Triumph of the underdogs? comparing twitter use by political actors during two Norwegian election campaigns

SAGE Open

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2014, Pages

  Larsson, Anders Olof ^a   Moe, Hallvard ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

Author keywords

Equalization; Normalization; Norway; Political communication; Politicians online; Social media; Twitter

Indexed keywords

EID: 84927626426     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21582440     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/2158244014559015     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Aardal, B., Krogstad, A., & Narud, H. M. (2004). I valgkampens hete: strategisk kommunikasjon og politisk usikkerhet [In the heat of the election campaign: Strategical communication and political uncertainty]. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
2. Ausserhofer, J., & Maireder, A. (2013). National politics on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 291-314.
3. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009, May 17-20). Gephi: An open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. Paper presented at the Third International ICWSM Conference, San Jose, CA.
4. Bekafigo, M. A., & McBride, A. (2013). Who tweets about politics? Political participation of Twitter users during the 2011 gubernatorial elections. Social Science Computer Review, 31, 625-643.
5. Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication & Society, 15, 662-679.
6. Bruns, A. (2011). How long is a tweet? Mapping dynamic conversation networks on Twitter using Gawk and Gephi. Information, Communication & Society, 15, 1323-1351.
7. Bruns, A. (2013). Faster than the speed of print: Reconciling “big data” social media analysis and academic scholarship. First Monday, 18(10). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4879
8. Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. (2011a). #Ausvotes: How Twitter covered the 2010 Australian federal election. Communication, Politics & Culture, 44(2), 37-56.
9. Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. (2011b). Gawk scripts for Twitter processing. Retrieved from http://mappingonlinepublics.net/
10. Bruns, A., & Highfield, T. (2013). Political networks on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 667-691.
11. Bruns, A., & Stieglitz, S. (2013). Towards more systematic Twitter analysis: Metrics for tweeting activities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 16, 91-108.
12. Christensen, C. (2013). Wave-riding and hashtag-jumping: Twitter, minority “third parties” and the 2012 US elections. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 646-666.
13. Coleman, S. S., & Blumler, J. G. (2009). The Internet and democratic citizenship: Theory, practice and policy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
14. Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22, 147-162.
15. Enli, G. S., & Skogerbø, E. (2013). Personalized campaigns in party-centred politics. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 757-774.
16. Freelon, D. G. (2010). Analyzing online political discussion using three models of democratic communication. New Media & Society, 12, 1172-1190.
17. Gibson, R. K. (2004). Web campaigning from a global perspective. Asia-Pacific Review, 11(1), 95-126.
18. Gibson, R. K., Lusoli, W., & Ward, S. (2008). Nationalizing and normalizing the local? A comparative analysis of online candidate campaigning in Australia and Britain. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 4, 15-30.
19. Gibson, R. K., & McAllister, I. (2014). Normalising or equalising party competition? Assessing the impact of the web on election campaigning. Political Studies. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12107
20. González-Bailón, S. (2013). Social science in the era of big data. Policy & Internet, 5(2), 147-160.
21. Graham, T., Broersma, M., Hazelhoff, K., & van ‘t Haar, G. (2013). Between broadcasting political messages and interacting with voters. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 692-716.
22. Graham, T., Jackson, D., & Broersma, M. (2014). New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of Twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns. New Media & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1461444814546728
23. Halavais, A. (2014). Structure of Twitter: Social and technical. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt, & C. Puschmann (Eds.), Twitter and society (pp. 29-42). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
24. Hermans, L., & Vergeer, M. (2013). Personalization in e-campaigning: A cross-national comparison of personalization strategies used on candidate websites of 17 countries in EP elections 2009. New Media & Society, 15, 72-92.
25. Hilson, M. (2008). The Nordic model. Scandinavia since 1945. London, England: Reaktion Books.
26. Jackson, N. A., & Lilleker, D. G. (2009). Building an architecture of participation? Political parties and Web 2.0 in Britain. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6, 232-250.
27. Kalnes, Ø. (2009). Norwegian parties and Web 2.0. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6, 251-266.
28. Karlsen, R. (2010). Fear of the political consultant: Campaign professionals and new technology in Norwegian electoral politics. Party Politics, 16, 193-214.
29. Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
30. Klinger, U. (2013). Mastering the art of social media. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 717-736.
31. Larsson, A. O. (2013). “Rejected bits of program code”: Why notions of “Politics 2.0” remain (mostly) unfulfilled. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10, 72-85.
32. Larsson, A. O., & Kalsnes, B. (2014). “Of course we are on Facebook-”Social media adoption in Swedish and Norwegian parliaments. European Journal of Communication.
33. Larsson, A. O., & Moe, H. (2012). Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign. New Media & Society, 14, 729-747.
34. Larsson, A. O., & Moe, H. (2013). Twitter in politics and elections-Insights from Scandinavia. In A. Bruns, J. Burgess, K. Weller, C. Puschmann, & M. Mahrt (Eds.), Twitter and society, 319-330. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
35. Larsson, A. O., & Svensson, J. (2014). Politicians online-Identifying current research opportunities. First Monday, 19(4).Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4897
36. Lewis, S. C., Zamith, R., & Hermida, A. (2013). Content analysis in an era of big data: A hybrid approach to computational and manual methods. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57, 34-52.
37. Lilleker, D. G., & Jackson, N. A. (2010). Towards a more participatory style of election campaigning: The impact of Web 2.0 on the UK 2010 general election. Policy & Internet, 2(3), 67-96.
38. Lilleker, D. G., Koc-Michalska, K., Schweitzer, E. J., Jacunski, M., Jackson, N., & Vedel, T. (2011). Informing, engaging, mobilizing, or interacting: Searching for a European model of web campaigning. European Journal of Communication, 26, 195-213.
39. Lisi, M. (2013). The professionalization of campaigns in recent democracies: The Portuguese case. European Journal of Communication, 28, 259-276.
40. Lomborg, S., & Bechmann, A. (2014). Using APIs for data collection on social media. The Information Society, 30, 256-265.
41. Margolis, M., & Resnick, D. (2000). Politics as usual: The cyberspace “revolution.” London, England: SAGE.
42. Prior, M. (2007). Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
43. Statistics Norway. (2014). Elections. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no/en/valg
44. Strandberg, K. (2009). Online campaigning: An opening for the outsiders? An analysis of Finnish parliamentary candidates’ websites in the 2003 election campaign. New Media & Society, 11, 835-854.
45. 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, 1329-1347. doi:10.1177/1461444812470612
46. Tenscher, J. (2013). First- and second-order campaigning: Evidence from Germany. European Journal of Communication, 28, 241-258.
47. Vaage, O. F. (2012). Norsk mediebarometer 2011 [Norwegian media barometer 2011]. Oslo: Statistisk sentralbyrå (Statistics Norway).
48. Vergeer, M., & Hermans, L. (2013). Campaigning on Twitter: Microblogging and online social networking as campaign tools in the 2010 general elections in the Netherlands. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18, 399-419.
49. Whitley, R. (2000). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
50. Wright, S. (2012). Politics as usual? Revolution, normalization, and a new agenda for online deliberation. New Media & Society, 14, 244-261.
51. Zimmer, M., & Proferes, N. (2014). A topology of Twitter research: Disciplines, methods, and ethics. Aslib Proceedings, 66, 250-261.