Nigel Jackson

Building an Architecture of Participation? Political Parties and Web 2.0 in Britain

ABSTRACT This article examines the differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 and how these Web strategies are used within a political communication context. The data focus on how political parties (and their leaders) in Britain use Web 2.0 applications. We consider whether the content political elites published in their Web 2.0 applications is shovelware and more appropriate for Web 1.0, or if a genuinely Web 2.0 style of political communication is emerging. We investigate the extent to which there has been a shift in the way British politicians communicate or if caution over co-production, coupled with the demands of electioneering, is restricting the development of interactivity. Our analysis suggests that British political parties have sought to create a “Web 1.5” that offers the advantages of both Web 1.0 and Web 2.0.

Informing, engaging, mobilizing or interacting: Searching for a European model of web campaigning

This study presents data from content analyses of the websites of all parties that stood in the 2009 European parliamentary elections in France, Germany, Great Britain and Poland. It cross-nationally examines the main functions of the websites, the adoption of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 features, and the political and cultural factors that determine parties’ online communication. The findings show that while the main website function varies across countries, Web 1.0 is still the dominant mode of campaigning. Moreover, offline inequalities within and between nations determine differences in parties’ individual online strategies: specifically, major parties in states with long histories of democracy and EU membership lead the way and offer more interactive and innovative modes of campaigning. On the other hand, minor parties, particularly in Poland, remain in a more Web 1.0, information-heavy mode of communication. This supports the so-called normalization thesis on both the meso and the macro level.

Towards a More Participatory Style of Election Campaigning: The Impact of Web 2.0 on the UK 2010 General Election

Web 2.0 has heralded a networked, participatory and conversational culture reaching beyond national borders and cultures, reshaping communicational hierarchies and thus creating a new set of communicative rules. Web 2.0 offers political actors a potentially effective means of building a relationship with activists, supporters and possibly floating voters. The cost, however, is that the interactive nature of these technologies requires some loss of control of political discourse. Election campaigning tends to be synonymous with top-down, persuasive and propaganda-style communication which aims to win the support of voters crucial for the victory of a candidate or party. While this remains as the dominant paradigm for understanding campaigns, the use of Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms challenges this notion. Emerging in 2005, Web 2.0 ushered in a networked, participatory culture to be observed online with tools facilitating asynchronous or symmetrical conversations to take place within a variety of online environments. This participatory and conversational culture, like the Internet itself, reaches beyond national borders and cultures, reshaping communicational hierarchies, thus creating a new set of communicative rules. Web 2.0 applications raise significant questions for political parties and individual candidates in terms of how they might use the Internet for building relationships with activists, supporters and possibly floating voters. Through the systematic measurement of the usage of Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms—embedded within or linked to—from the websites of six UK parties we analyse the use of the Internet, and in particular Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms, during the 2010 general election in the UK. We find that differing strategies emerge between parties, with some withdrawing from interactive feature use. Where Web 2.0 features are employed they are largely within discrete areas aimed at building contact with communities of supporters, but largely these are geared towards electoral objectives and not harnessing the collective wisdom of party networks to inform policy. Election campaigning tends to be synonymous with top-down, persuasive and propaganda-style communication which aims to win the support of voters crucial for the victory of a candidate or party. While this remains as the dominant paradigm for understanding campaigns, the use of Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms challenges this notion. Emerging in 2005, Web 2.0 has heralded a networked, participatory culture to be observed online with tools facilitating asynchronous or symmetrical conversations to take place within a variety of online environments. This participatory and conversational culture, like the Internet itself, reaches beyond national borders and cultures, reshapes communicational hierarchies, so creating a new set of communicative rules. Web 2.0 applications raises significant questions for political parties and individual candidates in terms of how they might use the Internet for building relationships with activists, supporters and possibly floating voters. Through the systematic measurement of the usage of Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms embedded within or linked to from six party websites we analyse the use of the Internet, and in particular Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms, during the general election in the UK 2010. We find differing strategies emerge between parties, with some withdrawing from interactive feature use. Where Web 2.0 features are employed they are largely within discrete areas aimed at building contact with communities of supporters, but largely these are geared towards electoral objectives and not harnessing the collective wisdom of party networks to inform policy.

Political parties, the Internet and the 2005 General Election: third time lucky?

Purpose – Existing literature has agreed that during elections party web sites are primarily an information tool. This study seeks to identify to what extent political parties have developed a distinctive role for the Internet as a communications channel.Design/methodology/approach – Research data were based on content analysis of the web sites and e‐newsletters of parties contesting the 2005 UK General Election, and interviews with party e‐campaigners.Findings – Party size determined whether they had an integrated online communication strategy or not. The Internet did provide a discrete role, that of recruiting new members, encouraging donations and mobilising volunteers. Whereas previous research has focused on the web as an election campaign tool, this study found that it was e‐mail, especially pass‐protected e‐newsletters to party members.Originality/value – The traditional view was that parties used their web sites primarily to promote information. This study suggests that they only do so partially. ...

Just Public Relations or an Attempt at Interaction? British MPs in the Press, on the Web and ‘In Your Face’

It is no longer sufficient for a British Member of Parliament to represent a particular party and be in a safe seat to guarantee re-election. Arguably the MP has to prove that they not only represent the party but also the constituency, and increasingly they feel under pressure to prove they take the latter aspect of the job very seriously. Therefore we find them engaging in various activities which can be described as profile building or public relations, activities which we recognize as being more consistent with the PR activities of charities and/or pressure groups. They act as campaigners, building themselves a profile through the local media, they are also increasingly using the Internet to promote themselves, their activities and a number of causes important to the MP and a section of the constituency. PR theory, especially Grunig and Hunt’s continuum and Ferguson’s relationship management theories, help explain the possible motivations for MPs using these various strategies. The question this article asks is whether this is just PR or is there a less cynical motive for this activity. In other words is it simply about vote winning, which clearly is a key aspect, or is there also a desire to increase interaction between the local electorate and their parliamentary representative.

Political Parties and Web 2.0: The Liberal Democrat Perspective

Political parties have been criticised for their limited use of interactivity via their Internet presences, largely it is suggested because they seek to control their online messages. This article will consider interactivity from the perspective of a political party, the Liberal Democrats, using their Freedom Bill online campaign as a case study. We suggest that the Liberal Democrats use ‘weak interactivity’ because of internal policymaking concerns, and their belief that as a political party they are promoting their ideas, not co-creating a new product. Thus we suggest interaction should be closer to a formal consultation than a face-to-face dialogue.

Dipping their big toe into the blogosphere: The use of weblogs by the political parties in the 2005 general election

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the use of weblogs by political parties in the 2005 general election campaign. It seeks to identify why, why not, and how parties used their weblogs during the election campaign.Design/methodology/approach – The weblogs of the five political parties which had a weblog were assessed, and eight party e‐campaigners were interviewed.Findings – The findings contrast with those of studies of the 2004 US presidential campaign where blogs appeared to play a significant campaigning role. Rather, in the UK, party blogs were essentially used as one‐way communication channels which added colour to party web sites. As a result, such weblogs may have encouraged visitors to return because of some form of voyeurism, but they were not either effective conversational, campaigning, or promotional tools.Research limitations/implications – The paper is based on a UK general election of an experimental political communication channel.Practical implications – Suggests the key el...

SEEKING UNMEDIATED POLITICAL INFORMATION IN A MEDIATED ENVIRONMENT: The uses and gratifications of political parties' e-newsletters

Political parties are increasingly attempting to communicate to sections of the electorate directly, in order to relay targeted messages. E-newsletters are one key communication mode that facilitates this strategy, and previous research indicates that these, like many communications using information and communication technology, offer much potential for the sender. This research focuses on the receiver, explicitly taking a uses and gratifications approach to understanding the function of e-newsletters for the UK electorate. Our findings suggest that the majority of receivers are committed party members who desire to receive information directly from the party that will help them in their campaigning and activist roles. There is, however, a minority of less-active, politically interested, subscribers who also use e-newsletters to aid their voter choice. The data suggest that e-newsletters are able to encourage subscribers to develop and build relationships with a political party, possibly becoming more active in their support than simply offering a vote at election times.

Tentative steps towards interaction: The use of the Internet in the British European Parliament Election 2009

Purpose – This study seeks to discover whether the existence of Web 2.0 applications introduced a more interactive approach to British parties and candidates’ use of the Internet during the 2009 European Parliament elections.Design/methodology/approach – Research data were based on content analysis of the web sites of British candidates and parties during the 2009 European Parliament elections. The conceptual framework assesses whether there is evidence of a monologic versus dialogic approach, and normalisation versus equalisation between parties.Findings – The paper finds that parties were not using Web 2.0 as a strategic device. The party list system meant that parties were twice as likely as candidates to use Web 2.0 applications and, overall, there is weak evidence of a third way of ebb and flow. Continuing the experience of previous elections there is evidence of a predominantly monologic approach; however, the debate is no longer simply between normalisation versus equalisation, a more sophisticated...

Elections 2.0: Comparing E-Campaigns in France, Germany, Great Britain and the United States

Past analyses of the role of the Internet in politics have described it as an underused tool in election campaigns (de Landtsheer et al., 2005; Kluver et al., 2007; Lusoli, 2005). Most studies find that party and candidate websites are created mainly to provide a space for offline material to be posted for viewing in a non-mediated environment (Morris, 1999). In contrast, elements which allow interaction are usually eschewed as these are said to detract from the core functions of campaigning and lead to a loss of message control (Stromer-Galley, 2000). Scholars have therefore come to postulate a normalisation of cyberspace (Resnick, 1998; Margolis & Resnick, 2000). Broadly, this includes two interlinked conclusions. Firstly, the normalisation of power relations which follows from observations that those parties with the greatest amount of resources have the most sophisticated web presences and lead innovations (Gibson et al., 2003). And secondly, there is the normalisation of political communication as offline traditions of campaigning override any Internet-specific style of electioneering that may encourage dialogue between candidates or parties and those whose votes they seek (for an overview see Schweitzer, 2008).