View
35
Download
3
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Running Head: 2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA 1
The 2012 U.S Presidential Campaign and Social Media:
The Role of Social Media in Young Voter Perceptions of Presidential Candidates
Ashley Behara, Christopher Naley, Anna Ragland, Emma Szyller, and Jacob Torres
St. Edward’s University
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA2
Introduction
Presidential campaigns are marked with political theater, fanfare, and the thrill of
democratic excitement. A good campaign will generate civic duty, as well as interest
amongst the larger American public. Most importantly, the campaign aims to humanize a
candidate, making them appear to be more trustworthy and caring of their constituency.
This political theater has garnered interest within our group, and has encouraged us to
investigate how it is used in a matter that affects us. Our age group, 18-30, is a highly
coveted demographic amongst politicians, and thus many messages are aimed in trying to
vie for its attention (Hong & Nadler, 2012). Of those mediums used to spread the
message, social media has been branded the primary method of reaching our
demographic.
The present study aims to analyze political campaign strategy with an established
Communication framework to explain how social media messages are being interpreted
by the youth demographic. Reiterating, how is social media being used to increase
presidential candidates credibility, and is it effective?
Literature Review
New technological innovations have been central to transforming the dynamics of
presidential elections with the emergence of radio, television, Internet, and currently,
social media. Past research indicates that management of new media technology is the
framework for a successful political campaign (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).
Communication theorist Marshall McLuhan (1964) identified media as “technological
extensions of the body”, a proclamation that still resonates today as American culture is
saturated in the convenience of “smart phones” and social media. McLuhan (1964)
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA3
argues that the content of the message plays a secondary role to the medium itself,
coining the axiom “the medium is the message.” The continued growth of the Internet
and social media supports McLuhan’s argument (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).
Presidential campaigns must adapt to new technologies, employ the tools voters are
using, and most importantly, have a message that resonates with the voters (Metzgar &
Maruggi, 2009).
Emerging media has been influencing the perception of presidential candidates
since the advent of radio. In analyzing influence of radio as a new technology in
campaigning, Mary Beth Leidman and Zack Stiegler (2011) point out that Calvin
Coolidge was the original U.S. President to foster a relationship between broadcasting
and the presidency. Coolidge was the first to broadcast his inauguration, an address to
Congress, and a political speech over the air (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). While Coolidge
introduced radio to the presidency, his successors intensified and refined the use of this
medium. Following Coolidge, Herbert Hoover gained notoriety by using radio to
establish frequent and direct contact between the President and everyday people
(Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). Furthermore, Hoover would address events that he could not
attend in person via the radio (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). Hoover maximized his use of
radio and as a result, gained cultural prominence (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).
Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) notably changed how presidents use media to
address the nation with his fireside chats. His campaign strategy was not only to continue
reaching the Americans via the radio, but analyzed the psychographics of his audience.
FDR’s campaign took into consideration that most people listened to the radio in the
comfort of their home, and that required a different manner of address (Leidman &
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA4
Stiegler, 2011). The use of media in this way marked a political shift. Politicians were
no longer simply orators, but were now figures of public address, speaking to the
audience collectively and building a sense of intimacy with the American public
(Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). His addresses were accessible and understandable to
everyday people. FDR’s choice of words created a sense of an individual belonging to the
grand-national “us”. FDR’s fireside chats and rhetoric were so effective that his strategies
have influenced the ways in which U.S. presidents utilize mass media technologies
(Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).
Another paradigm shift in media occurred with the invention of the television.
According to the New York Times, in 1960, 70 million viewers tuned in to watch Senator
John F. Kennedy and Vice President Richard Nixon in the first-ever televised presidential
debate. A series of four debates were aired and became the epicenter for the election’s
media strategy (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). Gaining notoriety as “The Great Debates,”
this marked television’s grand entrance into presidential election process. In examining
the televised debates, the first observation is the difference in the candidates’
appearances. JFK appears vibrant and personable while Nixon has a tired and
unenthusiastic demeanor. The differences in their image and performance collectively
gave Kennedy a victory in harnessing mass media (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). The 1960
presidential campaign exemplifies the integral role of a contemporaneous new media in
the political process. Studies often compare the trends that exist in JFK’s media
strategies and Barack Obama that have set a precedent for future political campaigns.
Their victories demonstrate that the framework for a successful campaign is paved on full
utilization of new media (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA5
The 2008 presidential campaign between Barack Obama and John McCain
notoriously became known as the “Internet Election.” While the use of the web in
presidential elections dates back to 2000, Obama was the first to mobilize a social
networking movement. In a recent Harvard University study, Hong and Nadler (2012)
argue that President Obama’s successful use of the web played a vital role in the success
of his campaign. Hong and Nadler (2012) reported that at the height of Obama’s
campaign, he employed over one hundred employees to work on his social media
outreach. In addition, Obama was the first to hold a virtual news conference via Twitter,
with members of the Senate able to submit question in real time (Hong & Nadler, 2012).
Obama also invoked FDR’s rhetorical movement of addressing his web supporters using
first-person plural and the second person phrases such as “join us” or “help us.” This
positions web users as active members of a presidential campaign (Leidman & Stiegler,
2011).
The rise of the Internet within the past decade has brought about cultural
revolutions familiar to millions of people around the world. These cultural revolutions
have been brought about primarily by social media websites such as Facebook and
Twitter. Social media sites enable various forms of interaction with fellow citizens and
political actors that were not possible prior to its growth (Kushkin & Yamamoto, 2010).
Furthermore, today’s younger generation no longer receives the majority of its
information from newspapers or television news, as did those in previous generations,
relying instead upon social media. Social media has given college students, specifically,
the opportunity to continue being informed citizens through a more interactive media
outlet.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA6
Presidential candidates, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have looked towards
social media to garner support from college-aged students and other younger
demographics. The present study explores the efficiency of these outreaches. Natch
Greyes examined the use of social media during the midterm House of Representative
election cycle two years ago in and concluded that many campaigns failed to appreciate
the new media’s ability to foster interaction with voters. He suggests that these
campaigns did not truly understand how to effectively use email, phone, and mail
communications. They failed to take advantage of the potential genuine, two-way lines of
communication with voters and instead used a one-way message strategy. It should be
noted however, that many differences exist between midterm and presidential elections,
and the ability to rally behind one political figure is arguably easier when compared to
the many seats at stake in a house or senate election.
Greyes observed that a two-way line of communication was used somewhat
effectively by Obama in the 2008 election. During this election, Obama was able to rally
support amongst college-aged students through his use of social media. Some speculate
he won because of the “young vote.”
Many young voters in 2008 obtained their information about a particular
candidate via social media, with approximately 27% of adults younger than 30 reported
obtaining campaign information from social media sites (Kushkin & Yamamoto, 2010).
This number is believed to increase during the current 2012 presidential election
campaign. Currently, Barack Obama’s campaign Facebook has just under 29 million
“likes,” while Mitt Romney has approximately 8.5 million. This piece of information
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA7
may support the claim that Obama’s 2008 win was heavily influenced by young voters,
who tend to be the primary users of Facebook.
According to Greyes, once you have piqued an online audience’s interest, its
members will happily spread your message by posting it on other new media sites or
passing it on to friends and acquaintances. The power of social media in relation to
college-age students is visible through the fairly recent political protests of the Egyptian
and Libyan governments. Websites such as Facebook and Twitter assisted in rallying
young, college-aged people to become politically disciplined, pragmatic, and
collaborative (Howard & Parks, 2012).
Today, Facebook and Twitter dominates American contemporary media culture
with social networking tools. Social networking has broadened the dialogue between
presidential candidates and the American public. A study analyzing Twitter and current
presidential campaign to date found that a candidate’s Twitter activities are associated
with the number of mentions they receive (Hong & Nadler, 2012). Analyzing the use of
media in presidential campaigns provides insight to the social and cultural impact of new
media in the U.S. (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). Studies demonstrated that the aggregate
effect of social media helps determine how voters view the election (Metzgar & Maruggi,
2009). The present study will explore the relationship between the use of social media
and influence of voter perception. The study will look specifically at how Twitter and
Facebook affect the 2012 presidential candidate’s credibility.
According to the Source Credibility theory one is more likely to be persuaded
when the source presents itself as credible (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). Previous
research has examined source credibility’s effect on the opinion and behavior of the
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA8
receiver, and suggests that highly credible sources generate more positive opinions and
more behavioral compliance than do less credible sources (Hovland & Weiss, 1951).
Hovland and Weiss (1951) found that credible public speakers were more persuasive than
their less credible counterparts. Accordingly, a decrease in the source’s credibility
negatively affects the attitude of the receiver toward that source (Hovland & Weiss, 1951;
Teven & Herring, 2005).
Source credibility impact on persuasion can be observed using the Heuristic-
Systematic model and the Elaboration Likelihood model. When elaboration is low,
source credibility functions as a “heuristic” or cue to persuasion, however, when
elaboration is moderate, source credibility influences the quantity of processing which
takes place (Tormala, Briñol, & Petty, 2007).
Hovland, Janis and Kelley (1953) suggest two primary dimensions of credibility;
trustworthiness and expertness. Trustworthiness refers to an audience perception of the
validity of a communicator’s claims (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). With regard to a
political campaign, trustworthiness refers to the degree to which voters put their trust in a
candidate. Expertness refers to the communicator qualification to offer valid and precise
information or to discuss a specific issue (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). McCroskey
and Teven (1999) identify goodwill as a third dimension of source credibility. Goodwill
refers to the audience perception of the source’s caring for them and whether the source
has their best interest at heart (McCroskey & Teven, 1999). If a candidate expresses
concern about the wellbeing of people, it might influence the opinion of voters of
whether a candidate might introduce policies that will benefit them. Voters are more
likely to perceive a candidate as credible if he or she connects well with the public.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA9
The credibility of presidential elections candidates develops over the course of a
campaign. A variety of sources influence voters’ perceptions of candidates including
campaign advertising, debates, news media, and the candidates’ communication
behavior. While a candidate position on certain issues or policies influences voters, his or
her personality and perceived credibility is perhaps the prime concern in shaping voter’s
choice (Stephen et al., 2004).
These findings are incongruent with research by Westerman, Spence & Van Der
Heide (2012), suggesting that social media users are inclined to be less trusting of official
sources. That is to say social and online media credibility does not seem to have a link
with “officialness”. This research of Twitter and its influence on current events and
news directly relates to how we assess credibility of a presidential candidate and deserves
further exploration.
The present study will expand upon this research, identifying the good media
strategies used in the current presidential election and analyzing their effectiveness by
examining the candidate’s credibility. Remaining congruent with the operationalized
definition of credibility our research will examine trustworthiness, expertness, and
perceived goodwill. The present study will provide a framework by which future social
media campaigns may be analyzed.
Are presidential candidates using social media effectively, and does it have an
impact upon their affect their credibility?
H1: Young voters’ level of interest in their political candidates' online postings will be
positively correlated with perceived candidate credibility
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA10
Methods
Participants
The study involves fifty-five (55) participants and was limited to the
researchers’ “friends” and “followers” on the social media sites “Facebook” and
“Twitter” in the United States. The participants represent various educational
backgrounds, careers, and classifications. In this study, demographics were observed and
collected in data compilation. The average age of the participants was 24.7 years, with a
range of 18-69. The modal age was 21. Participants’ political affiliations ranged a large
spectrum. The majority, 41% of participants identified with the Democratic Party.
Second highest affiliation came from Independents with 18%, followed closely by
Libertarian and Unaffiliated participants at 11%. Republican participants made up 9% of
the study. Of the 55 participants, 70.91% reported following at least one political
candidate or party on a social media website. 38.18% of participants reported being
occasionally interested in candidates’ postings on social media sites. Participation in this
study was voluntary and confidential.
Procedure
Each researcher used a convenience sample to gather volunteers to participate in
an online survey through social media sites regarding their experience following the
presidential candidates. The use of this convenience sample is appropriate in this
particular study particularly given that social media users were the targeted audience. The
survey, created by the researchers, consisted of five demographic questions and ten
questions for each of the three observed variables. The study utilized QuestionPro, an
online survey software website, to distribute the survey by creating a link to the questions
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA11
entered by the researchers. Each researcher posted a link to the survey through their
Facebook and Twitter accounts. The researchers requested participation from those who
use social media to follow the activities of the presidential candidates during the 2012
campaign. Participants were first presented with a consent form that informed them of the
study and risks involved. Each participant then responded to a series of questions
concerning political candidates, or political parties, use of social media. In addition to the
demographic data, the questions were designed to obtain data regarding the three
variables: trustworthiness, likeability, and credibility. The collection of data began on
October 31, 2012 until the presidential elections on November 6, 2012.
Measurements
As addressed in the introduction, this research is based on a scale that measures
credibility. The researchers used the operational definition of credibility based on the
Source Credibility Theory, which states that a person will be more persuaded if a person
presents himself or herself as credible. In this study’s case, it is whether one Presidential
candidate’s online credibility is more persuasive than the other.
The scale of credibility the research used was broken down into three sub-
categories consisting of trustworthiness, expertness, and perceived goodwill. Using those
three sections the researchers constructed an online survey. The survey included
demographic questions like the participants age, and political affiliations along with
questions shaped to place a numerical value on trustworthiness, expertness, or perceived
goodwill as they relate to the research. Questions like began by gathering background
information on the participants’ social media use, and their knowledge of Presidential
Candidates social media use. Questions like, “Do you follow at least one political
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA12
candidate, or party, on a social media website?” Then they transitioned into questions
designed to fit into the scale we used. Questions like, “How attuned to current events is
your candidate on social media?” The researchers formatted each question to measure
one of the three sub categories.
All questions were formatted on a scale rating of poor, below average, average,
good, or excellent. Numerical values were assigned to each response to allow for further
data analysis. The researchers asked willing volunteers to take the survey by posting the
link to the survey onto social media outlets.
Data Collection Procedures
After the presidential election on November 6, 2012, the researchers decided to
close the survey and begin collecting data. As previously mentioned, a total of fifty-five
surveys were completed by volunteering participants. After closing the survey,
researchers were able to view a results page on QuestionPro, which showed each
participant’s answers. Researchers used this page to transfer survey results into a
Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
Results
H1 predicted that young voters’ level of interest in their political candidates'
online postings will be positively correlated with perceived candidate credibility
Preliminary analysis
The descriptive statistics for each variable are depicted in Appendix A.
Reliabilities for the three dimensions of candidate credibility—expertness, perceived
goodwill, and trustworthiness—are depicted in Appendix B. Expertness, was reliable at
an alpha level of .93, perceived goodwill, alpha=.87, and trustworthiness, alpha=.96.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA13
During the course of the study, there were little to no ethical concerns facing the
researchers. Survey participants were asked to voluntarily participate in the study
regardless of political affiliation or any other ethically-challenging issue. Participants
were also not subject to any deception.
The present study was limited in the available sample, and thus results should not
be overgeneralized to a larger population without first taking this in to account. The
convenience sample consisted primarily of college-aged students and was limited in the
amount of available participants. The present study benefitted from conducting its
survey over the medium of social media, which ensured that all participants were social
media users, and increased the targeting of the sample. It should be noted however that
some social media users did not follow political candidates on said media. This may
have an impacted the results, due to limitations encountered by survey functionality. To
improve upon this, future testing will prompt a conclusion of the survey, following a
user’s selection of ‘following Zero candidates’.
The implications of the present study are far reaching. Though the millennial
generation is most commonly reached out to through the use of social media, not enough
scientific research has gone in to the actual effectiveness of said approach. The present
study expands the literature on the subject and sets a framework for further studies on the
subject.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA14
References
Greyes, Natch. “The Untapped Potential of Social Media.” Campaigns and Elections. (2010): 44-
47.
Hong, S. and D. Nadler (2012). Which candidates do the public discuss online in an election
campaign?: The use of social media by 2012 presidential candidates and its impact on
candidate salience. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 455-461.
Hovland, Carl and Weiss, Walter (1951), "The Influence of Source Credibility on
Communication Effectiveness," Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650.
Hovland, Carl I., Irving L. Janis, and Harold, H. Kelly (1953), Communication and Persuasion.
New Haven, CT: Yale Uni. Press.
Howard, P. and M. Parks. “Social Media and Political Change: Capacity, Constraint, and
Consequence.” Journal of Communication. 60 (2012): 359-362.
Kushin, M. and M. Yamamoto. “Did Social Media Really Matter? College Students’ Use of
Online Media and Political Decision Making in the 2008 Election.” Mass
Communication and Society. 13 (2010): 608-630.
Leidman, M. B. and Z. Stiegler (2011). Then and now: A content analysis of media used in the
presidential election campaigns of Kennedy and Obama. Sociology Study, 1, 1-10.
McCroskey, J. C., & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its
measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90-103.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extension of Man. 2nd ed. New York: New
American Library.
Metzgar, E. and A. Maruggi (2009). Social media and the 2008 U.S. presidential election.
Journal of New Communications Research, 4, 141-165.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA15
Stephen, T., Harrison, T. M., Husson, W., & Albert, D. (2004). Interpersonal communication
styles of political candidates: Predicting winning and losing candidates in three U.S.
presidential elections. In K. L. Hacker (Ed.), Presidential candidate images (pp. 177-
196). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
Teven, J. J., & Herring, J. E. (2005). Teacher influence in the classroom: A preliminary
investigation of instructor power, perceived credibility, and student satisfaction.
Communication Research Reports, 22, 235-246.
Tormala, Z. L., Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2007). Multiple Roles for Source Credibility under
High Elaboration: It’s all in the timing. Social Cognition, 25(4), 536-552.
Westerman, D., Spence, P. R., & Van Der Heide, B. (2012). A Social Network as Information:
The effect of system generated reports of connectedness on credibility on Twitter.
Computers In Human Behavior, 28(1), 199-206.
Recommended