Citizen Participation and Political Communication in a Digital World

Alex Frame, Gilles Brachotte

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781317388548
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Communication Studies
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

The arrival of the participatory web 2.0 has been hailed by many as a media revolution, bringing with it new tools and possibilities for direct political action. Through specialised online platforms, mainstream social media or blogs, citizens in many countries are increasingly seeking to have their voices heard online, whether it is to lobby, to support or to complain about their elected representatives. Politicians, too, are adopting "new media" in specific ways, though they are often criticised for failing to seize the full potential of online tools to enter into dialogue with their electorates. Bringing together perspectives from around the world, this volume examines emerging forms of citizen participation in the face of the evolving logics of political communication, and provides a unique and original focus on the gap which exists between political uses of digital media by the politicians and by the people they represent.

Part I
Participation and Political Communication

The Perspectives of Politicians and Parties

1 Talking to Themselves

A Classification of Facebook’s Political Usages and Representatives’ Roles Among Israeli Members of Knesset

Sharon Haleva-Amir

Introduction

Social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are currently the main online platforms parliamentarians use to communicate and connect with their constituents, alongside traditional media and Party events. The mainstream view on politicians’ usage of the Internet and mainly of social media is that the widespread use of the Internet for networking has the potential of fostering democracy and enhancing the connections between representatives and constituents; but as politicians are not using it to its full potential, they fail to induce engagement, but instead replicate their offline communication practices into the virtual sphere (e.g., Stromer-Galley 2000; Ward and Lusoli 2005; Jackson and Lilleker 2009b; Jackson and Lilleker 2011; Vergeer, Hermans and Sams 2013; Strandberg 2013; Stromer-Galley 2014).

This chapter is based on a study of the use of online platforms by Members of Knesset (Israeli parliament, henceforth MKs) for political communication purposes. The empirical research lasted two years (July 2009 – July 2011) using a combination of in-depth interviews, partly structured questionnaires and web content analysis. Inter alia I studied MKs activity on Facebook in order to identify activity formats and to characterize prevalent usages. Based on the assumption that representatives’ parliamentary roles as well as their political communication forms are changing due to social media, establishing a typology of political usages of Facebook will enable us to identify the way MKs currently occupy their roles as representatives and whether they use their online platform to stimulate citizens engagement and increase participation. To the author’s knowledge, this is the first study of its kind conducted in Israel. In addition to its novelty, the typology created in this study may subsequently prove applicable to parliamentarians worldwide.

1.1 Politicians and Social Media

The Internet has created an opportunity to restructure communication between parliament members (MPs) and their constituents (Zittel 2003) as web technologies change the very nature of communication (Castells 2000). Nevertheless, it seems that MPs continued to focus largely on promoting themselves by reporting their in-house efforts (Williamson 2009a). Furthermore, politicians in different countries use the web to produce electorally advantageous impressions (Stanyer 2008), rather than for engaging with the public (Jackson 2003; Vegyte, Malinauskiene and Petrauskas 2008). For those who expected that the web’s unique interactive characteristics would reduce the gap between politicians and citizens, this approach was rather disappointing (Vergeer, Hermans and Sams 2013). But then came social media and the Web 2.0 era.

While Web 1.0 period was characterized by websites predominantly providing static content and delivering one-sided, top-down messages, Web 2.0 is characterized by social platforms which enable users to share content items and converse more easily. Some commentators (e.g., Lilleker and Jackson 2009; Vergeer, Hermans and Sams 2013; Tenscher 2013; Klinger 2013) hoped that this shift of web generations would fundamentally change the way MPs communicate with their constituents, as conversations facilitated by social platforms were more horizontal than vertical.

“By inhabiting the same online spaces as their constituents on a day-to-day basis, MPs will interact with them in much more normal conditions – when the MP is not the privileged voice of authority, but merely one member of a conversation among many. In doing so, perhaps they will get a much more realistic idea of what their constituents actually think” (Colvile 2008; Virkar 2007). This hope has not really been fulfilled as research shows that politicians’ use of Web 2.0 applications resembles their use of websites during the web 1.0 phase; they still focus on delivering messages and promoting themselves and not on engaging with their constituents (Vergeer, Hermans and Sams 2013; Tunez and Sixto 2011; Jackson and Lilleker 2009a).

Nevertheless, use of social media among parliamentarians is constantly on the rise. In 2009 The Hansard Society had already identified British MPs as increasingly adopting social media, including Facebook (Williamson 2009b). This is also the case for New Zealand MPs (Busby and Bellamy 2011), United States congressmen and senators (Facebook 2010) Israeli MKs (Haleva-Amir 2014) and legislators in other western democracies.

1.2 Representatives’ Roles and Correlating Web Tools

Literature has recognized five main roles that representatives play: delegate, trustee, partisan, constituency service and promotion of self (Lilleker and Jackson 2009; Jackson and Lilleker 2009a). It should be mentioned that these roles are not exclusive: most representatives switch roles according to the circumstances. Each of these roles can be supported by specific digital usages.

1 The notion of delegation was developed during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries by philosophers such as John Locke. A delegate representative receives a mandate from his voters. He serves as an agent of particular interests, and his duty is to act in accord with these interests and not on his own discretion. To enable this, an MP acting as a delegate should identify the views of his constituents and act accordingly. Identifying constituents’ views can be facilitated by using online forums, polls and questionnaires as well as emails (Lilleker and Jackson 2009, 3).

2 The model of the representative as a trustee was classically articulated by Edmund Burke in the eighteenth century. Burke opposed the idea of ‘mandate’ or ‘instructions’ from the parliamentarian’s constituents dictating how he should vote or what line he should take on any particular issue. Citing Burke, “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion” (Arblaster 2002). In other words, a trustee-model MP may hear his constituents’ opinions and take them into consideration, but his decision must be independent and based on his best judgment. Referring to web tools, some believe the web burdens the trustee in making independent decisions as he is exposed to his constituents’ opinions over the internet (Ferber, Foltz and Pugliese 2007), while others believe the trustee can use the internet to share and promote his views (Lilleker and Jackson 2009, 3).

3 The partisan role, presented in the nineteenth century, places the party to which the parliamentarian belongs as his main priority. Parties control the selection processes and are, therefore, responsible for the political candidates’ careers; MPs find themselves obliged to vote according to party stands on different issues. Lilleker and Jackson argue that a partisan MP would use Web 2.0 applications while promoting his “party’s image, policy and activity … whilst also eschewing any move towards acting as a delegate, as voting decisions are more likely to be dominated by the party line” (Lilleker and Jackson 2009, 4).

4 The fourth model of constituency service prioritizes constituents. It is perceived by British MPs as their most important role (Power 1998; Rush 2001). Within this role, MPs try to communicate with constituents and address both individual and constituency problems. Lilleker and Jackson (2009) assert that Web 2.0 platforms usage can also enhance a sense of community and pertinence.

5 Political scientists have recently added a new role: promotion of self (Lilleker and Jackson 2009; Vergeer, Hermans and Sams 2013). This role exists only in the web (it is also referred to as e-Representation) and accompanies one of the other four roles mentioned above. This role corresponds with the current trend of personal politics as well as permanent campaigning (Blumenthal 1982; Rahat and Sheafer 2007; Stanyer 2008; Williamson 2009a); and it aims at presenting the MP in the most positive manner. Web 2.0 platforms such as social networks enable MPs to present themselves as human beings and not as placards, allowing them to share family photos, personal experiences, preferences of music and TV shows and so on. This personal and informal presentation of self can draw constituents nearer while decreasing estrangement and may result in increased political involvement on the part of the citizenry.

1.3 Politicians and Facebook – the Israeli Angle¹

MKs begun using social networks for political purposes way back in 2007. MKs’ presence on SNS allowed them to become acquainted with youngsters who are usually detached from politics, do not consume news through traditional media outlets, and spend many hours in online social activities (Lenhart et al. 2007). A recent LSE study discussing possible ways of increasing and extending youth participation suggests that youth are in favor of developing Facebook debates with political candidates as a possible way to increase youth participation in democratic life. The study details youth modes of participation over social platforms and mainly on Facebook. These include receiving political information, signing petitions and commenting on political issues (LSE Enterprise 2013).

In an editorial, the Yalla Kadima website (the portal for Kadima Party supporters and field activists) highlighted the advantages of joining social networks.

To all other Kadima MKs who are still having doubts. … Joining a social network is better than [my emphasis – SHA] establishing a website … the social network enables the elected representative to be in an active and exciting Internet core … In an SNS such as Facebook, elected representatives need not make an effort to bring users nearer. Facebook’s accessibility is high and its usage patterns are homogeneous. Moreover, it has a unique, uniting language which enables everybody to speak to one another eye to eye.

(Yalla Kadima 2007)

Many MKs adopted this recommendation and joined Facebook, creating both personal profiles (the application for private people, designed to create a network of friendships) and politician pages (the application specifically designed for politicians and used to create a network of supporters). The number of MKs active on Facebook in January 2009 was more than twice the number of MKs who had an active website. Sixty-one MKs (51 per cent) had a personal profile, a politician page or both. As of September 2010, political activity on Facebook had expanded further: 84 MKs (70 per cent) had a Facebook account.² Many MKs also appeared on a local Israeli SNS – The Marker Café. One of the crucial factors that contributed to this proliferation of online activity was the general instruction to members of the Knesset by its general manager, Dan Landau, in March 2010, to establish a formal profile on Facebook. This instruction’s objective was to encourage the creation of direct and straightforward channels of communication between representatives and citizens (Channel 2 News 2010).

Some MKs harnessed the advantages of social networking to their benefit and used the public sphere to trumpet their opinions – by publishing posts and referring to other content items in their own websites, by prompting discussions; by responding to questions and comments, by having long, direct dialogues with users, and by motivating young people to become socially engaged and politically active. However, most MKs used their profile wall (designed for public messaging) as an online billboard. As of July 2011 (endpoint of this study), 86 per cent of MKs (103 out of 120) had a personal profile, political page or both on Facebook (Haleva-Amir 2014).

1.4 Methodology

As a qualitative researcher following the grounded theory paradigm, I have stayed in the field during research period (July 2009 – July 2011) and tracked MKs’ political activity over the web: mainly their websites, blogs and social network sites. As part of the research I compiled a list of all (as opposed to a sample of) profiles and political pages of the 103 MKs active on Facebook (which constitute 86 per cent of Knesset Members). Using Facebook Interests Lists, I created a list of “18th Knesset MKs”. Choosing this list on Facebook’s sidebar facilitated a designated newsfeed compiled only of recent posts and activities from people included on the list.³ I did not store the data but rather kept constant track of this feed. This had enabled me to identify usage formats as well as thematic categories and develop a typology of political usages of Facebook. While doing so, I have collected specific examples of each of the categories.

The analysis was based on web content analysis broadly interpreted, though classification and theme analysis can also be seen as traditional web – content analysis. Susan Herring defines web-content analysis as “the analysis of web content, broadly construed, using various (traditional and non-traditional) techniques” (Herring 2010, 235). A qualitative researcher often has to create his own scheme based on the specific ‘field’ studied. Adopting the grounded theory approach to categorisation while staying in the “field”, I had developed the scheme and classified the posts. The categories mostly exclude one another and do not overlap.

1.5 Findings

Activity Formats

Findings show that MKs preferred the Personal Use format (personal profile) to the Designated Political Page Pattern (formal page).

Eighty-two out of 103 (80 per cent) MKs who had a Facebook account operated a personal profile; 61 per cent (63 MKs) operated some kind of formal page: politician page (63 MKs), public figure page (6 MKs), community page (4 MKs), government official page (2MKs) and even organization page (2MKs). These formats do not exclude one another; they can accumulate if MKs combine personal profiles and formal pages. About 47 per cent of MKs had operated a few personal profiles / formal pages according to their own preferences and needs, in various combinations.

Consequently, most MKs’ personal profiles...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Series
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Foreword: ‘Ideologies' and ‘Utopias' in the Discourses and Practices of Digital Politics
• Introduction
• Part I Participation and Political Communication The Perspectives of Politicians and Parties
• 1 Talking to Themselves A Classification of Facebook's Political Usages and Representatives' Roles Among Israeli Members of Knesset
• 2 Two Step Flow Twitter Communication in 2013 Italian Political Election A Missed Opportunity for Citizen Participation
• 3 Ad Hoc Mini-Publics on Twitter Citizen Participation or Political Communication? Examples from the German National Election 2013
• 4 Is Twitter Invigorating Spanish Democracy? A Study of Political Interaction through the Accounts of The Prime Minister and The Leader of the Main Opposition Party
• 5 Candidate Orientation to ICTs in Canadian Municipal Elections
• 6 “I show off, therefore I am” The Politics of the Selfie
• Part II Emerging Forms of Digital Media-based Political Participation by Citizens and Civic Activists
• 7 Re-Imagining the Meaning of Participation for a Digital Age
• 8 Who's Afraid of Clicktivism? Exploring Citizens' Use of Social Media and Political Participation in the Czech Republic
• 9 Twitter as a Counterpublic Sphere Polemics in the Twittersphere During French Electoral Campaigns
• 10 Cultural Creation and Political Activism in the Digital World
• 11 The Mediatization of Politics and the Digital Public Sphere The Dynamics of Mini-Publics
• 12 Alternative Media Spaces The Case of Russian LGBT News Blogging Community
• 13 Online Lobbying of Political Candidates
• Concluding Note
• List of Contributors
• Index