Understanding TwitterTM Use among Parliament Representatives: A Genre Analysis

This article examines parliament representatives' Twitter- contributions (tweets). First, the genre of communication approach is introduced to identify common characteristics and communication patterns. Second, the findings are analysed using various eDemocracy models and deliberative standards to identify to what extent these tweets could be characterized as part of a deliberative discussion. The tweets are mainly dominated by five communication purposes; providing links to information sources for other Twitter users, to inform about the representative's ongoing activities, to express views on topical issues, introducing non-political (private) content and participating in online discussions with other parliament representatives. Other less frequent communication patterns include tweets attracting attention to the representative's own blogs, requests for input from readers and finally discussions with citizens. The analysed tweets generally did not meet deliberative standards and are dominated by politicians disseminating information and discussing with other parliament representatives. We conclude by arguing that the parliament representatives Twitter use is linked to the Liberal Democracy model, where the main purpose is to disseminate information to electors, and provide information on ongoing activities to the audience.

[1]  Jody C. Baumgartner,et al.  MyFaceTube Politics , 2010 .

[2]  Todd Graham,et al.  Needles in a Haystack , 2008 .

[3]  Carina Ihlström,et al.  The evolution of a new(s) genre , 2004 .

[4]  C. Tilly Democracy , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[5]  Tero Päivärinta,et al.  Models of E-Democracy , 2006, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[6]  John Yen,et al.  Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on Web mining and social network analysis , 2007, KDD 2007.

[7]  Tero Päivärinta,et al.  The Genre System Lens on E-Democracy , 2008, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[8]  W. Orlikowski,et al.  Genres of Organizational Communication: A Structurational Approach to Studying Communication and Media , 1992 .

[9]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  Democracy Squared: Designing On-Line Political Communities to Accommodate Conflicting Interests , 2005, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[10]  Antje Gimmler Deliberative democracy, the public sphere and the internet , 2001 .

[11]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[12]  Kim Strandberg,et al.  Public Deliberation goes On-line? , 2008 .

[13]  Hyun-Gyung Im,et al.  Information Technology & People Temporal coordination through communication: using genres in a virtual start-up , 2022 .

[14]  赫尓徳,et al.  民主的模式 = Models of democracy , 1986 .

[15]  D. Silverman Interpreting Qualitative Data , 1993 .

[16]  William P. Eveland,et al.  Information and Expression in a Digital Age , 2005, Commun. Res..

[17]  Daniel L. Sherrell,et al.  Communications of the Association for Information Systems , 1999 .

[18]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research - A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[19]  Timothy W. Finin,et al.  Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities , 2007, WebKDD/SNA-KDD '07.

[20]  Martha Ann Carey,et al.  Focus Group Research , 2012 .

[21]  W. Orlikowski,et al.  Explicit and Implicit Structuring of Genres in Electronic Communication: Reinforcement and Change of Social Interaction , 1999 .

[22]  W. Orlikowski,et al.  Genre Repertoire: The Structuring of Communicative Practices in Organizations , 1994 .

[23]  Cheng Blanco,et al.  Social Science Computer Review , 1987 .

[24]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Genres of Digital Documents: Introduction to the Special Issue , 2005 .

[25]  B. Berelson Content analysis in communications research , 1952 .

[26]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  The shape of eParticipation: Characterizing an emerging research area , 2008, Gov. Inf. Q..

[27]  J. V. Dijk,et al.  Digital Democracy: Issues of Theory and Practice , 2001 .

[28]  R. Dahl,et al.  Democracy and Its Critics , 1990 .

[29]  A. Tocqueville,et al.  Democracy in America: In Two Volumes , 2012 .

[30]  Thomas J. Johnson,et al.  The Revolution Will be Networked , 2010 .

[31]  Tero Päivärinta,et al.  The concept of genre within the critical approach to information systems development , 2001, Inf. Organ..

[32]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  Designing Deliberation Systems , 2010, Inf. Soc..

[33]  D. Silverman Qualitative research : theory, method and practice , 2004 .

[34]  Johannes A.G.M. Models of Democracy and Concepts of Communication. , 2000 .

[35]  C. Pateman Participation and democratic theory , 1970 .

[36]  Jens Ulrich,et al.  Anmeldelse af "Eriksen, E. O. ; Weigård, J.: Kommunikativ handling og deliberativt demokrati: Jürgen Habermas' teori om politikk og samfunn" , 2000 .

[37]  Øystein Sæbø,et al.  Understanding the dynamics in e-Participation initiatives: Looking through the genre and stakeholder lenses , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..