IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ipewps/341421.html

The strategic use of microtargeting: The case of the German Federal Elections of 2025

Author

Listed:
  • Repp, Stefan

Abstract

Political microtargeting (PMT) is often associated with data-intensive voter profiling and the Cambridge Analytica scandal. This paper argues that such a framing is increasingly outdated, particularly in tightly regulated contexts. Drawing on expert interviews, social media content analysis and digital advertising spending data from the 2025 German federal election, we show that PMT has not disappeared under stricter European regulation but has fundamentally changed its form. Constrained by the GDPR and the Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising regulation, parties largely abandoned direct psychographic profiling. Yet targeted political communication remained highly effective through a different mechanism: algorithmic amplification. Platforms such as TikTok, Instagram and YouTube systematically amplified content from parties at the political margins, independent of advertising expenditure. The AfD and Die Linke achieved visibility far exceeding their paid spend, while better-funded mainstream parties underperformed in recommended feeds. Drawing on the Big Five personality model and the Persuasion Knowledge Model, this paper explains why platform-native, emotionally charged content proved so persuasive and why audiences were least likely to recognise it as targeted communication. The findings suggest that democratic oversight must shift focus from paid advertising to the design of algorithmic recommendation systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Repp, Stefan, 2026. "The strategic use of microtargeting: The case of the German Federal Elections of 2025," IPE Working Papers 270/2026, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ipewps:341421
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/341421/1/1972509160.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dobber, Tom & Ó Fathaigh, Ronan & Zuiderveen Borgesius, Frederik J., 2019. "The regulation of online political micro-targeting in Europe," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 8(4), pages 1-20.
    2. Hao Lin & Chundong Wang & Yongjie Sun, 2024. "How big five personality traits influence information sharing on social media: A meta analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Bodó, Balázs & Helberger, Natali & de Vreese, Claes H., 2017. "Political micro-targeting: a Manchurian candidate or just a dark horse?," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 6(4), pages 1-13.
    4. Friestad, Marian & Wright, Peter, 1994. "The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 1-31, June.
    5. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P., 2000. "The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(3), pages 653-663, September.
    6. Gerber, Alan S. & Huber, Gregory A. & Doherty, David & Dowling, Conor M. & Ha, Shang E., 2010. "Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(1), pages 111-133, February.
    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. Minah H. Jung & Leif D. Nelson & Uri Gneezy & Ayelet Gneezy, 2017. "Signaling Virtue: Charitable Behavior Under Consumer Elective Pricing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(2), pages 187-194, March.
    2. Lee, Alice J. & Ames, Daniel R., 2017. "“I can’t pay more” versus “It’s not worth more”: Divergent effects of constraint and disparagement rationales in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 16-28.
    3. Iván M. Durán, 2018. "Television and electoral results in Catalonia," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 423-456, November.
    4. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," NBER Working Papers 23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Wang, Xuehua & Keh, Hean Tat, 2017. "Consumer susceptibility to cross-selling persuasion: The roles of self-construal and interpersonal harmony," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 177-184.
    6. Meizhi Pan & Markus Blut & Arezou Ghiassaleh & Zach W. Y. Lee, 2025. "Influencer marketing effectiveness: A meta-analytic review," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 52-78, January.
    7. Heribert Gierl & Tina Großmann, 2008. "Imply-Benefit-Attribute im Bereich häufig gekaufter Konsumgüter," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 355-384, June.
    8. León, Gianmarco, 2017. "Turnout, political preferences and information: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 56-71.
    9. Laor, Tal, 2024. "Do micro-celebrities preserve social roles? Differences between secular and religious female Instagram lifestyle influencers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    10. Suwelack, Thomas & Hogreve, Jens & Hoyer, Wayne D., 2011. "Understanding Money-Back Guarantees: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Outcomes," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 462-478.
    11. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," Working Papers hal-03384143, HAL.
    12. Dwight R. Lee & Ryan H. Murphy, 2017. "An expressive voting model of anger, hatred, harm and shame," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 307-323, December.
    13. Gunawardena, Thuthi & Waiguny, Martin K.J., 2014. "So many things to do! How multitasking affects memory and attitude for product and brand placements," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 288-295.
    14. Boonrod, K. & Towprayoon, S. & Bonnet, S. & Tripetchkul, S., 2015. "Enhancing organic waste separation at the source behavior: A case study of the application of motivation mechanisms in communities in Thailand," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 77-90.
    15. Grácio, Matilde & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Information, get-out-the-vote messages, and peer influence: Causal effects on political behavior in Mozambique," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    16. Marco R Steenbergen & Tomasz Siczek, 2017. "Better the devil you know? Risk-taking, globalization and populism in Great Britain," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(1), pages 119-136, March.
    17. Anna Petherick & Guilherme A. Ramos & Rodrigo Furst & Rafael Goldszmidt & Eduardo B. Andrade, 2026. "Dynamics of sociopolitical polarization and effects of misperception-correcting information around the 2022 Brazilian elections," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 17(1), pages 1-15, December.
    18. Lisa M. George & Joel Waldfogel, 2006. "The New York Times and the Market for Local Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 435-447, March.
    19. Basso, Kenny & dos Santos, Cristiane Pizzutti & Albornoz Gonçalves, Manuela, 2014. "The impact of flattery: The role of negative remarks," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 185-191.
    20. Zarei, Shadi & Samavatiyan, Hossein & Akhoondi, Fereshteh, "undated". "How Persuasion Knowledge Creates Differences in the Role of Self and Functional Congruity on Predicting Customers’ Attitude and Behavioral Intention," 58th Annual Conference, Kiel, Germany, September 12-14, 2018 275860, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • M37 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Advertising

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:ipewps:341421. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iphwrde.html .

    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.