The Social Media Election. Was this it?
Five years ago, at the time of the last general election, I was studying for my undergraduate degree. For the first time ever I felt the election buzz. Although I personally wasn’t that interested, I found myself surrounded by people who couldn’t shut up about it, and everyone, of course, was voting Lib Dem.
This time around things are different. I’m back at home, fully employed and paying attention due to my own genuine interest. This is in no small part down to the role of Social Media (and hours of TV satire and a determination to not let full time muppet and general pain in the arse, Nigel Farage have any sort of power). The role of social media in this election has been much anticipated. We’ve already seen how social media can be used to reflect the way votes are likely to go in our own light-hearted infographic. However it is the use of social media to attract and persuade voters and to promote the campaigns of individual parties which has stirred up all the fuss.
The 2015 election has been dubbed ‘the social media election’. This was partly due to the speculation and anticipation due to the rise in Social media’s popularity over the last five years. 5 million people have joined Twitter alone in the years since Britain last went to the polls. This has been key for political parties. It meant that parties and politicians had a direct way of speaking to people without having to trawl the streets. This was good for two reasons. Firstly it meant that the powerful elite of our society didn’t have to go into areas where people shop in Aldi rather than Fortnum and Masons. Secondly, it meant that they could target specific demographics at the touch of a button. In particular they could target youths, or as they’re known in Westminster, ‘bloody hoodies’. Youths are not a group politicians normally go near for fear of being mugged or stabbed but now they could talk to them without fear of physical contact.
The televised debates in the last election boosted turn out by 65%, but only 44% of young people (aged 18-24) turned out to vote. It would therefore be amiss of parties not to take advantage of a primarily young person’s medium to reach this audience. It was revealed fairly early on that our current lord and master, Mr Cameron and his Conservatives had spent £100,000 pounds on Facebook advertising, ten times that of Labour and 1000 times that of UKIP. A recent article in the Guardian stated that Facebook has the potential to reach 9.2 million young people with one post and with UK adults spending a minimum of 1.33 hours on social media, spending obscene amounts on these platforms isn’t exactly a bad idea.
But it’s not just paid promotion and it’s not just Facebook. Politicians have taken to Twitter to personally promote key party policies (or at least their social media managers have). This means for the first time in living history, politicians have been forced into giving short concise answers and policy announcements.
Parties have also embraced the ways of YouTube. As you can imagine this means a lot of clips of speeches and cringe worthy videos of politicians looking to camera giving heart felt speeches “to you, the voter” *VOM*. The Conservatives channel is particularly bad for this. The video of David Cameron welcoming you to the channel actually makes me physically look away as if I were watching a man on Embarrassing Bodies with some disgusting skin complaint. Labour’s channel is marginally more watchable. It displays a great deal more personality. For example the featured video is of Miliband playing pool with snooker favourite Ronnie O’Sullivan. In fact celebrity support is something that Labour play on quite heavily with their channel featuring videos from people such as Martin Freeman, Steve Coogan and Jo Brand. The Lib Dem videos on the other hand focus very much more on the general public. Their featured video is the Clegg Meister visiting a school, followed by a video of him visiting animals. Everyone together now…awwwww.
Despite this use of social media many say that the ‘Social media election’ never came to fruition. The build-up has even been described as ‘routine, predictable and over cautious’. If that weren’t bad enough much of it has been unpleasant.
This is particularly evident on Twitter . Twitter as a PR and marketing tool can be and has been successful. For example a recent Twitter campaign prompted the petition to get leaders from smaller parties involved in the leaders’ debates. However much of the party campaigning consists of mocking and bitching about other party leaders. A perfect example of this is the Twitter feed of the one and only Boris Johnson. Bo-Jo’s feed consists mainly of jibes at Miliband, with his tweet referring to Miliband’s wall of policies being a personal highlight (see image). 
Obviously all parties’ campaigns feature a certain number of put downs but this election is being referred to as one of the ugliest campaigns in history. One therefore has to wonder whether Twitter is doing nothing more than making things worse. After all with Twitter you get trolls. The only thing that gets met through the Twitter bitching is the hope that there is a Malcom Tucker figure behind the scenes taking control of people’s mobiles and blasting them with a particularly taboo outburst.
I think, on reflection though, social media has played a huge part this time round. Yes it might not have been ‘the Social media election’ that we were all promised but it’s certainly a step in the right direction. If nothing else, it has shown how seriously we should take social media as a platform and the benefits of social media advertising. That’s something businesses can take out of this election regardless of the outcome. If Twitter promotion and campaigning is good enough to get you to run the country it’s good enough to get you some business and get your message out there.
Furthermore Stephen Coleman, professor of political communication at the University of Leeds, commented that traditional methods of party promotion, primarily newspapers, are being disregarded time and time again by readers who are desensitised to it. This also applies to the mounds and mounds of party leaflets we get through our doors which seems to have reached frankly ridiculous levels this year. Therefore it makes sense that other methods of campaigning should be introduced, if only to pump a little fresh blood into the election build up. Remember the last election, the so called ‘TV election’ that saw the first ever live TV debates that boosted voter turn out by over half? What I’m essentially saying is that when it comes to getting your message out there you can no longer just rely on one platform to do so. It’s very much a multi-platform world that we live in and as a result campaigns, political or not, can only benefit from multi-platform content. Just remember to make it nice. The place for trolling is in fairytales. Not the internet. Or the Hopkins residence.
(All of the above views are mine, not the company’s…or are they?! Yes, they are.
