Upload
aerona
View
41
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The Internet - Political Turn-On or Turn-off?. John Curtice Strathclyde University/ National Centre for Social Research. The Project. Modules on British Social Attitudes 2003 and 2005; plus previous info from 2000 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
The Internet - Political Turn-On or Turn-off?
John Curtice
Strathclyde University/
National Centre for Social Research
The Project
Modules on British Social Attitudes 2003 and 2005; plus previous info from 2000
Examine relationship between internet use and (1) political engagement, (2) social capital
Main N=3297 (2003); 3167 (2005)2005 module fielded after general election
The Structure
Has access to the internet helped to increase the political engagement of individual voters?
What role did the internet play in the dissemination of information in the 2005 election?
A turned on voter…
…trusts politicians &
government…participates in politics
Why might internet turn people on?
Greater transparency and availability of information
Lower cost - do it from homeLower cost - easier to organiseEasier to find fellow adherents
The Problem
If at one point in time internet users are more trusting and/or active…
…is that because they use the internetor, because they were more trusting
and/or active in the first place?
Trust by Length of Use
25 26 2527
8 97 8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
% t
rust
alw
ays/
mo
stly
Governments Politicians
Non-User < 2 yrs 2-5 yrs > 5 yrs
System Efficacy by Use
22
16
12 12
24
17
12 13
18
13
8 9
0
5
10
15
20
25
% s
tro
ng
ly a
gre
e
MPs lose touch Parties onlyvotes
Don't matter whopower
Non-User < 2 yrs 2-5 yrs > 5 yrs
Personal Efficacy by Use
20
15
911
13 1210
9
1715
9
6
02468
101214161820
% s
tro
ng
ly a
gre
e
Have no say Voting only say Politicscomplicated
Non-user < 2 yrs 2-5 yrs > 5 yrs
MPs lose touch
79 797372
66 65
010203040
5060708090
2000 2003 2005
% a
gre
e
Non-users 00 Users 00
Politics too complicated
7468 65
5144
40
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2000 2003 2005
% a
gre
e
Non-Users 00 Users 00
Interest in Politics
2724
34
44
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
% g
reat
dea
l/qu
ite
a lo
t
Non-User < 2 yrs 2-5 yrs > 5 yrs
Interest in Politics
27 2529
42 43 44
05
101520253035404550
2000 2003 2005
% g
reat
dea
l/qu
ite
a lo
t
Non-users 00 Users 00
Political Participation
6963
6969
33363842
11 141317
610 9
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Voted 05 Signedpetition
Contacted MP Gone ondemo
Non-user < 2 yrs 2-5 yrs > 5 yrs
Gone on demo
79
7
1416 16
02468
1012141618
2000 2003 2005
Non-users 00 Users 00
Contacted MP
13 1412
2321
17
0
5
10
15
20
25
2000 2003 2005
Non-users 00 Users 00
Conclusion
(Already) politically active were early internet adopters and use it as one way of pursuing their interest
But internet does not (substantially) increase how many people are politically ‘engaged’
But does this miss the point?
Argument assumes that internet only has a direct impact website -> user
Possibility of two-step flow. website -> user -> others
Fragmentation means two-step flows now only way any medium has an impact?
Acquiring information
56 5651
47
6 62
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
%
PEB Leaflet TV progNewspaper Party website Other websiteElection meeting
The Usual Suspects?
Traditional Digital
Men √ √
Educated √ √
Strong ID √ √
Interested in Politics
√ √ √ √
Election Talk
46
5 71
0
10
20
30
40
50
%
Friends etc person/phone Persuade by phoneFriends etc by email Persuade by email
Who Talks Most?
Interested in Politics 68.38
Age - (younger) 55.04
Education (more) 34.35
Strong party id 8.99
Female 5.74
Do Digital Users Talk?
Traditional User 224.24
Digital User 36.16
Conclusion
Still the case that few people use the internet to find out about politics
Those that do are mostly the usual suspects
Nevertheless digital users are particularly talkative - and so add a little more to the two-step flow of information