Public Administrators’ Use of Social Media Platforms

Abstract

Previous research incorporates Habermas' theory of communicative action with implications of social media for public discourse, yet few studies consider the theory's relevance and applicability to public administrators. This article addresses this weak link by focusing on the administration legitimacy dilemma. While social media can be useful to public administrators facilitating collaborative interactions with citizens, these platforms are not automatically suited to public participation in governance. Habermas' theory offers a framework for understanding these possibilities and challenges, as well as adapting social media constructively to administrative practice.

A közszolgálati kommunikáció eredményességére ható tényezők. A közszféra és a versenyszféra kommunikációs gyakorlatát befolyásoló különbségek

“…olyan kontextusban jelenítik meg a magánszféra üzeneteit, hogy azok -akár bújtatott formában -a lehető legjobban illeszkedjenek az adott célcsoport érdeklődéséhez. Nem véletlen, hogy az utóbbi időkben már a közszféra szervezetei is elkezdtek megjelenéseket produkálni ezeken az új médiafelületeken (Knox, 2016).…”

Unveiling cultures in emergency response communication networks on social media: following the 2016 Louisiana floods

“…There remains an increased need from the public to incorporate and monitor social media platforms during disasters, especially the ability of officials to facilitate collaborative interactions in multiple aspects of disaster governance (Knox 2016;Lui et al 2015;Palttala et al 2012). With the increased use of social media platforms, emergency management and crisis communication research has evolved to investigate and analyze the effectiveness of these tools.…”

What Potential for YouTube as a Policy Deliberation Tool? Commenter Reactions to Videos About the Keystone XL Oil Pipeline

“…Despite the large amount of discussion online, there was little‐to‐no attempt by industry experts to educate the commenters on the finer points of energy policy, its process, and how decisions are made within the machinery of government. This poses a serious problem for the legitimacy of the public service among such popular social media tools (Knox, ). Even if, as van Dijck () argues, the public is only controlling the content they consume, the perception of how the public service makes decisions can have a reach beyond the online world.…”

“…The introduction of social networking sites such as YouTube to mainstream public discourse has marked considerable changes to the way both interest groups and citizens engage with policy debate (Jones & McBeth, ; Knox, ; Sayre, Bode, Shah, Wilcox, & Shah, ). By taking advantage of YouTube's easy‐to‐use interface and large number of users, interest groups can use YouTube to lobby governments indirectly through public opinion campaigns using narrative structures that best promote their position (McBeth, Shanahan, Arnell, & Hathaway, ; Shanahan, McBeth, & Hathaway, ).…”