Politics is not my field of research, but since the blog is called All Information On Social Media I should do my best to address the issues brought on by my readers. So here it goes…an item on Politics and Social Media!

In an interview of the Volkskrant (Dutch Newspaper: http://bit.ly/bd9MgO) with our former minister of Home Affairs Guusje ter Horst, she stated that it was an thorn in her side that ministers are communicating with the outside world through new media during meetings. She advocates that the new prime minister should prohibit (?!) the use of twitter, text messages, Internet etc. To me this sounded kind of strange, because the Netherlands has a representative democracy. This means that politicians represent the folk, so why shut the door during discussions and debate away from media spotlights? Why not involve the real-time opinions of the folk?

Politics is communication

Communication is a necessary prerequisite for the functioning of any political system. It needs input – demands of citizens and their expressions – and it needs output – political decisions and actions have to be communicated to the public-.  The mass media are essential for this function.

Understanding the world

Individuals cannot understand the world fully and they constantly struggle to interpret their life experiences and to make sense of the world around them. In order for individuals to efficiently process new information, they apply interpretive schemas or primary frameworks to classify information and interpret it meaningfully. Media and in particular social media have the ability to present relatively complex issues, such as politics, efficiently and in a way that makes the information comprehensible to the public because they play to existing cognitive schemas.

Mediatization of Politics

The intensity of how people rely on mass media to form and shape their opinions over time have been increased. This is called the mediatization of politics. Four phases can be distinguished that should give insight in what the current position of the media for political communication holds. We have reached the fourth and last stage of mediatization of politics called permenantly campaigning.

In this last phase the intensity of the media experiences is much stronger than in the earlier phases. Political actors not only have to adapt to the media but also internalize these and allow the media to become a built-in part of the governing processes. This is, what I think, that Guusje Terhorst wants to prevent.

Social Media and Government

What could social media offer to the government? Possibly the following five things:

  • More differentiation:  Instead of a one-size fits it all approach the government could target and monitor the specific needs and wants of different groups of citizens.
  • Less Jargon: Microblogging applications such as twitter force politicians to give clear cut answers and responses, without  jargon and formal stump speech/press release formats. Also, the informal character of social media invites politicians to write and talk informally and dispose all the jargon.
  • Learn from thousands of interactions: Many conversation take place online. People who have never met physically could have very personal and deep conversations and discussions with each other that are open to the public. Politicians could observe and listen to this and learn more about the problems citizens walk against in daily life.
  • Citizen reviewers: A lot of documents/brochures etc are developed to inform citizens about particular subjects. These document could be posted online so that citizens can tag, comment and rate them.
  • Behavioral feedback: Data site navigation, downloaded information, time spend on the webs, performed clicks etc, is all valuable information that can be used to shape the design and delivery of services.

Practical Implications

The following implications can be drawn from the above stated information:

  • People have a need to classify and simplify information to build a better understanding of things.  Media and in particular social media have the ability to make complex issues simple and to explain it plain and simple, thus without the jargon, what the issue entails.  This makes discussion about the topic possible.
  • Social media have the properties to enhance the communication between politicians/government and citizens; to engage citizens in the political decision-making which is the basic foundation of democracy and to improve the delivery of services.
  • Using social media for political objectives is still in an experimental phase. Of course there are risks, but the exact risks of the usage of social media applications will only enlighten when these apps are used. Effective and efficiently make use of these apps is a learning process as with everything I suppose.

These implications are not as clear cut as the previous post, but politics and engagement of citizens is a complex process. As said earlier, politics is not my field of research, but I do hope that this post has given some perspective on how social media could be used for political purposes. But I do know one thing and that is that I disagree with Guusje Terhorst.

I don’t think that cutting the communication with the outside world during meeting is a good solution. prohibiting mobiles with internet possibilities is a good solution. We should actually all make use of the collective intelligence that characterizes social media and brainstorm together on how we can effectively make use of social media applications to support governmental processes and effectively engage citizens into the political decision-making process.

Therefore I would like to end this post by encouriging you all to join he discussion and share your point of thoughts regarding this subject!