Pol Comm 10 Aesthetics & Web 2.0

The aestheticisation of politics and the use of

Web 2.0

Lecture 10

Perception Politics

“Princes do not need to possess all qualities necessary for good governance, but they should certainly appear to possess them”

Niccolo Machiavelli The Prince c1498

Perception Politics (De Vries)Political Identity

Personality ImpressionsCandidate Image

Political Impression Management

Perception

Emotion Cognition

Impression Formation

Voter Attitudes

Observations Research among the young

Interested in political issues Not interested in news about politicians

Politicians seek to celebritise themselves Offer an alternative perspective of them Try to connect with masses But are we bovvered?

Research among the young Interested in political issues Not interested in news about politicians

Politicians seek to celebritise themselves Offer an alternative perspective of them Try to connect with masses But are we bovvered?

Research among the young Interested in political issues Not interested in news about politicians

Politicians seek to celebritise themselves Offer an alternative perspective of them Try to connect with masses But are we bovvered?

Celebrity Politicians Project an aesthetic character

Or is that synthetic Allow the appearance of authenticity

Humanisation / Symbolic Representation Take politics into other fora / media

Dumbing down / Infotainment ‘infoenterpropagainment’ Rachel Caulfield

Are these appropriate?

The challenge for politicians! Prominence is the oxygen of politics If you are not on Television you don’t exist So...

Do you accept any offer of TV coverage? Do you only choose ‘serious’ programmes? What will get you the better image? Do politicians ever look good on TV?

New Media – New Opportunities

Alternative impressions

Jackson & Lilleker, forthcoming (Book to be published 2011)

The Online Environment Cluttered Open Access Mediated and Unmediated

Can we distinguish always?

A site for numerous battlegrounds

Web 1.0 versus 2.0 Web 1.0

Information provision Static, one to many communication Non-adaptive/adaptable

Web 2.0 conversations, interpersonal networking, personalisation

and individualism relationships, communities & interaction User led and generated An architecture of participation with a flat hierarchy

Comfort Zones Main

Local and national press, television Understand shared needs despite hostility

Secondary Preparation of material for Web 1.0 Creating websites/e-newsletters

Web 2.0?

Web 2.0 for political communication

Advantages Interactivity – direct conversation Connectedness - relational Participatory deliberation

Disadvantages Losing control Levelling the playing field No hierarchy or guaranteed credibility

The norms of Web 2.0 Conversations Three-way Participation Co-creation Flattened heirarchies

The drive for a digital strategy “The goal of developing a digital strategy is to turn

anxiety into advantage, by replacing current planning and strategic activities with new ones better suited to a business environment populated by killer apps” (Downes & Mui, 2000:11)

Suggests embracing or rejecting! But that rejection is not really an option

Politics on the Web Majority is PR based

Websites promoting constituency service Web 1.0 informational role Email to subscribers E-newsletters among supporters Editing entries on Wikis

Adventures in Web 2.0 MySpace, Facebook and the social network Blogging Facebook apps Kerry McCarthy – Twitter Tsar Second Life

SNS & Blog content changing

Delegate (of a group) 88 items

Trustees (parliamentary work) 147 items

Party (megaphones) 206 items

Constituency (representatives) 172 items

Jackson & Lilleker (2009) Me, MySpace and I; British Politics, Vol 4. No. 2. pp 236-264

Where conversations take place

• Suggests aesthetics important to ‘friends’

Interactivity in peacetime and elections

The potential for political communication “A “private-collective” model of innovation

where [participants] obtain private rewards from [contributing] for their own [and the community’s gratification], sharing their [ideas], and collectively contributing to the development and improvement of [policy]”

Adapted from Krogh, Spaeth & Lakhani 2003

Web 1.5 – impression management

You can ‘meet’ the politician, but

You do not get thechance to talk

Thoughts To what extent can and should politicians

aestheticise their personality? Can that be done in a mass-mediated

environment? Is Web 2.0 the answer and why? Are current adventures in Online Political

Communication about interacting or getting media coverage? – what is appropriate?

What role can this play for low involved publics? Can this influence public opinion – speculate!