Campaign & Social Media-2

Running Head: 2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA 1

The 2012 U.S Presidential Campaign and Social Media:

The Role of Social Media in Young Voter Perceptions of Presidential Candidates

Ashley Behara, Christopher Naley, Anna Ragland, Emma Szyller, and Jacob Torres

St. Edward’s University

2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN & SOCIAL MEDIA2

Introduction

Presidential campaigns are marked with political theater, fanfare, and the thrill of

democratic excitement. A good campaign will generate civic duty, as well as interest

amongst the larger American public. Most importantly, the campaign aims to humanize a

candidate, making them appear to be more trustworthy and caring of their constituency.

This political theater has garnered interest within our group, and has encouraged us to

investigate how it is used in a matter that affects us. Our age group, 18-30, is a highly

coveted demographic amongst politicians, and thus many messages are aimed in trying to

vie for its attention (Hong & Nadler, 2012). Of those mediums used to spread the

message, social media has been branded the primary method of reaching our

demographic.

The present study aims to analyze political campaign strategy with an established

Communication framework to explain how social media messages are being interpreted

by the youth demographic. Reiterating, how is social media being used to increase

presidential candidates credibility, and is it effective?

Literature Review

New technological innovations have been central to transforming the dynamics of

presidential elections with the emergence of radio, television, Internet, and currently,

social media. Past research indicates that management of new media technology is the

framework for a successful political campaign (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).

Communication theorist Marshall McLuhan (1964) identified media as “technological

extensions of the body”, a proclamation that still resonates today as American culture is

saturated in the convenience of “smart phones” and social media. McLuhan (1964)


argues that the content of the message plays a secondary role to the medium itself,

coining the axiom “the medium is the message.” The continued growth of the Internet

and social media supports McLuhan’s argument (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).

Presidential campaigns must adapt to new technologies, employ the tools voters are

using, and most importantly, have a message that resonates with the voters (Metzgar &

Maruggi, 2009).

Emerging media has been influencing the perception of presidential candidates

since the advent of radio. In analyzing influence of radio as a new technology in

campaigning, Mary Beth Leidman and Zack Stiegler (2011) point out that Calvin

Coolidge was the original U.S. President to foster a relationship between broadcasting

and the presidency. Coolidge was the first to broadcast his inauguration, an address to

Congress, and a political speech over the air (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). While Coolidge

introduced radio to the presidency, his successors intensified and refined the use of this

medium. Following Coolidge, Herbert Hoover gained notoriety by using radio to

establish frequent and direct contact between the President and everyday people

(Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). Furthermore, Hoover would address events that he could not

attend in person via the radio (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). Hoover maximized his use of

radio and as a result, gained cultural prominence (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).

Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) notably changed how presidents use media to

address the nation with his fireside chats. His campaign strategy was not only to continue

reaching the Americans via the radio, but analyzed the psychographics of his audience.

FDR’s campaign took into consideration that most people listened to the radio in the

comfort of their home, and that required a different manner of address (Leidman &


Stiegler, 2011). The use of media in this way marked a political shift. Politicians were

no longer simply orators, but were now figures of public address, speaking to the

audience collectively and building a sense of intimacy with the American public

(Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). His addresses were accessible and understandable to

everyday people. FDR’s choice of words created a sense of an individual belonging to the

grand-national “us”. FDR’s fireside chats and rhetoric were so effective that his strategies

have influenced the ways in which U.S. presidents utilize mass media technologies

(Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).

Another paradigm shift in media occurred with the invention of the television.

According to the New York Times, in 1960, 70 million viewers tuned in to watch Senator

John F. Kennedy and Vice President Richard Nixon in the first-ever televised presidential

debate. A series of four debates were aired and became the epicenter for the election’s

media strategy (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). Gaining notoriety as “The Great Debates,”

this marked television’s grand entrance into presidential election process. In examining

the televised debates, the first observation is the difference in the candidates’

appearances. JFK appears vibrant and personable while Nixon has a tired and

unenthusiastic demeanor. The differences in their image and performance collectively

gave Kennedy a victory in harnessing mass media (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). The 1960

presidential campaign exemplifies the integral role of a contemporaneous new media in

the political process. Studies often compare the trends that exist in JFK’s media

strategies and Barack Obama that have set a precedent for future political campaigns.

Their victories demonstrate that the framework for a successful campaign is paved on full

utilization of new media (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011).


The 2008 presidential campaign between Barack Obama and John McCain

notoriously became known as the “Internet Election.” While the use of the web in

presidential elections dates back to 2000, Obama was the first to mobilize a social

networking movement. In a recent Harvard University study, Hong and Nadler (2012)

argue that President Obama’s successful use of the web played a vital role in the success

of his campaign. Hong and Nadler (2012) reported that at the height of Obama’s

campaign, he employed over one hundred employees to work on his social media

outreach. In addition, Obama was the first to hold a virtual news conference via Twitter,

with members of the Senate able to submit question in real time (Hong & Nadler, 2012).

Obama also invoked FDR’s rhetorical movement of addressing his web supporters using

first-person plural and the second person phrases such as “join us” or “help us.” This

positions web users as active members of a presidential campaign (Leidman & Stiegler,

2011).

The rise of the Internet within the past decade has brought about cultural

revolutions familiar to millions of people around the world. These cultural revolutions

have been brought about primarily by social media websites such as Facebook and

Twitter. Social media sites enable various forms of interaction with fellow citizens and

political actors that were not possible prior to its growth (Kushkin & Yamamoto, 2010).

Furthermore, today’s younger generation no longer receives the majority of its

information from newspapers or television news, as did those in previous generations,

relying instead upon social media. Social media has given college students, specifically,

the opportunity to continue being informed citizens through a more interactive media

outlet.


Presidential candidates, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have looked towards

social media to garner support from college-aged students and other younger

demographics. The present study explores the efficiency of these outreaches. Natch

Greyes examined the use of social media during the midterm House of Representative

election cycle two years ago in and concluded that many campaigns failed to appreciate

the new media’s ability to foster interaction with voters. He suggests that these

campaigns did not truly understand how to effectively use email, phone, and mail

communications. They failed to take advantage of the potential genuine, two-way lines of

communication with voters and instead used a one-way message strategy. It should be

noted however, that many differences exist between midterm and presidential elections,

and the ability to rally behind one political figure is arguably easier when compared to

the many seats at stake in a house or senate election.

Greyes observed that a two-way line of communication was used somewhat

effectively by Obama in the 2008 election. During this election, Obama was able to rally

support amongst college-aged students through his use of social media. Some speculate

he won because of the “young vote.”

Many young voters in 2008 obtained their information about a particular

candidate via social media, with approximately 27% of adults younger than 30 reported

obtaining campaign information from social media sites (Kushkin & Yamamoto, 2010).

This number is believed to increase during the current 2012 presidential election

campaign. Currently, Barack Obama’s campaign Facebook has just under 29 million

“likes,” while Mitt Romney has approximately 8.5 million. This piece of information


may support the claim that Obama’s 2008 win was heavily influenced by young voters,

who tend to be the primary users of Facebook.

According to Greyes, once you have piqued an online audience’s interest, its

members will happily spread your message by posting it on other new media sites or

passing it on to friends and acquaintances. The power of social media in relation to

college-age students is visible through the fairly recent political protests of the Egyptian

and Libyan governments. Websites such as Facebook and Twitter assisted in rallying

young, college-aged people to become politically disciplined, pragmatic, and

collaborative (Howard & Parks, 2012).

Today, Facebook and Twitter dominates American contemporary media culture

with social networking tools. Social networking has broadened the dialogue between

presidential candidates and the American public. A study analyzing Twitter and current

presidential campaign to date found that a candidate’s Twitter activities are associated

with the number of mentions they receive (Hong & Nadler, 2012). Analyzing the use of

media in presidential campaigns provides insight to the social and cultural impact of new

media in the U.S. (Leidman & Stiegler, 2011). Studies demonstrated that the aggregate

effect of social media helps determine how voters view the election (Metzgar & Maruggi,

2009). The present study will explore the relationship between the use of social media

and influence of voter perception. The study will look specifically at how Twitter and

Facebook affect the 2012 presidential candidate’s credibility.

According to the Source Credibility theory one is more likely to be persuaded

when the source presents itself as credible (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). Previous

research has examined source credibility’s effect on the opinion and behavior of the


receiver, and suggests that highly credible sources generate more positive opinions and

more behavioral compliance than do less credible sources (Hovland & Weiss, 1951).

Hovland and Weiss (1951) found that credible public speakers were more persuasive than

their less credible counterparts. Accordingly, a decrease in the source’s credibility

negatively affects the attitude of the receiver toward that source (Hovland & Weiss, 1951;

Teven & Herring, 2005).

Source credibility impact on persuasion can be observed using the Heuristic-

Systematic model and the Elaboration Likelihood model. When elaboration is low,

source credibility functions as a “heuristic” or cue to persuasion, however, when

elaboration is moderate, source credibility influences the quantity of processing which

takes place (Tormala, Briñol, & Petty, 2007).

Hovland, Janis and Kelley (1953) suggest two primary dimensions of credibility;

trustworthiness and expertness. Trustworthiness refers to an audience perception of the

validity of a communicator’s claims (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). With regard to a

political campaign, trustworthiness refers to the degree to which voters put their trust in a

candidate. Expertness refers to the communicator qualification to offer valid and precise

information or to discuss a specific issue (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). McCroskey

and Teven (1999) identify goodwill as a third dimension of source credibility. Goodwill

refers to the audience perception of the source’s caring for them and whether the source

has their best interest at heart (McCroskey & Teven, 1999). If a candidate expresses

concern about the wellbeing of people, it might influence the opinion of voters of

whether a candidate might introduce policies that will benefit them. Voters are more

likely to perceive a candidate as credible if he or she connects well with the public.


The credibility of presidential elections candidates develops over the course of a

campaign. A variety of sources influence voters’ perceptions of candidates including

campaign advertising, debates, news media, and the candidates’ communication

behavior. While a candidate position on certain issues or policies influences voters, his or

her personality and perceived credibility is perhaps the prime concern in shaping voter’s

choice (Stephen et al., 2004).

These findings are incongruent with research by Westerman, Spence & Van Der

Heide (2012), suggesting that social media users are inclined to be less trusting of official

sources. That is to say social and online media credibility does not seem to have a link

with “officialness”. This research of Twitter and its influence on current events and

news directly relates to how we assess credibility of a presidential candidate and deserves

further exploration.

The present study will expand upon this research, identifying the good media

strategies used in the current presidential election and analyzing their effectiveness by

examining the candidate’s credibility. Remaining congruent with the operationalized

definition of credibility our research will examine trustworthiness, expertness, and

perceived goodwill. The present study will provide a framework by which future social

media campaigns may be analyzed.

Are presidential candidates using social media effectively, and does it have an

impact upon their affect their credibility?

H1: Young voters’ level of interest in their political candidates' online postings will be

positively correlated with perceived candidate credibility


Methods

Participants

The study involves fifty-five (55) participants and was limited to the

researchers’ “friends” and “followers” on the social media sites “Facebook” and

“Twitter” in the United States. The participants represent various educational

backgrounds, careers, and classifications. In this study, demographics were observed and

collected in data compilation. The average age of the participants was 24.7 years, with a

range of 18-69. The modal age was 21. Participants’ political affiliations ranged a large

spectrum. The majority, 41% of participants identified with the Democratic Party.

Second highest affiliation came from Independents with 18%, followed closely by

Libertarian and Unaffiliated participants at 11%. Republican participants made up 9% of

the study. Of the 55 participants, 70.91% reported following at least one political

candidate or party on a social media website. 38.18% of participants reported being

occasionally interested in candidates’ postings on social media sites. Participation in this

study was voluntary and confidential.

Procedure

Each researcher used a convenience sample to gather volunteers to participate in

an online survey through social media sites regarding their experience following the

presidential candidates. The use of this convenience sample is appropriate in this

particular study particularly given that social media users were the targeted audience. The

survey, created by the researchers, consisted of five demographic questions and ten

questions for each of the three observed variables. The study utilized QuestionPro, an

online survey software website, to distribute the survey by creating a link to the questions


entered by the researchers. Each researcher posted a link to the survey through their

Facebook and Twitter accounts. The researchers requested participation from those who

use social media to follow the activities of the presidential candidates during the 2012

campaign. Participants were first presented with a consent form that informed them of the

study and risks involved. Each participant then responded to a series of questions

concerning political candidates, or political parties, use of social media. In addition to the

demographic data, the questions were designed to obtain data regarding the three

variables: trustworthiness, likeability, and credibility. The collection of data began on

October 31, 2012 until the presidential elections on November 6, 2012.

Measurements

As addressed in the introduction, this research is based on a scale that measures

credibility. The researchers used the operational definition of credibility based on the

Source Credibility Theory, which states that a person will be more persuaded if a person

presents himself or herself as credible. In this study’s case, it is whether one Presidential

candidate’s online credibility is more persuasive than the other.

The scale of credibility the research used was broken down into three sub-

categories consisting of trustworthiness, expertness, and perceived goodwill. Using those

three sections the researchers constructed an online survey. The survey included

demographic questions like the participants age, and political affiliations along with

questions shaped to place a numerical value on trustworthiness, expertness, or perceived

goodwill as they relate to the research. Questions like began by gathering background

information on the participants’ social media use, and their knowledge of Presidential

Candidates social media use. Questions like, “Do you follow at least one political


candidate, or party, on a social media website?” Then they transitioned into questions

designed to fit into the scale we used. Questions like, “How attuned to current events is

your candidate on social media?” The researchers formatted each question to measure

one of the three sub categories.

All questions were formatted on a scale rating of poor, below average, average,

good, or excellent. Numerical values were assigned to each response to allow for further

data analysis. The researchers asked willing volunteers to take the survey by posting the

link to the survey onto social media outlets.

Data Collection Procedures

After the presidential election on November 6, 2012, the researchers decided to

close the survey and begin collecting data. As previously mentioned, a total of fifty-five

surveys were completed by volunteering participants. After closing the survey,

researchers were able to view a results page on QuestionPro, which showed each

participant’s answers. Researchers used this page to transfer survey results into a

Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.

Results

H1 predicted that young voters’ level of interest in their political candidates'

online postings will be positively correlated with perceived candidate credibility

Preliminary analysis

The descriptive statistics for each variable are depicted in Appendix A.

Reliabilities for the three dimensions of candidate credibility—expertness, perceived

goodwill, and trustworthiness—are depicted in Appendix B. Expertness, was reliable at

an alpha level of .93, perceived goodwill, alpha=.87, and trustworthiness, alpha=.96.


During the course of the study, there were little to no ethical concerns facing the

researchers. Survey participants were asked to voluntarily participate in the study

regardless of political affiliation or any other ethically-challenging issue. Participants

were also not subject to any deception.

The present study was limited in the available sample, and thus results should not

be overgeneralized to a larger population without first taking this in to account. The

convenience sample consisted primarily of college-aged students and was limited in the

amount of available participants. The present study benefitted from conducting its

survey over the medium of social media, which ensured that all participants were social

media users, and increased the targeting of the sample. It should be noted however that

some social media users did not follow political candidates on said media. This may

have an impacted the results, due to limitations encountered by survey functionality. To

improve upon this, future testing will prompt a conclusion of the survey, following a

user’s selection of ‘following Zero candidates’.

The implications of the present study are far reaching. Though the millennial

generation is most commonly reached out to through the use of social media, not enough

scientific research has gone in to the actual effectiveness of said approach. The present

study expands the literature on the subject and sets a framework for further studies on the

subject.


References

Greyes, Natch. “The Untapped Potential of Social Media.” Campaigns and Elections. (2010): 44-

47.

Hong, S. and D. Nadler (2012). Which candidates do the public discuss online in an election

campaign?: The use of social media by 2012 presidential candidates and its impact on

candidate salience. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 455-461.

Hovland, Carl and Weiss, Walter (1951), "The Influence of Source Credibility on

Communication Effectiveness," Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650.

Hovland, Carl I., Irving L. Janis, and Harold, H. Kelly (1953), Communication and Persuasion.

New Haven, CT: Yale Uni. Press.

Howard, P. and M. Parks. “Social Media and Political Change: Capacity, Constraint, and

Consequence.” Journal of Communication. 60 (2012): 359-362.

Kushin, M. and M. Yamamoto. “Did Social Media Really Matter? College Students’ Use of

Online Media and Political Decision Making in the 2008 Election.” Mass

Communication and Society. 13 (2010): 608-630.

Leidman, M. B. and Z. Stiegler (2011). Then and now: A content analysis of media used in the

presidential election campaigns of Kennedy and Obama. Sociology Study, 1, 1-10.

McCroskey, J. C., & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its

measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90-103.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extension of Man. 2nd ed. New York: New

American Library.

Metzgar, E. and A. Maruggi (2009). Social media and the 2008 U.S. presidential election.

Journal of New Communications Research, 4, 141-165.


Stephen, T., Harrison, T. M., Husson, W., & Albert, D. (2004). Interpersonal communication

styles of political candidates: Predicting winning and losing candidates in three U.S.

presidential elections. In K. L. Hacker (Ed.), Presidential candidate images (pp. 177-

196). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.

Teven, J. J., & Herring, J. E. (2005). Teacher influence in the classroom: A preliminary

investigation of instructor power, perceived credibility, and student satisfaction.

Communication Research Reports, 22, 235-246.

Tormala, Z. L., Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2007). Multiple Roles for Source Credibility under

High Elaboration: It’s all in the timing. Social Cognition, 25(4), 536-552.

Westerman, D., Spence, P. R., & Van Der Heide, B. (2012). A Social Network as Information:

The effect of system generated reports of connectedness on credibility on Twitter.

Computers In Human Behavior, 28(1), 199-206.

Documents

Campaign & Social Media-2