An analytical analysis on the effects non-partisan and non-government organisations such as GetUp have on political participation.
By Leah Skinner
The Internet and Web 2.0 technologies and tools allow us to interact, communicate, and collaborate with each other on political issues in both synchronous and asynchronous ways (Iosifidis & Wheeler, 2016, Stromer-Galley & Wichowski, 2011, pp. 169). Similarly, this method of communication affords us tools to communicate without bounds of time or space and without discrimination, creating civil societies that can mobilise quickly, cross-collaborate on multicultural issues and distribute messages to a wide and diverse demographic (Stromer-Galley & Wichowski, 2011, pp. 171-173). GetUp is a non-government organisation (NGO) in Australia providing a decentralised platform where citizens can do just that: form a virtual civil society where members and everyday citizens are effecting change on political issues affecting the nation. Their use of social networking sites (SNS) as a platform for political participation and campaigning, enables democratic process and empowers citizen activism. This essay will analyse how social networks empower citizens to act on political change through non-partisan organisations like GetUp. It is also noted here that online participation provides analytics to organisations which enables digital listening that can have a two-pronged effect: the collective voice is in itself effecting change; however, this could similarly lead to panoptic control.
The Internet and more specifically social networking sites (SNS) provide a platform for non-government organisations (NGO) like GetUp to form, which empowers citizens to engage in political discussions online. By using decentralised spaces such as SNS, citizens can engage in non-electoral activism. Similarly, SNS enable citizens to engage in democracy, empowering citizen activism outside of traditional partisan environments (Stromer-Galley & Wichowski, 2011, pp. 169). According to Martin (2012, pp. 216), this strategy of adopting online spaces for spreading political messages and effecting activism is preferred among young Australians who are “less engaged in electoral politics and more engaged in non-electoral forms of participation”. Furthermore, Cameron and McAllister’s (2016, pp.15) research shows a steady incline in online activity during elections, in citizen engagement with unofficial political content, and supports SNS as a means to connect with politics. Facebook, specifically, is an effective platform for citizens to engage in political activity that also appears to contribute towards swaying votes and voters (Casteltrione, 2015, pp. 3). Gonzalez-Bailon (2014, pp. 3) suggests this is due to the communicative and collaborative nature of SNS. Furthermore, research shows that the decentralised nature of online spaces empowers citizens in non-democratic nations to connect outside of controlled political spaces (Dalton, Sin, & Jou, 2007, Iosifidis & Wheeler, 2016). The adoption of the internet and the web into our everyday lives highlights how integrating political strategies into virtual spaces is an effective method that has an instant audience across SNS (Karpf, 2018, pp. 1). In Australia, GetUp has used the appeal and ease of SNS, giving rise to a new political campaigning frontier that is leading the charge on social politics, evidencing the rise of citizen-powered change. They do this by offering engaging content across SNS like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. According to the 2016-2017 Annual Report, GetUp's social media content successfully targeted social issues relating to immigration and asylum, climate change, racism, mining and industrialisation, and exposed political inequality, injustice, and corruption, building campaign strategies around these issues. As a result, member numbers increased by a little over 36,000, taking their total member count to over 1million people. Of that over 1million activists participated online in some form in favour of GetUp's campaigns. By adopting SNS and even email into their campaigning strategies, GetUp has created virtual platforms that empower citizens to act on change.
GetUp’s online presence supports democracy as citizens are empowered to engage in political discourse. Stromer-Galley and Wichowski (2011, pp. 169) suggest that the success of online spaces is due to the communicative and collaborative nature of SNS and in a broader sense Web 2.0 tools and technologies. Citizens can engage in conversations relating to social and political issues, “clarifying their own views, learn about the opinions of others, and discover what major problems face the collective” (Stromer-Galley & Wichowski, 2011, pp. 169). Such discussions empower citizens and enable democracy (Stromer-Galley & Wichowski, 2011, pp. 169). These online discussions appeal to individuals due to the ease of access and anonymity as virtual spaces afford individuals a platform to express their views without “recrimination” (Stromer-Galley & Wichowski, 2011, pp. 170). Similarly, virtual platforms attract both like-minded and diverse individuals, encouraging cross-cultural collaboration and communication, highlighting the appeal for individuals to engage online (Stromer-Galley & Wichowski, 2011, pp. 170). GetUp has harnessed the power and appeal of the Internet to empower and engage citizens in political discourse. GetUp has over 1 million members, and they pride themselves on being a “disruptive political force” for a more “just Australia”, “returning power into the hands of everyday people”(Oosting, GetUp! Annual Report, 2016-2017, pp. 2-3). Their 2016-2017 annual report suggests their online campaigns have done just that with data from June 30, 2017, reporting 424,565 followers on their Facebook page alone; 1,177,867 members acted with 865,835 of those actions being signed petitions from email or online campaigns across SNS (GetUp! Annual Report 2016-2017, pp. 5). Similarly, GetUp’s campaign videos received over 28 million views over the past year, appearing in newsfeeds over 190 million times (GetUp! Annual Report 2016-2017, pp. 6). These figures show that the Internet and the Web have engaged citizen activists whilst they participate in SNS as part of their everyday lives. Over a two month period during the 2016 election campaign, GetUp members acted on matters 230,588 times (GetUp! Post Election Report, 2016, pp. 2). In particular, GetUp’s YouTube advertisements were distributed to Facebook and viewed over 11 million times, with each video reportedly receiving 20,000 views (GetUp! Post Election Report, 2016, pp. 4, and pp. 17). SNS are key to engaging members in activism. Furthermore, this suggests that SNS have the potential to affect offline and online political discourse. GetUp reported that audiences were engaged with their “videos and live streams” on Facebook over 700,000 times during a single month (GetUp! Post Election Report, 2016, pp. 18). On top of this, GetUp’s content reached over 1 million users on Facebook during a critical point in the 2016 election (GetUp! Post Election Report, 2016, pp. 18). This demonstrates that GetUp members are motivated communities of power that are engaged in online activism, enabling democracy. Grassroots organisation like GetUp understand the importance of social media in their campaign strategies and similarly understand the affordance of SNS and digital listening.
Digital listening across virtual platforms affords key analytics to organisations like GetUp, giving power to the collective voice. From SNS, political players and organisations can access key data that can be adopted into campaigning strategies (Karpf, 2018, pp. 1). This indicates that the digital voice informs digital listening, and suggests that virtual civil societies are a collective power being heard (Karpf, 2018, pp. 1). Similarly, this data allows GetUp- and political players- to form their tactics around the digital voice. This tactic of digital listening allows organisations to analyse key data to adopt trends based on member engagement. Similarly, digital listening allows organisations to cast their net to wider audiences and attract new members (Vromen & Coleman, 2013, pp. 76). Furthermore, digital listening ensures “democratic process of governance” as the collective voice requires action from “elected leaders” (Stromer-Galley & Wichowski, 2011, pp. 169). However, this also suggests that the digital political landscape has a two-pronged effect: digital listening means that the collective voice is in itself effecting change; however, this is likewise leading to panoptic control (Karpf, 2018, pp. 2). However, Karpf (2018, pp. 2) discusses the collected analytical data as limited and far from qualitative, instead, the data displays a snapshot of behaviors and habits towards singular subjects. When we consider the idea of political campaigning as the means to enlist rhetoric and evoke emotion in voters (Vromen & Coleman, 2013, pp. 95), we might consider the ideological views of the party as beneficial in understanding its motive. Kittilson and Dalton (2011, pp. 627) suggest that social capital and civil societies must centre around the “active citizen”. For GetUp, they certainly highlight that its key purpose and drive is informed by its members, therefore at the heart of GetUp is the active citizen. This suggests that GetUp need analytics to deliver campaign strategies that meet its members’ ideologies, and not just for enlisting rhetorical devices. Digital listening is therefore essential for organisations like GetUp to maintain their members’ engagement. By listening to its members, GetUp builds and maintain trust within its community, which is suggested to be imperative in forming democratic environments where members are active (Kittilson & Dalton, pp. 627). Similarly, digital listening offers tactical advantages to GetUp, where strategies and causes are adopted and formed from essential data collection. Vromen and Coleman (2013) suggest that the digital listening of virtual spaces for organisations like GetUp is key to engaging an audience through developing storytelling tactics. Whilst Vromen and Coleman use the word ‘storytelling’ here, what we may conclude is that rhetoric and persuasion is likewise enlisted in decentralised organisations like Getup and are not unlike their political counterparts. Ultimately, their analysis suggests that GetUp’s campaigning efforts are only successful when their causes directly reflect the thoughts and ideas of their members (Vromen & Coleman, 2013, pp. 77), further cementing the idea that decentralised organisations are driven by the online collective voice.
Here, the analysis of the emergence of digital politics aims to discover if SNS empower citizens to participate in politics. Due to the ubiquitous nature of the Internet, we have seen political participation merge into digital spaces. Furthermore, as we participate in online activities as part of our everyday lives, we are similarly engaged in political discourse. It is evidenced that GetUp’s use of SNS offer a space for citizens to do just that. By using SNS, GetUp offers a decentralised space where citizens feel empowered to act on change. Similarly, citizens feel more comfortable participating in politics online. The use of analytics from SNS informs digital listening, highlighting that the collective voice enforces the democratic process: democracy relies on its citizens. SNS, therefore, reinforce democracy and enables the citizen to become an essential political actor. The decentralised nature of SNS is an effective medium that empowers citizens to engage and participate in political activism.
References:
Cameron, S. M., & McAllister, I. (2016). Trends in Australian Political Opinion: Results
from the Australian Election Study 1987 - 2016. Canberra: Australian National University. Retrieved from Australian Electoral Study Website:
https://www.australianelectionstudy.org/trends.html
Casteltrione, I. (2015). The Internet, social networking Web sites and political participation
research: Assumptions and contradictory evidence. First Monday, 20(3), 1-14.
https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i3.5462
Dalton, R.J., Shin, D.C. & Jou, W. (2007). Understanding Democracy: Data from
Unlikely Places. Journal of Democracy, 18(4), 142-156. Retrieved from
https://muse-jhu-edu.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/article/223229
GetUp!. (2016). 2016 Post Election Report for GetUp!. Retrieved from
https://d68ej2dhhub09.cloudfront.net/2181-Getup-Election-Report-2016.pdf.
GetUp!. (2017). 2016-2017 Annual Report for GetUp!, Retrieved from
https://d68ej2dhhub09.cloudfront.net/2449-Annual_report_2016-17.pdf
Gonzalez-Bailon, S. (2014). Online Social Networks and Bottom-Up Politics.
In M. Graham (Ed. Et al), Society and the internet: how networks of
information and communication are changing our lives, (pp 209-222).
Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://link.library.curtin.edu.au/ereserve/DC60270702/0?display=1
Iosifidis, M., & Wheeler, M. (2016). Public Diplomacy 2.0 and the Social Media. In
M. Iosifidis and M. Wheeler, Public Spheres and Mediated Social Networks
In the Western Context and Beyond (pp. 149-173). [Springer Ebook version] London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi-org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1057/978-1-137-41030-6
Karpf, D. (2018). Analytic Activism and Its Limitations. Social Media + Society,
January-March, 1-10. DOI: 10.1177/2056305117750718
Kittilson, M.C. & Dalton, R.J. (2011). Virtual civil society: the New Frontier of
Social Capital? Political Behavior, 33(4), 625-644.
DOI: 10.1007/s11109-010-9143-8
Martin, A. (2012). Political participation among the Young in Australia: Testing
Dalton’s Good Citizen Thesis. Australian Journal of Political Science, 47(2),
211-226. DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2012.677003
Stromer-Galley, J., & Wichowski, A. (2011). Political Discussion Online. In M. Consalvo
& C. Ess (Eds.) The Handbook of Internet Studies (pp. 168-187). [Wiley Online Library version] Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Vromen, A., & Coleman, W. (2013). Online Campaigning Organizations and
Storytelling Strategies: GetUp! in Australia. Policy & Internet, 5(1), 76-100.
https://doi-org-dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.1002/poi3.23.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on citizen activism, social media as a political landscape, and political engagement.
Until next time, continue to write, read, talk, and live life.
Leah x
Comentarios