Adoption and Use of Digital Media in Election Campaigns: Australia, Canada and New Zealand
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Adoption and use of digital media in election campaigns: Australia, Canada and New Zealand PETER CHEN * University of Sydney This article examines the role of digital media in three recent national election campaigns: Australia in 2007 and Canada and New Zealand in 20081. Examining the process of technology adoption and strategic use by parties and individual candidates, it explores similarities and differences in the use of these evolving campaigning channels. Against the current literature on variables influencing technology adoption, specific attention is given to the use of different communication channels as tools to target specific audiences, the adoption of a wide variety of technologies to ensure broad (‘mass’) reach, and the co-ordination of messages across different platforms. The analysis aims to identify structural, organisational, technological and cultural determinants of variation in the adoption and deployment of these technologies. Introduction The electoral impact of technologies such as the internet has been a focus of research for two decades. Considerable attention has been given to the use of different types of technology (see Davis, Owen, Taras & Ward, 2008), the way in which candidates and parties represent themselves online (e.g. political marketing and technology association as discussed by Margolis & Resnick, 2000), and the impact of new channels2 on normative democratic values (see the ‘equalisation-normalisation’ debate discussed by Small, 2008a and others). While normative approaches have emphasised deterministic explanations for patterns of technology adoption (technology characteristics for the cyber-optimists, and structural and lock-in advantages for the pessimists), this article explores a wider range of variables that impact on the way different types of digital media are adopted and employed in political campaigns. These variables range from ‘hard’ contextual determinants of political competition (for example, political institutions and electoral regulations), to ‘softer’ factors associated with inter-jurisdictional learning and the norms of presentation, performativity and publication (for example, the “genre effect” discussed by Foot, et al., 2007). 1 The author would like to thank a number of people who assisted in collection of data that contributed to this article: Australian election 2007, Lucas Walsh (collaborator); Canadian election 2008, Lamia Fahmi (research assistance and translation); New Zealand election 2008, Joe Atkinson, Alexander Abraham, Jennifer Curtin, and Edwin de Ronde of the University of Auckland. Interviewees are acknowledged separately. Thanks also go to the Athabasca University for the Academic Research Fund grant to undertake portions of this research, and reviewers who provided useful input into development of this article. 2 Following Rogers’ (1983) broad definition of a channel as a means “by which messages get from one individual to another” channel in this context is used as a meta term that sits above technically-defined methods of communication (sub-media) and socially-defined methods of communication (e.g. communication with an online community, or via a specific online genre, such as a blog). Public Communication Review, Vol. 1, 2010. 3 Proponents of contexualism would argue that the relationship between technology and society is complex and dialectical, with the expectation of greater variability in technology adoption and application between countries. This necessitates comparative analysis to isolate the societal and political contextual variables that make a difference in how digital media are employed during elections. Alternatively, an emphasis on genre effects would suggest that more universal factors related to a particular style of communication and presentation are significant drivers of technology adoption.3 Finally, one could argue that elements of the above may be operative at the same time, a complex, if not, contradictory hybrid of technological empowerment, normalisation, contextual and genre effects. This article contributes to the growing cross-national comparisons on the role of digital media in national elections with the intent of addressing the question of the impact of digital media upon democratic practices. This comparison will focus on recent national elections in three Westminster democracies: Australia, New Zealand and Canada. This comparison will assist in addressing what variables have greater explanatory power in shaping the use and impact of digital technologies in three national electoral web spheres, and the role of digital media in modifying democratic processes. The first question focuses on those factors that drive change, the second on the normative impact of changes identified in political practice. The article is divided into the four sections: The first is methodological. The second situates the article within the dominant themes of the literature followed by a brief overview of key contextual factors. Particular consideration is given to specifying what is meant by democracy and the theorised relationship between democracy and technology. The third section details research findings in terms of candidates, political parties, and the relationship between centralisation and control, a relationship underscored by the parliamentary system and the residual power of television broadcasting in the complex media ecosystem of each country. Finally, the article concludes with analysis and explanations of the particular use and impact of digital media in recent national elections in these parliamentary democracies. Methods and approach The role of digital media in election campaigns has evolved considerably over the last 20 years (Ward, 2008, pp. 2-4). From a purely support role (electoral database, direct mail printing, and graphical design as discussed in Chen, 2005), information and communications technologies (ICTs) have increasingly found a place as direct channels of communication from and to political parties and candidates. Over time this use has developed from simple “emulations” of other forms of media such as the use of candidate websites as static online “brochures” or electronic billboards (Gibson & Ward, 2002) to increasingly sophisticated campaign tools that are used for mass and select advertising, recruitment and fundraising, and the facilitation of political dialogue. Most recently digital media has become more central to the campaign process with campaigns employing a wider range of digital channels, increased professionalisation, and reintegration of online channels into the core marketing strategies. The range of channels employed and the tendency for rapid change in political practice between electoral cycles necessitates the use of a variety of research methods to capture comparative data and ensure key changes in practice are not overlooked (Chen & Walsh, 3 Genre effects refers to situations whereby “… sites produced by the same type of actor and/or sharing a similar purpose often reflect certain regularities of form and function that become associated with the genre of the site by both producers and visitors alike” (Foot, et al., 2008, p. 44). Public Communication Review, Vol. 1, 2010. 4 2009). For the three elections considered in this article, their temporal closeness assists in comparison (less than one year separates the three election dates)4, as the development of new channels (for example, social networking services (SNS)) can make comparisons with older data sets difficult. In this comparative analysis three research methods were employed: Content analysis5 of individual candidates’ use of a variety of digital media, identifying and quantifying the use and functionality of websites (campaign sites, party “mini-sites”6, third party content hosting7), accessibility of candidates using electronic mail (e-mail), and the use of, and number of social ties associated with, SNS8 and hybrid systems with SNS characteristics9. See Table 1 for sample size; A survey of candidates examining computer literacy, use of different communications channels, candidate perceptions of the value of different communications channels, use of information and communications technologies in administrative and support functions in the campaign, and assistance provided by the candidates’ political party for different campaigning techniques/channels; Semi-structured interviews with party officials from parties of government, and key minor parties (based on electoral results from recent elections). Sample A sample of electorates/electoral districts was selected purposively and content analysis was undertaken of the sites of all candidates in selected districts. The Australian and Canadian surveys were distributed only to those candidates whose sites were selected for content analysis. The New Zealand election survey was distributed with the New Zealand Candidate Survey undertaken by the University of Auckland to all candidates standing in the election. (See Table 1 for sample numbers.) 4 The Australian election was held on 24 November 2007, the Canadian election on 14 October 2008, and the New Zealand election on 8 November 2008. 5 An example of the coding frame used for this method can be found Chen (2008). 6 Some form of entry on the campaign website of the party. The extent of these varies greatly, from one line entries, to detailed biographies that allowed the candidate to provide additional material (such as online video or a campaign blog). The advantages of these latter type of mini-site are their low cost