political scientist at hiit
DESCRIPTION
I talk about two themes: 1) a participation system for audiences, and 2) research on social media in the context of politics and elections. The participation system discussed in the first part is a communications tool developed at the Digital Content Communities group of HIIT. For example, during large scale lectures the system empowers the students to take part on the lecture, not to sit back and merely watch the slides. This presentation will focus on the evaluation dimensions and future research we plan to conduct using the system, in addition to a few preliminary results. The second topic examines the use of social media in politics in Finland, and tries to bring a more nordic view to the U.S. dominated research. Preliminary analysis of the parliamentary elections and current work on the municipal elections are discussed.TRANSCRIPT
Political Scientist at HIIT
Matti Nelimarkka [email protected] Twitter: @matnel ; IRCNet: matnel
Today I will talk about
Pervasive participation tool • background
• current system
• preliminary results
• future work
Social media and politicians • background
• parliamentary elections (2011)
• municipal elections (2012)
Participation?!
Voting
Riots
Discussing
E-mailing council members
Contacting administration
Petitions
Liking in Facebook
Anduiza, et al. (2009). Political participation and the internet. Information, Communication & Society, 12: 6, 860 -878
Consuming
van Deth (2001). Studying political participation: towards a theory of everything?. Joint Sessions of Workshops of the European Consortium for Political Research
Participation?!
Voting
Riots
Discussing
E-mailing council members
Contacting administration
Petitions
Liking in Facebook
Consuming
Graham (2012). Beyond ”Political” Communicative Spaces: Talking Politics on the Wife Swap Discussion Forum. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9(1), 31–45.
Dahlberg (2011). Re-constructing digital democracy: An outline of four “positions”. New Media & Society, 13(6), 855–872.
Deliberative digital democracy
Liberal-individualist digital democracy
Hitchhikers guide to Deliberation
A B
a b
Hitchhikers guide to Deliberation
A B α à a
?
a
…
Hitchhikers guide to Deliberation
A B b ≈ a’
b > a?
α = a’
a’ a’
Online world and participation
Machintosh et al (2003): Electronic Democracy and Young People
Jensen (2003): Virtual democratic dialogue? Bringing together citizens and politicians
Albrecht (2006): Whose voice is heard in online deliberation? A study of participation and representation in political debates on the Internet.
Strandberg (2008): Public deliberation goes on-line? An analysis of citizens’ political discussions on the Internet
prior to the Finnish parliamentary elections in 2007
Dahlberg (2001): Extending the public sphere through cyberspace: The case of Minnesota E-Democracy
Baek et al (2011): Online versus face-to-face deliberation: Who? Why? What? With what effects?
They have just been building platforms… What
recommendations would I give to someone building such
system?
They have just been building platforms… What
recommendations would I give to someone building such
system?
“… comparatively testing different forum interfaces to see how they impact deliberation (and other values)
would enhance Saward’s democratic toolkit. …”
Wright (2012). Politics as usual? Revolution, normalization and a new agenda for online deliberation. New Media & Society, 14(2), 244–261.
Presemo and work on that
Backchannels and stuff IRC (McCarthy & boyd, 2005)
Twitter (Elmer, in press)
backchan.nl (Harry et al., 2009)
ClassCommons (Du et al., 2012)
McCarthy, & boyd (2005): Digital backchannels in shared physical spaces. CHI ’05 Elmer (in press). Live research: Twittering an election debate. New Media & Society
Du et al.. (2012):. Augmenting classroom participation through public digital backchannels. GROUP ’12 Harry et al. (2009): backchan.nl. CHI 09
Our Contribution: ���Support for (study of) ���control mechanics���
My thinking
Social structure Affordances and
limitations Feedback mechanics
My thinking
Social structure Affordances and
limitations Feedback mechanics
Anonymity? Message length?
Turn taking?
My thinking
Social structure Affordances and
limitations Feedback mechanics
Computational analysis?
Social feedback? Karma?
Evaluation ‘framework’
Experience
Deliberation
Approaches to study
Maija Matti Minni
Mika
The Study Anonymous Nicks
New threads 2.2 3.4
Responses 3.1 13.8
Σ 3.4 13.6
per contributor
Observation In the context of boarding school students presenting their progress on weekly bases:
1. Anonymous participants and named participants generated circa same amount of new topics
2. Named participants were much more interested in the conversation
Example Mui.
mui rekursiivinen mui mui rekursio jatkuu tuska, rekursio ei mene tämän syvemmälle asia on korja5ava potkitaan ma7a kayte5avyysongelmasta
(with nicks)
Hello. hello recursive hello hello recursion con<nues oh my, the recursion doesn’t go deeper this must be fixed let’s no<fy ma7 about an usability issue
Example oo5e kaikki homoja t. anonymous
väitän, e5ä naisille oikea termi ois "lesbo" väitän e5ä "lesbo" on puhekielinen ilmaus ja myös naispuoliset homot ovat homoja väitän, e5ä ''homo'' on puhekielinen ilmaus ja homot ja lesbot ovat homoseksuaaleja' to5a!
(anonymous)
you’re all gay t. anonymous
i claim that for women the correct term is “lesbian” I claim that "lesbian” is a spoken language term and all female gays are also gays I claim that “gay” is a spoken language term and all gays and lesbians are homosexual I agree
Futu
re w
ork
Something totally different next!
“These are the social media elections”
Previous work
Golbeck et al (2010): Twitter use by the U.S. Congress. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(8)
Adamic & Glance (2005): The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: divided they blog.
Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Link discovery
Lassen & Brown (2011): Twitter: The Electoral Connection. Social Science Computer Review, 29(4)
Schweitzer (2011): Normalization 2.0: A longitudinal analysis of German online campaigns in the national elections 2002-9. European Journal of Communication, 26(4)
Williams & Gulati (in press): Social networks in political campaigns: Facebook and the congressional elections of 2006 and 2008. New Media & Society
Stromer-Galley, J. (2000). On-line interaction and why candidates avoid it. Journal of Communication, 50(4)
Parliamentary elections 2011 Presence in social media Number of followers in social networks
Parliamentary elections 2011 Presence in social media Number of followers in social networks
Younger people are more likely to be present in social media and they are also more active
Parliamentary elections 2011 Presence in social media Number of followers in social networks
The money spend on the campaing does not increase the engagement in the media, even while the presence is increased
Parliamentary elections 2011 Presence in social media Number of followers in social networks
The importance of the party has no positive impact in the presence nor in the engagement.
Parliamentary elections 2011 Presence in social media Number of followers in social networks
Personal attributes have no significant impact.
Social media ~ (big) data
Status updates Comments Likes Shares Friendships Followership
Social media ~ (big) data
Status updates Comments Likes Shares Friendships Followership
Fancy method
We have a clue
Social media ~ (big) data
Status updates Comments Likes Shares Friendships Followership
Fancy method
We have a clue
About what?
Something interesting…
Normalization Homogeneity
Equality Impact
Data – we have it!
{"347840141974498": [{"timestamp": 1347827862, "comments": [], "likes": [], "text": null, "id": "347840141974498_347840168641162", "user": 347840141974498}, {"timestamp": 1347829790, "comments": [{"id": 5464046, "timestamp": 1347965163, "likes": [347840141974498], "user": 100000602647522, "text": "Kovin on aution n\u00e4k\u00f6ist\u00e4 alaosasta,mutta olisiko siin\u00e4 1 aika kirkas t\u00e4hti !"}, {"id": 5480710, "timestamp": 1348351602, "likes": [], "user": 100000309911166, "text": "Onko t\u00e4m\u00e4 jo suursein\u00e4joki?"}, {"id": 5482478, "timestamp": 1348396864, "likes": [1098500432], "user": 347840141974498, "text": "T\u00e4lt\u00e4 se Sein\u00e4joki kokonaisuudessaan n\u00e4ytt\u00e4\u00e4. Pisteet kuvaavat Keskustan kuntavaaliehdokkaita. Arvaatte varmasti minun sijaintini t\u00e4ss\u00e4 kartassa. :)"},
~55 M of Facebook dumps ~25 M of Tweets
Futu
re w
ork
Political Scientist at HIIT
Matti Nelimarkka [email protected] Twitter: @matnel ; IRCNet: matnel