Policy debate in the age of social media: the Australian experience Tanja Porter A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of The Australian National University December 2016 © Copyright Tanja Porter All Rights Reserved 2016 Declaration I declare that this thesis is the product of my own independent research. It contains no material which has been accepted for any other degree or diploma, or any copy or paraphrase of another person’s material except where due acknowledgement is given. Tanja Porter 7 December 2016 iii Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been possible without the support of a number of people. My thanks to Professor John Wanna – Chair of my supervisory panel – for tireless patience as I attempted to put my finger on the puzzle that motivated the research, and for the lovely office with tangential views of Lake Burley Griffin. Also, to other panel members – Professors John McMillian and Ian Marsh – whose presence reminded me that interrogating politics and the work of government is not only deeply interesting but necessary. I wish I had drawn on your guidance more often. I would also like to acknowledge the many people around the country that agreed to be interviewed for my case studies. Conversations with Members of Parliament, hotel owners, government regulators, journalists, policemen, lobbyists and NGO’s were highlights of my PhD experience. Thank you for sharing your insights about the exciting, yet ultimately uncertain, impact of social media on your policy goals. My fellow PhD students in the ANZSOG corridor likewise provided support. In particular, Ram Ghimire shared his biscuit collection and lunch-time laps of the bike path around the Crawford School to stretch our legs and clear our heads. In our many miles, I learnt more about public sector reform in Nepal than I could ever have anticipated knowing. Thank you for your ever pleasant company. This thesis owes a great debt to my family. My parents – Doug Porter, Raewyn Porter – who opened my eyes to a way of questioning that made my learning, and this thesis, a joy and much more than I could have achieved on my own. This project has opened up new conversations with you, and for that alone I would do it again in a heartbeat. Finally, and most significantly, special thanks to Chad and Seth. Without your support this thesis would not have become reality. You’ve lived daily through the trials, the joys, and the stresses. My love and gratitude always. v Abstract Public distrust and dissatisfaction with mainstream politics is a concern for many Western democracies. Governments have set great store in the potential for social media to reverse citizens retreat from politics and restore public confidence in policy making. According to the Australian government, the open and participatory character of social media will bring a diversity of citizens’ experiences into policy debates, enriching deliberation on policy solutions, and drive greater responsiveness and accountability from government and the political elite. This thesis investigates the extent to which social media is delivering on these expectations. Departing from the positivist assumptions and quantitative techniques that dominate research about social media in Australian politics, this thesis foregrounds the political context and policy dynamics within which social media is adopted. It examines how and with what strategic aims social media has been deployed by policy actors in three contemporary cases of public policy debate in Australia. These are: (i) the introduction of ‘lock-out’ laws and mandatory sentencing in response to alcohol-fuelled violence in Sydney; (ii) the decision to overhaul arrangements to support disabled Australians, as manifest in the National Disability Insurance Scheme and (iii) the level of personal control over end of life choices and attempts to legislate for voluntary euthanasia. Each of these debates is illustrative of the constant contest between policy actors over the role of contemporary government and the scope of citizen responsibilities and each therefore offer rich empirical insights into the ways social media may be influencing established democratic relations. With insights derived from elite actor communications, policy analysis and digital ethnography, the thesis finds social media being used by policy actors across the political spectrum in highly targeted strategies that both open new and compound existing channels to influence policy debate. For citizens and civil society, social media is facilitating a groundswell of personalised story-telling and mobilisation, while for government and formal political actors, social media enables more precise targeting and wider circulation of political messaging. Although the impact of this activity on policy vi outcomes is highly contingent on the policy relationships at play, the use of social media is largely consistent with government expectations. To assess whether the case evidence points to deepening democratic relationships, as is the express aim of government policy, the thesis draws on concepts from critical theory, namely Jurgen Habermas’ ‘public sphere’ and the normative framework it provides for political deliberation. When the evidence is viewed through this lens, it is apparent that social media also has various deleterious effects. For instance, it tends to amplify what Habermas called the ‘raw’ discourses of our private domain in the public sphere, therein weakening the independence and public-mindedness that underscores the legitimacy of public opinion. The thesis concludes that, rather than contributing wholly positively to citizens’ deliberative capacity, social media accentuates long running trends that contribute to the democratic deficit. The juxtaposition of these two conclusions about the impact of social media paves the way for a discussion that provides a modest but significant contribution to the existing scholarship. vii Table of Contents Declaration ............................................................................................ iii Acknowledgements ................................................................................ v Abstract ................................................................................................. vi Table of Contents ...................................................................................ix List of Images ........................................................................................ xiii Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 Overview of the thesis .............................................................................................................. 4 Participation, policy and social media ...................................................................................... 5 Existing research ....................................................................................................................... 9 Research objectives and questions ......................................................................................... 10 The empirical focus: three case studies .................................................................................. 11 Methods and analytical tools .................................................................................................. 13 Thesis findings ......................................................................................................................... 15 Contribution ............................................................................................................................ 17 Chapter One: Background ..................................................................... 19 Liberal democracy in crisis? .................................................................................................... 21 The social media solution ....................................................................................................... 24 The economic logic of Gov 2.0 ............................................................................................ 26 Horizontal engagement: social media and citizens working together ............................... 28 Vertical engagement: social media and citizens working with government ...................... 29 Political legitimacy and the ‘public sphere’ ............................................................................ 32 Chapter Two: literature review and critique ......................................... 37 Part A: Literature Review ........................................................................................................ 38 Social media and government ............................................................................................ 41 Social media during elections ............................................................................................. 44 Social media and political leaders ....................................................................................... 47 Social media and offline activity ......................................................................................... 49 Part B: Limitations of the literature ........................................................................................ 51 Summary ................................................................................................................................. 54 Chapter Three: analytical framework and research methodology ......... 55