Over the next couple of months, I will be collecting and analysing Twitter data (technology permitting) around the WA state election, to be held on 9 March 2013: see this post for an introduction to this project.

As we enter February, five weeks remain until election day in Western Australia – the writs still have not been issued, nominations have not yet closed, and there are still debates and policy announcements to cover before the actual voting takes place. Although we are still technically in the ‘phoney’ campaign stage until 6 February, when the writs will be issued, plans and proposals are being released and debated, and individual and party campaigns launched; among the major initiatives announced is the ALP’s Metronet public transport plan, which was first outlined last year but has seen additional details (about lines, stations, and costings) released and debated this week. ‘Metronet’ has been added to the keywords tracked for this project, and later in the campaign I’ll have a look at the shape of this issue-specific discussion network.

For now, though, this post provides just a quick overview of activity so far this year by the nominated candidates, parties, and politicians on Twitter. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I’m tracking the Twitter accounts of candidates in the state election, located by searching Twitter using Antony Green’s list of candidates, and by examining Twitter lists created around WA politics and the election. So far, over 100 such accounts have been identified, including those of current politicians who are retiring at the election. In addition, I am tracking the accounts of the WA branches of the main political parties, relevant hashtags, and other associated accounts, including prominent journalists.

To capture the tweets from these accounts, I am using the tool yourTwapperkeeper, and processing the resulting archives with gawk scripts created by Axel Bruns and Jean Burgess for the Mapping Online Publics project.For the candidate accounts, each archive searches for the user name (e.g. EricRipperMLA) as a keyword – finding tweets mentioning this user as well as tweets by the user. There are some limitations here; not all tweets will be archived for highly active keywords, as yTK is not able to access the full stream of tweets within the Twitter API – however, for the purposes of the election campaign, for most archives this will not be a problem. yTK also does not always capture ‘button’ retweets – manual RTs (where users add RT @user: to the start of the tweet, plus any comment) are captured, but tweets where users have clicked the ‘Retweet’ button on Twitter are not always archived.

While this limits the datasets somewhat, the lack of button RTs also means that the connections represented here are more likely to represent actual responses to – or, in the case of reciprocal mentions, some interaction between – candidates on Twitter. To explore these interactions, I have created two network maps, not based around any individual hashtag but instead drawing on the tweets published by, and mentioning, the candidate accounts between 1 and 31 January 2013. The networks are formed by extracting user names from the captured tweets, and noting these names as either ‘from’ (the account publishing the tweet) or ‘to’ (the account mentioned in the tweet). These extracted lists are then imported into the network visualisation software Gephiand laid out using the Force Atlas 2 algorithm (where nodes with shared connections are placed closer than nodes which do not share connections). Each node represents a Twitter account – the size of each node depends on the number of users mentioning these accounts, with the larger nodes receiving the most mentions. The candidate accounts are coloured by their party: red for the ALP, blue for the Liberals, orange for the Nationals, green for the Greens, and pink for the independents. The colour of each edge shows the node from which it originates (who is making the link to another account).

 

wavotes2013-jan2013-deg5-detail

 

Unsurprisingly, given the overview of WA politics on Twitter in previous posts, two parties visually dominate the map: the ALP and the Greens. However, the Greens candidates cluster more tightly than their ALP counterparts; indeed, there are two primary Greens clusters, one involving several candidates (including Cameron Poustie, Lynn Maclaren, and Jonathan Hallett), and another concentrated solely on George Crisp, running in the electorate of Nedlands. The separation of Crisp from the rest of the group is not showing that he is not connecting or connected to these other candidates in tweets (the edges show that this is not the fact), but instead that his tweets also mention several other unique users not mentioned by other accounts – a high number of unique accounts connected only to one node will draw that node further away from others in the main network.

This aspect of force-directed algorithms can also be seen in the top-right of the network, where the @premierbarnett account can be found in blue; while not an official account, I have left it in the network to see who is tweeting at this account in place of an official Colin Barnett Twitter presence. Here, several unique users mention Barnett – and only Barnett of the candidate accounts – in their tweets. There is some topicality here, as some of these accounts’ names are pro-sharks (and thus responding to Barnett’s remarks about killing dangerous sharks).

Another cluster can be found in the network, corresponding to several Nationals candidates (and the WA Nationals account); however, this cluster does not cover all Nationals candidates, as closer to the centre of the network are accounts for the likes of Mia Davies, Paul Brown, and Jill Sounness. Their presence here is partly attributable to Davies’ account; in addition to mentioning and being mentioned by Nationals accounts, Davies is also tweeted at by several ALP accounts, pulling her node closer to the ALP section than those pertaining to her fellow Nationals.

Indeed, what is clear from the map is that, while there is some obvious partisan clustering, as candidates tweet primarily with their fellow party members, there are accounts from most parties which will tweet at, and receive tweets from, opposing candidates (or accounts from other parties, anyway – regardless of whether or not they are not directly running against each other). Despite the limited Liberal presence, or perhaps because of this, such activity is particularly obvious with the Liberal member for Ocean Reef, Albert Jacob; his tweets include mentions of the ALP’s Ken Travers and Tony O’Gorman, and he is also mentioned by these same accounts. With less party engagement on Twitter, it may be that the few Liberal members active here, such as Jacob, have more freedom to respond to what the opposition is tweeting. However, with such a limited sample of Liberal accounts, and a wide variety of politician approaches to social media, this is only one of many possible explanations.

Interestingly, major media and commentator accounts are distributed across the network, rather than being located more centrally as might be expected. There are some central accounts, of course – such as The West Australian, as well as the ABC’s Oliver Peterson and 720 Perth – but others are more closely connected to particular parties. The political analyst and former staffer Darren Brown, for example, appears with the Greens cluster through responses to pieces he wrote for WA Today about their campaign so far. Other media accounts, such as radio host Howard Sattler and Perth local television station West TV, are more closely linked to the ALP accounts in part because of targeting of these accounts by candidates and their followers in an attempt to get another pre-election debate (‘the People’s Debate’) to take place.

wavotes2013-jan2013-polpartyonly_detail

To finish for now, the second map above shows the same network, but filtered down to only show connections between the candidate/party accounts. Again, the partisan clustering is obvious, although as noted before there are some accounts which will tweet across party lines. A final interesting point is the presence of two active independents among the ALP accounts – Max Hipkins (Nedlands) and Greg Ross (Kalamunda), who both tweeted at the prominent ALP members Ken Travers and John Hyde in comments about Perth’s public transport (and received responses, too, in an ongoing discussion).

The activity represented here covers the first month of 2013, before the election campaign proper (although including major announcements); during the campaign, I’ll return to these maps with snapshots of the current activity, to examine whether these patterns are replicated or challenged as election day approaches.

 

2 Responses to WA Votes 2013 – January’s candidate network maps

  1. Greg Ross says:

    Genuinely fascinating Tim,as is Twitter and its value, to both Tweeters and observers. As a long-term marketing cove, I freely admit to a certain uncertainty as to what purpose Twitter serves. It’s apparent that it is definitely an ego tool for all who use it (myself included), it’s also a way of instantly circumventing outside editorial control and, again with ego, a way of ‘proving’ you’re up to date with what’s happening. However, in the case of candidates such as myself, will it secure votes? That I don’t know. My gut feeling is that it should / must be part of a broad brush marketing approach and that it could be a double edged sword, if a journo decides to trawl through a candidates collected scrawls – I suspect a picture of that person will become readily identifiable.
    I found the links and your mentioning of them, with myself and Max Hipkins with Ken Travers and Ben Wyatt, fascinating, what would a statistician make of them? One could easily jump to the conclusion that Max and I are both closet Labor luvvies, but the reality may be more that Travers and Wyatt are very active across all sections of the media, both hold high-end roles in the Labor party and both communicate.
    I think you’re on to something with you trending webs and that it’s entirely possible each person’s collective tweets paint a very real picture of that person, but then I return to the question of will it bring votes? I still can’t call it, but I have the same sort of feeling about it, as I had when I first started emailing in the mid late 1990s – “this might go somewhere, I’m interested.”
    I’ll watch your articles with interest, all good things, Greg Ross

  2. tim says:

    Hi Greg,

    Thank you for your comments!

    From the previous research into political communication online that I’ve been involved in, from blogs to social media, there are several different ways that politicians and candidates use such platforms – some use it purely as an additional means of sharing their media releases, some will post their own views and engage with other users who tweet at them, and of course some will not use it all. There is no single right approach to this, as individuals will have various reasons as to why they use social media and what they want to get from such platforms.

    Within political circles, though, and especially during election campaigns, I think you’re right that those people involved should at least have some presence, even if just for marketing/branding. Social media – and especially Twitter, which is my focus here – make public figures accessible, in an extremely visible way, that other means of communication (such as email) do not. Even if you do not get replies from these public figures, the fact that you can tweet at their accounts – using their account names in the tweet rather than referring to them in general – creates a link to these individuals, which other users can see when reading the tweets. This is one reason why I am fairly critical of the limited Liberal engagement with Twitter; yes, it reduces a possibility of candidates going off message, making gaffes, or posting ill-advised public statements which can spread quickly, but using Twitter does not mean that these things will automatically happen. The use of social media – by the voting public as well as politicians – is increasingly widespread overall, and an ever-important means of breaking and sharing news and information. I’d argue that for politicians – and especially for the party in power – having a presence on these sites, even if just accounts which share media releases, is better than none at all. Looking at the way that the follower numbers continue to increase for the unofficial Colin Barnett account (@PremierBarnett), there are Twitter users who do want to follow these political figures; it will be interesting to see if the WA Liberal policy on this changes after the election, regardless of the result.

    Despite these points, though, I am quite skeptical about the actual impact that Twitter alone can have on election results (whether overall or in individual electorates); the Twitter population is not representative of everyone online, nor of the entire electorate, and having thousands of followers on Twitter does not mean that the votes will go your way too. However, I also believe that if you are a new candidate in an electorate, and especially running without major party support, using platforms such as Twitter are important means of making your views public. They are not the only means that should be used, of course, but making your ideas visible to the people who could be voting for you (or people who might then increase the visibility of your views) is rather important during a campaign! There is the possible downside of this, as historical tweets are visible and searchable, but that is an important aspect of all online communication too; be aware that what you say, once online, is very hard to remove from the public record that is the internet.

    I want to go into the links between candidates in a later post, so I’ll keep my comments on this brief, but I agree with you about why reasons why people like yourself and Max Hipkins tweet with Ken Travers and other ALP members; I would argue, too, that this follows on from the point I made above about the limited Liberal presence – if there were more Liberal candidates on Twitter, I would expect more links to them from members of other parties. I should have stressed in the post itself, and will do so in the next one, that the links between accounts here do not mean agreement or endorsement of each account’s views. Rather, links are made here for myriad reasons, from agreeing and supporting ideas to questioning or criticising tweets. Tweeting at Ken Travers does not mean that a person agrees with his tweets – but on a topic such as public transport, he has shown himself to be an active voice about related issues on Twitter, and will respond to comments. It makes sense that there would be connections between him and other candidates since public transport (and related infrastructure developments) has been a major discussion point so far in the ‘phoney’ campaign. This also underlines the importance of not just taking a visual representation of these connections as gospel – the maps I have provided are visual aids to show the connections between candidates and other users, but they do not themselves explain why these links have been made. Again, I’ll go into more detail about this in a later post!

    Thanks again for getting in touch, and good luck with your campaign!

    Tim.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>