IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v8y2020i2p197-207.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Following Politicians on Social Media: Effects for Political Information, Peer Communication, and Youth Engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Franziska Marquart

    (Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Jakob Ohme

    (Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Judith Möller

    (Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Young citizens increasingly turn to social media platforms for political information. These platforms enable direct communication between politicians and citizens, circumventing the influence of traditional news outlets. We still know little about the consequences of direct contact with politicians on such platforms for citizens’ political participation. Here, we argue that the interplay of different actors in the political news diet of citizens should be investigated from a networked communication perspective. Relying on a cross-sectional survey of young Danes (15–25 years old, n = 567), we investigate the relationship between following politicians on social media and: (a) the composition of young citizens’ political media diet; and (b) their civic messaging and campaign participation. Following political actors on social media relates to increased campaign engagement and can be a catalyst for young people’s exposure to campaign news, but their friends and followers function as the main node of their political online networks. We document a process of the de-mediation of politics on social media: Established news media lose influence as primary information sources for young citizens. We discuss these results in the context of users’ active curation and passive selection of their political social media diet.

Suggested Citation

  • Franziska Marquart & Jakob Ohme & Judith Möller, 2020. "Following Politicians on Social Media: Effects for Political Information, Peer Communication, and Youth Engagement," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 197-207.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v8:y:2020:i:2:p:197-207
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v8i2.2764
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/2764
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v8i2.2764?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jakob Bæk Kristensen & Thomas Albrechtsen & Emil Dahl-Nielsen & Michael Jensen & Magnus Skovrind & Tobias Bornakke, 2017. "Parsimonious data: How a single Facebook like predicts voting behavior in multiparty systems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-12, September.
    2. Alan S. Gerber & Donald P. Green & Ron Shachar, 2003. "Voting May Be Habit‐Forming: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(3), pages 540-550, July.
    3. Xinshu Zhao & John G. Lynch & Qimei Chen, 2010. "Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 197-206, August.
    4. Alan Gerber & Donald Green & Ron Shachar, 2003. "Voting may be habit forming: Evidence from a randomized field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00251, The Field Experiments Website.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Franziska Marquart & Jakob Ohme & Judith Möller, 2020. "Following Politicians on Social Media: Effects for Political Information, Peer Communication, and Youth Engagement," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 197-207.
    2. Robert A. Jackson & Matthew Pietryka, 2022. "The influence of becoming a parent on political participation in the United States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(3), pages 565-580, May.
    3. Yoichi Hizen & Kengo Kurosaka, 2021. "Monetary Costs Versus Opportunity Costs in a Voting Experiment," Working Papers SDES-2021-1, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Feb 2021.
    4. Donald P. Green & Alan S. Gerber, 2003. "The Underprovision of Experiments in Political Science," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 589(1), pages 94-112, September.
    5. repec:ehu:ikerla:6417 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Valentina A. Bali & Lindon J. Robison & Richard Winder, 2020. "What Motivates People to Vote? The Role of Selfishness, Duty, and Social Motives When Voting," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    7. Kai Jäger, 2020. "When Do Campaign Effects Persist for Years? Evidence from a Natural Experiment," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 836-851, October.
    8. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.
    9. Ronconi, Lucas, 2019. "From Citizen's Rights to Civic Responsibilities," IZA Discussion Papers 12457, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Kevin Denny & Orla Doyle, 2009. "Does Voting History Matter? Analysing Persistence in Turnout," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 17-35, January.
    11. Li, Xiaolin & Rao, Raghunath Singh & Narasimhan, Om & Gao, Xing, 2022. "Stay positive or go negative? Memory imperfections and messaging strategy," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1127-1149.
    12. Pereira dos Santos, João & Tavares, José & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Can ATMs get out the vote? Evidence from a nationwide field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    13. Sebastian Garmann, 2020. "Political efficacy and the persistence of turnout shocks," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 411-429, November.
    14. Ang, Desmond, 2018. "Do 40-Year-Old Facts Still Matter? Long-Run Effects of Federal Oversight under the Voting Rights Act," Working Paper Series rwp18-033, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    15. Gaebler, Stefanie & Potrafke, Niklas & Roesel, Felix, 2020. "Compulsory voting and political participation: Empirical evidence from Austria," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    16. Matthew I. Jones & Antonio D. Sirianni & Feng Fu, 2022. "Polarization, abstention, and the median voter theorem," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    17. LeRoux Kelly & Langer Julie & Plotner Samantha, 2023. "Nonprofit Messaging and the 2020 Election: Findings from a Nonpartisan Get-Out-The-Vote (GOTV) Field Experiment," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 157-183, April.
    18. Kevin Arceneaux & David W. Nickerson, 2009. "Who Is Mobilized to Vote? A Re‐Analysis of 11 Field Experiments," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 1-16, January.
    19. Daniel D. Bonneau & John Zaleski, 2021. "The effect of California’s top-two primary system on voter turnout in US House Elections," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, March.
    20. Şehide Kilinc, 2025. "Research Trends on Political Participation of School Aged Children and Adolescents: Bibliometric Mapping and Content Analysis," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 18(2), pages 753-787, April.
    21. Ethan Kaplan & Fernando Saltiel & Sergio Urzúa, 2023. "Voting for Democracy: Chile's Plebiscito and the Electoral Participation of a Generation," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 438-464, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v8:y:2020:i:2:p:197-207. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.