On-Line Interaction and Why Candidates Avoid It

Stromer‐Galley, Jennifer

doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02865.x

Cited by 383 publications

(185 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

170

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is argued that interactive tools will be eschewed by electoral political organisations particularly due to the risks involved (Stromer-Galley, 2000). Empirical findings reinforce this data (Ward and Gibson 1998, Newell 2001, Coleman 2001, and contrast with optimistic readings of the potential offered for politics by using an alternative, online, model of communication (Rheingold 1993, Stone 1996Coleman & Blumler, 2009).…”

Section: Introducing Interactivitysupporting

confidence: 50%

Interactivity and Branding: Public Political Communication as a Marketing Tool

Lilleker

2014

Journal of Political Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective communication is essential for brands to gain awareness, interest and loyalty from their consumers; the same is as true for politics as for any manufacturer or service provider. The challenge for political parties and candidates seeking support or election is finding the means to transmit their messages to an increasingly hard to reach audience. The consumer within a political context may avoid hard news or broadcast political debate, discard any direct mail received and, when receiving glimpses of political communication, simple reject any political messages as spin and propaganda. In order that brand values are accepted and understood and accepted effective, unmediated communication is crucial and increasingly political communication strategists are turning to the Internet which can not only enable the reaching of a wider audience but can also complement and augment the brand character.As new technologies are adopted, new modes of communication are also introduced. While a website can act as a shop front from which parties or candidates can advertise their policies and personnel, the style of the site (design, language and features) can act as metaphors for the professionalism and style of representation offered. To appear modern parties are increasingly adopting Web 2.0 tools, platforms and features. These all permit, to differing degrees, users to interact with parties and candidates and have conversations across online platforms. This interactivity can, if used strategically, be used as a tool for branding a party or candidate given that the uses of such tools can be metaphors for openness, accessibility and the representational character that may be provided post election. We explore this issue drawing on original empirical data gathered through analyses of online activities during the French and US presidential contests of and of UK parties and MPs during 2008. Through a process of creating narratives for each of the brands analysed, based upon a content and discourse analysis of the websites and other online presences, we identify what characteristics the online shop front is designed to project. These narratives, cumulatively, suggest that the online environment is becoming a key communicational tool for those who seek election, and potentially a key source of information for the voter; thus an important location to place strategic branded information. However it appears that interactivity is better suited to the activities of candidates, nationally or locally, due to the individualistic nature of conversational interactivity. Interactivity can thus have a significant role to play within a presidential contest where the individual is seeking office, but when representatives attempt to construct their individual brand it can also challenge traditional hierarchies within party based parliamentary systems such as the UK. Interactivity and Branding, public political communication as a marketing toolCommunicating the Political Brand While it may not be common to view politicians or politic...

show abstract

Section: Introducing Interactivitysupporting

confidence: 50%

Interactivity and Branding: Public Political Communication as a Marketing Tool

Lilleker

2014

Journal of Political Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Williamson (2008) suggests there are also cultural barriers underpinning the lack of innovation. Legislators tend to prefer to control the parameters of communication and so will be unlikely to discuss policy with citizens outside of private spaces (see also Stromer-Galley, 2000). However, given the separation between the MEP and their domestic polities, and the drive within the EP for legitimacy across Strategy (PCS).…”

Section: Three Strategies For Online Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Online Political Communication Strategies: MEPs, E-Representation, and Self-Representation

Lilleker

Koc-Michalska

2013

Journal of Information Technology & Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Dr Lilleker's expertise is in public engagement in politics, and in particular how public engagement can be potentiated and facilitated using technological innovations. He has published widely on the professionalisation and marketisation of political communication including Political Campaigning, Elections and the Internet We find that a homestyle strategy predominates followed by impression management.

show abstract

“…La primera corriente anuncia el uso de las nuevas tecnologías de internet que cambia la comunicación tradicional y ejerce una influencia positiva sobre ella envolviendo a los ciudadanos en los procesos y cambios políticos (Stromer-Galley 2000, Foot y Schneider 2006Vaccari 2008aVaccari , 2008bVaccari , 2008cPepe y di Gennaro, 2009). Los defensores de la corriente contraria demuestran a base del material diferente http://www.revistalatinacs.org/070/paper/1068/38es.html Página 730 que el uso de las redes sociales no afecta la eficacia y calidad de la comunicación política (Margolis et al 2003;Gibson 2004;Druckman et al 2007;Kifer and Parkin 2007;Larsson 2011;Gibson et al 2008;Zittel 2009;Kalnes 2009).…”

Section: Red Social Usuarios Al Mes (Personas) Autores Activos (Persounclassified

Comunicación política en la red social Facebook: segmento rusoparlante

Pilgún¹,

Gradoselskaya²

2015

RLCS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cómo citar este artículo / Referencia normalizada M Pilgun, G Gradoselskaya (2015) Today the analysis of communication processes in politically active communities in the network environment is of great importance as the virtual sphere becomes more and more significant for achieve of various political aims both in Russia and around the world. The prospect of an actual study is to identify the ratio of online and offline communication activity of actors in the political sphere in the Russian segment of Facebook.

show abstract

On-Line Interaction and Why Candidates Avoid It

Cited by 383 publications

References 13 publications

Interactivity and Branding: Public Political Communication as a Marketing Tool

Interactivity and Branding: Public Political Communication as a Marketing Tool

Online Political Communication Strategies: MEPs, E-Representation, and Self-Representation

Comunicación política en la red social Facebook: segmento rusoparlante

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About