Cybercampaigning in the 2010 Presidential Election in the Phils
•Als PPT, PDF herunterladen•
0 gefällt mir•600 views
The document discusses cybercampaigning in the Philippines leading up to the 2010 elections. It finds that while candidate websites provide one-way information like traditional media, some show potential for greater voter engagement through features like inviting supporters. However, survey respondents mainly used cybercampaign tools to access more candidate information rather than interact. While the internet could empower voters, contextual factors in the Philippines like mobile phone use suggest normalization may still dominate. Regulation of cybercampaigning is unclear as the internet transforms political landscapes.
![Background ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (19)
Ähnlich wie Cybercampaigning in the 2010 Presidential Election in the Phils
Ähnlich wie Cybercampaigning in the 2010 Presidential Election in the Phils (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Cybercampaigning in the 2010 Presidential Election in the Phils
- 1. Mary Grace P. Mirandilla December 7, 2009 CPR south 4, Negombo, Sri Lanka
- 6. Cyberspace Normalization DOMINANT CANDIDATE MAINSTREAM MEDIA EXPOSURE DOMINATE CYBERSPACE INFO PRODUCER INFO CONSUMER BLAH! BLAH!
- 8. Cybercampaign Innovation ONE-WAY EMPOWERING INTERACTIVE COST-EFFECTIVE Access, provide , and validate information Promote or criticize a candidate Quick feedback Interact w/ candidate and other voters Information provision Candidate promotion Political discussion Voter mobilization Campaign participation Fundraising
- 15. Candidate SNS
- 16. 72 Respondents 57 15
- 17. Profile Age 30-49 y/o 33 (54.2%) 18-29 y/o 20 (38.9%) 50+ y/o 4 (5.0%) Sex Male 40 (55.6%) Female 32 (44.4%) Location Manila 30 (41.7%) Luzon 20 (27.8%) Abroad 13 (18.1%) Mindanao 5 (6.9%) Visayas 4 (5.6%) Employment Yes 53 (73.6%) Student 11 (15.3%) Unemployed 8 (1.1%)
- 18. Profile Income P50,001 and up (Class A - Upper Class) 27 P30,001-P50,000 (Class B - Upper Class) 13 P15,001-PP30,000 (Class C1 - Middle Class) 8 P8,001-P15,000 (Class C2 - Middle Class) 7 P3,001-P8,000 (Class D - Lower Class) 2 P3,000 or less (Class E - Extremely low class) 2 Political Group No 53 (73.6%) Yes 19 Political party Party-list Interest group Support for a candidate Still choosing a candidate 38 (52.7%) Active supporter of a candidate 14 Passive supportive of a candidate 12 Apolitical/doesn’t support any 8 55.6%
Hinweis der Redaktion
- On May 10, 2010 , 50 million Filipinos are expected to vote at 350,000 precincts to elect a president, vice president, and nearly 300 members of Congress as well as more than 17,000 local officials. Each election year, candidates and parties come up with their own gimmicks to attract voters, the most expensive being political ads on TV, radio, and print—traditional mainstream media that cost billions of pesos In recent years, the internet has been included as one of the “platforms” of political candidates. From websites to social networking sites, candidates have invaded cyberspace for their campaigns. The medium offers a cheaper and interactive platform but access by citizens still limited. This research looks at this new phenomenon of cybercampaigning, particularly for the 2010 presidential elections.
- TV ads cost P250-300,000 for a 30-sec. spot. Candidates who spend much during campaigns prone to corruption when in office to repay patrons. Law sets campaign ad spending limit at P3/per voter or P150 million (USD3.1 million) for 50 million voters (2009) In 2004, presidential candidates spent P5-10 billion (USD104-208 million), compared to P1-3 billion (USD 31.2 to 62.5 million) in 1998 RA 9006 “Fair Elections Act” (2001) allows: National office - 120 minutes (TV ad); 180 minutes (radio ad) for each candidate/party Local office - 60 minutes (TV ad); 90 minutes (radio ad) for each candidate/party On internet, candidates can reach voters who can, in turn, “spread” the word thru SNS, Twitters, etc. Information can easily be created, revised, and updated
- Combined use of websites and social networking sites such as Facebook, Friendster and YouTube.
- Real-world characteristics will be replicated on party/candidate websites, without maximizing interactive and networking potential of ICTs Major parties/candidates dominating everyday domestic politics, who have the resources and machinery, will have greater presence and also dominate cyberspace
- Traditionally, candidates (information producers) provide one-way, downward information to voters (info consumers) thru mainstream media. This same relationship will be seen online. Dominant candidates with party machinery who enjoy great media exposure will also dominate cyberspace. Same political ad content in TMM will be seen on cyberspace with little, if any, use for dynamic and interactive features of the internet.
- On the contrary, candidates/parties can interact with, mobilize support and encourage campaign participation of, the electorates Allows candidates with less resources and rarely seen in mainstream media to dominate campaign in cyberspace
- With the Internet, voters now have the tool to participate and engage candidates and other voters The gap between candidate and voters is narrowed, as electorates play a bigger role in campaigning, thereby empowering them
- Each feature includes several items: Information (12); Mobilization (5); Community (10); Services (9); Design (6). Perfect item-score = 42. In the end, items of each feature are measured based on their cumulative item-scores and weighted scores. Perfect weighted-score = 5.
- 7 candidates got a passing score, with 6 getting an above-average score. Escudero got highest score of 3.0. He dominated mobilization where almost everybody else got a 0 score. Pangilinan got the highest score for any feature; a 0.9 for information 3 candidates (Binay, Estrada, and de Castro) got a below-average score, w/ de Castro getting the lowest score. All 3 scored 0 for mobilization and below ave. for community. Two of them scored below ave. for design.
- Sampling frame was Facebook and Friendster network of 5 potential candidates, who approved researcher’s invitation to join network. Sample list was drawn by selecting the 30 th member on candidate’s network list who is Filipino and at least 18 years of age. As of May 15, 2009, total sample list consisted of 581 eligible respondents. 142 SNS members responded to request and gave e-mail address. 15 responded from Friendster and 57 from Facebook, a total of 72 respondents, a 12% response rate based on sample list of 581.
- What did we find out? A majority of SNS respondents were 30-49 years old, male, and employed. Over 40% was based in Manila and almost 30% resides in Luzon. Interestingly, 18% of them were based abroad.
- 40 (55.6%) of the respondents come from the Upper Class, 22 of them come from Villar and Legarda’s network. Most of the respondents don’t belong to a political group, only 19 do. Over half of them are “still deciding” on which candidate to support.
- Almost 50% voted last in 2007 Congressional and local elections. Most respondents are registered voters and almost all plan to vote in 2010.
- Almost 70% of respondents have been using the internet for over 7 years . Over 60% of the 63 who responded to this question have internet subscription at home Almost all 63 respondents use the internet everyday News and current affairs dominate the info accessed online, but info specific to politics and government was not as popular
- Networking at work: respondents found out about candidate SNS through their membership. Half of respondents belonged to more than 1 candidate SNS. Respondents joined candidate’s SNS mainly to access information about them. Only 17% joined because the believed in the candidate. A measly 4% joined because they wanted to be heard
- TV as main campaign medium is confirmed by interviews with media relations team and PR experts Internet was a distant second to TV in rank #1 but a close second to newspaper in rank #2. However, remember that sample is biased. For the masses, scenario can be very different. Interestingly, the ubiquitous mobile phone was ranked #6
- Online newspapers were main info sources, which suggests that respondents are a “reading” bunch (newspaper ranked #2 and 3, offline) Escudero scored low on web services but aced mobilization, which Roxas flunked.
- Despite being heavy and veteran internet users, respondents seem focused on the information they can access from candidates and not on the opportunity to engage them or participate in campaign activities Main reason for visiting cybercampaigning tools is access to information When asked what content/feature they found most beneficial , respondents point to access to more information about credentials and track record, and advocacies Getting information about meetings, forums, and activities that they can attend only ranked #4
- There is potential for equalization in recruitment of team of core supporters online Edge-based organizations empower supporters at the edge (those out on the field) to make decisions, conceptualize and implement activities, and mobilize support for a candidate, without being part of a rigid, high-cost campaign structure (Sviokla, 2009)
- Resource theory argues that those who have access to resources are the ones who can afford to use the internet “ Undecided voters,” an important population who can be swayed, who are open to what political candidates have to offer. US and UK scholars point to transformative potential of Internet more as an “organizational tool” targeted to supporters and activists rather than as a communication device aimed at persuading undecided voters (Vaccari, 2008) and the internet’s inability to attract “floating voters” (undecided) .
- Trust issue: Filipinos more comfortable with face-to-face, interpersonal, and unmediated transactions Even respondents who are pre-disposed to have inclination to politics use the internet mostly for general news, work, and to communicate with loved ones Apart from reforming party machinery, it remains to be seen whether Filipino voters themselves will use the internet beyond the usual information acquisition. Are they willing and able to take part as core supporters to campaign for a candidate they truly believe in? What is the value-added of learning more about the candidates, if the information will come from the candidates themselves? How do voters really choose their candidates given more “information?” For example, some people in SNS ask candidates for help in addressing their personal problems, such as seeking jobs abroad, bad water supply in their village, or to support their candidacy in their barangay. But, that’s another research topic.