New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of Twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns

Todd Graham, Dan Jackson, Marcel Broersma

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    212 Citations (Scopus)
    318 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Twitter has become one of the most important online spaces for political communication practice and research. Through a hand-coded content analysis, this study compares how British and Dutch Parliamentary candidates used Twitter during the 2010 general elections. We found that Dutch politicians were more likely to use Twitter than UK candidates and on average tweeted over twice as much as their British counterparts. Dutch candidates were also more likely to embrace the interactive potential of Twitter, and it appeared that the public responded to this by engaging in further dialogue. We attribute the more conservative approach of British candidates compared to the Netherlands to historic differences in the appropriation of social media by national elites, and differing levels of discipline imposed from the central party machines.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)765-783
    Number of pages19
    JournalNew Media and Society
    Volume18
    Issue number5
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - May-2016

    Keywords

    • Comparative research
    • United Kingdom
    • Twitter
    • social media
    • politicians
    • Netherlands
    • Internet
    • elections
    • Election Campaign
    • CAMPAIGNS
    • Political parties
    • E-Democracy
    • Digital Politics
    • Digital Democracy
    • Democratic Representation
    • Internet Studies
    • POLITICAL SCIENCE
    • Political Studies
    • New Media
    • Digital Media
    • RECIPROCITY
    • Citizen Engagement
    • INTERACTIVITY
    • Members of Parliament

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of Twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this