E-Electioneering: Use of new media in the 2007 Australian federal election

Like the 2007–2008 US presidential primaries, the 2007 Australian federal election was described as “the YouTube election” and an “internet election” (Media Monitors, 2008). This followed studies of use of what are termed ‘new media’ for political communication in a number of campaigns including the 2000 US presidential election (Bentivegna, 2002, p. 50) and the 2004 US presidential election which was described as “a critical turning point” (Xenos and Moy, 2007, p. 704). However, the development of web 2.0 1 internet media, expanding broadband, and other changes have overtaken many findings of previous research. Some of the most popular new media currently in use were ‘invented’ post-2004. The rapid rate of technological and social change makes new media research particularly time-bound and indicates that ongoing empirical studies and analysis are needed. This paper contributes to understanding of how new media are used in political communication and how they influence the public sphere (Habermas, 1989, 2006), particularly looking at public interaction and participation (Carpentier, 2007) which have been identified as key features of web 2.0 media and as requirements of an active public sphere, based on findings of a study conducted by the Australian Centre for Public Communication at the University of Technology Sydney during the 2007 Australian federal election.

[1]  K. A. Hill,et al.  Cyberpolitics: Citizen Activism in the Age of the Internet , 1998 .

[2]  P. Chen Candidates' new media use in the 2007 Australian national election , 2008 .

[3]  Nico Carpentier Participation and interactivity: changing perspectives. The construction of an integrated model on access, interaction and participation , 2007 .

[4]  Sara Bentivegna Politics and New Media , 2002 .

[5]  Werner J. Severin,et al.  Communication Theories: Origins, Methods and Uses in the Mass Media , 1991 .

[6]  P. Shoemaker Communication Campaigns about Drugs : Government, Media, and the Public , 1989 .

[7]  David Gauntlett Media, Gender and Identity: An Introduction , 2002 .

[8]  Steven G. Jones Cybersociety 2.0: revisiting computer-mediated communication and community , 1998 .

[9]  Ithiel de Sola Pool,et al.  Technologies of Freedom , 1983 .

[10]  Robert W. McChesney,et al.  The Internet and U. S. Communication Policy-Making in Historical and Critical Perspective , 1996, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[11]  S. Schneider Creating a Democratic Public Sphere Through Political Discussion , 1996 .

[12]  Patricia R. Webb Cybersociety: Computer-mediated communication and community , 1996 .

[13]  J. Habermas Political Communication in Media Society: Does Democracy Still Enjoy an Epistemic Dimension? The Impact of Normative Theory on Empirical Research , 2006 .

[14]  Bohdan O. Szuprowicz,et al.  Multimedia Networking , 1995 .

[15]  Sally J. McMillan Exploring Models of Interactivity from Multiple Research Traditions: Users, Documents, and Systems , 2002 .

[16]  Chris Newbold,et al.  The media book , 2002 .

[17]  Mike Gasher Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times , 2000 .

[18]  James Curran Media and power , 2002 .

[19]  James W. Tankard,et al.  Communication theories: Origins, methods, uses , 1979 .

[20]  Sonia Livingstone,et al.  New Media, New Audiences? , 1999, New Media Soc..

[21]  R. McChesney Rich media, poor democracy : communication politics in dubious times , 2000 .

[22]  Michael A. Xenos,et al.  Direct and Differential Effects of the Internet on Political and Civic Engagement , 2007 .

[23]  Anders Hansen,et al.  Mass Communication Research Methods , 1998 .

[24]  Roger F. Fidler,et al.  Mediamorphosis: Understanding New Media , 1997 .