Hunt, Watson and the impact of social media on the nature of politics

More than three-quarters of the electorate would vote via the internet if they could, according to a survey into the impact of social media on the general election.

The survey, conducted by media consultants Lewis Communications, interviewed 1,000 people on their attitudes to the use of social media and digital technology in politics. The findings were released prior to a debate in London on the subject.

Some 56% of those polled had visited political websites, signalling a substantial increase in online politics compared with 1995, while 24% said they regard Twitter as an essential communications tool for politicians. But only 27% would be encouraged to vote for a particular MP if contacted on a social networking site, compared with 47% who said they would not.

"Many commentators believe this will be the UK's first internet election with politicians exploiting channels such as Facebook and Twitter to convey their message,” said Lewis' digital PR director Eb Adeyeri.  "Online campaigns are measurable; are a great way to engage people in real-time; and are clearly going to feature prominently in this election.

With more than half of respondents visiting political websites and three-quarters expressing an interest in voting online, it is imperative that parties recognise and build on this interest. However, there are rules that the parties need to follow if they are to successfully engage with the electorate using social media. A badly-focused social media campaign could do more harm than good as Gordon Brown discovered with his infamous YouTube appearance."

Fifteen per cent of those polled thought Tory leader David Cameron – who (in)famously commented that “too many tweets make a tw*t” - would have the most followers on Twitter of all the political leaders, although some four percent made an interesting pitch to the effect that the late Labour premier Clement Attlee would in fact be the most followed...Some 18% of those polled recognised Kerry McCarthy not as Labour's Twitter tsar, but as an Irish pop star.

The view from the House

Two 'Twitter-friendly' MPs were asked to comment on the findings at a debate session in London with both arguing that there are lessons to be learned if the potential of social media is to be realised in political circles. “Careless Tweets sink fleets,” quipped Shadow Secretary for Culture, Media and Sport Jeremy Hunt. “I think this is analagous to the arrival of email in that it is significant, but it is easy to overstate its significance. If you look back at previous general elections, in 1997 the thing that the parties understood was the importance of good literature. In 2005, direct mail and highly personalised communications were what mattered. In 2010, digital media will be the next big hurdle that the parties have to cross.”

Hunt cited a recent embarrassing example of how the reach of social media is changing the relationship between Mps and their constituents. “Shortly after the expenses scandal broke, I got into a taxi,” he recalls. “The taxi driver must have recognised me as an MP because he gave me two receipts. I blogged about this and the next thing is I get an email from a constituent asking why was I taking a taxi, why didn't I get a tube?  The internet has changed relationships, making us far more accountable for what we do.

“Constituents have access to much more information. In the old days the masters in parliament had more knowledge to hand than their constituents but that's no longer the case. You get emails asking why a particular cancer drug is not available on the NHS and they know more than you. That's a good thing, it's fantastically democratising. As Mps we have to be ready to learn from our constituents.”

While attention is fashionably focused on social media, it may be a more familiar mass medium that really has an impact on the 2010 election, reckoned Tom Watson, MP for West Bromwich East. “The defining characteristic of the next election will be television,” he suggested. “We have the three television debates coming up and those are going to be historic. Now, they might be a let down with no-one watching, but I suspect they will fall in the middle and be seen as quite interesting.”

But there are areas in which social media will have an impact. “It allows people to form groups easily, to come together at scale at low cost,” argues Watson. “It might also draw new people into the political debate, people with every specialist narrow interest.  When politicians are talking about bringing in money for elections, online may help us to find a large number of people who can make small donations rather than a small number of people making large donations.  Most of all there will be an intake of Mps of both parties with innate social media enthusiasm, people who have used technology and the tools in their teens. They will put a huge demand on the parliament of the day.”

Not the year of social media?

"Although social media can contribute to shaping the political mood of the country, it is clear that the traditional channels of communication and engagement prevail," commented  Vuk Trifcovic of research firm Ovum. "That is not to say that social media will not play a part. Preparing for a tight electoral race, the political parties are keen to compete on all fronts in the hope that even modest gains could bring disproportionate benefits by tipping the scales in their favor.

"Nevertheless, it would appear that the parties in the UK are not planning to press on with ambitious and systematic constituent relationship campaigns executed via social media. Ovum notes that the discussion revolves almost exclusively around blogging and microblogging platforms, aimed primarily at communication and collaboration within the caste of politicians, journalists, and interest groups.

"Although there is a sense that life in the Westminster village is evolving due to the use of social media, it is Ovum's impression that this is the extent of the changes . The parties acknowledge that social media can be used to mobilize activists, engage new audiences, or harvest a long tail of donators. However, unless the parties have a surprise up their sleeve, we do not believe that social media will play an integral part of the campaign efforts in the forthcoming elections. Whether the parties will regret not taking the initiative, by implementing strategic and far-reaching social media engagement campaigns, remains to be seen."

Trifcovic reckons that there is more that the parties could do even now. "Given the focus on the TV debates, Ovum would recommend targeted complementary social media campaigns as a good starting point," he suggested. "The parties could benefit from monitoring the sentiment expressed on microblogging platforms or social networks during the debates and follow up by serving appropriate content back to the electorate through social media channels.

"Should the parties adopt more ambitious constituent relationship management initiatives enabled by social media, it is clear that software-as-a-service (SaaS) tools should be the preferred delivery option. Election campaigns have a finite lifespan, require scalability, are prone to unpredictable demand spikes, and have minimal IT staff at their disposal. All of those requirements fit well with the value proposition of the SaaS model, rendering SaaS applications a clear choice in this sub-segment of the constituent relationship management market."