Political Campaigns Through Social Networks

Political campaigns through social networks

Introduction

ICT or Information and Communication Technologies play a fundamental role within the Information Society. Unlike traditional media, technological resources have achieved a more direct participation between politicians and citizens. Communication occurs directly and exchange is possible through social networks, forums or blogs.

Castells (2002) defines the Internet as “an instrument that promotes democracy for its easy access to political information and thus allows citizens to be as informed as their leaders”.

Thus, the arrival of the Internet has generated great changes in various fields. Not only did it allow a more efficient communication, but it went through barriers concerning health, challenging new education modalities and thus also had an impact on the economy.

For companies, having a website became a priority, blog management a good option and setting a presence in social networks a requirement. Initially these tools were thought to public.

Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, are the most used tools to disseminate information and thus also obtain key data to prepare and implement a communicational strategy.

The low cost of advertising guideline, the possibility of segmenting the public to which you want to reach and have daily, weekly, monthly or annual reports about the campaign are factors that add compared to traditional communication.

Other factors that make vital elements within political communication have to do with the possibility of having a population analysis in terms of tastes, occupations and ages of followers.

Thanks to social networks, it is also possible to talk about a participatory democracy, and through the publication of information, the exchange and confrontation of opinions, a greater approach between politicians and citizens is generated, and that approach makes communication direct and dynamic toat the same time between both users.

Developing

The basis of politics is communication, so social networks have become fundamental tools within it since they function as connection agents.

Thus, these new media have forced the political class to change their strategy when transmitting their messages and ideas. Currently, they seek to position themselves and achieve engagement with citizens.

Among the most used platforms to carry out the campaigns we can mention Facebook created by Mark Zuckerger in force since 2004, Twitter founded by Evan Williams, Biz Stone and Kack DORSEY in 2006 and Instagram that was devised by Kevin Systrom and Mike Kriegerin 2010.

Each network has millions of users, which demonstrates the growth achieved, highlighting its worldwide expansion.

The main reason why social networks have become primary tools to carry out a political campaign has to do with the capacity for population analysis in terms of segmentation of the target according to tastes, trends, interests or population location. In addition to the low cost of advertising guideline and the possibility of accessing daily, weekly, monthly or annual reports about the campaign implemented.

On the point, Barack Obama, began to his electoral campaign using communication and advertising with the motto Yes, We Can, without imagining that this would be the beginning of great changes.

Before that moment of change, governments made use of the Internet only to publish information forgetting the interaction with citizens.

Political communication

Political communication is a necessary element to win the elections and to guarantee democratic stability. It is related to political marketing and propaganda.

For Castells (2009), “the media are not the fourth power. They are much more important: they are the space where power is created. The media constitute the space in which the relations of power between the political and social actors are decided. Therefore, to achieve their objectives, almost all actors and messages must go through the media. They have to accept the rules of the media game, the language of the media and their interests ".

Through political communication it is possible to bring together the actors who participate in this exchange process. As Wolton (1995) mentions, “it is an indispensable process for the contemporary political space that allows the confrontation of political speeches: ideology and action for politicians, information for journalists, communication for public opinion and probes".

For its part, Canel (2006) defines political communication “such as the activity of certain people or institutions (politicians, communicators, journalists and citizens) in which, as a result of the interaction, there is an exchange of messages with whicharticulates political decision making, as well as the application of these in the community ”.

Thus, politician 2 gives way.0 that is not defined as a user or who incorporates social networks in their political propaganda, but is the one who adopts and assumes an adequate attitude as the basis and principle of their campaign.

Cyberdemocracy

The use of social networks in political communication is considered a communicative phenomenon, because it not only gives way to the debate, but it is also possible to know needs through contributions made from cyberactivism also called cyberdemocracy.

Thus, the networks have changed the current political landscape, and to provide statements, it is not necessaryThe decision of a voter.

Providing information on social networks is simply a new form of political communication that everyone can use, and the digital gap is a factor that must be taken into account when spreading information because a certain population group will not accuse receipt of the same.

On this point and according to data published by ECLAC (2013), there is a first digital gap that refers to access to the computer and internet connection according to their demographic characteristics of people. The second is related to the uses, both to the intensity and the variety of uses, and is determined by the abilities and skills generated by individuals to use the devices and resources of the new technological paradigm.

In this way we can affirm that it is not always possible to shorten distances using social networks, it also constitutes an element of exclusion to certain sectors of the population.

Example of social and technological application

Political communication evolves with the rise of social networks, showing this is the impact of electoral campaigns headed by Barack Obama in the United States in 2008 and 2012 through Facebook. During his campaign the candidate for president of the United States had more than 31 million followers on Facebook, and about 22 million on Twitter.

In Europe, interesting changes were also observed in 2014 with the arrival of new political parties that did not have funds to finance their campaigns and saw Twitter as a valuable tool to make known.

And the most recent case is that of Nayib Bukele current president of El Salvador, who did not use social networks only to reach office, but still use it to provide indications to their respective ministers and in this way generates empathy withMost of his followers.

At the country level, in the last developed elections, it was possible to use social networks more strongly. The electoral propaganda not only overwhelmed television, radio or written press, they were also present in the networks with the greatest preponderance, taking into account that during the last presidential elections, social networks in Paraguay were very new.

Future projections

There are factors that can cooperate so that the use of social networks when making political communication is successful.

The first important factor is linked to the handling of accounts, they are generally managed by a community manager that is in turn paid by a digital agency. These profiles should be administered by the candidate or political, so that this interaction directly is really given. Not being the candidate who responds or posts the information constitutes a loss of credibility.

On the point, Mario Riorda (2017) states that “the social networks of the rulers are based on gerund and demonstrate a kind of accountability (arbitrary and personal) in real time: the reality mode, as is known inThe jargon. "Doing", "visiting", "touring", "speaking" are typical uses of digital government communication, and contribute more to the ego than management. They have little or null pedagogical contribution regarding policies and their need for legitimation. This is a reality show with a single protagonist: the ruler ".

Likewise, politicians focus on giving information without worrying about interaction, moreover, in most cases these profiles are being administered by third parties, which instead of shortening distance between the two sides, some rejection of theShared information, and in this way the attacks by cybernauts are given way.

The amount of daily posts must also be a detail that must be taken.

conclusion

Social networks within political communication is a reality and we must be able to adapt to this new stage. There is currently a lot of technology, but democracy remains little, that is, the problem was not only the lack of technology but the predominant political model.

To achieve optimal results, it is necessary to take into account some details such as generating traffic with quality information. This quality is related to the level of interaction that the politician can generate through their networks. When this traffic is not generated, this added value is not generated that may interest the citizen.

And to achieve that added value mentioned it is necessary to hear the opinions and have the needs of the electorate in accounts. Likewise, you must work on segmentation and messages for each collective audience.

Currently, social networks are used by politicians only to inform and interaction is still very scarce. This is because most accounts are managed by third parties which causes that closeness to be reflected.

In Paraguay, the phenomenon of social networks is considered a tool for citizen participation, and the latest calls to demonstrations constitute proof of this.

This trend will be stronger over the years, directly impacting the media ecosystem and the public option environment and consistent with the media audience.

Another issue has to do with the existing digital gap, campaigns must be thought of public including those who will not be able to read them through networks. On this point it would be interesting for each politic to analyze in advance the context in order to be able to define the actions and determine the most prudent means that must be used.

Political activities are based on their communication, but work on the communication approach, the Internet and social networks will be only an organizational structure and an instrument of communication.

Bibliography

• Arenas r., M. (2011). Gender Digital Gap: Women and New Technologies. Yearbook
• Faculty of Law, (4), 97-125. Recovered from: http: // dspace.Uah.es/dspace/bitstream/handle/10017/9843/gap_arenas_afdua_2011.PDF?sequence = 1
• Canel, m. J. (2006). Political communication: a guide for study and practice. Tecnos.
• Castells, m. (2002). the age of information. Economy, Society and Culture. Buenos Aires: 21st century.
• ECLAC (2013). Digital economy for structural change and equality. Santiago: ECLAC. Recovered from: https: // repository.ECLAC.org/Bitstream/Handle/11362/35408/1/s2013186_es.PDF
• ECLAC (2013). Women in the digital economy: overcome the threshold of inequality. Document presented at the Regional Conference on Women in Latin America and the Caribbean, Santo Domingo recovered from:
• https: // repository.ECLAC.org/Bitstream/Handle/11362/16561/1/s2013579_es.PDF
• Saiz, j. B. (February 6, 2008). Electoral cybermarketing. Recovered from: http: // www.Trends21.NET/MARKETING/CIBERMARKETING-Electoral-1_A22.HTML
• Riorda, m. Social networks to govern. Recovered from: https: // www.profile.com/News/Elobservador/Networks-Social-To-Governor.phtml?FBCLID = iWar3xo1_uordudsjszrrpqagzodfxqki9yf7SJJ5U48-bkuqzbrfo1uof_nw
• WOLTON, d. (nineteen ninety five). Political communication: construction of a model. Barcelona, Gedisa.