Article published in:
Re/constructing Politics Through Social & Online Media: Discourses, ideologies, and mediated political practices
Edited by Michał Krzyżanowski and Joshua A. Tucker
[Journal of Language and Politics 17:2] 2018
► pp. 241–257

A sentiment democracy?

When (and when not) politicians follow their Followers

| Università degli Studi di Milano
Does the interaction with the opinions of ‘friends’ and ‘followers’ affect the behavior of politicians? So far, little attention has been devoted to the effect of social networking sites (SNS) on ‘hard politics’ choices. Focusing on two case studies related to Italian politics, namely the debate on the civil unions bill and the ‘Fertility Day’ crisis, in 2016, this paper tries to fill this gap assessing the influence of SNS on the behavior of politicians. For this purpose, supervised aggregated sentiment analysis and time series analysis are used to evaluate whether politicians surrender to the pressure put on them by their followers. The findings highlight some positive effects in terms of accountability/transparency, though in terms of responsiveness politics seems to continue as usual, and the road toward a full ‘sentiment democracy’ is still far ahead.
Keywords: Parliamentary votes, Government communication, Twitter, Facebook, Sentiment Analysis, e-democracy, responsiveness, accountability
Published online: 20 October 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17007.cer
References

References

Ceron, Andrea
2016 “Competing Principals 2.0? The impact of Facebook in the 2013 selection of the Italian Head of State.” Italian Political Science Review 46(3): 313–333. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017a “Intra-party politics in 140 characters.” Party Politics 23(1): 7–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017b Social Media and Political Accountability: Bridging the Gap between Citizens and Politicians. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ceron, Andrea, Luigi Curini, and Stefano Iacus
2016 “iSA: a fast, scalable and accurate algorithm for sentiment analysis of social media content.” Information Sciences 367–368: 105–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chadwick, Andrew, and Jennifer Stromer-Galley
2016 “Digital Media, Power, and Democracy in Parties and Election Campaigns: Party Decline or Party Renewal?” International Journal of Press/Politics 21(3): 283–293. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fraustino, Julia D., and Liang Ma
2015 “CDC’s Use of Social Media and Humor in a Risk Campaign – “Preparedness 101: Zombie Apocalypse”.” Journal of Applied Communication Research 43(2): 222–241. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, Rachel K.
2015 “Party Change, Social Media and the Rise of ‘Citizen-Initiated’ Campaigning.” Party Politics 21(2): 183–197. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Graham, Todd, Dan Jackson, and Marcel Broersma
2016 “New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of Twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns.” New Media & Society 18(5): 765–783. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, Marc, Mathieu Rosenbaum, and Nakahiro Yoshida
2013 “Estimation of the lead – lag parameter from non-synchronous data.” Bernoulli 19(2): 426–461. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Philip N.
2005 New Media Campaigns and the Managed Citizen. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Karlsson, Martin, and Joachim Åström
2016 “The political blog space: A new arena for political representation?” New Media & Society 18(3): 465–483. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, Anders O.
2013 ““Rejected bits of program code”: Why notions of “Politics 2.0” remain (mostly) unfulfilled.” Journal of Information Technology and Politics 10(1): 72–85. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, Anders O., and Øyvind Ihlen
2015 “Birds of a feather flock together? Party leaders on Twitter during the 2013 Norwegian elections.” European Journal of Communication 30(6): 666–681. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Margetts, Helen
2006 “Cyber Parties.” In Handbook of Party Politics ed by Richard Katz and William Crotty, 528–535. London: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mosca, Lorenzo, Cristian Vaccari, and Augusto Valeriani
2015 “An Internet-Fuelled Party? The Five Star Movement and the Web.” In Beppe Grillo’s Five Star Movement: Organisation, Communication and Ideology ed by Filippo Tronconi, 127–152. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Neuman, Russell W., Lauren Guggenheim, S. Mo Jang, and Soo Young Bae
2014 “The dynamics of public attention: Agenda-setting theory meets big data.” Journal of Communication 64(2): 194–214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Niederdeppe, Jeff, Kathryn Heley, and Colleen Barry
2015 “Inoculation and Narrative Strategies in Competitive Framing of Three Health Policy Issues.” Journal of Communication 65(5): 838–862. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scarrow, Susan E.
2015 Beyond Party Members: Changing Approaches to Partisan Mobilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Suler, John
2004 “The online disinhibition effect.” CyberPsychology and Behavior 7(3): 321–326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tromble, Rebekah
2016 “Thanks for (actually) responding! How citizen demand shapes politicians’ interactive practices on Twitter.” New Media & Society. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vaccari, Cristian, and Augusto Valeriani
2015 “Follow the leader! Direct and indirect flows of political communication during the 2013 Italian general election campaign.” New Media and Society 17(7): 1025–1042. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 “Party Campaigners or Citizen Campaigners? How Social Media Deepen and Broaden Party-Related Engagement.” International Journal of Press/Politics 21(3): 294–312. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vergeer, Maurice, Liesbeth Hermans, and Steven Sam
2013 “Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: the exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style.” Party Politics 19(3): 477–501. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Scott
2012 “Politics as Usual? Revolution, Normalization and a New Agenda for Online Deliberation.” New Media & Society 14(2): 244–261. CrossrefGoogle Scholar