The Communication Behavior of German MPs on Twitter: Preaching to the Converted and Attacking Opponents

Abstract

What effect does the communication of politicians on Twitter have? Is it reinforcing existent ideologies because users get messages of politicians mostly from their own ideological cluster? Or is Twitter exposing the users to cross ideological content as well? We argue that both is the case. We show that politicians use the different communication channels. Twitter provides to distinguish between communication within their own ideological cluster in order to organize support and across these clusters to argue against their opponents. Considering German general elections as a case study, we present empirical tests that politicians—more than other politically interested users—use Twitter mostly to provide information but with significant differences between parties. We furthermore show that politicians use the whole spectrum of communication channels provided by Twitter. Finally, there is an empirical evidence of different qualities of the communicated content: measured by sentiment analysis the communication with members of the same party is less harsh than the communication with political rivals. This particular usage of communication on Twitter might lead to stronger polarization in political discourses.

The Rise of Germany's AfD

“…While mentions can contain positive or negative messages about the party, likes and retweets serve as measures of support [24]. For both these measures, there is a large difference between the AfD values and those of the other parties.…”

Social media and microtargeting: Political data processing and the consequences for Germany

“…Hence, political preferences appearing on social media platforms cannot be assumed to be the same for the actual electorate. The politically active user population on Facebook is in no way representative of the whole population of a country (Ruths and Pfeffer, 2014), while the expression of an opinion online does not fully correspond to a coherent political statement (a like is not a vote; Hegelich and Shahrezaye, 2015). Furthermore, the evaluation of social media data is bound with multiple methodological issues (Hegelich, 2017).…”

“…Given the fact that users agree to publish on social media a huge amount of data about their political and non-political preferences and behaviour, these platforms are an ideal source for political knowledge extraction. Social media have become a key environment for political campaigns, as the majority of politicians can use them to communicate directly with the electoral body (Barberá and Zeitzoff, 2017; Hegelich and Shahrezaye, 2015; Medina Serrano et al., 2019; Nulty et al., 2016; Stier et al., 2017). That aside, political actors often perform organized influencing strategies on social media, frequently trespassing the legal limits set (Weedon et al., 2017).…”

Social Media Sourcing Practices: How Dutch Newspapers Use Tweets in Political News Coverage

“…While only few of the British and German MPs covered by these studies adopt Twitter as a regular communication channel, most of their posting activity follows their pre-existing ideological positioning and promotes them as opinion leaders (cf. Hegelich and Shahrezaye 2015;. But what holds true for the United Kingdom and Germany is rather different in Switzerland: Rauchfleisch and Metag (2016:15) show that geographic factors are more important for politicians' interactions via Twitter than their party affiliations.…”