Upload
darren-lilleker
View
516
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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!