“Social media affect the election campaign, but not the outcome”

Enlarge

Anna Sophie Kümpel is Chair Professor of Communication, with a special focus on media reception and effects, at LMU’s Department of Media and Communication. In our interview, she explains the role of social media in elections and the significance of large followings.

Parties advertise on posters, at information stands, in print media, and on social networks. What roles do social media play in politics today?

Anna Sophie Kümpel: All the elements you mentioned play a role, but the importance of online information channels, and not least social media platforms, has substantially increased in recent years. Traditional campaigning methods such as posters and information stands continue to serve the local presence of politicians and parties and the mobilization of voters. And media presence in traditional formats like talk shows and TV debates remains important for reaching the public.

Social media platforms allow parties to appeal directly and interactively to eligible voters. What you need here is a good feel for the logic of the respective platforms and a style of communication that fits the medium.

Can an individual post sway an election, or is the effect more of a cumulative nature?

The forming of political opinions is generally a longer-term process, affected by a variety of factors such as a person’s background, personal experiences, and social environment. That being said, media also play a role here – albeit more cumulatively and over longer periods. Although a single successful post can garner a lot of immediate attention and spark debates, by and large it will lead to lasting changes in opinion or voting decisions only in exceptional cases.

So do we overestimate the importance of social media for elections?

Social media have a growing influence on information usage, and consequently opinion formation, especially among younger voters. Current survey data from the Reuters Institute Digital News Report shows that 35 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds describe social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram as their main source of news. This does not mean, however, that they decide elections. Overall, the use of social media is just one factor among many. What we can say is that social media platforms influence the style of campaigning, but not the election outcome.

How do the style of political address and the topics covered differ among the various social networks?

TikTok is predominantly used by younger people, while Facebook is increasingly becoming the network for older folks. TikTok calls for short, visually appealing content, often humorous or emotional in nature. Political messages have to get to the point quickly and come in creative packaging – otherwise, users will swipe past them. Facebook, by contrast, is suitable, at least in principle, for more detailed information through its linking of content and different presentation logic. Certainly, the choice of platform has a major influence on which political content is presented and how.

In Germany, the AfD party has long dominated political TikTok. Now other parties are trying to catch up. Can they succeed with clips like the one with Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s briefcase?

The AfD was quick to recognize the potential of TikTok and uses the platform primarily to address young voters. Its success is owing to the party’s calculated digital strategy but is also amplified by the platform itself. After all, researchers have found that social media algorithms are ‘partial’ to simple, emotional, and often radical positions. Other parties are now attempting to leverage TikTok more. This can work when the content is authentic and matches the party’s image.

Is it really necessary for political messages to be presented in rap songs on social media? Shouldn’t young people be interested in their future without such gimmicks?

It’s always important to address target groups with tailored content – whether you’re targeting older or younger votes. Experimenting with new formats and editing styles can pay off specifically when using social media. But authenticity is always crucial. When parties or politicians try to adopt youth or platform cultures, it can come across as forced and embarrassing. In any case, the topics addressed are usually more important than the presentation style.

Do factual and sober posts even have a chance to go viral?

Pointed and provocative posts do indeed often have a wider reach, as they generate more interactions. Nevertheless, factual and informative contributions can also be successful if they address relevant topics and offer added value to users. But without question, it’s a major challenge to create political content that algorithms ‘like’ yet which are not overly abbreviated or emotionalized.

Do large numbers of followers automatically mean a lot of votes in an election?

A large number of followers on social media cannot be converted into votes in the ballot box. Although they’re a factor in the visibility of content on the platforms themselves, they have few real-world implications. This becomes clear when we consider that a follow does not even mean that a person sympathizes with a party or would vote for it.

This brings us neatly to filter bubbles: Do social networks just reinforce existing opinions, or do they also offer new perspectives?

Current research indicates that the fear of filter bubbles is warranted only to a certain extent – even on social media, people consistently encounter contrary opinions. Nevertheless, platform algorithms have a considerable influence on the information flow and can exert their power particularly when users get their information exclusively through social media or deliberately spend time in politically homogeneous online networks. What’s crucial, therefore, is how people use social media and their ability, and willingness, to consciously engage with other opinions and positions.

Is there a danger that politicians will only give short TikTok-friendly speeches in the future and adopt overly polarized positions on election issues?

There is nothing new in politicians adapting their public appearances to the logic of different media – speeches and public addresses were always written in the knowledge that the statements would be picked up and disseminated by the media. However, I don’t think that a complete ‘TikTokification’ of politics is necessarily on the cards. Certainly, it will become increasingly important for politicians to be able to present complex subjects in a simple and succinct manner. But this can also be an opportunity – as long as politicians avoid the pitfalls of excessive emotionalization and polarization.