Campaigns and conflict on social media: a literature snapshot

Abstract

Purpose: This literature review discusses the themes identified in the submissions to this volume. The findings are contextualized in recent scholarship on these themes.Design, Methodology, Approach: The discussion is organized around predicting social media use among candidates, organizations, and citizens, then exploring differences in the content of social media postings among candidates, organizations, and citizens, and finally exploring the impact of social media use on mobilization and participatory inequality defined by gender, age, and socio-economic status.Findings: This volume addresses whether social media use is more common among liberal or conservative citizens, candidates and organizations; the level of negativity in social media discourse and the impact on attitudes; the existence of echo chambers of like-minded individuals and groups; the extent and nature of interactivity in social media; and whether social media will reinforce participation inequalities. In sum, the studies suggest that negativity and interactivity on social media are limited and mixed support for echo-chambers. While social media mobilizes citizens, these citizens are those who already pre-disposed to engage in civic and political life. Originality: This paper explores key topics in social media research drawing upon 60 recently published studies. Most of the studies are published in 2015 and 2016, providing a contemporary analysis of these topics. The studies in this volume address some of the most contentious issues in social media research. How are social media tools used differently by females and males, candidates and citizens, and will social media ameliorate or exacerbate participation inequalities (Bode et al., this volume; Evans, this volume; Gainous et al., this volume; Straus et al., this volume; Vraga, this volume; Valenzuela et al., this volume)? To what degree is social media discourse negative and does social media use produce critical attitudes (Bode et al., this volume, David et al., this volume, Gainous et al., this volume; Merry, this volume; Valenzuela et al., this volume)? Do social media build echo chambers of like-minded individuals and groups (Merry, this volume; Vraga, this volume) and to what degree is social media use interactive (Merry, this volume; Straus et al., this volume; Kruikemeier et al., this volume)? These issues are addressed at the political elite level (political candidates), the organizational level (political parties, interest groups), and at the citizen level. The discussion is organized around predicting social media use, then exploring differences in the content of social media postings, and finally examining the impact of social media use on mobilization and participatory inequality. Social Media Use Partisanship and IdeologyIdeology and partisanship have been widely studied as predictors of social media adoption in campaigns and among citizens. At the aggregate level, the research offers stronger

Political Impression Management Through Direct and Mediated Communication: The 2014/2015 Croatian Presidential Elections

“…The extent to which such attacks took place was significantly lower on social networks. This is in line with previous research which found that going negative is not a commonly employed technique for the social media platform (Boulianne, 2016;Ceron & d'Adda, 2016;Evans et al, 2014).…”

“…1 Twitter, on the other hand, is known for communicating critical information, and candidates may well try to attack their opponents without having media to frame their statements (Larsson, 2015, p. 462). However, existing research, mostly focused on the US, suggests that Twitter, alongside Facebook, is rarely used by candidates for launching attacks on opponents (Boulianne, 2016;Evans, Cordova, & Sipole, 2014). Furthermore, even when candidates use Twitter for attacks, tweets promoting positive campaign messages outnumber those negative (Ceron & d'Adda, 2016, p. 1940.…”

Does Campaigning on Social Media Make a Difference? Evidence From Candidate Use of Twitter During the 2015 and 2017 U.K. Elections

“…Despite the supporting evidence for the effectiveness of interactive engagements with social media, it is worth noting that empirical research on Twitter campaigning has consistently critiqued politicians for making little use of its interactive features and preferring “the broadcast communication model” (Bentivegna & Marchetti, 2017, p. 138). Indeed, Keller and Kleinen-von Königslöw (2018) argue that while politicians often pay lip service to the potential benefits of citizen interaction, this is merely “cyber rhetoric” and not followed through in practice (see also Boulianne, 2016). Larger political forces (Heiss, Schmuck, & Matthes, 2018) and “populist” parties (Jacobs & Spierings, 2019) are apparently even less likely to engage in interaction.…”

Election Campaigning on Social Media: Politicians, Audiences, and the Mediation of Political Communication on Facebook and Twitter

“…Boulianne, 2016;Jungherr, 2016b). Still, in terms of cross-media research, this literature is limited in several regards: first, most studies focused on one isolated platform, overwhelmingly Twitter and-less often-Facebook.…”

“…Should they tailor their messages to the specific habits and audiences on social media platforms? Although academic research on social media campaigning has flourished in the past several years (Boulianne, 2016;Jungherr, 2016b), it is still unclear which topics politicians address on these platforms, since previous research mostly concentrated on meta data generated by the use of communication conventions such as retweets, @-mentions, likes, or hashtags. Understanding the ways in which politicians Sebastian Stier, Arnim Bleier, and Haiko Lietz are Postdoctoral Researchers, and Markus Strohmaier is a Scientific Director at GESIS -Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences.…”