IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v13y2023i3p70-d1096644.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of Twitter during Televised Election Debates: Spanish General Election (28 April 2019) vs. French General Election (24 April 2022)

Author

Listed:
  • Julia Fontenla-Pedreira

    (Department of Audiovisual Communication and Advertising, School of Communication, University of Vigo, 36005 Pontevedra, Spain)

  • Carmen Maiz-Bar

    (Department of Audiovisual Communication and Advertising, School of Communication, University of Vigo, 36005 Pontevedra, Spain)

  • Talia Rodríguez-Martelo

    (Department of Audiovisual Communication and Advertising, School of Communication, University of Vigo, 36005 Pontevedra, Spain)

Abstract

Social media have become key in political communication, playing a crucial role in election campaigns due to their fast, ubiquitous communication. This paper focuses on the comparison of the use of the social network Twitter in Spanish and French public and commercial television stations, during the last televised debates held during their general elections (2019 and 2022). It seeks to find whether conversation and interaction with their audiences take place, and whether these meet the dialogic principles set forth by Kent and Taylor adapted to Twitter by Ribalko and Seltzer to include usefulness of information, generation of return visits and dialogic loop preservation. To do this, the content of the general Twitter profiles of two French television stations, together with their profiles focused on informative content, were analyzed before, during and after the televised election debate held on 20 April. Likewise, the Twitter profiles corresponding to two Spanish television stations, together with the profiles corresponding to their news programs, were studied before, during and after the televised election debates held on 22 and 23 April. After screening all their posts, those referring to the debate and generating the largest engagement figures were selected, in order to compare the topics covered in the televised debates with those covered in Twitter. The results reveal that the information-focused accounts originate more posts whose content is linked to the televised debates, in contrast with the general accounts. Furthermore, both the unidirectionality of their content, and the lack of dialogue and interaction between these accounts and their audiences, become apparent, in addition to the minimal occurrence of “debate about the debate” flow among users.

Suggested Citation

  • Julia Fontenla-Pedreira & Carmen Maiz-Bar & Talia Rodríguez-Martelo, 2023. "Use of Twitter during Televised Election Debates: Spanish General Election (28 April 2019) vs. French General Election (24 April 2022)," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-15, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:70-:d:1096644
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/13/3/70/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/13/3/70/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tudor Niciporuc, 2014. "Comparative analysis of the engagement rate on Facebook and Google Plus social networks," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 0902287, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    2. Dong, Xuefan & Lian, Ying, 2021. "A review of social media-based public opinion analyses: Challenges and recommendations," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    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. Cano-Marin, Enrique & Mora-Cantallops, Marçal & Sánchez-Alonso, Salvador, 2023. "Twitter as a predictive system: A systematic literature review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    2. Wen Zhang & Qiang Wang & Jian Li & Zhenzhong Ma & Gokul Bhandari & Rui Peng, 2023. "What makes deceptive online reviews? A linguistic analysis perspective," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Adekoya, Oluwasegun B. & Oliyide, Johnson A. & Saleem, Owais & Adeoye, Habeeb A., 2022. "Asymmetric connectedness between Google-based investor attention and the fourth industrial revolution assets: The case of FinTech and Robotics & Artificial intelligence stocks," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    4. Tinggui Chen & Chenhao Tong & Yuhan Bai & Jianjun Yang & Guodong Cong & Tianluo Cong, 2022. "Analysis of the Public Opinion Evolution on the Normative Policies for the Live Streaming E-Commerce Industry Based on Online Comment Mining under COVID-19 Epidemic in China," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(18), pages 1-27, September.
    5. Jain, Lokesh, 2022. "An entropy-based method to control COVID-19 rumors in online social networks using opinion leaders," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Ugur Bilgin & Selin Soner Kara, 2024. "Identification of Perceived Challenges in the Green Energy Transition by Turkish Society through Sentiment Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-22, April.
    7. Camilleri, Mark Anthony & Kozak, Metin, 2022. "Interactive engagement through travel and tourism social media groups: A social facilitation theory perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Alsaad, Abdallah & Alam, Md. Moddassir & Lutfi, Abdalwali, 2023. "A sensemaking perspective on the association between social media engagement and pro-environment behavioural intention," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    9. Uthman Alturki & Ahmed Aldraiweesh, 2022. "Adoption of Google Meet by Postgraduate Students: The Role of Task Technology Fit and the TAM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-22, November.
    10. Zhang, Wenyao & Zhang, Wei & Daim, Tugrul U., 2023. "Investigating consumer purchase intention in online social media marketing: A case study of Tiktok," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    11. Polyzos, Efstathios & Fotiadis, Anestis & Huan, Tzung-Cheng, 2023. "From Heroes to Scoundrels: Exploring the effects of online campaigns celebrating frontline workers on COVID-19 outcomes," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    12. Liu, Liyi & Tu, Yan & Zhou, Xiaoyang, 2022. "How local outbreak of COVID-19 affect the risk of internet public opinion: A Chinese social media case study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    13. Hou, Shengjie & Zhang, Xiang & Yi, Biyi & Tang, Yi, 2022. "Public attitudes on open source communities in China: A text mining analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).

    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:gam:jsoctx:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:70-:d:1096644. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.