politics via sms: message sent?
DESCRIPTION
Politics via SMS: Message sent?. Dimitra Dimitrakopoulou Instructor at the Department of Public Relations and Communication, Technological Educational Institute of Western Macedonia PhD Candidate, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Politics via SMS: Message sent?
Dimitra Dimitrakopoulou
Instructor at the Department of Public Relations and Communication, Technological Educational Institute of
Western Macedonia
PhD Candidate, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication,
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
Focus of the paper
The aim of this present paper is to examine the use of SMS (Short Message System) as a new form of political communication.
We present the empirical research that we have conducted in order to examine the new form of political communication via mobile text messaging in the Greek political scene.
We have focused particularly on the pre-election campaign of the Greek parliamentary elections of 7th March 2004.
Which elements of political communication do mobile text
messaging incorporate? Non verbal, written form of political
communication Include political content Aim to influence the electorate Are an intentional production and transmission
of messages which is achieved regardless of spatial and temporal boundaries
The revolutionary feature of SMS which all new ICTs share, is the transcendence of any intermediaries (in this case, journalists) which act as carriers of political messages in traditional media
ICTs offer a unique opportunity to politicians to communicate with their electorate directly without the need of journalists
“The next social revolution” in “the third age of political
communication” Rheingold studies the phenomenon of “smart mobs” as the next social revolution.
For Rheingold, “mobile communications and pervasive computing technologies, together with social contracts that were never possible before, are already beginning to change the way people meet, mate, work, fight, buy, sell, govern and create. Some of these changes are beneficial and empowering, and some amplify the capabilities of people whose intentions are malignant”
Blumler and Kavanagh: the third age of political communication is characterized by “more cyber politics”.
Cyber politics will evolve into three directions: a.) it could become a campaign medium in its own right, not necessarily displacing but supplementing more traditional ones, b.) it could become an important vehicle of interest group solidification and mobilization within and across national boundaries and c.) it could diversify the exposure to political communication of those regular users who enjoy exploring the access to a wider range of views and perspectives that the Internet affords.
OWNERSHIP OF MOBILE PHONE, 2001 - 2004
Do you own a mobile phone?
15-65 years old
Total sample
Source: VPRC, www.vprc.gr (last accessed 2/2/2005)
IMPORTANCE OF MOBILE PHONE, 2002 - 2004
How important is the mobile phone for you personally?
Very Quite Little Not at all
Source: VPRC, www.vprc.gr (last accessed 2/2/2005)
Empirical researchResearch questions:
How do politicians use/exploit this new communication medium?
How does mobile text messaging affect the communication between political candidates and voters?
Is text messaging a way of empowerment of the citizen as far as his/her information and political involvement are concerned? (from the politicians’ point of view)
What is the importance of communication via SMS in comparison to communication with other media?
Hypotheses to be tested
Politicians use SMS as a way to communicate with the electorate as far as procedural and informational only issues are concerned.
SMS constrain to a large extent the communication between politicians and citizens.
Traditional media still count as more important for politicians.
Methodology
Our field work was conducted during 8-22 February 2005.
We used a structured questionnaire with 11 close-ended questions. The questionnaire was sent all 300 Members of the Greek Parliament via email.
66 completed questionnaires were returned, which amount to 22% of our total sample.
SMS USE
Yes46%
No54%
FREQUENCY
10%
2 με 453%
> 547%
66,7
6,7
20
0
6,7
0
80
6,7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Invitation-information for aspeech/meeting
Reminder ofyour
candidature
Rally ofvolunteers
Wishes forNamedays
CONTENT
0
66,7
27,8
5,6
11,1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
High cost Impersonalcommunication
Annoyance of the voter Contraint of politicalspeech
Other
REASONS
0
9,1
45,5
24,2
6,1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Not at all
Little
Quite
Very
Extremely
IMPORTANCE OF FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION VIA SMS - CHEAP
0
0
12,1
27,2
45,5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Not at all
Little
Quite
Very
Extremely
FAST
9,1
21,1
9,1
12,1
30,3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Little
Quite
Very
Extremely
IMMEDIATE
6,1
6,1
21,1
36,3
12,1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Little
Quite
Very
Extremely
FLEXIBLE
3
6,1
18,2
27,2
33,3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Little
Quite
Very
Extremely
MASS
12,1
15,2
51,5
15,2
6,1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
very low
low
average
high
very high
LEVEL OF EMPOWERMENT OF THE POLITICIANS' COMMUNICATION WITH THE ELECTORATE
6,1
24,2
54,5
15,2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Not at all
Little
Quite
Very
Extremely
IMPORTANCE OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION VIA SMS
NE
WS
PA
PE
RS
Littl
e
Ver
y
TELE
VIS
ION
Littl
e
Ver
y
RA
DIO
Littl
e
Ver
y
INTE
RN
ET
Littl
e
Ver
y
EM
AIL
Littl
e
Ver
y
SM
S
Littl
e
Ver
y
S1
0 0 0
33,3
54,5
6,1
0 0 0
15,2
78,8
03
30,3
45,5
15,2
0
24,2
54,5
12,1
30
42,4
30,3
15,2
6,1
0
36,336,3
18,2
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
MASS MEDIA IMPORTANCE - MASS RANGE
NE
WS
PA
PE
RS
Littl
e
Ver
y
TELE
VIS
ION
Littl
e
Ver
y
RA
DIO
Littl
e
Ver
y
INTE
RN
ET
Littl
e
Ver
y
EM
AIL
Littl
e
Ver
y
SM
S
Littl
e
Ver
y
S1
6,1
21,2
33,3
24,2
9,1
6,1
12,1
15,2
24,2
36,3
3
18,218,2
42,4
12,1
6,1
15,2
27,3
21,2
24,2
3
12,1
33,3
21,2
24,2
9,1
12,1
42,4
12,1
18,2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
MASS MEDIA IMPORTANCE - INTERACTIVITY
36,3
27,3
24,2
6,1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Agree
Nor agree nor disagree
Disgree
Don't know/Don't answer
THE SENDING OF SMS…IS AN EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION MEDIUM WITH THE ELECTORATE
42,4
24,2
18,2
12,1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Agree
Nor agree nor disagree
Disgree
Don't know/Don't answer
...IS EXTREMELY CHEAP
54,5
15,2
21,2
3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Agree
Nor agree nor disagree
Disgree
Don't know/Don't answer
...IS IMPERSONAL
27,3
27,3
27,3
12,1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Agree
Nor agree nor disagree
Disgree
Don't know/Don't answer
...IS ANNOYING FOR THE RECEIVERS
54,5
27,3
6,1
6,1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Agree
Nor agree nor disagree
Disgree
Don't know/Don't answer
...CONSTRAINTS AND IMPOVERISHES POLITICAL SPEECH
66,6
21,2
12,1
3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Agree
Nor agree nor disagree
Disgree
Don't know/Don't answer
...CANNOT REPLACE THE COMMUNICATION VIA THE PRESS
78,8
12,1
0
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Agree
Nor agree nor disagree
Disgree
Don't know/Don't answer
...CANNOT REPLACE THE COMMUNICATIOJ VIA THE TELEVISION
0
3
48,5
12,1
39,4
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Through mobile phonecompany
Through the companythat provided the
service of mass sendingof SMS
Through personaldatabase
Through written consentof receivers
Don't know/Don't answer
WAY OF ACQUISITION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS
KNOWLEDGE OF LEGISLATION
Yes88%
No12%
6,1
21,2
51,5
21,2
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
very low low average high very high
LEVEL OF OFFENSE OF PERSONAL DATA'S PROTECTION
Conclusions Politicians who use SMS as a new form of political
communication limit it to sending messages for procedural purposes (information and invitations for speeches and public meetings) and wishes.
Mobile text messaging is considered a subsidiary form of political communication, which is obvious in the respondents’ answers in the questions of empowerment and importance of communication via SMS.
Traditional media, with the television standing at the top of the hierarchy, still count as more important for politicians. New ICTs (Internet, email, SMS) come second in their preferences, which can partially be attributed to the low penetration and use of the new media in Greece.
The respondents do not seem to identify the sending of SMS as spamming or unwanted communication. However, this last issue is extremely important and needs definitely more elaboration and in depth research in order to clarify the vague issue of the citizens’ protection from unwanted communication.
