By: Brittany T. Epps
Washington, DC—In the presidential election of 1960, John F. Kennedy was able to defeat his opponent and revitalize the way campaigns were ran by using television, a relatively new medium, to connect with voters across America.
In 2008, Barack Obama’s prowess over the Internet, a platform that had been fairly neglected and underestimated in terms of campaigning, led to his success and ensured that every election following would have to take the virtual world into account.
In the 2012 election season, in which for many voters, a candidate’s funding, likeability, and very existence is linked to his Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Tumblr, Pintrest, and other social media sites, it is important to look back to the first election that brought awareness to the power of the World Wide Web and online technology: 2004.
“Social media has played a significant role in the coverage and impact of the 2012 election,” said Jennifer C. Thomas, a professional journalist and media professor. “Yet, it was in 2004 that the Internet was first used in a presidential election.”
During the 2004 presidential race between George W. Bush and John Kerry, Facebook was still known as “The Facebook” and Twitter was nonexistent. Candidates utilized other, seemingly antiquated, methods to aid their campaigns.
“I think blogs were more prevalent in 2004,” said Ron Nixon, a New York Times Washington Correspondent.
“Twitter wasn’t a factor, Facebook wasn’t a factor—it was more Internet blogs and traditional outreach like TV and radio advertising. That was basically the way people would run a campaign since the 60s. Another thing is email. In 2004, it was not new but it was utilized and kind of new in campaigning.”
In 2004, Howard Brush Dean III, a Democrat who served six terms as the 79th Governor of Vermont, ran unsuccessfully for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination. All was not in vain, however, as his Internet-based fundraising and grassroots organizing took a starring role in the 2004 campaign season and set the tone for many political candidates after him, including President Obama.
Once the votes were tallied, social media did not win Dean the nomination, but it did offer the nation a glance at what this sort of campaigning could produce.
“In 2004, presidential hopeful Howard Dean transformed politics by utilizing the Internet as an integral part of his campaign,” said Alexis Rice, a Johns Hopkins fellow and the creator of Campaigns Online. “Dean was the first candidate to use blogging, Meetups, and other innovative technology tools as part of his campaign strategy. Thanks to the innovation of the Dean campaign, blogs are a useful political communication tool that has become a standard not only in presidential campaigns, but in state and local elections as well.”
From 2004 and on, the use of the Internet and social media has become a method for candidates to reach out to and connect with a broader demographic, raise unforeseen funds, and more effectively inform the voting population of their political stance.
Presidential candidates, however, were certainly not the only ones utilizing online technology. Voters did as well. The use of social media by presidential candidates in 2004 became a way for many voters to be informed of candidates’ positions, views, and their history in government.
“During the 2004 presidential election, there were 75 million people who used the Internet for political news,” said Thomas.
According to the Pew Internet & American Life Project, 37 percent of the adult population and 61 percent of online Americans–fully 75 million Americans–accessed the internet to obtain political news and information, participate directly in the political process by volunteering or giving contributions to candidates, and to discuss candidates and debate issues in email. Approximately 35 percent of Internet users, or about 43 million people, said they used email to discuss politics, and one of the most popular email subjects were jokes about the candidates and the election.
In 2004, voters were beginning to use the Internet as a platform to vocalize and share their opinions with the rest of the nation. This election changed the way in which citizens speak to each other about politics.
“Newly armed with online pulpits, more citizens are using the Web to vocalize opinions through blogs, video, email and podcasts and to mobilize community efforts around the candidates,” said Stefanie Olsen, a senior writer for CNet.
A post-election, nationwide survey by the Pew Internet & American Life Project and the Pew Research Center for The People & The Press shows that the online political news consumer population grew dramatically from 18% of the U.S. population in 2000 to 29% in 2004.
There was also a reported striking increase in the number who cited the internet as one of their primary sources of news about the presidential campaign: 11% of registered voters said the internet was a primary source of political news in 2000 and 18% said that in 2004.
Young adults–voters under 30–make up the majority of social media users and are those who stay on the cutting edge of technological advances. According to Pew, currently 95% of 18-29 year-olds use the Internet, and 78% of all American adults use the Internet on a daily basis.
In 2004, by successfully utilizing new and social media online and even creating blogs targeted to this specific demographic, Dean’s campaign was able to engage younger voters–a segment of America’s population that was crucial to Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008 and in the present election.
In 2004, the Internet was found to be a viable arena for political expression by both presidential candidates and voters in a way that it had never been before. 2008’s presidential election took the Web’s capabilities several steps further. In 2012, even more potential has been unearthed and candidates are more tech-savvy than ever.
As online technology advances, so will presidential campaigns.
The question is, though, what sort of platform will be able to crash and overwrite the mighty powers of the Internet?
By Kylee Coney.
Story Board, used to create our final multimedia presentation
by, Noelle A. Jones
WASHINGTON, D.C.—In the months since the start of the 2012 Election Season, what was once a bare-faced political declaration for the next President of the United States has turned into an hard-hitting social media throw down—with the main players Barack Obama and Mitt Romney utilizing today’s savviest weapons—Face book, Twitter, YouTube and even fledgling networks Pintrest and Instagram.
In the midst of the virtual fist flying through cyberspace—the biggest question is how much does social media matter? Is this overt use of social networks just an election trend—or has it permanently changed politics forever? Do social networks now have the power to predict the winner, before they’ve even won? Let the hash tags begin.
“Twitter and FB are like the main source of news for a lot of people. By using those sources, people are a lot more informed as far as the younger voters and the uninformed voters as well,” said Edward Reese, a project manager from Chicago, Illinois. “ I can typically log into Twitter and see a quick 140 words of knowledge. And that’s just how a lot of people do it these days.”
As Election Day drew nearer, social networks were firing up providing both comical and scrutinizing commentary on the performance of Obama and Romney. Currently Obama reigned supreme in the social media war with his social media presence far exceeding that of Romney’s. But did Obama’s 20 million twitter followers compared to Romney’s 1.4 million really make a difference? In observance of the past it is evident the essential role social media plays in expanding the reach for campaigns.
In 2004, Howard Dean set the stage beginning as merely an underdog—his name only floating around circles in his native Vermont. After collaborating with longtime political strategist Joe Trippi, Dean began to lay the foundation for social networks being used as a successful medium for campaigns. Using Meetup.com Dean organized groups of his supporters across the nation—to form volunteer groups, promote house parties, to canvass; bypassing traditional methods of costly volunteer recruitment, and most importantly to raise money.
“I think blogs were more prevalent in 2004,” said New York Times Reporter Ron Nixon. “Twitter wasn’t a factor, Face book wasn’t a factor—it was more blogs and traditional outreach like TV advertising, radio advertising, that was the main thing in 2004. So that was more or less a basic 20th Century old media style campaign…”
President Obama’s—‘Obama for America’ blog is simply a brainchild of Dean’s ‘Howard Dean Call to Action Weblog,’ the first presidential campaign blog ever made.
Executive Producer at CNN and Mass Media Arts Professor at Clark Atlanta University, Jennifer Thomas notes the importance of media reflected in the 2008 election:
“Some studies show that while entertaining or intriguing, political advertisements have little to do with the final outcome of elections, said Thomas. However, for younger demographics, social media is power. President Obama’s campaign four years ago is a testament to that.”
In the article “How Obama’s Internet Campaign Changed Politics,” by Clair Cain Miller with the NYTimes Arianna Huffington said: ‘If it were not for the Internet Barack Obama would not be president.’ In the article both Huffington and Trippi spoke of the way in which Obama used interactive Web 2.0 tools to advertise to voters, defend against false accusations and communicate with constituents. Obama’s 2008 ‘hybrid campaign,’ used social platforms to organize –investing big bucks into YouTube and Face book Ad’s while his opponent McCain invested primarily in television advertisements.
“[In 2008] McCain’s campaign didn’t utilize it [Social Media and YouTube] as much, and I think overall Democrats got out a little ahead of Republicans on this…,” said Nixon. This time around I think it’s kind of even.”
Research suggest that YouTube videos were more effective than television ad’s for one dynamic reason—YouTube videos allow viewers to chose to watch them at their convenience instead of having their television shows interrupted. In 2008, Obama’s team built a strong foundation on networks like Face book not only creating a page, but also creating pages targeted to specific groups like Women for Obama and Latinos for Obama thus allowing voters to make ‘meaningful’ personal connections—virtually.
Seeing that Barack Obama reigned victorious in 2008, brings attention to the glaring fact that social media does in fact play a larger role than ever imaginable—therefore both candidates used social networks as a thrust to engage voters and to appeal to their interest by any means necessary.
Journalist are also using social media as a ally—its clear importance is forcing them to change their approach by thinking differently, and integrating new mediums into their coverage.
“Journalists have to write differently, and think differently with the growing trend of social media,” said Thomas. “In addition to writing news packages, they have to write versions for the web; or blogs; as well as post tweets and Face book posts.”
Major news outlets and Political News sources, are also using social media to gauge what their readers are talking about—staying on top of the conversation and expanding the political process.
“The Washington Post has a system where they can tally how many times a candidates name is mentioned on Twitter, said Washington Post News Aide Lauren McEwen. “For example, after that 47 percent video, Mitt Romney’s name came up so many times. People were furious! After President Obama’s disappointing performance at the first presidential debate, his name skyrocketed. This system shows you, what people are talking about and how they’re engaging.”
The growth of social media is astonishing. According to statistics released by Twitter 500,000 tweets were posted during all four presidential debates in 2008. However, in the first presidential debate of 2012, more than 10 million tweets were posted. More recently, Twitter named Election Day 2012 the most tweeted about event in U.S. Political History.
A study done in 2011 by the digital agency Social Vibe of Voting- Age Social media Users revealed that 94 percent of these individuals get their political information online.
“Just like newspaper, radio, and television has played a role for Americans in the past as a platform to hear campaigns, initiatives etc, social media definitely plays a role,” said freelance journalist, Natelege Whaley. “I think it’s safe to say its role will only get bigger in the future as the generations who grew up with social media as a part of their lives become older.”
Since the election, major news outlets have noted the role that an integrated social media approach may have played on President Obama’s victory. Columnist for the Huffington Post, Daniel Burrus wrote in his column about the importance of future political candidates putting full utilization of social media high on their list of strategic tools to assume victory—and this may very well be true.
“These are the tools that reflect the evolution of campaigning,” declared Nixon. “If you can reach 100,000 people with a tweet versus paying a couple of million dollars trying to reach those people that’s a good use of your campaign dollars because even though the two campaigns were supposed to succeed a billion dollars this year—trying to reach a nation of 330 million people is just quite a lot. And trying to overwhelm the other candidate with your message takes a lot. So I think that that’s what these tools have helped the campaigns do—is reach a lot more people in a lot more different ways than they were before.”
By Kylee Coney, Brittany Epps and Noelle Jones
Special to Howard University News Service
HYATTSVILLE, Md. — As dusk turned to dawn, voters gathered outside the Hyattsville Public Library in frigid 30-degree weather, awaiting an opportunity to cast their ballot in the 2012 presidential election.
With fingers tapping and eyes glued to smartphone screens to keep them occupied during their wait, many voters demonstrated the increased role that technology has played in the voting season.
And with President Barack Obama’s 20 million Twitter followers and Gov. Mitt Romney’s 1.5 million followers, it is clear that voters were very engaged during the 2012 campaign season.
Edward Reese, a recent college graduate from Chicago, said electronic media and social networking sites serve as a quick and accessible way for individuals to keep up with political news and to share their personal views in the virtual sphere. For example, political junkies can receive and contribute political information 140 characters at a time using Twitter.
“It’s a huge tool,” Reese said. “That’s typically how the younger generation and those that don’t watch or have time to read the news are getting informed about voting and about a lot of the issues that are out there right now.”
Recent studies bear him out. According to the Pew Research Center, 45 percent of American adults own smartphones, and 66 percent of those adults between the ages of 18-29. And the State of the News Media 2012 survey reported that 67 percent of digital news consumers with smartphones and tablets have gotten news recommendations from Facebook and 39 percent follow news recommendations from Twitter.
Courtney Alvarez, a lawyer and Hyattsville, Md. resident, said social media also can provide an arena for dialogue.
“I used them more to just kind of read up on what other people were thinking about the campaign,” she said. “But I did see a lot of my friends and others debating back and forth over those different mediums.”
Even though seniors are the fastest growing group on social networks, Raymond Harrison, 87, is not one of them. He said social media did not play major role in his election experience, and sites like Facebook and Twitter were more for his grandchildren.
“No, I’m not [active on social networks] but my grandchildren are. I let them handle that. I can’t handle it,” he said.
According to Reese, the ways voters consume political news is often determined by age. “For the majority of voters from other generations, it probably won’t even matter,” he said. “There’s only a small portion of the population that will really be affected by social media when it comes down to voting.”Despite age differences and communications preferences, none of the voters at the Hyattsville poll would deny the importance of voting.
“Every election matters. It affects your income, your well being [and] the economy. It’s very important,” said Stacey Weathers-Price, a Hyattsville resident and teacher.
Voters on the long line that wrapped around building didn’t seem to be deterred by the wait to cast their ballot for the next president of the United States.
“I’ve been waiting in line for about 35 to 40 minutes,” Raymond Harrison said. “And I’m going to stand out here just as long as it takes for me to vote. I hope I can make it.”
Obama supporter, G. Alexander Moore, an IT specialist from Durham, N.C., said he was just waiting to celebrate.
“I’ll be at an election party down on U Street with the rest of the crowd like last time, elated,” he said, “shouting and tweeting Obama!”
Direct Link: http://howarduniversityelectionproject.com/social-media-drives-young-to-hyattsville-polls-joined-by-elders/
The S.M.E. Project [2012] 