Featur e
and engage with voters. Social media like Facebook and Twitter are relatively new compared to the classic tools like literature drops and door-to-door canvassing. The latter are tried, tested and true and any seasoned campaigner can advise a candidate on how to properly execute these operations. Not so for social media tactics and techniques. Their newness means campaign managers and com- munications operatives are continually learning how to translate social media into electoral success and avoid it becoming a laborious exercise riddled with pitfalls. Often theses lessons are learned in a “trial by fire” fashion. What sorts of pictures are appropriate to post on the political Facebook account? Who should be allowed to be a Facebook “friend”? Should Tweets make relaxed statements or insight- ful offerings, offer humour or remain as serious and professional as a press conference? Keeping questions like these in mind will help to avoid a social media scandal from erupting and allow for a focused effort translating social media into an election win. Anthony Furey, who writes commentary appearing in the Monday editions of the National Post, conducted an interview
To Tweet or Not to Tweet? Most
of today’s political candidates, or at least their teams, are fully plugged into the diverse array of social networking tools available to spread their message
for Campaigns & Elections magazine with the magazine’s regular social media contributor, Brett Bell, as well as social media experts Stefan Baranski and Jonathan Goldsbie.
CAMPAIGNS & ELECTIONS (C&E): Is there a standard litmus test for people in politics to figure out what should and should not be put on Facebook, Twitter or a blog?
BARANSKI: I think there’s only one rule for candidates and their staff - what goes out on social media, is as good as a news re- lease from the campaign. One important caveat though - in the world of twibbons, facebook badges and fake twitter accounts - all of which we’re seeing for the first time in this year’s munici- pal campaign season in Ontario - the dynamics change for sure. You can’t control who downloads your campaign’s twibbon, nor can these supporters be considered to be acting on behalf of a particular campaign. But for candidates and their staff - what you put out there reflects directly on your campaign.
BELL: The litmus test is always the same, in or out of the political realm: relevance. Whenever a campaign is thinking about post- ing any content online, they should immediately ask themselves whether visitors, voters or supporters would actually benefit from the information. With the ubiquity of social media publishing tools, it’s easy to post anything and everything. But politicos - probably more than the average individual or company - must realize they have a limited window to capture and hold voter’s attention. It’s easy to overwhelm the voter who’s looking to get specific information and get out. So, always be relevant.
GOLDSBIE: Think before you post: “Is this something that someone might screencap to use against us later?” Of course, from my perspective it’s better when politicians don’t think before they post, so I can take a screencap and use it against them later.
42 Campaigns & Elections | Canadian Edition
C&E: Is there a different level of debate on social media plat- forms? For instance, can a candidate say something on their Twitter that would otherwise be too cheeky or risqué to say in a televised debate?
BARANSKI: It depends on the individual. What social media platforms do allow for is an unprecedented window into a particular candidate’s headspace. We’ve never had that ability before. Compare Ontario Premier McGuinty and Opposition Leader Tim Hudak. Hudak has mastered Twit- ter and Facebook to share thoughts about the latest cur- rent event - often before the journos file for the next day’s paper. We get to follow along in real time - his schedule, who he’s meeting with, what he’s thinking at any particular moment. We have to rely on the Toronto Star to find out what McGuinty’s thinking. Then there’s a politician like Tony Clement. His Twitter feed is hilarious - he thrives on sharing cheeky observations. On balance, I think social media channels are a direct reflection on the personality of the user. The boundaries are still being pushed, so I don’t think anyone can confidently say yes or no to your ques- tion. That said, I think it’s widely accepted that what goes out on social media is a direct reflection on the candidate. Feeling cheeky? There’s an app for that...or at least a chan- nel for it.
BELL: Yes and no. I think Twitter, Facebook and other “status update” social networking applications have moved from an interesting personal hobby to a legitimate com- munications medium for campaigns. Many campaigns are publishing news releases and official announcements and
An interview with Brett Bell, Stefan Baranski, and Jonathan Goldsbie
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80