaign Communication states, “Today, the new communication technologies are essential elements of electoral politics and today, most campaigns spend between 5 to 10 percent of their budget on new media” (Trent, 368). The book goes on to say that the Internet such as “Web 2.0 is instantaneous, interactive, and personal. The new technology generated a new online political environment. It allows connections with supporters on a more personal basis. More specifically, social networking sites such as Facebook allow campaigns to get to younger voters and to stay connected in a variety of ways during a campaign” (Trent, 371).
Further, according to news media coverage, new media is having a huge impact on the 2012 campaign. For instance, a New York Times article said:
On Thursday, another Facebook user adopted the site’s new Timeline feature, regaling followers with the minutiae typical of the world’s cyber capital of oversharing. He worked at an ice cream parlor in 1978. He started his current job in 2009. He takes lots of pictures with his wife and kids. This particular account holder, however, has the force of more than 25 million “likes” behind him. And a pretty powerful army. Indeed, as Facebook announced that the Timeline feature would be expanded to branded pages for businesses and public figures, President Obama’s Facebook page adopted the new format on Thursday, offering visitors a peek at his extended biography, a deluge of pictures and videos from his campaign and presidency, and a jab at those who question the authenticity of his birth certificate (Flegenheimer, 1).
Matthew Struzzi
ReplyDeleteBlog 4 continued
This same type of impact can be seen on the Republican side of the campaign, as well. For instance, a Fox News article said:
Despite the Obama campaign’s social media success, Moffatt says the Romney team continues to enjoy a spike in followers across the Twitterverse – and pointed to Ann Romney as an early example of that success. The day after Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen said on television that Romney’s wife “never worked a day in her life,” Ann Romney set up a Twitter account and fired back. "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys," Romney tweeted. "Believe me, it was hard work." Almost instantly, Moffatt said, Mrs. Romney attracted tens of thousands of followers to her Twitter account, which describes her as “Mom of five boys. Grandmother of 18. Out campaigning for @mittromney” (Corbin, 1).
In conclusion, not only can both the political campaigning field and the campaigns themselves recognize how much of an important and strong impact the Internet and social media can have, but the public can also see this, because it is all over the Internet and social media. This is a huge change from all previous campaigns, including the last ones, because the Internet, social media, and technology have never been this advanced or popular in this country’s campaigning history.
Works Cited
Corbin, Cristina. “Romney Campaign Claims to be Closing Gap on Social Media Battle.” Fox News. N.p., 2 Sept. 2012. Web. 1 Oct. 2012. http://www.foxnews.com
Flegenheimer, Matt. “Obama Gets a Facebook Upgrade.” New York Times. N.p., 3 Mar. 2012. Web. 1 Oct. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com
Trent, Judith S., and Robert V. Friedenberg. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe campaigns and their supporters are using the internet and social media more than ever in this presidential election. While Obama certainly was active on social media in the 2008 election, his campaign has proven this year that it is truly still at the forefront of using technology to benefit his run for reelection. According to an article on CBS news the Obama campaign posted almost four times as much content on its social media sites than the Romney campaign during a two week period in June of 2012 (Condon). According to the Pew Research Center study cited by CBS Romney's campaign talked about the President in 1/3 of the content while Obama's campaign talked about Romney less than half as much (14%). During the study 3% of Obama's campaign Tweets were retweets while Mitt only had one retweet during the time- which was a retweet of a message from Romney's son (Condon). This shows the level of actual interaction between candidates and voters is still relatively low on social media. This being said, Obama did do an Ask Me Anything (AMA) on the popular social media site Reddit in which he answered as many questions he could in about a half hour time span (Reddit). This actually caused so much traffic on the site that the site went down due to the high number of page requests. I think these are the types of things which will truly help Obama to get out the vote again in 2012, as they directly interact with voters, especially a younger crowd which was crucial in 2008. Most of the users of Reddit are males between the ages of 20 and 35 and so things like this will help Obama to mobilize his supporters. The actual AMA was quite interesting and was a slight departure from the normal things which dominate campaigns, with Obama discussing everything from his favorite basketball player and the White House beer recipe to more serious issues like continued space exploration and his plan for helping out recent college graduates with student loan debts (Reddit).
ReplyDeleteThe Washington Post put up an article today concerning following the debates via social media. The official Twitter hashtag is #debates (Jennings). This is good because it helps to get young people involved, and not just young people who are already partisan, but also young people who may not hear the messages which the candidates have in any other forum. In the same way that the tv revolutionized the debates in the 1960 election social media has the opportunity to change the nature of elections in this election.
According to Campaigns on the Cutting Edge “in campaign 2010, 73 percent of American voters went online for political information or activism” (Turk, 52). This is a very large section of the population and it means that information is not only quickly transmitted, but that it is easily accessed. Social media websites give campaigns new ways to access voters while websites like Politifact.org can help voters to make decisions about what is true and what is false. According to Turk in McCain's 2008 election 33 percent of his only funding came from email marketing and 58 percent came from his campaign website. While in his 2010 Senate campaign 83 percent came from email and only 15 percent through his website. This illustrates the changes which can occur in just a few short years with such large changes in technology occurring all the time. Obama's campaign has taken advantage of email marketing, I receive emails from the campaign almost daily, with promises of chances for special VIP events with Beyonce and Jay-Z to dinner with Barack in exchange for campaign donations. One of the biggest advantages of online fund raising that the book points out is that there is no need to pay for advertising space (Turk, 53). This is key not only for fund raising but for getting out any message. Both campaigns this year have all their political ads online on YouTube, which not only enables on demand viewing of the ads, but also allows a forum (albeit a poor one) for discussion of the issues presented in the ad.
DeleteWorks Cited
Condon, Stephanie. "Obama More Active on Social Media, with Less Focus on Jobs, Report Shows." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, 15 Aug. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2012. .
"I Am Barack Obama, President of the United States -- AMA." Reddit. Reddit Inc., 29 Aug. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2012. .
Jennings, Natalie. "How to Follow the #debates on Social Media." Washington Post. Washington Post, 2 Oct. 2012. Web. 2 Oct. 2012. .
Turk, Michael. "Chapter 4: Social and New Media - An Evolving Future." Ed. Richard J. Semiatin. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2013. 53-53. Print.
“As campaigns have evolved over the years, changing media platforms have challenged the unprepared and presented opportunities to the bold and innovative” (Turk 48). Campaigns and their supporters are using the Internet and social media in a variety of different ways in the 2012 election. Both campaigns are using the social media to their advantage and using it more than ever before. This “new media” campaign is having a profound effect on the 2012 campaign as well. “Between 2000 and 2010, the percentage of adult Americans using the Internet to research the election grew from 18 percent to 73 percent” (Turk 48). Campaigns and their supporters are using the Internet and social media in the campaign by using it to get their message out. It was once that a voter would use the Internet to sign up to donate to their campaign or to find their news about each candidate. In today’s election individuals are seeing politics affecting all of their social media outlets. Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and others have become the source for supports to post their opinions about the candidates, share photos promoting their candidate, and being able to follow or befriend their favorite candidate.
ReplyDeleteCampaigns are using social media as a way to get quick pieces of information out to the public. While the “new media” does bring about positives to the campaign such as more people having the opportunity to become more involved, it also can detract attention to what truly is important to the campaign. The “new media” is taking time away from real news to report about subjects that truly have no real importance to the campaign. For example, CNN reported an ecard that was put on tumblr by the Obama campaign stating “vote like your lady parts depended on it”. This ecard was originally posted on September 25th and by last Tuesday afternoon it had reached over 8,700 “notes”. The ecard also gained attention on twitter. While this report shows the impact social media is having on the election, it is not giving the voters any sort of substance about the campaigns to help one decide who to vote for. Before “new media” news organizations were already reporting subjects that were attention grabbing or shocking simply to gain ratings. The use of “new media” is now giving news organizations the opportunity to use more unimportant material since there is more of it on the Internet than ever before. Obama along with Romney are currently using many social networking websites such as Twitter and Facebook, this gives his supporters the opportunity to interact with his campaign. “The impact of social media became so great that the number of friends and followers of a campaign became a metric by which campaign success and failure were judged” (Turk 52).
ReplyDeleteUsing new media helps the campaigns by making the voters able to participate in the campaign besides donating money. “In the most recent presidential campaign cycle, the rise of social media has played a significant role in campaigns. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and MySpace were used by campaigns to coordinate supporters, and were used by supporters to self-direct their own efforts independently of the campaign” (Turk 52). “New media” has given voters the opportunities to make their own posts about the candidates. On Facebook individuals create their own groups in support of their candidates or against the opposing side. This helps bring more attention and awareness to the election, which is positive, if the information is accurate. Since “new media” gives anyone the opportunity to participate in sharing opinions and information with others it also gives the opportunity for misinformed individuals to post material that then others on the internet see and believe is true.
Works Cited
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2013. Print.
"TRENDING: How #ladyparts Went Viral." รข€“ CNN Political Ticker. N.p., 02 Oct. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2012. .
In the 2012 campaign, candidates and their supporters are simply advancing with the times. Technology is becoming ever so prevalent in all aspects of life, so it comes as no surprise to see that social media is playing the biggest role it has ever played in election history. Since the Internet became a factor in campaigning over a decade ago, its power has only gotten stronger, and with that, obtained much more responsibility.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Political Campaign Communication, Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign was the first to really utilize the Internet and as time went on, its usage rapidly increased. However, the way the Internet was used then greatly differs from how it is used now. For example, “Although the number of candidate websites increased in 1994, the dominant presence on the web was nonprofit organizations and special interest groups. Most of the sites were informational rather than partisan.” (Trent et al 367) Much of this change is accredited to how much of the Internet has expanded. Its accessibility has grown rapidly in our country and all over the world. It takes almost no effort to be updated on the latest information regarding absolutely anything. So why wouldn’t campaigns and their supporters utilize this as much as possible?
In 2004, “52 percent of voters indicated that information obtained from the Internet influenced their vote.” (Trent et al 367) If the majority of voters were influenced by this medium eight years ago, I can only imagine how much that number has increased since then. However, what interests me the most is something also discussed in Trent’s book. When discussing campaign websites, Trent says, “The most common features of campaign websites include: biography, issue positions, campaign news, links to other sites, donation information, contact information (in addition to e-mail), volunteer sign-up, photos of campaign events, and a campaign calendar.” (Trent et al 369) Since I’m no political campaign expert and I’m judging solely based on this reading, I wonder if Obama’s campaign website says anything at all about Romney, and vice versa.
If we think about it, we just discussed the important of campaign advertising and the idea that much of the campaign advertising we see consists of one candidate portraying their opponent in a negative light. To me, it seems as though campaign websites take a different spin on campaigning and instead focus on aspects that are positive and strictly about one specific candidate. So why is that more attention is given to campaign advertising? Is it more convenient? In my opinion, no. Especially when dealing with the younger generation, it seems as though the Internet and social media is relied on more heavily than television. If voters started focusing more on these campaign websites, maybe they would be more aware of the positive aspects of the current election.
News media is constantly discussing the idea of just how impactful “new media” is during the current campaign. For example, Politico recently published a video featuring three of their reporters called, “Will Twitter determine debate outcome? ("Driving the Day")” In this video, Politico media reporter and blogger Dylan Byers said, “What happens now is that the takeaway from the debate is largely defined as the debate is happening on Twitter. Anything that gets a major reaction gets retweeted over and over, then every journalist is paying attention to the 'oh my God' moment. You're going to see that happen on Twitter. You're going to see campaigns move to respond to that as it's happening." So in a sense he is saying that Romney can say something during the debate, and within seconds of his sentence being finished, a social medium is flooded with thoughts and reactions, rather than waiting for the entire debate to be over for discussion to begin; or even better, waiting until the next day. Social media has given our country the ability to really be present in this election right as it is happening.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. "Chapter 11: New Media and Political Campaigns." Political Campaign Communication. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. 365-77. Print.
Allen, Jonathan. Dylan Byers. Jake Sherman. “Will Twitter determine debate outcome? (“Driving the Day”). Politico. 2 October 2012. Web. 3 October 2012.
As a media studies major, I find social media to be extremely fascinating in the way that it can connect, promote, and generate so much content within a single day. Not only are everyday people using it to their advantage, so are companies and politicians. In previous campaigns, print and television ads ruled. Without directly speaking to them, it was the candidates’ main avenue to connecting with voters. Campaigns were much less personal and consistent within an average voter’s day to day life. Whereas now, Obama’s campaign tweets almost a few dozen times a day, and therefore is always staying current in any given person’s Twitter feed. Currently, “online, users are more active participants in public conversations. It is not just journalists who set the public agenda. In the digital age, citizen observations, experiences, and concerns expressed over the Internet influence the political agendas of the politicians (Trent et. al 370).” By engaging audiences, they seemingly become more interested and active in the issues of the day.
ReplyDeleteWhile Obama campaign has always made headlines regarding their incredible use of social media, especially within the last election cycle when its popularity was still growing. Romney claims to be doing just as well on social media, with slightly different tactics. “While President Obama and his supporters prepare for what Democrats are calling ‘the most open and accessible convention in history,’ Romney’s team boasted Saturday that it is closing the digital gap between the campaigns and accused its rival of running a social media operation that’s just too – well, hyperactive (Corbin).” The Romney campaign criticized Obama’s bombardment of social media, saying that if everything was important, then ultimately nothing was (Corbin). Romney is using a strategy of only tweeting or posting sparingly and with priority. While some may say Romney is not active enough, perhaps when he does post it is more meaningful and attractive to followers. From this, we can see how there are many different sides and maneuvers that are still being explored on social media campaigns.
However, not everyone sees the impact of social media on presidential campaigns positively. Bob Sullivan from NBCNews.com has a critical view of new media. “While social media may appear to offer unfettered, uncontrollable discussion of candidates and their positions, the campaigns are hard at work learning how to manipulate the tools to their advantage (Sullivan).” He thinks that social media is simply another tool used to control voter’s opinions and behaviors. It is a way of gaining voters without being overt. While candidates are seen as keeping up with the times, they are also burrowing their way into individual’s private lives more than ever. But, not only does Sullivan say that the increase of social media is harmful to voters, it is to candidates as well. “(Brad) Phillips also said sarcastic memes could slowly but surely wear down a candidate's chances, cumulatively building an impression that ‘a candidate is a joke,’ which would be hard to counteract (Sullivan).” With the increase in comedy and parody surrounding elections, any small slip-up can erupt into a huge ordeal which can damage a candidate’s reputation irreparably. For example, Romney’s 47% comment or Obama’s bear hug have led to memes all over the internet. Phillips continued on by saying, "’Is that clean (campaigning)?’ he asked. ‘I don't know. But in future political cycles, I believe candidates will have to pay a lot more attention to this’ (Sullivan)." Overall, social media has had some great and also some not-so-great results for candidates. On the one hand it is certainly a powerful tool to connect directly with voters, especially those who are undecided. Conversely, it has also led to more sterilized candidates who may be too worried about being themselves without it backfiring on the internet.
DeleteTrent et. al. "Political Campaign Communication."
Corbin. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/01/romney-campaign-claims-to-be-closing-gap-in-social-media-battle/
Sullivan. http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/02/14173756-sarcasm-campaigning-social-media-hones-cynical-edge-in-presidential-politics?lite
Society is constantly changing. With its new technological developments and scientific strides, the interest of the public fluctuates on a seemingly weekly basis. For this reason, presidential candidates have to do the same.
ReplyDeleteToday technology has a firm grasp on the interests of the majority of the public. From toddlers to elderly citizens, the Internet and social media has become a familiar presence throughout each aspect of their life. In her book titled, Political Campaign Communication, Judith Trent addresses the issue of new media, writing, “Today we live in the digital age. Everyone has a voice and shares views in ways never before witnessed in history” (Trent et. Al. 376). With the immense demographic reached by the these technologies, it only seems logical that political candidates have been forced to put into use the tools offered to them through the use of the internet and social media.
Throughout the 2012 campaign, it seems that there is nowhere a person can visit on the internet where they will not be met with a political message relating to the 2012 campaign. From Twitter to Youtube to Facebook, presidential candidates are able to inform voters of their future plans through almost any technology related activity in which they wish to engage. Richard J. Semiatin addresses the accessibility that new media has created for political campaigns in his book entitled, Campaigns on the Cutting Edge, writing, “As campaigns innovate, the continuing convergence of technologies will make mobile the focal point of campaigns. It’s no longer enough to simply try to reach voters. It will be critical to reach voters no matter where they are” (Semiatin 60). The fact is that the technological strides made since the 2008 presidential elections have made information so much more accessible to voters, whether they wish to see it or not.
Of course, one cannot discuss the issue of social media without touching upon the Internet giant that is Facebook. Through the site, political candidates are able to speak directly to their followers and gauge the public’s response based upon the feedback that they receive on each of their posts in “likes” and comments. Currently, Mitt Romney’s Facebook page has 7,979,962 likes and 1,940,437 people talking about it throughout the social media network of Facebook (Facebook). Comparatively, President Barack Obama’s Facebook has 29,091,424 likes and 1,524,667 people talking about it (Facebook).
The candidates are able to engage in a conversation with their followers on Facebook through posts on their pages. Elston Rhiannon addresses this topic in an article for the Huffington post, writing, “User interaction, or engagement, is important to social media analysts because it provides a way to measure how many people are listening each time a message is posted to a social media site. The metrics vary depending on the tool, but on Facebook, for example, comments, shares and 'Likes' are the virtual equivalent to a campaign rally's cheers and boos” (Rhiannon). On Mitt Romney’s Facebook page, viewers will encounter posts reading, “What our economy runs on is free people pursuing their dreams. That's what makes America work. Like if you agree” (Facebook). Through posts like this one, candidates are able to inform the public of their plans, encourage the public to share their plans with others, and understand the public’s feedback relating to the plan.
However, unlike the 2008 election, President Obama, dubbed the “undeniable king of digital outreach” by The Christian Science Monitor, is not the only one playing the social media card. Republican candidate Mitt Romney has been able to take advantage of the fact that many republican voters have gained a new knowledge of the use of the “new media,” thus allowing him to garner a greater online following. TIME Magazine’s journalists addressed the issue, writing, “Democratic voters tend to be younger (thus earlier adopters). But older people, who skew Republican, have been quickly expanding their digital presence in the last two years and from a political perspective, 2008 and 2010 were worlds apart” (TIME).
DeleteSocial media and the internet have a firm grasp on the political futures of each of the candidates. Each of them needs to find the best way to use the internet to their advantage in order to emerge victorious from the political race. However, as our society continues to change and technology continues to develop, we can only imagine the ways in which the new media will become old media, giving way to newer media, and the way the newer media will affect political races for generations to come.
Work Cited
Elston, Rhiannon. "Why Mitt Romney Wants to Be Your Facebook Friend." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 02 Oct. 2012. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
Goodale, Gloria. "New Social Media and the 2012 Election: Waaaaay beyond Facebook 2008." The Christian Science Monitor. The Christian Science Monitor, 20 Apr. 2011. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
"Barack Obama - Politician | Facebook." Barack Obama - Politician | Facebook. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
"Mitt Romney | Facebook." Mitt Romney | Facebook. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
Semiatin, Richard J. Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print.
Sorensen, Adam. "Republicans Close the Social Media Gap." TIME.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
Trent, Judith S., and Robert V. Friedenberg. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. New York: Praeger, 1991. Print.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn this campaign both Romney and Obama are using social media as much as they can. Social media is an incredible resource for any candidate and there is no surprise that both are using it from Facebook pages to personal YourTube channels. What really sets the use of social media apart in the 2012 race, is the lack of an uproar. In the 2008 election Obamas use of social media was a major talking point “The Obama campaign had ten times more online staff than the McCain campaign. In fact, Obama added online communications as a separate and equal element of his campaign team and strategy” (Trent et al 368). This was a big deal, not only was it talked about during the election but McCain’s lack of an online presence is still talked about today. It goes to show how much our society has come to adapt to the presence of social media. From a young adults point of view, the idea of your parents having Facebook in 2008 around the last election was crazy and almost felt like an invasion of privacy. Now just four years later there are ads for social media sites such as google+ that focus completely on using the website as a tool for parents and children to stay in contact. Society is more comfortable with social media and following suit, so are campaigns. “And, with it campaigns are changing too. President Obama has been using things like Facebook, Twitter and You Tube to communicate directly with their supporters — and without the “filter” of the media — for the better part of the last four years. And, it wasn’t by accident that Mitt Romney’s unveiled a smart phone app to announce his vice presidential pick this summer” (Cizzilla 1). Social media is an incredible tool for candidates.
ReplyDelete‘New media’ is having a major impact on the 2012 election. It is giving candidates the ability to reach out directly to the people. I can tweet at Barak Obama. You can tweet at Mitt Romney. Will they read it themselves while standing in line for coffee like the rest of the world? Probably not. But it doesn’t matter there was a something sent directly to them. It creates a sense of connection and somehow levels the playing field. There are also some negative impacts of ‘new media’ on campaigns. Because information is so accessible, candidates have to be careful with what they say and do at every single moment of every single day (Mitt Romney, I am looking at you). But that is not only negative impact ‘new media’ brings. With the abundance of information available on any candidate it is very easy for the information to be manipulated for a calculated message. “The sheer volume of information available on the Internet, both true and bogus, has made the business of adding context and teasing out fact from fiction "more democratic because people have a variety of views fighting it out in the media space," Renshon said, adding that people often use this information to back up views they already hold” (Abdullah 1). The internet is not defined as one type of media, rather it is the melting pot that the United States was before it became the salad bowl. It has its ups and downs, it is a tool as well as a weapon. Today it is significantly more integrated to society and campaigns, it has become the norm. Along with that, its positives for campaigns like connecting the voters and candidates, and negatives like over exposure have also become the norm.
CONT.
ReplyDeleteWORKS CITED
Abdullah, Halimah. "Out of Context out of Bounds? Not in 2012 - CNN.com." CNN. Cable News Network, 01 Jan. 1970. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
Cillizza, Chris. "The Rapidly Changing Media Landscape and What It Means for Politics — in 1 Chart." Www.washingtonpost.com. Washington Post, 1 Oct. 2012. Web. 3 Oct. 2012. .
Trent, Judith S., and Robert V. Friedenberg. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. New York: Praeger, 1991. Print.
As we Americans become more attached to our smart phones, tablets and laptops, it is no surprised that the candidates are seeking to utilize these technologies and incorporate the internet and social media within their campaigns. For this election both President Barack Obama and Former Governor Mitt Romney are featured on the most popular social network sites, as they and their wives both have an official Facebook page and Twitter account. Each candidate has their own campaign website as well. Both websites are hubs of recruitment for volunteers and supporters. When one goes to either mittromney.com or barackobama.com before the individual is able to view any of the content on the candidate’s site, he or she is asked to enter their email address and zipcode. The candidates are seeking to gain email addresses because as Trent and al suggests email can be an effective tool. It can be used to send out a targeted message, solicit donations, recruit and organize volunteers and activate voters on Election Day (Trent et al, 375). Since the email can be
ReplyDeleteWhile email may be one of the most effective tools for the campaigns to make use, in my research it appeared that Twitter was the most popular in terms of media influence and user ease. The media and the average voter on Twitter is able to track popular topics and trends with hashtags. Twitter users are also able to converse with others by tagging them in their usernames in tweets with the “@” symbol. Most importantly twitter is composed of information that can be seen in real-time. For that reason it is often the place to look for breaking news. As Trent et al says, “the primary function of Twitter is ‘authentic personal communication’” (Trent et al, 375). Twitter allows the candidates to speak to supporters that they would not be able to personally meet or speak to. The user who follows candidates and reads his tweets has the potential to feel as if the candidate is speaking directly to him or her and creating a deeper connection to the candidate. Twitter is also a good tool to use to get short, but direct and meaningful messages across. For example after Ann Romney was criticized for being a stay at home mom, a twitter account was created for her and her first tweet was, “I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.”
Twitter is a tool being used not just by the candidates, but other voting groups and news organizations to keep track of the election. For example found on the NBC news website titled, “Splunk and Rock the Vote Partner on U.S. Election Social Media Visualization”, it was announced that Splunk Inc. “the leading provider of software for real-time operational intelligence” would be teaming up with Rock the Vote to create a visualization of election information for younger voters who get their news via social media (MarketWire). The visualization would give these voters a place just for them to follow and gain a better understanding of election coverage and issues, which would hopefully encourage them to vote. It is composed from tweets and hashtags related to the presidential election. This innovative idea is just an example of how social media is becoming the new go-to place for people to seek out election news and gather information about the candidates.
In a video found on Politico.com discusses the important role of Twitter regarding the Presidential Debates. Media blogger Dylan Byer suggests, “Some people believe Twitter is replacing the spin room. The takeaway from the debate is largely defined as the debate is happening on Twitter…you’re going to see campaigns move to respond to that as it’s happening.” The real time of twitter allows people to react to the event as it happening, and then gives the campaign the ability to do damage control and react to people responses before the debate has even ended. With its often uncensored and emotional users and tweets, Twitter allows the campaign to gain a better understanding of how public truly views their candidate, and they can therefore tweak the campaign to better reflect the candidate on how they wish he be received. The popularity of Twitter demonstrates that social media is being used in this campaign more than it has in the past and voters are using social media to engage in the campaign in new ways that they were unable to previously.
DeleteWorks Cited
Byers, Dylan. "Re: Will Twitter Determine Debate Outcome?" Video blog comment.Politico.com. N.p., 3 Oct. 2012. Web. 3 Oct. 2012. .
MarketWire. "Splunk and Rock the Vote Partner on U.S. Election Social Media Visualization." NBCNews.com. N.p., 3 Oct. 2012. Web. 3 Oct. 2012. .
Romney, Ann. “I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.” 11 April 2012, 10:18pm. Tweet.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Websites like Newsweek’s Daily Beast, are examples in themselves of new media being used as part of campaigns. Though news websites are not directly being paid and supported by one candidate’s campaign, they report on the events of the election which keeps the candidates in the eyes and minds of the public. Perhaps you may not visit a candidate’s website and see a report of their speech the previous night but you will be sure to see is plastered on every news website. Newsweek has an entire section called Election Beast which enables the public to follow any news related to the 2012 presidential race. An example is an article, “The Art of Debate Deflection” speaking about the upcoming debates and how Obama may prepare to rebuttal Romney’s points. Though Newsweek is only reporting on strategies Obama may use in the upcoming debate, speaking about the event is in a way advertising and promoting the debates to the viewer. It reminds the viewer to watch the debates the following night by the fact that the article simply exists. Another news outlet that is using new media is The Washington Post. An article also speaking of the upcoming debates also uses a video to in addition. The video recaps the 2008 election and important talking points of Obama and Romney. Using new media like video in place of a lengthy article allows a viewer to quickly see everything they need to read in a quicker and more efficient way. It also does the same job as the Newsweek article did, by reminding viewers that there are presidential debates approaching that they should think about watching.
ReplyDeleteFreedlander, David. "What Romney and Obama Can Learn About the Art of Debate Deflection." The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 02 Oct. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2012. .
McKellog, JulieAnn. "The Debate We’ve Already Seen." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 03 Oct. 2012. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Social media in this election cycle is more prominent than ever; not only are social media networks more noticeable in political elections but they have a more permanent and significant place in everyday life, campaigns are simply reflecting that fact. In a nationwide election the Internet, more specifically “new media” sources, are a cheap and expedited way for candidates and their campaign camps to reach a mass amount of people instantaneously. With the development of this “new media” outlets such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google and simply the Internet in general have forged a path which bypasses the 24-hour news cycle, which for decades dominated political rhetoric. Now, new sources search social media to find stories instead of new social media posts reflecting on traditional news stories. For instance, The Daily Beast released a story on October 1st notifying readers that Barack Obama tweeted that the campaign has successfully reached 10 million campaign donations. The story as published by The Daily Beast was two sentences and generated seven comments from readers. The tweet that Barack Obama published, the tweet, which the news reported on, received 894 retweets and 257 favorites on the social site. This exemplifies the idea that social media may be moving beyond traditional news outlets, even those online, by allowing campaigns to break stories without the use of media outlets. Tweets and Facebook posts in addition to blogs allow candidates to publish a message for a mass audience however they see fit, without needing to rely on a media outlet or professional to get their story on the front page. Now campaigns can get their story on the front page of everyone’s newsfeed on their own.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, this idea of “new media” allows for more discussion in a single campaign cycle. With limited print space in a newspaper and limited moments on a television commercial or news program, the topics of discussion in campaigns were traditionally limited and specifically focused. Now, however, the options for discussion are unlimited in the new frontier of the Internet. Trent, in Political Campaign Communication Principles & Practices suggests that, “new media enhances citizen issue understanding and political engagement.” (Trent, 366) Although I agree with Trent I must clarify my stance by questioning the true understanding citizens develop without the help of a narrator such as a news anchor, editor or journalist.
When discussing the impact of social media it must be noted that this campaign cycle and that of 2008 has been a great image for what a social campaign should be. The candidates are using their resources to both motivate and persuade voters. While using persuasive scripts in venues such as a phone bank, persuasive scripts are time consuming and therefore expensive. Additionally running persuasive television ads is less effective than other forms of television advertisements. The Internet and new media allows for persuasive arguments over broad audiences; Trent concludes that, “the key is to target ‘persuasive’ messages for the right niche.” (Trent, 368) With the numerous venues both Gov. Mitt Romney and Pres. Barack Obama have commandeered it is safe to say that they have forged new paths in the realm of “niche” marketing on the Internet - each campaign has multiple websites (with blogs), Twitter tags and Facebook pages. Both campaigns are working hard to utilize their cyber space to the best of their abilities and it is noted that “a great web campaign, for Foot and Schneider, informs, involves, connects and mobilizes supporters.” (Trent, 369) The Obama campaign recently sent an email to supporters looking for people to volunteer to move to battleground states in the final weeks of the election to increase the GOTV presence and secure victory in certain areas of the nation. Although I found the email to be asking a great deal from me, I have to admit that this was certainly new in the field of campaigning, but that is what this new media does – breaks traditional boundaries in hopes for a positive outcome. If asking supporters to move for a few weeks isn’t the prime example of connecting, informing, involving, and mobilizing than I don’t know what was meant by Foot and Schneider.
DeleteNew media has taken over the campaign this year, but I think it is for the best of each camp. The Internet is far more beneficial for controlling the release of a message, reaching a vast audience, persuading without spending, and as noted in the latter argument, connecting and mobilizing supporters. The 2008 campaign is still revered as the peak of campaigning in new media, but maybe the results of this election may justify that this 2012 election in fact surpassed the success seen in 2008.
Works Cited:
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. "Chapter 11: New Media and Political Campaigns." Political Campaign Communication. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. 365-77. Print.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/10/01/obama-camp-reaches-10-million-donations.html#comments
https://twitter.com/BarackObama
CONTINUED:
ReplyDeleteWebsites like Newsweek’s Daily Beast, are examples in themselves of new media being used as part of campaigns. Though news websites are not directly being paid and supported by one candidate’s campaign, they report on the events of the election which keeps the candidates in the eyes and minds of the public. Perhaps you may not visit a candidate’s website and see a report of their speech the previous night but you will be sure to see is plastered on every news website. Newsweek has an entire section called Election Beast which enables the public to follow any news related to the 2012 presidential race. An example is an article, “The Art of Debate Deflection” speaking about the upcoming debates and how Obama may prepare to rebuttal Romney’s points. Though Newsweek is only reporting on strategies Obama may use in the upcoming debate, speaking about the event is in a way advertising and promoting the debates to the viewer. It reminds the viewer to watch the debates the following night by the fact that the article simply exists. Another news outlet that is using new media is The Washington Post. An article also speaking of the upcoming debates also uses a video to in addition. The video recaps the 2008 election and important talking points of Obama and Romney. Using new media like video in place of a lengthy article allows a viewer to quickly see everything they need to read in a quicker and more efficient way. It also does the same job as the Newsweek article did, by reminding viewers that there are presidential debates approaching that they should think about watching.
Works Cited:
Freedlander, David. "What Romney and Obama Can Learn About the Art of Debate Deflection." The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 02 Oct. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2012. .
McKellog, JulieAnn. "The Debate We’ve Already Seen." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 03 Oct. 2012. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
The Internet has changed how campaigning and advertising are used in politics. With technology being so advanced, people are able to look for any clip, article, or speech online. Between the 1920s to the 1950s, radio was a dominant form in how the candidates communicated with the public. “During this period, radio introduced talk shows and “news reports,” and imposed time constraints upon speakers for message presentations” (Trent et al 365). In addition, television became prominent for advertising. “Television became a major player in American politics in 1952 with the broadcast of party conventions and the first political ads”(Trent et al 366). Following the television is the Internet – which is now able to give supporters access to these ads, conventions, and other information at the click of a button.
ReplyDeleteThe Internet was taken full advantage of during the 1992 Clinton campaign. “However, it was limited to e-mail, discussion groups, and listserv distribution of information” (Trent et al 367). Although these forms are not half of what we have today, they were most popular at the time. A few years later, each party had developed their own websites with information on candidates, videos, and news reports. Voters were given the ability to research a candidate and their past appearances.
Another big advancement of campaigns and the Internet is the ability to make a donation online. In 2000, “John McCain made headlines by raising over 7$ million online” (Trent et al 367). This way to contribute to one’s party or candidate made it easier for a supporter to give. Instead of sending a check and going through a whole process to deliver it where they want, all people have to do is enter their credit card number. Being that everyone has become highly dependent on technology, this allows one to contribute without leaving his her home.
This campaign has been different from previous campaigns because of the extensive use of social media. Using social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube strive to reach out to the younger population and avid Internet users. Many people use the Internet, so it is important to target all audiences. Trent et al states, “They skim many topics and hit many sites. The key is to target “persuasive” messages for the right niche” (Trent et al 368-369). If web specialists post certain statuses, articles, or videos, they will spike the public interest - which causes people to repost and comment with their thoughts.
In 2012, Facebook and Twitter have been the most popular social media sites used and talked about. The Wall Street Journal Online conducted an interview with Joel Kaplan, Facebook’s vice president of U.S. public policy, on how social media has changed campaigns. He discussed how the purpose of Facebook has changed and how the “young” demographic is no longer the sole user of the popular site. Kaplan states about analyzing the age and gender posting about politics, “As the demographic got older, we saw more and more people talking about and engaging on Facebook about the candidates we are tracking. It is a reflection of how the demographic on Facebook has changed over time.” He went on to say, “It started off in Mark Zuckerberg’s dorm room for his college classmates, but over time Facebook has grown so that we now have more U.S. citizens on Facebook in 2012 than actually voted in the 2008 elections.” Both Obama and Romney have realized the use in social media, and many of their campaign efforts are directed to developing new strategies to present to the people. If more people are on Facebook than voted in the 2008 election, the only way to reach those people is through their main source of communication and interaction.
DeleteInternet has also changed the way people communicate about the campaign by the sole fact of getting their voices heard. People can create blogs, tumblrs, and channels on Youtube to give opinions on candidates and their beliefs. For example, “The Obamaphone Lady” video went viral after being published by the user RealFreedom1776 on Youtube. The Wall Street Journal online published an article to debate racial stereotypes based on this video. James Taranto says, “The Obamaphone Lady, who as far as we know hasn’t been otherwise identified is a middle aged black woman with a loud, gravelly voice.” She is seen screaming at he camera to keep Obama in office because he gave her a phone. People have argued that the video is racist, being that she is of color and so is Obama. Elspeth Reeve, from the Atlantic Wire, says “The video belongs to a genre popular on conservative blogs in which poor people, usually confirm conservatives’ worst 47-percent fears by saying that they can get something for nothing because Obama is in office.” While there are many interpretations of this video, the main point was that she was giving her view on Obama. People can view and dissect it however they want, clearly by creating a controversy over it. Nevertheless, once it was posted on Youtube ,it was accessed by the world. People could support it or fight it, but the power of social media allows anyone to share and comment on it.
Works Cited
“How Has Social Media Changed Campaigns?” Wall Street Journal Online. 29 Aug. 2012. Web. 2 Oct. 2012.
RealFreedom1776. “Original Obamaphone Lady” Youtube. Web. 2 Oct. 2012
Taranto, James. "The 'Obamaphone Lady'" Wall Street Journal Online. 1 Oct. 2012. Web. 2 Oct. 2012.
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Throughout the years of elections and campaigns, the way candidates have been reaching out to the public has evolved. In the dawning of the internet in 1991, the technology allowed campaigns to reach out in new ways. “…campaigns established websites functioning as “virtual billbords,” offering material that would traditionally be printed as leaflets. By the end of the 1990s, search engines, portals and e-commerce sites were common,” (Trent, 366). This change in technology allowed the campaigns to distribute information with less man power and allow anyone to access the information with just a click of a button on a computer rather than being at the mercy of finding someone handing out leaflets of information or waiting for mail. Today in 2012, “new media” is shaping the campaign and the way that information and advertisement is received by the public even more than before. In 2008 “the Obama campaign hired web specialists to plot strategies of contact to included the social networks of Facebook and MySpace as well as YouTube videos,” (Trent, 368). Trent goes on to note that $25 million was spent just on new media by the Obama campaign. This devotion of such a large chunk of focus and money to new media shows the importance of new media. It’s safe to assume that the 2012 Obama campaign will spend just as much time and money on new media because the campaign has the understanding that the public is easier to reach over the internet. In an age where so many people spend so much of their time on the computer, it makes sense to place advertisements right on their screens.
ReplyDeleteCONTINUED: Taking a look at Obama’s Facebook page shows how keeping up with social media trends will keep a candidate ahead of the curve. With so many generations now implementing Facebook, especially the youth group, having a Facebook page for a campaign allows people to not only access information about a candidate but it also keeps them constantly in your mind with new posts flashing on the newsfeed to tell you the latest updates about the race. Even trending websites like Tumblr and Twitter give a candidate the edge. From my own observations, Obama being so popular on websites that are used by the youth has allowed him to keep his hip and cool image and thus gaining the majority of the youth vote. In 2012, living in such a fast paced, technological world, if a candidate were to neglect campaigning strategies in the area of new media, I feel secure in saying that it would drastically hurt their chances in the political race. A website such as Twitter keeps up with this day and age by summing up a person’s thoughts in 140 characters. It’s quick and efficient and in respect to a campaign, allows the information to be received in an immediate manner that is still personal from the candidate. Trent mentions that “for campaigns, it’s another way to “touch” supports. The primary function of Twitter is “authentic personal communication”. From a campaign perspective, it’s about writing a speech in 140 characters,” (Trent, 375).
DeleteWebsites like Newsweek’s Daily Beast, are examples in themselves of new media being used as part of campaigns. Though news websites are not directly being paid and supported by one candidate’s campaign, they report on the events of the election which keeps the candidates in the eyes and minds of the public. Perhaps you may not visit a candidate’s website and see a report of their speech the previous night but you will be sure to see is plastered on every news website. Newsweek has an entire section called Election Beast which enables the public to follow any news related to the 2012 presidential race. An example is an article, “The Art of Debate Deflection” speaking about the upcoming debates and how Obama may prepare to rebuttal Romney’s points. Though Newsweek is only reporting on strategies Obama may use in the upcoming debate, speaking about the event is in a way advertising and promoting the debates to the viewer. It reminds the viewer to watch the debates the following night by the fact that the article simply exists. Another news outlet that is using new media is The Washington Post. An article also speaking of the upcoming debates also uses a video to in addition. The video recaps the 2008 election and important talking points of Obama and Romney. Using new media like video in place of a lengthy article allows a viewer to quickly see everything they need to read in a quicker and more efficient way. It also does the same job as the Newsweek article did, by reminding viewers that there are presidential debates approaching that they should think about watching.
DeleteWorks Cited:
Freedlander, David. "What Romney and Obama Can Learn About the Art of Debate Deflection." The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 02 Oct. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2012. .
McKellog, JulieAnn. "The Debate We’ve Already Seen." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 03 Oct. 2012. Web. 03 Oct. 2012. .
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Over the past few election years the significance of using the Internet has had an ever-increasing impact on the presidential campaigns. During the rise of the Internet in the 1990s campaigns started to examine the Internet as a way of politically campaigning. In 1992 Bill Clinton was the first candidate to extensively use the Internet during the lection period, and since that point with the technology constantly evolving so did the amount that candidates relied and focused on the Internet. The election of 2004 was the first election year that really saw a huge influence of the Internet. As explained in the reading,” Nearly 100 million citizens used the Internet for political information, nearly 50 million discussed election by email, 13 million made a contribution online, and 52 percent of voters indicated that information obtained from the Internet influenced their vote” (Trent et All 367). Since so many people started to use the Internet as a source of finding news and creating opinions on the candidates they were ultimately going to vote for in the election, campaigns started focusing a lot of their attention on the Internet.
ReplyDeleteThe 2008 election brought a whole different variety of mediums to the campaign due to the creation of web 2.0. Web 2.0, as defined in the reading as, “Web 2.0 is considered the second wave of the internet. It marks the age of social media and technology. Web 2.0 is instantaneous, interactive, and personal. This new wave has created so much potential to reach new audiences in entirely new dimensions. A great example of this new potential is YouTube. In the reading is shows,” YouTube as a website not only is entertaining, but also demonstrates the power of individual voters to influence an election. Posted material may be viewed by millions, be picked up by the news media, and generate public discussion.” (Trent et. All 373).
This election year is vastly different from even that of 2008 because of the prominence of social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook. Both Romney and Obama have used both of these forums to reach their audiences in ways that were never possible before. It seems though that with Obamas prior experience and success with social media in 2008 election, that his campaign has a much better handle on how to effectively use social media sites to his advantage. An article in the Huffington Post breaks down the numbers of followers of each of the candidates stating,” Obama had 28,658,765 Facebook fans but also 19,806,314 Twitter followers. Republican candidate Mitt Romney (whose Twitter profile simply reads "Former Governor of Massachusetts") had just 6,961,665 fans on Facebook and 1,123,637 followers on Twitter in comparison. According to SBS World News, the Obama team's online popularity is due in part to the "more sophisticated way" they are using the available communications tools.” (Knight). From sheer numbers alone it seems that people are more drawn to Obama’s tweets and Facebook posts, because he is able to deliver them in relatable way. This argument seems to be a reoccurring theme in this election period that Romney does not come off as relatable to the American public. It also appears that Obama is spending more of his focus on social media as one of his main ways of communication. In the same Huffington Post article Knight states “Chris Hughes, one of the three co-founders of Facebook, has been recruited to increase the effectiveness of Obama's digital campaign.” (Knight). These seems to have been a crucial move on Obamas part because in another article on CBS News showed that the Obama campaign invested more time in social media sites. According to the article, “Over a two-week period in June, the Obama campaign posted nearly four times as much content on its website and social media sites than the Romney
campaign, according to the Pew Research Center. The Obama campaign's digital content also saw a larger audience response, according to the study, with twice the number of "shares," online views and comments.” (Condon). This shows a direct correlation between the amount of effort that candidates put into social media with the amount of people engaged in their content. If Mitt Romney wants to break his image as incapable to relate the common American he needs to begin to understand that social media is a way to break this image and that his campaign needs to spend for focus on this aspect of campaigning,
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
Condon, Stephanie. "Obama More Active on Social Media, with Less Focus on Jobs, Report Shows." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, 15 Aug. 2012. Web. 02 Oct. 2012. .
Knight, Mark. "U.S. Presidential Race and the Social Media Battle." Huffington Post. N.p., 18 Sept. 2012. Web. 2 Oct. 2012. .
Trent, Judith S., Robert V. Friedenberg, and Robert E. Denton, Jr. Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices. 7th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.