Die CDU Onlinekampagne für die Landtagswahl 2010 in Nordrhein-Westfalen: Ein Zwischenstand
Eine Präsentation gehalten während des Politcamp 2010 in Berlin am 21. März 2010.
Während des Politcamp 2010 in Berlin präsentierte ich am 21. März den aktuellen Zwischenstand der CDU Onlinekampagne zur Landtagswahl in Nordrhein-Westfalen am 9. Mai 2010. Dies ist eine ausformulierte und leicht erweiterte Version meiner Präsentation.
Disclaimer: Ich berate die Onlinekampagne der CDU Nordrhein-Westfalen.
Nach den guten Erfahrungen mit Onlineunterstützerteams im Hessenwahlkampf wird auch in NRW der Großteil der Onlineaktivitäten von einem freiwilligen Unterstützerteam organisiert. Die Lektionen des hessischen webcamp09 sind die Basis für das NRW Onlineunterstützerteam NRW für Rüttgers.
Die dort gesammelten Videos sind fast ausschließlich von Freiwilligen produziert. Eine Ausnahme stellt die Vorstellung des Freiwilligen-Teams dar.
Bisher lassen sich die Videos überwiegend drei Themengruppen zuordnen. Die für deutsche Onlinekampagnen wahrscheinlich am innovativsten Videos sind regelmäßige direkte Videobotschaften des Generalsekretärs der CDU Nordrhein-Westfalens Andreas Krautscheid.
In diesen Videobotschaften stellte er sich seinen Unterstützern vor,
reagierte spontan auf tagesaktuelle Entwicklungen,
oder rief zu thematischen Aktionen auf.
Ein anderes viel genutztes Format ist die Vox Populi. In diesen von Freiwilligen konzipierten, gedrehten und geschnittenen Videos werden Menschen aus Nordrhein-Westfalen auf der Straße zu ihrer Meinung zu tagesaktuellen Themen gefragt.
Zusätzlich begleiten wir mit Videos klassische politische Veranstaltungen.
Zusätzlich zu diesem von dem Untersützerteam NRW für Rüttgers genutzten YouTube Kanal gibt es einen YouTube Kanal der CDU Nordrhein-Westfalen auf dem von CDU NRW-TV produzierte Videos präsentiert werden.
Wurde noch in der Kampagne zur Bundestagswahl 2009 von der CDU große Aufmerksamkeit auf die Erstellung und den Betrieb der teAM 2009 Online-Community gelegt, so werden viele dieser Funktionen in der Onlinekampagne zur Landtagswahl 2010 in Nordrhein-Westfalen durch die Nutzung von Facebook sicher gestellt.
Zentrum unserer Aktivitäten auf Facebook ist das von uns betriebene Facebook Fanprofil für Jürgen Rüttgers, das mit der Unterstützerseite NRW für Rüttgers verknüft ist.
Zusätzlich hierzu ist die CDU Nordrhein Westfalen auch mit einem weiteren Fanprofil auf Facebook vertreten:
Ein weiterer Unterschied zur Bundeskampagne liegt in unserer Nutzung der VZ-Netzwerke. Während die Bundeskampagne noch grosse Energie auf Aktionen um das Edelprofil der Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel verwendete, so betreiben wir zwar ein Edelprofil für Jürgen Rüttgers, fokusieren unsere Aktivitäten jedoch auf Facebook.
Zusätzlich hierzu nutzt die Kampagne auch Twitter mit dem Account @NRWRuettgers:
Auf diesem Account twittern die Unterstützer Ulrich Gelsen #ug [@gelsen], David J. Ludwigs #dl [@cronenbuerger] und Florian Braun #fb [@flobraun]. Um der Unpersönlichkeit eines Teamfeeds zu entgehen nutzen wir eindeutig zugewiesene Hashtags, so dass zu jeder Zeit nachvollziehbar ist welcher der Autoren gerade twittert.
Über den Twitter Account @NRWRuettgers twittert das Unterstützteam von Veranstaltungen,
Generell ist uns die Interaktion um unsere Beiträge gleich auf welchem Kanal sehr wichtig. Auch wenn manchem die Zeit von dem posten eines Kommentars und seiner Freischaltung etwas zu lange dauert wir freuen uns über Kommentare und Aktivität um unsere Beiträge. Zeigt dies doch, dass wir mit unserem Angebot auf Interesse stossen und Debatten auslösen.
Die oben beschriebenen Elemente der Onlinekampagne sind für uns zur Zeit die wichtigsten Bausteine, auf die wir den Großteil unserer Aufmerksamkeit konzentrieren. Zusätzlich zu diesen Onlineangeboten findet die Kampagne aber auch auf anderen Onlinekanälen statt: Flickr, CDU Nordrhein-Westfalen, Jürgen Rüttgers und CDU NRW/Blog.
Für eine Diskussion weiterer Aspekte der Onlinekampagnen zur Landtagswahl 2010 in Nordrhein-Westfalen haben Oliver Zeisberger für die SPD und ich für die CDU im Westen ein Interview gegeben. Dieses Interview ist eine gute Ergänzung zu dieser Beschreibung unserer Kampagnenelementen.
[Update 2010/04/04]
Dieser Beitrag wurde inzwischen ebenfalls sowohl auf dem CDU NRW / Blog als auch auf dem Blog Homo Politicus veröffentlicht.
Oliver Zeisberger betreut mit seiner Agentur den Onlinewahlkampf der NRW SPD während ich das Onlineunterstützerteam der CDU Nordrhein-WestfalenNRW für Rüttgers berate.
In this paper I use four case studies to illustrate potential uses of Twitter for political activists. The paper was drafted in early 2008 and written in the autumn of the same year. So unfortunately I didn’t address Twitter’s Iran-moment. Still, although some of the examples in the paper may seem dated I hope the lessons drawn from the case studies are still relevant. Judge for yourself.
The paper runs at around 3900 words. If that is a bit daunting have a look at this presentation. This should contain the main idea of the paper. The complete text can be found here.
This feels a bit like old news. But who says information has a sell-by-date?
In November Christoph Bieber, Martin Eifert, Thomas Groß and Jörn Lamla published the book “Soziale Netze in der digitalen Welt” to which I contributed a chapter on the political uses of Twitter.
My chapter is called “Twitterende Politiker: Zwischem buntem Rauschen und Bürgernähe 2.0″. In that chapter I describe how German politicians use Twitter-Feeds. I also attempt to form preliminary usage-categories. SInce the chapter has been written in April of 2009 some of the examples seem a bit dated. Still it seems the categories hold up quite nicely to the test of time. I’m very much looking forward to early 2010 when Pascal Jürgens and I will quantitavely test these categories on a large data-set. So as always, the best is yet to come.
Andreas Jungherr (2009) ‘Digital channels, the change in community structures and its consequences for social participation’. Paper presented at the ISEA 2009: International Symposium for the Electronic Arts, University of Ulster, Belfast, UK on 23 August – 1 September 2009.
For a short glance at the argument have a look at the presentation. The full paper can be found below.
Digital channels change the structure of communities and thus indirectly influence the political participation of citizens in a society. This paper addresses challenges and opportunities that arise for political participation of citizens through these developments.
The structure of social communities is subject to change. Traditional communities formed around tribal structures. The major integrating factors were shared space and family structures. In the 19th century a new form of community structure developed, this time centred on the concept of a nation. The major integrating factors were a hereditary line belonging to the nation in question and a shared tradition, culture and educational canon (for a more detailed discussion see Gellner 1964, and Gellner 1983). During the last decades increased geographical mobility of individuals, increased specialization in education, a growing income gap and the possibility of pervasive digital communication have disrupted these factors. This led in developed countries yet again to a change in community structures. A decrease in participatory activities in local communities has been substituted by a significant increase of activities in online communities. Communities of tribe, nation or location are increasingly substituted by communities of interest or practice. This has consequences for participation by citizens in social institutions.
The field of social network analysis distinguishes between two types of links between people. Let’s take a hypothetical person and call him Marcus. Links between Marcus and people who are acquaintances of him but who are not likely to socially interact with each other are called weak ties. The other type of link is called strong tie. This applies to links from Marcus to people who in turn are highly likely to interact with each other (Ganovetter 1983: 221ff.). As Mark Granovetter has argued in his classical article, information travels very fast through a social system in which many individuals are interconnected trough are large amount of weak ties (Granovetter 1973). This phenomenon leads to the so-called small world effect. The average distance between social actors in a social system appears surprisingly low, since although people tend to cluster in highly interconnected groups, these groups are connected through individuals with weak ties (for a short overview Granovetter 2003). The small world effect has received considerable attention by sociologists, epidemiologists and marketing practitioners. These studies focus on how information travels through social systems via social ties.
Although it has been shown that weak ties are instrumental in distributing information, they seem to have little effect on collective action. A reason for this might lie in the relatively high opportunity cost collective action brings to participants while the mere forwarding of information rarely carries any meaningful opportunity costs. It seems for collective action to spread communities connected through strong ties are the most fertile ground. Mobilisation and political persuasion still appear to be most effective when groups of highly interconnected people are confronted with issues that appear relevant to all of them. This common truth from Marketing (Earls 2007) and Community Organizing (Alinsky 1971) still holds true in the digital realm. For collective action to occur it is necessary to have a large group of highly interconnected people who share common issues, trust each other and are willing to shoulder the relatively high opportunity costs of collective action. It does not suffice to have a Facebook-Group with 6000 supporters. These supporters may be willing to carry a cause like a fashionable pop-culture-badge. They might even be ready to distribute information about the cause to their social network but this lifestyle-politics alone does not automatically lead to collective action. Why is that?
In classic location based communities the members are connected mainly through strong ties. People tended to live and work in relatively close proximity. There was little mobility. Commitment to a location tended to be long-term. This lead to a lot of shared interests. For example, if I expect to live with my family in a specific neighbourhood for the foreseeable future, I share with my neighbours an interest in the development of said community. For this I might accept the opportunity costs of participating in communal activities, local politics, and if need be even collective action for a relevant issue. The literature shows a marked decline of social participation of that kind (Putnam 2000). This corresponds with a change in society.
Higher job-mobility of people leads to an ever-increasing number of different locations a person is likely to live in. Just because I moved into a house in a neighbourhood does not mean I intend on living there for long. My next move might already be scheduled. So why engage in the local location-based community? Why shoulder the high opportunity costs end engage in local issues, when I know, that I and my family will be gone in five years? Throw ever decreasing costs of communication and travel into the mix and I can finally throw off the dictate of geography.
In the past the group of people I interacted with depended mainly on geography. It was reasonable to work out differences and come to a common understanding since one was likely to be in each other’s company for a while. This is the dictate of geography. This expectation of a shared future led individuals to shoulder opportunity costs and work out differences and maybe even engage in collective action towards a common goal.
Today interaction does not depend on a shared location anymore. I can freely communicate with people all around the world. Our connection can be based on a shared past, a common vocation or interests. These contacts, which are only based on commonalities, do not carry the same opportunity costs of interaction, like the kind where the only common element was a shared location. While this might play towards an individual’s need for homophily and thus increase personal wellbeing, it also has consequences for a social system.
The connections people form via digital channels tend to be weak ties. The gang of dwarfs and knights with whom I roam through the plains of Azeroth is not likely to share all that many interests with my Eastern Standard Tribe (Doctorow 2004) of co-workers who in turn are not very likely to share the passions of my international geocaching community. So while my personal interests are ever more closely matched with that of individuals in my social network, the issues and interests shared by the whole of my social network tend to decrease drastically. Thus this social network loses the ability and interest in common collective action.
This change in the type of connections between community members affects the participatory power of the community in question. People who are connected through strong ties tend to influence each other stronger, share more common interests and are thus more ready for participatory action. People who are connected through weak ties are more likely to distribute information further and faster but are less likely to convince other members of their community of something they do not already believe in.
Still, recent events seem to tell a different story: a candidate for the US presidency manages to successfully enlist cohorts of digital natives and progressives in his bid for office; Moldovans take the streets while twittering; Iran changes after a contested election in a nation of twittering protesters who inspire the support of Twitterers worldwide. These are only three high profile examples of digitally enabled collective action. How do these examples fit in the argument above? Do weak ties enable collective action after all? Let’s have a closer look at one of these examples to gain a deeper understanding of the meaning of the success of these movements and to identify what makes them tick.
One of the highly publicised successes of the 2008 presidential campaign of Barack Obama was his use of online campaign communication. Here, two elements of this online campaign shall be discussed further.
First the candidate inspired through his charisma and his message of hope supporters to contribute personal campaign material. They designed images, cut videos and contributed slogans. These in turn were put on the net and distributed to a large community of interest. This is the power of weak ties at work. Information, in this case the links to community relevant material on the web, gets distributed very fast. This distribution is also an evaluation process. Members of the community decide about the quality of an image, spot or slogan before they click the forward button. The aggregate number of clicks or forwards becomes thus an indicator of the collective wisdom of the community. This phenomenon alone does not yet contradict the argument above: Information travels very fast through weak ties. Still, this is not yet collective action in the traditional sense. Just hitting the forward button, does not make me a political activist. This is lifestyle-politics not political activism.
The second aspect of the Obama online-campaign cuts closer to the bone. Through the online-portal my.barackobama.com local supporters were enabled to find likeminded individuals in their vicinity to coordinate and then in turn to collectively organize campaign events. This is exactly what should not happen if the argument above holds true: online communities are connected through weak ties, which do not lend themselves for collective action. Ergo, online communities do not tend to participate in collective action all that much. But if one looks closer, one finds the reason for the success. This element of my.barackobama.com allowed users with a specific portfolio of interests – here political interest and support of Barack Obama – to find likeminded individuals. But instead of connecting a user from Atlanta to an Obama supporter in Greece the site offered the contact information of other Obama supporters in the greater Atlanta region. Thus, the online community allowed users to form location based communities of interest and with it strong ties to other Obama supporters. The community activities online facilitated collective action through the distribution of relevant information and how-to know how, but the collective action itself still depended on the organisers on the ground. This is the prototype for the combination of community structures on- and offline.
This example clearly shows the blueprint for the successful community organizing of the future: the combination of digital communication channels and geographic location. This is already shown in the success of location based services, the beginnings of alternate reality games which mix online profiles with location based cues, and the ever increasing uses of mobile devices. This connection between information distribution via weak ties through digital communication channels and the re-enabling of location-based strong ties is the future for collective action.
Pascal Jürgens and Andreas Jungherr (2009) ‘Twittering Dissent: Social Web Data Streams as Basis for Agent Based Models of Opinion Dynamics’, in: Martin Welker, Holger Geißler, Lars Kaczmirek, Olaf Wenzel (eds.), 11th General Online Research Conference, GOR 09: Proceedings, Vienna, p. 81.
Due to copyright restrictions I can’t make this paper available on this page. If you are interested you can find the paper in the Proceedings of the 11th General Online Research Conference edited by Martin Welker, Holger Geißler, Lars Kaczmirek and Olaf Wenzel. On his webpage Martin Welker makes a pdf of the proceedings available.
For the gist of the paper have a look at the presentation:
Abstract
The attempt of Web Science to develop a deeper understanding of human behavior on and with the web, as practiced today, struggles to transcend the stage of isolated case studies of individual phenomena with little or no connection to the nature of human behavior as a whole. The authors believe this state can be remedied by a more conscious combination of theoretical concepts of human behavior and empirical work. To this end this paper identifies four key challenges in sound Web Science: A – Providing theoretical context for studies, B – addressing the role of technological design and communication culture, C – dealing with large data sets and D – charting the web so research can be placed within. We then propose a blueprint for research practices which is based on the school of critical rationalism and serves to increase a study’s contribution to the field of web science.
The interplay of theory and observation: a proposition for structured research on human behavior on the web
This is the poster version of the paper The Interplay of Theory and Observation: A Proposition for Structured Research on Human Behavior on the Web which Pascal Jürgens and Benjamin Heitmann presented in early 2009 in rainy Athens at the WebSci’09: Society On-Line.
For the paper have a look at this pdf at the online proceedings of the conference. There you can also take a closer look at the poster itself.
Andreas Jungherr (2008) ‘Twittering Activists: the Uses of Twitter for Political Activism’. Paper presented at “Social Web: Towards Networked Protest Politics?” Organized by the SFB Changing Protest and Media Cultures SFB/FK 615 Media Upheavals University of Siegen, Germany on 7-8 November.
Twittering Activists: The Uses of Twitter for Political Activism
by Andreas Jungherr
2008/11/05
slightly copyedited version
2010/03/16
A Paper presented at
“Social Web: Towards Networked Protest Politics?”
Changing Protest and Media Cultures SFB/FK 615 Media Upheavals
University of Siegen, Germany
November 7, 2008
For a short glance at the argument have a look at the presentation. The full paper can be found below.
Abstract
Social web applications have proven to be disruptive in different fields of social life. One of the most successful applications of the last year has been the microblogging service Twitter. This paper uses four short case studies to illustrate the possible uses of microblogging for political activist.
Motivation
Social web applications like Facebook, Flickr and Twitter, have lowered the organizing costs for communities dramatically (Shirky: 2008). These lowered costs should vitalize social movements. Those cost benefits should show the greatest effects for small groups of activists or communities without a large organizational machinery. Especially spontaneous social activism around transient topics on a local level should profit from the ready availability of social applications. Those applications can be used to achieve tasks, which until recently, demanded large organizations and considerable resources.
Often social media applications are used by early adopters merely for hedonistic purposes. But when reaching a critical threshold in ease of use and distribution some of these applications get chosen by activists as tools for social action (Zuckerman: 2008). During 2007 the use of the social media application Twitter, a “social networking and microblogging service utilizing instant messaging, SMS or a web interface” (help.twitter.com: FAQ), has spread widely. Over the last months the use of Twitter has proven disruptive in a number of different fields: journalism (Howlett: 2008), conferences and business gatherings (Owyang: 2008), emergency proceedings in reaction to natural disasters (Poulsen: 2007) and even political activism (Simon: 2008). These events show that Twitter has become a useful tool for the organization of social movements. To understand the potential uses of Twitter for political activists the observer has to look closer at these disruptions.
The emergence of social web applications is a new phenomenon. At this stage of scientific enquiry it is vital to understand the uses and effects of different social web applications for different forms of social organizations. This paper analyses the uses of one of the most successful web applications, Twitter, in four short case studies which show different possibilities for the use of Twitter by political activists.
Incident #1) After the Assassination of Benazir Bhutto the news of this event traveled with amazing speed through the community of Twitter users, even overtaking the speed by which the blogosphere was reacting (Howlett: 2008). This incident shows the potential for political activists to distribute highly volatile information through Twitter.
Incident #2) At the 2008 SXSW conference in Austin, Texas, the journalist Sarah Lacy interviewed Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg in a keynote presentation. During this interview a large group of Twitter users in the audience started to share their, mostly negative, reactions to Sarah Lacy’s interview style in real time on their respective Twitter-Feeds. Parts of the audience were using Twitter as an open backchannel to an event they shared. Their criticism was first raised and amplified on their Twitter-Feeds before they expressed their criticism at the keynote presentation itself (Owyang: 2008). This incident shows the potential for political activists to use Twitter as a powerful backchannel to social events.
Incident #3) During the San Diego wildfires in October 2007 volunteers and journalists started to use Twitter. Via Twitter they distributed live updates on the position of fires and orchestrated collective action (Poulsen: 2007). This incident shows that political activists can use Twitter to efficiently coordinate social action and protests.
Incident #4) In April 2008 the American journalism student James Karl Buck covered political protests in Egypt. During his work he was arrested by the Egyptian police. Via SMS he posted the word “Arrested” on his Twitter-Feed. Friends and colleagues of his monitored his Twitter-Feed and could secure his release in a matter of hours (Simon: 2008). This incident shows that political activists can use Twitter to monitor each other’s situation and in doing so increase their security.
These case studies show clearly four possibilities which are open to political activists who are using Twitter:
Lesson #1) Microblogging facilitates the fast distribution of information to a local or global community of interest.
Lesson #2) The use of microblogging feeds can be a powerful open backchannel to actively monitor and comment on current events.
Lesson #3) The use of Twitter can be an efficient way to organize and coordinate small groups for collective action and protests.
Lesson #4) The use of Twitter can establish a remote presence for a group of activists.
These case studies show that political activists can use the social web application Twitter as a tool in their communication strategy and in the organization of social movements. Twitter does not lend itself to every task at hand. Its design and the way it is commonly used suggest specific uses of Twitter for political activists to achieve tasks that were until recently only possible for large organizations with considerable resources.
Methodology
The social web and social applications are rather new phenomena. This makes a comprehensive scientific discussion of the potential of microblogging for political activists difficult. Microblogging tools like Twitter have not yet become standard tools in the communication strategy of groups who are trying to influence political processes. Especially large institutions like political parties seem very hesitant to integrate these new tools in their communication strategies. Still there exist isolated use-cases which carry lessons for those who try to influence public opinion or who try to organize collective action. This paper uses four events and the reactions to them on the microblogging platform Twitter to show exemplarily four different possibilities for activists to use microblogging tools to better achieve their goals.
The aim of this paper is not to give a how-to version to political activism via Twitter. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to the demands of different groups and environments. Each group has to assess the possibilities and limitations of microblogging for their specific purposes. A communication solution which can be perfect for a local politician trying to connect with her constituency could be of no use to a group of human rights activists trying to increase their voice. Each situation and each aim needs a customized communication strategy. The promise of microblogging lies in its short form and its adaptability to different situations and different needs.
The following case studies serve to showcase some of the possibilities of microblogging in various communication contexts. They are by no means comprehensive and only serve as an indication for the possibilities of the use of microblogging to influence public opinion or to organize collective action. In fact each documented attempt by political activists to use Twitter or a comparable service can serve as an experiment on the possibilities of microblogging and only further our understanding of the interactions between the social web, public opinion and collective action.
This is also the time to shortly address a challenge which the processes here described hold for democratic societies. While democratic societies rightly applaud the chance that through microblogging dissenting opinions in oppressed societies can increasingly be voiced, microblogging also holds the real possibility for extremist fringe groups in established democracies to use the same communication tools to achieve their goals and thereby destabilize established democracies. This challenge has to be addressed in the future.
What is Twitter?
Twitter is a microblogging service which went live in October 2006 (Obviously: 2007). Twitter allows its users to post messages of up to 140 characters to a personal message feed. Users have the possibility to syndicate feeds by other users. This means they are notified through different communication channels if a feed, which a user has syndicated, is updated. This syndication is called “following”. A user who syndicated a given feed is called “follower”. On the profile pages of any given user, there is a list of all the users who are following her, and all the users she is following herself.
Users can either choose to monitor their syndicated feeds through the web portal of Twitter or through different desktop or mobile phone applications through which they are also able to update their own feeds. In the past it was also possible to be informed of selected Twitter-Feeds through SMS. Today this is only possible in selected countries (Twitter Blog: 2008). Still, there is a strong immediacy of Twitter updates and to the fast distribution of information through Twitter. The self selection of users who decide to follow a given feed leads to network effects. A group of followers of a given feed often form a community of interest. This facilitates the dissemination of news through these communities.
Twitter users have also the possibility to add keywords to their messages. The “#” sign at the beginning of a word signals a keyword (Twitter Fan Wiki: 2008). This convention enables users to monitor special keywords. Even if they do not follow all the feeds of users which post on a given topic they can monitor the respective messages. Especially during the 2008 American presidential election campaign different third party applications used this convention to offer different mashups and mappings of political messages in the Twitterverse (see for example: Election 2008; or: Politweets).
Twitter is not the only microblogging application available for use. There are a number of other services comparable to Twitter (see for example: identi.ca; Jaiku; Plurk or Pownce). Still, Twitter is the most widely used microblogging service. As of November 2008 there are probably around 3 million Twitter accounts in use (TwitDir: 2008). The events described in this paper happened on and with Twitter. But this does not mean the lessons drawn from these incidents neccessarily only apply to the use of Twitter. on the contrary, it is reasonable to assume these processes, although observed on Twitter, also apply to the use of microblogging applications in general.
Since Twitter is a rather new phenomenon a convention for the academic citation of Twitter-Feeds is not yet clearly established. This paper adopts a convention from Twitter itself, where if a user is directly addressed her user name gets preceded by the sign “@”. Therefor if the feed of a given user is cited in this paper the citation is given through her username preceded by “@” (i. e. @username).
The Incidents
The following incidents took place between late 2007 and early 2008. They are chosen for the amount of documentation that is available on them and their appropriateness to serve as a showcase for the possibilities the use of microblogging tools hold for political activists.
Incident #1) The Assassination of Benazir Bhutto
On December 27, 2007 the world was shocked by the events in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. The leader of the Pakistani opposition party Pakistan Peoples Party, Benazir Bhutto was killed in a suicide attack during a political rally (BBC News: 2007). The news coverage by the established media outlets was heavily supplemented by news from local bloggers (Gahran: 2007). This mutual dependency between established media and the blogosphere is not new, instead it is rather typical for the uneasy relationship between the two. What was new this time around, was the introduction of a third element: microblogging. Local Twitterers, like Dr. Awab Alvi (@teeth) or social media consultant Dina Mehta (@dina, Mehta: 2007) started to monitor local and international media outlets and posted their observations and comments on their Twitter-Feeds and blogs. Prominent Twitterers like Dave Winer (@davewiner), Laura Finton (@pistachio) and Dennis Howlett (@dahowlett) started also to to post snippets of different news sources to their respective Twitter-Feeds. From then on the Twitterverse was abuzz with discussion on the events in Rawalpindi and their possible repercussions (Howlett: 2008).
The reason for the immediacy and intencity of this discussion lies in the nature of Twitter and of microblogging in general. Since Twitter is a tool mainly used to receive personal updates by a community of interest, news hits faster. Many users of Twitter use applications that show recent Tweets on the user’s desktop. Instead of having to actively visit the site of a given news outlet, or a news aggregation site, or instead of actively checking one’s RSS Feeds to find the news of Benazir Bhutto‘s assassination, any Twitter user connected to the power users like Winer, Finton or Howlett was informed immediately of the events in Pakistan. Also an immediate reaction was further facilitated through the brevity of Twitter messages. Instead of having to publish a balanced blog post on the events Twitterers could comment in messages of 140 characters or less. What these comments may have lacked in depth or balance they made up for through immediacy. And with each of these comments on Twitter the news of Benazir Bhutto‘s assassination spread further through the Twitterverse.
This incident holds the first lesson on the use of microblogging for political activists:
Lesson #1) Microblogging facilitates the fast distribution of information to a local or global community of interest.
One of the major concerns of political activists is to enable a fast distribution of in their view relevant information to a community of interest. Before the advent of blogs this was rather difficult and cost intensive since one had to either go through established media channels or self-publish the information in costly publications. This situation started to change through the growing relevance of the blogosphere and easy syndication through RSS. The use of microblogging applications holds further promise for political activists. Information now travels even faster than through blogs and through the communal nature between groups of Twitterers news that gets adopted by a Twitterer for her feed carries with it an implicit endorsement and therefore gains in social relevance for the followers of this Twitterer. The chance of further distribution of this information therefore rises, as compared to information contained in an anonymous press release.
Microblogging is important for political activists since through it they can distribute information faster and can attach social significance to it.
Incident #2) The 2008 SXSW Lacy / Zuckerberg keynote
The annual South by Southwest conference in Austin, Texas holds special significance for the success story that is Twitter. At the 2007 meeting of this conference there was a presentation by the Twitter development team. More importantly, during the conference a number of participants started to use Twitter to share opinions on the presentations or to meet up. This widespread adoption of Twitter amongst SXSW participants became a milestone in the spread of the application (Calore: 2007). The high density of Twitter users at the same event one year later made the incident at the 2008 SXSW possible.
One of the highly aticipated events during the 2008 meeting of the South by Southwest conference was a moderated keynote address with the Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. The event was scheduled as an interview between Zuckerberg and the business journalist Sarah Lacy (@sarahcuda). What started out as a highlight of the conference became an infamous example of a keynote gone wrong.
Already during the opening questions a group of Twitter users started to share their, mostly negative reactions, to Sarah Lacy’s interview style, in real time on their Twitter-Feeds. The comments ranged from specific objections to questions or answers to personal insults against the interviewer. Other twittering audience members started to join in and soon the negative opinions in the Twitterverse spilled over in the conference room, when audience members started to actively and vocally expressed their criticism during the keynote itself (Owyang: 2008). After the dust settled some of the twittering critics felt their criticism during the keynote to be excessive and some even publicly apologized for their behavior (Scoble: 2008). There are different explanations for the event. Some commentators seek the reason in the business oriented questions by Sarah Lacy and the technology centered interests of the audience (Solis: 2008). Others think that Twitter functioned as an echo chamber of the negative opinions and facilitated the emergence of a twittering mob (Hinckley: 2008).
While the exact reasons for this event remain unclear, this incident holds the second lesson on the use of microblogging for political activists:
Lesson #2) The use of microblogging feeds can be a powerful open backchannel to actively monitor and comment on current events.
Until now it had been difficult for political activists to establish a communication sphere in which opinions could be voiced in real time by every participant of a social event. Until now this running commentary had to be provided by a proxy. For example a pair of journalists that were commenting on the course of a shared social event, like for example a political rally or a sports event. Through the easy use of microblogging applications like Twitter it is now very easy for users to comment and receive comments in real time during social events. An additional example for this possibility is the use of Twitter during the 2008 American presidential campaign. There was the attempt to provide a running commentary on the televised debates of the two presidential candidates (Current). In this active backchanneling of social events lies a chance for political activists to create a communication sphere where it is possible voice opinions which would remain otherwise unheard off in the public discourse.
Microblogging is important for political activists since through its easy use as an open communication backchannel political activists can establish echo chambers for opinions that would otherwise appear isolated and maybe even disappear from the public discourse.
Incident #3) San Diego wildfires
In October 2007 San Diego fell victim to disastrous wildfires. Since residential areas were in danger, San Diego citizens depended on real time news coverage on the ever changing location of the fires and rescue procedures. The established media outlets could not satisfy this urgent need for current information. So two residents, Nate Ritter (@nateritter) and Dan Tentler (@viss) started to post real time updates with information on the fires and rescue proceedings to their personal Twitter-Feeds. On their feeds they aggregated news from the official media outlets, as well as information gathered by neighbors and friends who monitored the developments on the street. Through this their Twitter-Feeds became an information backbone to the community (Poulsen: 2007).
The San Diego events hold the third lesson for political activists regarding the use of microblogging services:
Lesson #3) The use of Twitter can be an efficient way to organize and coordinate small groups for collective action and protests.
As seen in San Diego, Twitter can serve as an easy tool to establish a fast and cheap resource for crowd resourcing. Political activists equipped with mobile communication devices become intelligent sensors who are able to monitor in real time events. This can be the monitoring of natural disasters, the monitoring of rescue procedures (Poulsen: 2007) or the monitoring of elections (see for example: Twitter Vote Report). Through the observance of communication conventions, like the inclusion of agreed-upon keywords, it is possible for each community member to monitor the messages of other users on the given event. On the basis of this situation awareness groups of political activists can be coordinated and even take coordinated action in seemingly chaotic situations. This makes Twitter to an excellent crowd sourcing and tool for political activists.
Microblogging is important for political activists, since microblogging feeds can be used to monitor events in real time and coordinate collective action.
Incident #4) James Karl Buck twitters in Egypt
During anti-government protests in Egypt in April 2008, the American journalism student James Karl Buck was arrested by the Egyptian police. Still on the way to the police station, Buck managed to use his cell phone and send a SMS. With this SMS he updated his personal Twitter Feed with just one word “Arrested”. Friends and colleagues of James Karl Buck monitored his Twitter-Feed and could secure his release from an Egyptian jail in a matter of hours, although they were miles away (Simon: 2008).
This incident clearly holds the fourth lesson for political activists regarding the use of microblogging services:
Lesson #4) The use of Twitter can establish a remote presence for a group of activists.
Through the routine use of Twitter political activists are able to establish a virtual presence for each member of the group no matter where that person is located. It is also possible for other people interested in or sympathetic to the group to participate in the community on Twitter. Through this groups of activists can increase their reach beyond directly involved people. As seen in this incident, it is also possible for political activists to activate certain pre formulated procedures at the publication of a specific message. Twitter serves in this case as a distribution channel for cues for action to communities, send by individuals.
Microblogging is important for political activists since it enables community members to monitor their respective situation effortlessly. This increases the security of political activists considerably.
Conclusion
This paper tried to use four events which occurred during late 2007 and early 2008 to illustrate the potential the use of microblogging applications holds for political activists. Out of the presented incidents four lesson for political activists were derived. These lessons are:
Lesson #1) Microblogging facilitates the fast distribution of information to a local or global community of interest: Microblogging is important for political activists since through it they can distribute information faster and can attach social significance to it.
Lesson #2) The use of microblogging feeds can be a powerful open backchannel to actively monitor and comment on current events: Microblogging is important for political activists since through its easy use as an open communication backchannel political activists can establish echo chambers for opinions that would otherwise appear isolated and maybe even disappear from the public discourse.
Lesson #3) The use of Twitter can be an efficient way to organize and coordinate small groups for collective action and protests: Microblogging is important for political activists, since microblogging feeds can be used to monitor events in real time and coordinate collective action.
Lesson #4) The use of Twitter can establish a presence for a group of activists: Microblogging is important for political activists since it enables community members to monitor their respective situation effortlessly. This increases the security of political activists considerably.
These lessons do not cover all possible uses of microblogging for political activists. At this stage, it is not yet possible to account for all these possibilities. All we can do this early in the game is to actively search for exemplary events, which illustrate the potential of microblogging. There remain difficulties. While it is useful to analyze events after the fact, categorize them and systematically compare them to similar events, the academic understanding of this phenomenon remains incomplete. To accurately assess the potential of microblogging for political activists, scientists have to incorporate operational aspects in their analysis. To do this they have to closely accompany groups of political activists who try to incorporate microblogging into their communication strategy.
Right now is not the time for comprehensive accounts of the possible uses of microblogging for political activists and the effects this may or may not have for societies. Right now is the time for tinkering. The real challenge does not yet lie with the scientists. The real challenge lies with political activists. Theirs is the possibility to adapt microblogging tools for their needs and thereby uncover the hidden potentials for social change that lie still dormant in the widespread adoption of this technology. We as scientists can accompany them on their way be it as tinkerers or as reflective observers.
