Search

A wealth of research examines the relationship between digital media consumption and political participation. Research typically defines participation broadly and focuses on Western contexts. We seek to add to the understanding of this relationship by focusing more directly on the relationship between digital media consumption and the propensity to vote among young people in a less democratic context. To do so, we examine a set of Central Asian countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) that have varying degrees of democratization. We test whether digital media consumption stimulates voting among respondents aged 18-30, and if this is contingent on how free and fair are the elections. Our results suggest that in the most democratic country, Kyrgyzstan, the relationship between digital media use and the propensity to vote is relatively flat while digital media use in less democratic countries, overall, is associated with a decrease in the propensity to vote. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We investigate to what extent partisan political candidates in the United States pay attention to different issues in their campaign communication, and whether they systematically deliver messages using different types of sentiment. Methods: We analyze the 267,538 tweets issued by candidates for the U.S. Congress during the 2018 midterm elections using a combination of latent topic modeling, sentiment analysis, and regression analysis, estimating both issue emphasis and the emotional tone of communications. Results: We find that candidates discussed a small number of distinct issues. Sentiment analysis reveals that the emotions used to convey these topics varied considerably more than interparty emphasis. Moreover, we observe that Democrats and Republicans discussed the same topics in very different ways, with Democrats—the out‐party at the time—proving more negative in their messaging. Conclusions: When partisans discuss those issues their respective parties "own," there are asymmetries in the emotion they use to communicate about these issues. The concept and measurement of issue ownership are complicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study illuminates the emotions of mixed‐status families as they anticipated the 2016 Presidential election. From a 6‐year longitudinal case study of four Mexican immigrant families, we present interviews from May of 2016, prior to the presidential primaries, and from November of 2016, the day before or the day of the presidential election. Using a multiple case study method (Stake, 2006, Multiple case study analysis. Guilford Press, New York; Yin, 2014, Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage, Los Angeles, CA), our primary goal was to describe how immigrant Mexican adults and their preadolescent and adolescent children (or grandchildren) personally and collectively reacted emotionally to the events leading up to the 2016 presidential election, and how they managed and coped with their emotions. Our secondary goal was to explain how their emotional reactions changed over time and were influenced by age and immigration status. Initially, participants expressed concern and fear about the anti‐immigration rhetoric by the conservative political movement, but largely felt reassured that such rhetoric would not prevail. In the days immediately preceding the election, a notable change seemed apparent among all participants, regardless of immigration status. They expressed having intense emotions ranging from fear and angst to disbelief, anger, and denial, which they attempted to manage through external (e.g., community involvement, activism, solidarity) and internal (e.g., family communication, cognitive strategies) actions. Older adolescents had a better understanding of the implications of the election for their family than younger adolescents did. We provide recommendations for family practice and policy aimed to support and advocate on behalf of immigrant families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politics & Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The ability of authoritarian regimes to maintain power hinges, in part, on how well they are able to manipulate the flow of information to the masses. While authoritarian states have had success controlling traditional media, the growth of social media over the last decade has created new challenges for such regimes. The Russian experience offers an example of how an authoritarian regime responds to this potential threat. Because of the massive demonstrations surrounding the 2011-2012 Duma elections, the ruling Russian government suspected that social media provided a significant impetus for the demonstrations. Social media, through its dissemination of opposition blogs, could have helped drive negative attitudes about the governing party. As such, the government responded by employing strategies to tighten their grip on the digital flow of information. We use survey data to demonstrate that exposure to blogs via social media at the time of the demonstrations led many to believe that the elections were fraudulent. Ultimately, we contend that Russian fears concerning the importance of social media for the fomenting of opposition movements is well grounded. Social media can drive support for opposition in an autocratic state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online social networking sites are rapidly becoming a central component of the modern political campaign. We build a theoretical framework to explain how and why state party organizations are incorporating social networking sites - Facebook in particular - into their strategy to support their candidates. After offering some descriptive evidence documenting this outreach effort, we estimate a series of models to explain both some factors that contributed to the effectiveness of state parties' efforts to reach the public through Facebook in the 2010 state elections and how well the efforts complemented their larger effort to gain seats in their respective state legislatures. The results indicate, first, that Republicans seemed to do a better job of reaching the public through Facebook, that active use of Facebook by both parties attracted potential voters to their profiles, and that increased party expenditures also attracted people. Second, the results indicate that a growing Facebook following across the course of the election provided a larger electoral benefit for Democrats than Republicans. We offer some theoretical speculation to account for this inherent paradox. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses about Internet voting. According to the article, the Arizona Democratic Party allowed party members to vote in the Democratic Presidential primary during the Presidential primary elections in 2000 through the Internet. A research was made to understand the effects of Internet voting on the electorate and the conclusion of the research was that voting via the Internet presents an electoral bias to voters who are white, younger in age and more affluent.