- About
- Upcoming
- Publications
- Conference Slides
- [ir13] #oo activism: uses of Twitter within the Occupy Oakland movement
- [ecc12] Political networks on Twitter: Tweeting the Queensland state election
- [ecc12] Tweeting le Tour: Connecting the Tour de France’s global audience through Twitter
- [ir13] #auspol, #qldpol, and #wapol: Twitter and the new Australian political commentariat
- [ir13] #eurovision: Twitter as a technology of fandom
- [ir13] Sharing the News: dissemination of links to Australian news sites on Twitter
- [georabble 6/big data week] Big Data + Twitter
- Contact
...and then the world





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
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.