Microblogging, Constituency Service and Impression Management: UK MPs and the Use of Twitter

Abstract

Twitter, a microblogging site which allows users to deliver statements, thoughts and links in 140 characters to followers as well as a wider Internet audience, is the latest online communications technology adopted by MPs. Assessing the use of early adopters, this article considers which MPs are most likely to use Twitter (e.g. tweeting), and how. Content analysis of tweeting MPs was conducted, and identified personal and political characteristics which may influence use. The data suggested that of the six characteristics tested, gender, party and seniority had most impact on adoption. Applying Jones and Pittman's (1982) typology there is clear evidence that MPs use Twitter as a tool of impression management. Constituency service is a secondary function of the use of Twitter by MPs. Where MPs use Twitter as part of their constituency role it is to promote their local activity. We note that a small group of MPs use Twitter as a regular communication channel, but most are only occasionally dipping their toe into the microbloggersphere.

Members of the Scottish Parliament on Twitter: good constituency men (and women)?

“…While our coding framework has developed independently over a number of years, this particular study was, to a certain extent, also influenced theoretically by work conducted by Jackson and Lilleker (2011), when they examined UK MPs' Twitter use. Jackson and Lilleker drew on two interrelated theories.…”

Strategic communication of EU affairs: an analysis of legislative behaviour on Twitter

“…Legislative studies of this particular social media channel have, so far, largely focused on legislators' Twitter presence and activity around electoral campaigns (for extensive reviews, see Jungherr, 2014Jungherr, , 2016. Early studies found that legislators' party membership, age, gender, and seniority determine who uses Twitter and how often (Jackson & Lilleker, 2011;Lassen & Brown, 2011;Hemphill, Otterbacher, & Shapiro, 2013;Peterson, 2012). More recent research on the members of the European Parliament (MEPs), moreover, shows that voting systems, district magnitude, and seat safety are also important factors (Obholzer & Daniel, 2016;Scherpereel, Wohlgemuth, & Schmelzinger, 2016); presence and activity on Twitter increase with the incentives that these factors create for individual legislators to cultivate a personal vote.…”

“…More recent research on the members of the European Parliament (MEPs), moreover, shows that voting systems, district magnitude, and seat safety are also important factors (Obholzer & Daniel, 2016;Scherpereel, Wohlgemuth, & Schmelzinger, 2016); presence and activity on Twitter increase with the incentives that these factors create for individual legislators to cultivate a personal vote. With regard to the content, Twitter seems to mimic legislative communication practices in both form and substance, where legislators 'broadcast' their typical messages to voters in a way that leaves very little room for interactive communication (Golbeck, Grimes, & Rogers, 2010;Hemphill et al, 2013;Jackson & Lilleker, 2011;Saebø, 2011).…”

“…A large majority of the dormant 27 accounts had not had a tweet for years, indicating that these MPs stopped using Twitter. Hence I excluded them from the analysis (for the same practice, see Jackson & Lilleker, 2011). 5.…”

Do Online Election Campaigns Sway the Vote? A Study of the 2011 Scottish Parliamentary Election

“…In the 2011 campaign, there was some evidence of the development of a Scottish version of what Jackson and Lilleker (2011) describe as a virtual "smoking room" -a Twitter community of politicians who communicate regularly with each other. Indeed, 3.6% of the overall candidate Twitter traffic was directed at other candidates; this compares with just a handful of posts exchanged between two candidates in 2010.…”