Campaigning on Twitter: Microblogging and Online Social Networking as Campaign Tools in the 2010 General Elections in the Netherlands

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 399-419

  Vergeer, Maurice ^a   Hermans, Liesbeth ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Election campaign; Microblogging; Online social networking; Political communication

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER NETWORKS;

CAMPAIGN TOOLS; ELECTION CAMPAIGN; GENERAL ELECTIONS; LARGER NETWORKS; MICROBLOGGING; NETHERLANDS; NORMALISATION; ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORKINGS; POLITICAL COMMUNICATION; SOCIAL NETWORKING SERVICES;

SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

EID: 84880399645     PISSN: None     EISSN: 10836101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jcc4.12023     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Abraham, L.B., Mörn, M.P. & Vollman, A. (2010). Women on the web: How women are shaping the internet. Comscore. Retrieved October 20 2010 from http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Presentations_Whitepapers/2010/Women_on_the_Web_How_Women_are_Shaping_the_Internet.
2. Anstead, N. (2008). The internet and campaign finance in the U.S. and the UK: An institutional comparison. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 5(3), 285-302.
3. Anstead, N. & Chadwick, N. (2009). Parties, election campaigning, and the internet. In A. Chadwick, & P.N. Howard (Eds.), Handbook of internet politics (pp. 56-71). London: Routledge.
4. Barber, B.R., Mattson, K. & Peterson, J. (1997). The state of 'electronically enhanced democracy': A survey of the Internet. New Brunswick, NJ: Walt Whitman Center.
5. Bimber, B. & Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning online: The internet in US elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press
6. Caprara, G.V., Barbaranelli, C. & Zimbardo, P.G. (1999). Personality profiles and political parties. Political Psychology, 20(1), 175-197.
7. Caprara, G., Francescato, D., Mebane, M., Sorace, R. & Vecchione, M. (2010). Personality foundations of ideological divide: A comparison of women members of parliament and women voters in Italy. Political Psychology, 31(5), 739-762.
8. Chadwick, A. (2009). Web 2.0: New challenges for the study of e-democracy in an era of informational Exuberance. I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 5(2), 9-42.
9. Chen, P. (2010). Adoption and use of digital media in election campaigns: Austria. Canada, New Zealand. Public Communication Review, 1, 3-26.
10. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G. & Aiken, L.S. (2002). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Copsey, N. (2003) Extremism on the net: The extreme right and the value of the internet. In R. Gibson, P. Nixon & S. Ward (Eds.). Political parties and the internet: Net gain? London: Routledge.
12. Comscore (2011). The Netherlands ranks #1 worldwide in penetration for Twitter and Linkedin. Retrieved May 3rd 2011 from http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/4/The_Netherlands_Ranks_number_one_Worldwide_in_Penetration_for_Twitter_and_LinkedIn
13. Cormode, G. & Krishnamurthy, B. (2008). Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. First Monday, 13(2). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2125/1972
14. Cornfield, M. (2004). Politics moves online: Campaigning and the internet. New York: The Century Foundation Press.
15. Farrell, D.M. (2001). Electoral systems: A comparative introduction. London: Palgrave.
16. Flickinger, R.S. & Studlar, D.T. (2007). One Europe, many electorates? Models of turnout in European Parliament elections after 2004. Comparative Political Studies, 40(4), 383-404.
17. Foot, K.A., Schneider, S.M. & Dougherty, M. (2007). Online structure for political action in the 2004 U.S. congressional electoral web sphere. In R. Kluver, N.W. Jankowski, K.A. Foot & S.M. Schneider (Eds.) The internet and national elections: A comparative study of web campaigning, pp. 93-103. London: Routledge.
18. Gibson, R. & Römmele, A. (2001). Changing campaign communications: A party-centered theory of professionalized campaigning. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 6(4), 31-43.
19. Gibson, R. & Ward, S. (2009). Parties in the digital age. Representation, 45(1), 87-100.
20. Gray, M. & Caul, M. (2000). Declining voter turnout in advanced industrial democracies, 1950-1997: The effects of declining group mobilization. Comparative Political Studies, 33(9), 1091-1122.
21. Greengard, S. (2009). The first internet president. Communications of the ACM, 52(2), 16-18
22. Gulati, G. & Williams, C. (2007). Closing the gap, raising the bar: Candidate web site communication in the 2006 campaigns for congress. Social Science Computer Review, 25(4), 443-465.
23. Gulati, G. & Williams, C. (forthcoming). Social networks in political campaigns: Facebook and the congressional elections of 2006 and 2008. New Media & Society.
24. Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1).
25. Hargittai, E. & Hinnant, A. (2008). Digital inequality: Differences in young adults' use of the Internet. Communication Research, 35(5), 602-621.
26. Hilbe, J.M. (2007). Negative binomial regression: Modeling overdispersed count data. Cambridge University Press.
27. Hosmer, D.W., Lemeshow, S. & Cook, E.D (2000). Applied logistic regression (2nd ed.). New York; Chichester: Wiley.
28. Hsu, C.L., & Park, H.W. (2011). Sociology of hyperlink networks of Web 1.0, Web 2.0, and Twitter: A case study of South Korea. Social Science Computer Review, 29(3), 354-368.
29. Jackson, N. (2006). Banking online: The use of the Internet by political parties to build a relationship with voters. In D. Lilleker, N. Jackson & R. Scullion (Eds.). The marketing of political parties (pp. 157-184). Manchester University Press: Manchester.
30. Jackson, N. & Lilleker, D. (2009). Building an architecture of participation? Political parties and Web 2.0 in Britain. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 6, 232-250.
31. Jackson, N. & Lilleker, D (2010). Tentative steps towards interaction: The use of the Internet in the British European parliament election 2009. Internet Research, 20(5), 527-544.
32. Kaid, L.L. (2006). Political web wars: The use of the internet for political advertising, in A.P. Williams and J.C. Tedesco (Eds)., The internet election: Perspectives on the web in campaign 2004. pp. 67-82. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
33. Keman, H. (2007). Experts and manifestos: Different sources-Same results for comparative research? Electoral Studies, 26(4), 76-89.
34. Kluver, R., Jankowski, N., Foot, K. & Schneider, S.M. (Eds.) (2007). The internet and national elections. A comparative study of web campaigning: Routledge.
35. Lewis, J. & West, A. (2009). 'Friending': London-based undergraduates' experience of Facebook. New Media & Society, 11(7), 1209-1229.
36. Lilleker, D. & Malagón, C. (2010). Levels of interactivity in the 2007 French presidential candidates' websites. European Journal of Communication, 25(1), 25-42.
37. Margolis, M., Resnick, D. & Wolfe, J.D. (1999). Party competition on the Internet in the United States and Britain. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 4(4), 24-47.
38. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J.M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444.
39. Norris, P. (2000). A virtuous circle: Political communications in postindustrial societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide? Civic engagement, information poverty and the internet worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41. Norris, P. (2003). Preaching to the converted? Pluralism, participation and party websites. Party Politics, 9(1), 21-45.
42. Orchard, L.J. & Fullwood, C. (2010). Current perspectives on personality and internet use. Social Science Computer Review, 28, 155-169.
43. O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved from http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
44. Park, H.W., & Janowski, N.W. (2008). A hyperlink network analysis of citizen blogs in South Korean politics. Javnost/the Public, 15(2), 57-74.
45. Parmelee, J.H. & Bichard, S.L. (2012). Politics and the Twitter revolution: How tweets influence the relationship between political leaders and the public. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
46. Pujazon-Zazik, M. & Park, M.J. (2010). To tweet, or not to tweet: Gender differences and potential positive and negative health outcomes of adolescents' social internet use. American Journal of Mens Health, 4(1), 77-85.
47. Rae, D. (1968). Fractionalization of some European party systems. Comparative Political Studies, 1(3): 413-418.
48. Ran, W. & Lo, V.H. (2006). Staying connected while on the move: Cell phone use and social connectedness. New Media & Society, 8(1), 53-72.
49. Rojas, H., & Puig-i-Abril, E. (2009). Mobilizers mobilized: Information, expression, mobilization and participation in the digital age. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 902-927.
50. Rice, R.E., & Katz, J.E. (2003). Comparing internet and mobile phone usage: Digital divides of usage, adoption, and dropouts. Telecommunications Policy, 27(8-9), 597-623.
51. Sams, S., Lim, Y.S., & Park, H.W. (2011). E-research applications for tracking online socio-political capital in the Asia-Pacific region. Asian Journal of Communication, 21(5), 450-466.
52. Scholten, O. & Ruigrok, N. (2006). Politiek en politici in het nieuws in vijf landelijke dagbladen [Politics and politicians in the news of five newspapers]. Amsterdam: Persinstituut/Nieuwsmonitor.
53. Schweitzer, E.J. (2008). Innovation or normalization in e-campaigning? A longitudinal content and structural analysis of German party websites in the 2002 and 2005 national elections. European Journal of Communication, 23(4), 449-470.
54. Segerberg, A. & Bennett, W.L. (2011). Social media and the organization of collective action: Using Twitter to explore the ecologies of two climate change protests. The Communication Review, 14(3), 197-215.
55. Stirland, S. (2008, 4 November). Propelled by internet, Barack Obama wins presidency. Wired Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/11/propelled-by-in/
56. Sudulich, L. (2009, April) Do ethos, ideology, country and electoral strength make a difference in cyberspace? Testing an explanatory model of parties' websites. Paper presented to ECPR Joint Research Workshops, Lisbon.
57. Tedesco, J.C. (2004). Changing the channel: Use of the Internet for communicating about politics. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 507-532). Mahwah, N.J.: LEA.
58. Vaccari, C. (2008). From the air to the ground: The Internet in the 2004 US presidential campaign. New Media Society, 10, 647-65.
59. Van Kersbergen, K. & Krouwel, A. (2008). A double-edged sword! The Dutch centre-right and the 'foreigners issue'. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(3), 398-414.
60. Vergeer, M., Hermans, L. & Cunha, C (forthcoming-a). Web campaigning in the 2009 European Parliament elections: A decade of cross-national comparative website-feature analysis. New Media & Society.
61. Vergeer, M., Hermans, L. & Sams, S. (forthcoming-b). Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: The exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style. Party Politics. DOI: 10.1177/1354068811407580
62. Wiggins, J.S. (2001). Personality structure. In N.J. Smelser & P.B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp.11317-11320). London: Elsevier.
63. Williamson, A. (2010). Inside the digital campaign. In R.K. Gibson, A. Williamson & S. Ward, The internet and the 2010 election putting the small 'p' back in politics? (pp. 17-26). London: Hansard Society.
64. Zappavigna, M. (2011). Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on Twitter. New Media & Society, 13(5), 788-806.