Social Media & Politics: Engaging the disinterested

It's clear that social media is now integral in modern politics and must be a key focus point for any political strategy to win public support. Be it the way politics is reported, campaigns are run or public political debate and discussion is held, social media plays a key role in defining the aspirations of politicians. There is no better example of this than the 2008 and 2012 Obama election campaigns, which utilised a range of online tools to connect, engage and encourage conversation with voters. Furthermore, the multitude of news sites and blogs, both serious and satirical, reporting politics means that voters have never had a greater range of political viewpoints to consider, nor more of an avenue to express their own political voice. 

This presents clear advantages and disadvantages for politicians. Social media allows for political agendas to be spread more easily. Politicians can connect with their public using YouTube videos, tweets and Facebook pages. They can engage online communities and encourage supporters to promote political causes more easily and more economically. The obvious disadvantage, is that the same tools which allow them to connect with the public, can also destroy them. One slip up from a politician and  the ability to go 'viral' via social media can cause huge downfalls. Online tools are also striving to make politicians more accountable, with sites like GetUp! keeping track of political promises and catching out any that are not fulfilled.

One interesting facet of politics entering the social media realm, is the ability for campaigns to engage the disinterested. A politician who tweets, uploads YouTube videos or posts on Facebook can feel more human, more current and more in touch with society. Older style campaign tactics require voters to spend time carefully considering viewpoints. We know that the portion of the public with a strong interest in politics will be willing to carefully review all elements of campaigns before making voting decisions. However for the portion of the population who are generally disinterested in politics and don't desire spending long periods of time weighing up voting options, familiarity with a politician who has connected with them via a quick social media grab may be enough to sway a vote regardless of the core political views that politician holds. From the politicians perspective, it doesn't matter who votes for them nor the level of interest they hold in politics, but that the end result of obtaining votes is achieved. 

REFERENCES:


Germany, JB. 2009, ‘The online revolution’ in D. W. Johnson (Ed.) Campaigning for president: strategies and tactics, new voices and new techniques, Taylor and Francis, UK, EBL EBook Library, pp 147-159, viewed 8 January 2013, <http://www.swin.eblib.com.au/EBLWeb/patron?target=patron&extendedid=P_425530_0&>

Winograd, M & Hais, MD 2008, Millenial makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the future of American politics, Rutgers University Press, pp. 156-173, EBrary, viewed 8 January 2013, <http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://site.ebrary.com/lib/swin/Doc?id=10231500>

Young, S 2010, 'New, political reporting and the internet' in How Australia decides: election reporting and the media, Cambridge University Press Australia, EBL EBook Library viewed 8 January, 2013, pp. 203-228, <http://www.swin.eblib.com.au.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/patron/Read.aspx?p=647454&pg=225>