The Social Media Paradox Explained: Comparing Political Parties’ Facebook Strategy Versus Practice

Abstract

Political parties' interaction strategy and practice on Facebook is the topic of this article. Political parties and individual politicians can use social media to bypass media and communicate directly with voters through websites and particularly social media platforms such as Facebook. But previous research has demonstrated that interaction on social media is challenging for political parties. This study examines the disparity between interaction strategy and online responsiveness and finds that political parties identify three clear disadvantages when communicating with voters online: online reputation risk, negative media attention, and limited resources. In addition, the authenticity requirement many parties adhere to is creating a "social media interaction deadlock," which is increasing the disparity between the parties' expressed strategy and online performance. This study compares major and minor political parties' interaction strategy during the 2013 national election in Norway and combines interviews of political communication directors with an innovative method to collect Facebook interaction data.

The Rise of Germany's AfD

“…As they have limited access to traditional mass media, they use these new communication channels to overcome disadvantages in communication and to contact potential voters [31]. Therefore, outsider parties emphasize their online presence and intensify their interactions with users to achieve effective communications [27]. Due to their limited resources, they are even more selective about the topics that they express opinions about and they deploy strategies that promote only their strongest arguments [68].…”

Sociale mediers rolle i politisk kommunikation: et litteraturstudie

“…Omvendt så er det uklart, hvor meget engagement, vi bør forvente af politikere, og der savnes nuance i diskussionen af den indflydelse, som delvis og sporadisk engagement kan have på den politiske proces. Studier som Kalsnes (2016) fører eksempelvis en nuanceret diskussion af "The Social Media Paradoks", som omhandler de strategiske årsager politikerne har til at undgå eller nedprioritere interaktion i praksis. Et interviewstudie af Farkas og Schwartz (2018) viser også, at de kommunikationsansvarlige i partierne er meget interesserede i at opnå engagement på Facebook under valgkampen.…”

“…Der er flere studier som kombinerer interviews med statistik baseret på metadata fra di-gitale spor. Kalsnes (2016) studie i norsk kontekst og Magin et al's (2017) studier i Tyskland og Østrig kombinerer i begge tilfaelde interview med analyse af metadata fra sociale medier. Her finder begge studier en uoverensstemmelse mellem partiernes ideal for brug af sociale medier med deres praktiske brug af platformen i det daglige.…”

“…Graham et al 2016;Kalsnes 2016, Jackson og Broersma 2016; Klinger og Russman 2017), selvom flere pointerer, at europaeisk og nordisk kontekst er meget forskellig fra amerikansk(Karlsen og Enjolras 2016;Magin et al 2017). Amerikansk politik siges eksempelvist at vaere mere medie-og kandidatfokuseret versus partifokuseret(Geber og …”

Motivacija glasača — moralno utemeljenje odluke i odgovornosti za njezine poljedice

“…45 Baš kao što političke stranke i političari kao pojedinci koriste različite vrste medija da bi utjecali na ponašanje glasača, odnosno da bi ih motivirali. 46 Cilj svakoga tko ozbiljno promišlja o glasaču ne bi smio ostati na razini zadovoljenja njegovih osnovnih potreba i očekivanja. Konačni je cilj potrebno postaviti na inovativan način i ljestvicu obećanja podići visoko upravo na način raumijevanja činjenice da glasači od nas danas očekuju da nadmašimo njihova očekivanja i premašimo vlastita obećanja!…”