Online Campaigning in France, 2007-2012: Political Actors and Citizens in the Aftermath of the Web.2.0 Evolution

Journal of Information Technology and Politics

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 220-244

  Koc Michalska, Karolina ^a   Gibson, Rachel ^b   Vedel, Thierry ^c  

^a Centre for Political Research of Sciences   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^c SCIENCES PO   (France)

Author keywords

Electoral behavior; French presidential election; Internet; online strategy; political communication; political engagement; Web.2.0

Indexed keywords

EID: 84901275019     PISSN: 19331681     EISSN: 1933169X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19331681.2014.903217     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Anduiza, E., Gallego, A., & Cantijoch, M. (2010). Online political participation in Spain: The impact of traditional and Internet resources. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7(4), 356-368.
2. Anstead, N., & Chadwick, A. (2008). The 2008 digital campaign in the United States: The real lessons for British parties. Renewal: Journal of Labour Politics, 16, 86-98.
3. Belanger, E., Cautrès, B., Foucault, M., Lewis-Beck, M., & Nadeau, R. (2012). Le vote des Français de Mitterrand à Sarkozy. Paris, France: Presses de Sciences Po.
4. Bentivegna, S. (2006). Rethinking politics in the world of ICTs. European Journal of Communication, 21(3), 331-343.
5. Best, S., & Krueger, B. (2005). Analyzing the representativeness of Internet political participation. Political Behavior, 27(2), 183-216.
6. Bimber, B. (1999). The Internet and citizen communication with government: Does the medium matter? Political Communication, 16, 409-428.
7. Bimber, B. (2001). Information and political engagement in America: The search for political effects of the Internet. Political Research Quarterly, 54(1), 53-67.
8. Bimber, B. (2012, November). Digital media in the Obama presidential campaigns: Comparing 2008 and 2012. Presentation given during "Chasing the Digital Wave: International Lessons for the UK 2015 Election Campaign," Hansard Society, London, UK.
9. Bimber, B., & Copeland, L. (2013). Digital media and traditional political participation over time in the U.S. Journal of Informational Technology and Politics, 10, 125-137.
10. Bond, R., Fariss, C., Jones, J., Kramer, A., Marlow, C., Settle, J., & Fowler J. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489, 295-298.
11. Boulianne, S. (2009). Does Internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26(2), 193-211.
12. Bousquet, F. (2009). Le net-campagne de 2007: Entre mobilisation et participation. In P. Maarek (Ed.), La communication politique de la présidentielle de 2007 (pp. 105-120). Paris, France: L'Harmattan.
13. Bréchon, P. (2006). Comportements et attitudes politiques. Grenoble, France: Presses universitaires de Grenoble.
14. Briggs, S., & Cheek, J. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54(1), 106-143.
15. Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W., & Stokes, D. (1960). The American voter. New York, NY: Wiley.
16. Carlson, T., & Djupsund, G. (2001). Old wine in the new bottle? The 1999 Finish election campaign on the Internet. Press/Politics, 6(1), 68-87.
17. Carlson, T., & Strandberg, K. (2008). Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose? The evolution of Finnish Web campaigning 1996-2004. In J. Strömbäck (Ed.), Communicating politics: Political communication in the Nordic countries (pp. 161-179). Göteborg, Sweden: Nordicom.
18. Ceron, A., Curini, L., Iacus, S., & Porro, G. (2014). Every tweet counts? How sentiment analysis of social media can improve our knowledge of citizens' political preferences with an application to Italy and France. New Media & Society, 16(2), 340-358.
19. Chadwick, A. (2012). Recent shifts in relationship between the Internet and democratic engagement in Britain and United States: Granularity, information exuberance, and political learning. In E. Anduiza, M. Jensen, & L. Jorba (Eds.), Digital media and political engagement worldwide: A comparative study (pp. 102-118). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20. Chiche, J., & Haegel, F. (2002). Les connaissances politiques. In G. Grumberg, N. Mayer, & P. Sniderman (Eds.), La démocratie à l'épreuve: Une nouvelle conception de l'opinion des français (pp. 273-292). Paris, France: Presses de Sciences-Po.
21. Coleman, S., & Gøtze, J. (2001). Bowling together: Online public engagement in policy deliberation. London, UK: Hansard Society.
22. Colombo, C., Galais, C., & Gallego, A. (2012). Internet use and political attitudes in Europe. In E. Anduiza, M. Jensen, & L. Jorba (Eds.), Digital media and political engagement worldwide: A comparative study (pp. 102-118). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23. Conway, M., & Donard, D. (2004). An evaluation of New Zealand political party Web sites. Retrieved January 5, 2013, from: http://informationr.net/ir/9-4/paper196.html.
24. Druckman, J., Kifer, M., & Parkin, M. (2010). Timeless strategy meets new medium: Going negative on congressional campaign Web sites, 2002-2006. Political Communication, 21(1), 88-103.
25. Esser, F., & de Vreese, C. (2007). Comparing young voters' political engagement in the United States and Europe. American Behavioral Scientist, 50(9), 1195-1213.
26. Farmer, R., & Fender, R. (2005). E-parties: Democratic and republican state parties in 2000. Party Politics, 11, 47-58.
27. Foot, K., & Schneider, S. (2006). Web campaigning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Foot, K., Schneider, S., Kluver R, Xenos, M., & Jankowski, N. (2007). Comparing Web production practices across electoral Web spheres. In R. Kluver, N. Jankowski, K. Foot, & S. Schneider (Eds.), The Internet and national elections: A comparative study of Web campaigning (pp. 243-260). London, UK: Routledge.
29. Gibson, R., & Cantijoch, M. (2011). Conceptualizing and measuring participation in the age of the Internet: Is online political engagement really different to offline? Paper presented at the Colloquium "Methodological Challenges in Participation Research," Cordoba, Spain, November 4-5. Retrieved January 5, 2013, from: http://drupals.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/ipol/sites/default/files/newdocs/Cordoba_2011.pdf.
30. Gibson, R., Cantijoch, M., & Ward, S. (2010, September). Another false dawn? New media and citizen participation in the 2010 UK general election. Paper presented at the Elections Public Opinion and Parties Conference, University of Essex. Retrieved January 5, 2013, from: http://drupals.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/ipol/?q=node/6 01.05.2013.
31. Gibson, R., Margolis, M., Resnick, D., & Ward, S. (2003). Election campaigning on the WWW in the USA and UK-a comparative analysis. Party Politics, 9(1), 47-75.
32. Gibson, R., & McAllister, I. (2014). Normalizing or equalizing party competition? Assessing the impact of the Web on election campaigning. Political Studies. doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12107
33. Gibson, R., & Ward, S. (1998). U.K. political parties and the Internet: "Politics as usual" in the new media? Press/Politics, 3(3), 14-38.
34. Gibson, R., & Ward, S. (2000). A proposed methodology for measuring the function and effectiveness of political Web sites. Social Science Computer Review, 18(3), 301-319.
35. Greffet, F. (2013). New technique, new mobilizations? French parties in Web.2.0 era. In P. Nixon, R. Rawal, & D. Mercea (Eds.), Politics and the Internet in comparative context: Views from the cloud. London, UK: Routledge.
36. Gueorguieva, V. (2007). Voters, MySpace, and YouTube: The impact of alternative communication channels on the 2006 election cycle and beyond. Social Science Computer Review, 26(3), 288-300.
37. Hamilton, A., & Tolbert, C. (2012). Political engagement and the Internet in the 2008 U.S. presidential elections: A panel survey. In E. Anduiza, M. Jensen, & L. Jorba (Eds.), Digital media and political engagement worldwide: A comparative study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38. Hardy, B., & Scheufele, D. (2005). Examining differential gains from Internet use: Comparing the moderating role of talk and online interactions. Journal of Communication, 55(1), 71-84.
39. Hindman, M. (2009). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton.
40. Hoffman, L. (2012). Participation or communication? An Explication of Political Activity in the Impact of the Web on Election Campaigning. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 9(3), 217-233.
41. Jorba, L., & Bimber, B. (2012). The impact of the digital media on citizenship from a global perspective. In E. Anduiza, M. Jensen, & L. Jorba (Eds.), Digital media and political engagement worldwide: A comparative study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42. Kalnes, Ø. (2009). Norwegian parties and Web.2.0. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(3-4), 251-266.
43. Kenski, K., & Stroud, N. (2006). Connections between Internet use and political efficacy, knowledge, and participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(2), 173-192.
44. Kluver, R., Jankowski, N., Foot, K., & Schneider, S. (2007). The Internet and national elections. A comparative study of Web campaigning. London, UK: Routledge.
45. Koc-Michalska, K., & Lilleker, D. (2013). MEPs online: Understanding communication strategies for remote representatives. In P. Nixon, R. Rawal, & D. Mercea (Eds.), Politics and the Internet in comparative context: Views from the cloud (pp. 213-232). London, UK: Routledge.
46. Koc-Michalska, K., & Lilleker, D. (2014). Interagir avec les candidates: Les stratégies interactives lors de l'élection présidentielle française de 2012. In P. Maarek (Ed.), Présidentielle 2012, une communication politique bien singulière (pp. 149-165). Paris, France: L'Harmattan.
47. Koc-Michalska, K., & Vedel, T. (2013). Les pratiques informationnelles durant la campagne presidentielle. In P. Perrineau (Ed.), Le vote normal: Les élections présidentielle et législatives d'avril-juin 2012. Paris, France: Presses de Sciences Po.
48. Kroh, M., & Neiss, H. (2012). On the causal nature of the relationship between Internet access and political engagement: Evidence from German panel data. In E. Anduiza, M. Jensen, & L. Jorba (Eds.), Digital media and political engagement worldwide: A comparative study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
49. Lilleker, D., & Jackson, N. (2011). Elections 2.0: Comparing e-campaigns in France, Germany, Great Britain and the United States. In J. Schweitzer & A. Steffen (Eds.), Das Internet im Wahlkampf: Analysen zur Bundestagswahl 2009 (pp. 96-116). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS [Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften].
50. Lilleker, D., & Koc-Michalska, K. (2013). Online political communication strategies: MEPs e-representation and self-representation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(2), 190-207.
51. Lilleker, D., & Koc-Michalska, K. (In press). Online delivery and demand in France 2012 presidential election. In J. Bishop & A. Solo (Eds.), Politics and Policy in the Information Age. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
52. Lilleker, D., Koc-Michalska, K., Schweitzer, E., Jacunski, M., Nigel, J., & Vedel, T. (2011). Informing, engaging, mobilising or interacting: Searching for a European model of Web campaigning. European Journal of Communication, 26(3), 195-213.
53. Margolis, M., & Resnick, D. (2000). Politics as usual: The cyberspace "revolution." Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
54. Margolis, M., Resnik, D., & Tu, C. (1997). Campaigning on the Internet: Parties and candidates on the World Wide Web in the 1996 primary season. Press/Politics, 2(1), 59-78.
55. Mayer, N. (2010). Sociologie des comportements politiques. Paris, France: Armand Colin.
56. Morozov, E. (2013). The Net delusion: The dark side of Internet freedom. New York, NY: PublicAffairs.
57. Nam, T., & Stromer-Galley, J. (2012). The democratic divide in the 2008 U.S. presidential election. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9(2), 133-149.
58. Nie, N., Junn, J., & Stehlik-Barry, K. (1996). Education and democraticship in America. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
59. Norris, P. (2003). Preaching to the converted? Pluralism, participation and party Web sites. Party Politics, 9(1), 21-45.
60. Norris, P., & Curtice, J. (2008). Getting the message out: A two-step model of the role of the Internet in campaign communication flows during the 2005 British general election. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 4(4), 3-13.
61. Prior, M. (2005). News vs. entertainment: How increasing media choice widens gaps in political knowledge. American Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 577-592.
62. Resnick, D. (1998). Politics on the Internet: The normalization of cyberspace. In C. Toulouse & T. Luke (Eds.), The politics of cyberspace (pp. 48-68). New York, NY: Routledge.
63. Rojas, H., Shah, D., Cho, J., Schmierbach, M., Keum, H., & Gil de Zuniga, H. (2005). Media dialogue: Perceiving and addressing community problems. Mass Communication & Society, 8, 95-110.
64. Saglie, J., & Vabo, S. (2009). Size and e-democracy: Online participation in Norwegian local politics. Scandinavian Political Studies, 32(4), 382-401.
65. Scheufele,D., & Nisbet, M. (2002). Being a citizen online-new opportunities and dead ends. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 7, 55-57.
66. Schweitzer, E. (2005). Election campaigning online: German party Websites in the 2002 national elections. European Journal of Communication, 20(3), 327-351.
67. Schweitzer, E. (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, 449-470.
68. Schweitzer, E. (2011). Normalization 2.0: A longitudinal analysis of German online campaigns in the national elections 2002. European Journal of Communication, 26, 310-327.
69. Smith, A. (2013). Civic engagement in the Digital Age. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved January 5, 2012, from: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Civic-Engagement.aspx.
70. Smith, A., Schlozman, K., Verba, S., & Brady, H. (2009). The Internet and civic engagement. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved January 5, 2013, from: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/15-The-Internet-and-Civic-Engagement.aspx.
71. Strandberg, K. (2013). A social media revolution or just a case of history repeating itself? The use of social media in the 2011 Finnish parliamentary elections. New Media & Society, 15(8), 1329-1347.
72. Tkach-Kawasaki, L. M. (2003). Clicking for votes: Assessing Japanese political campaigns on the Web. In K. C. Ho, R. Kluver, & K. C. Yang (Eds.), Asia.com: Asia encounters the Internet (pp. 159-174). London, UK: Routledge Curzon.
73. Tolbert, C., & McNeal, R. (2003). Unraveling the effects of the Internet on political participation? Political Research Quarterly, 56(2), 175-185.
74. Tumasjan,A., Sprenger, T., Sandner, P., & Welpe, I. (2010). Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In Proceedings of the Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Retrieved January 5, 2013, from: http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM10/paper/viewFile/1441/1852.
75. Vaccari, C. (2008). Surfing to the Elysee: The Internet in the 2007 French elections. French Politics, 6, 1-22.
76. Vaccari, C. (2013). Digital politics in Western democracies: A comparative study. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
77. Vassallo, F. (2010). France, social capital and political activism. London, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.
78. Vedel, T., & Cann, Y. (2008). Internet. Une communication électorale de rupture? In P. Perrineau (Ed.), Le vote de rupture (pp. 51-77). Paris, France: Press de Sciences-Po.
79. Verba, S., Schlozman, K., & Brady, H. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
80. Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Cunha C. (2013a). Web campaigning in the 2009 European parliament elections: A cross-national comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 15, 128-148.
81. Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Sams, S. (2013b). Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: The exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style. Party Politics, 19, 477-501.
82. Wang, S. (2007). Political use of the Internet, political attitudes and political participation. Asian Journal of Communication, 17, 381-395.
83. Ward, S., & Gibson, R. (2003). Online and on message? Candidates Websites in the 2001 general election. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 5(2), 188-205.
84. Wolfinger, R., & Rosenstone, S. (1980). Who votes? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
85. Wooldridge, J. M. (2001). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
86. Xenos, M., & Foot, K. (2005). Politics as usual or politics unusual? Position taking and dialogue on campaign Websites in the 2002 elections. Journal of Communication, 55(1),169-185.