Since Obama’s election we seem to be convinced that Twitter is an important instrument when you want to win the elections. But the question is: is this true? And is it true in all countries?

C, the membermagazine of Logeion (organization of Dutch communication professionals) you will find an article where they question this assumption. According to Tom Baker twitter is only used by 10% of the Dutch population and 95% of us don’t read political tweets. The average twitter user is very well educated and has an uncommon interest in news and politics. You will see this confirmed by the NRC study on who voted for whom. Those who voted for ‘Purple’ can be found in The Randstad and Groningen and around universities etc. The conclusions about who tweet seems to be strengthened by the fact that at universities 80% of the voters vote ‘Purple’. Those who voted for Wilders can be found in the poorer suburbs of the cities and of course in smaller towns of Brabant and Limburg. As they conclude in C you will never reach the famous ‘Henk and Ingrid’ by using twitter. They just don’t tweet and probably don’t read the newspapers of those who do.

How did Wilders do it if it wasn’t through tweeting? He used the classical media and mostly TV, and not the time allotted officially for political parties (his followers probably don’t watch these programs either. ;-) No, he got an enormous amount of free TV time given to him by the journalists who probably voted ‘purple’. How did he do it? His capacity to frame issues in such a way that attracts his followers and….. is attractive to people working for the media (so they will help spreading the news….) If you haven’t done so jet read Kuitenbrouwers new book on this issue.

Now back to Obama’s success. I guess in his case it wasn’t just the use of new social media. I guess the fact that he is also a master in framing did a huge part of the job. Maybe supported by a good use of social media, but I guess his capacity to frame gave him the advantage in the media watched by the average voter’. Maybe our politicians should use some of their twittertime to train their ability to frame? Maybe this is a good time to do it?

tagged with: framing, twitter

Comments

Rogier Brussee on 5 October 2010 at 00:52

Twitter or indeed any social media gives a politician the opportunity to write whatever he or she wants for an audience and makes this easy. This is the point abour highly accesible media Erik and I are making in our paper (here at the Crossmedia site). It works for everybody not just for “tordinary” people.  But from a generating buzz point of view, politicians have a major advantage: their social media use is bound to be followed by journalists, other politicians and devoted canvassing followers.  Therefore their social media use gets noted, often generating mass media attention which even tends to quote the original messages. Wilders has also obviously used twitter to influence the negotiations for a new government and put his negotiating partners under pressure . In other words I think you are right that twitter reaches only a small group of people, but that group has a disproportionate influence on public opinion.

If you don’t believe me, here is a quote from an interview with Sarah Palin
on the Gulfspill: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,594502,00.html
(For those who have been hiding under a rock: Foxnews hardly
qualifies as left wing media)


VAN SUSTEREN: All right, let’s move on to Facebook. You use Facebook.
Did you know that president—former President Bush is now on
Facebook?

PALIN: I saw that and I heard that he did his inaugural address. Right on!

VAN SUSTEREN: What—I mean, it’s extraordinary when you think of
where politics—I mean, 10 years ago, even the concept of FaceBook
—I mean, it didn’t even exist. I mean, it’s bizarre. Now—now we
—now we, you know, have FaceBook from our politicians.

PALIN: You know why it is? We have got to—those of us who are just
common sense conservative, we have got to have that ability to speak
with the American voter, with the public, minus the filter of the
“lamestream media” that does not like our message. And in the case
where we are presently, they want to protect President Obama’s big
government agenda. So whatever it is that we say or do or want to
translate via print or television, they filter it and they misconstrue
things and they misreport. So hey, we’re going right to the people via
Twitter, via Facebook, whatever we can to get the truth out there to
the American public about what’s going on in this country.

VAN SUSTEREN: There goes employment in the news business! We’re going
to lose our jobs if you guys keep doing that, going straight to the
people. Governor, thank you.

Comment on this post

Name *

Email *

Message *