Nigel Jackson’s research while affiliated with University of Plymouth and other places

Purpose – This study seeks to discover whether the existence of Web 2.0 applications introduced a more interactive approach to British parties and candidates’ use of the Internet during the 2009 European Parliament elections. Design/methodology/approach – Research data were based on content analysis of the web sites of British candidates and parties during the 2009 European Parliament elections. The conceptual framework assesses whether there is evidence of a monologic versus dialogic approach, and normalisation versus equalisation between parties. Findings – The paper finds that parties were not using Web 2.0 as a strategic device. The party list system meant that parties were twice as likely as candidates to use Web 2.0 applications and, overall, there is weak evidence of a third way of ebb and flow. Continuing the experience of previous elections there is evidence of a predominantly monologic approach; however, the debate is no longer simply between normalisation versus equalisation, a more sophisticated approach suggests a third way, where political campaigning has been altered. While the overall levels of interactivity and dialogue are not high, there is some evidence of the development of a Web 1.5 sphere offering more interaction, but within a controlled environment. This study notes that ideology is a factor, where it is the right wing parties which are most likely to adopt interactivity. Originality/value – Previous literature on elections in general, and the European Parliament elections specifically, suggest that in the UK the Internet is primarily used for monologic communication and supporting the normalisation thesis. This study suggests, within an era of Web 2.0, a slight refinement to this interpretation.

Web 2.0 has heralded a networked, participatory and conversational culture reaching beyond national borders and cultures, reshaping communicational hierarchies and thus creating a new set of communicative rules. Web 2.0 offers political actors a potentially effective means of building a relationship with activists, supporters and possibly floating voters. The cost, however, is that the interactive nature of these technologies requires some loss of control of political discourse. Election campaigning tends to be synonymous with top-down, persuasive and propaganda-style communication which aims to win the support of voters crucial for the victory of a candidate or party. While this remains as the dominant paradigm for understanding campaigns, the use of Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms challenges this notion. Emerging in 2005, Web 2.0 ushered in a networked, participatory culture to be observed online with tools facilitating asynchronous or symmetrical conversations to take place within a variety of online environments. This participatory and conversational culture, like the Internet itself, reaches beyond national borders and cultures, reshaping communicational hierarchies, thus creating a new set of communicative rules. Web 2.0 applications raise significant questions for political parties and individual candidates in terms of how they might use the Internet for building relationships with activists, supporters and possibly floating voters. Through the systematic measurement of the usage of Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms—embedded within or linked to—from the websites of six UK parties we analyse the use of the Internet, and in particular Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms, during the 2010 general election in the UK. We find that differing strategies emerge between parties, with some withdrawing from interactive feature use. Where Web 2.0 features are employed they are largely within discrete areas aimed at building contact with communities of supporters, but largely these are geared towards electoral objectives and not harnessing the collective wisdom of party networks to inform policy. Election campaigning tends to be synonymous with top-down, persuasive and propaganda-style communication which aims to win the support of voters crucial for the victory of a candidate or party. While this remains as the dominant paradigm for understanding campaigns, the use of Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms challenges this notion. Emerging in 2005, Web 2.0 has heralded a networked, participatory culture to be observed online with tools facilitating asynchronous or symmetrical conversations to take place within a variety of online environments. This participatory and conversational culture, like the Internet itself, reaches beyond national borders and cultures, reshapes communicational hierarchies, so creating a new set of communicative rules. Web 2.0 applications raises significant questions for political parties and individual candidates in terms of how they might use the Internet for building relationships with activists, supporters and possibly floating voters. Through the systematic measurement of the usage of Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms embedded within or linked to from six party websites we analyse the use of the Internet, and in particular Web 2.0 tools, features and platforms, during the general election in the UK 2010. We find differing strategies emerge between parties, with some withdrawing from interactive feature use. Where Web 2.0 features are employed they are largely within discrete areas aimed at building contact with communities of supporters, but largely these are geared towards electoral objectives and not harnessing the collective wisdom of party networks to inform policy.

Political parties have been criticised for their limited use of interactivity via their Internet presences, largely it is suggested because they seek to control their online messages. This article will consider interactivity from the perspective of a political party, the Liberal Democrats, using their Freedom Bill online campaign as a case study. We suggest that the Liberal Democrats use ‘weak interactivity’ because of internal policymaking concerns, and their belief that as a political party they are promoting their ideas, not co-creating a new product. Thus we suggest interaction should be closer to a formal consultation than a face-to-face dialogue.

This article examines the differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 and how these Web strategies are used within a political communication context. The data focus on how political parties (and their leaders) in Britain use Web 2.0 applications. We consider whether the content political elites published in their Web 2.0 applications is shovelware and more appropriate for Web 1.0, or if a genuinely Web 2.0 style of political communication is emerging. We investigate the extent to which there has been a shift in the way British politicians communicate or if caution over co-production, coupled with the demands of electioneering, is restricting the development of interactivity. Our analysis suggests that British political parties have sought to create a “Web 1.5” that offers the advantages of both Web 1.0 and Web 2.0.

This paper considers whether the use of weblogs and social networking sites (SNS) (Web 2.0 applications) by MPs has enhanced the representative process. A content analysis was conducted of MP's weblogs and SNS during May 2008. Two approaches to representation were analysed. First, whether MP's use of Web 2.0 applications was consistent with one of the four models: delegates, trustees, party and constituency. Second, whether the basis for a separate framework of `e-representation' can be said to exist. The data suggest that MP's use of Web 2.0 applications is most likely to be within the party and constituency models, although we also suggest the existence of a possible fifth model, the representation of self. There is limited evidence that a fully functioning model of e-representation currently exists, but the basis exists for such a model to develop in the future. With weblogs this is likely to be based upon a global constituency centred around issues and/or the MP's personality. For SNS it is more likely to be centred on constituency. The legacy of Web 2.0 may be that it empowers MPs to express themselves, and citizens to see MPs as accessible, ordinary people.British Politics (2009) 4, 236-264. doi:10.1057/bp.2009.2

Purpose – Existing literature has agreed that during elections party web sites are primarily an information tool. This study seeks to identify to what extent political parties have developed a distinctive role for the Internet as a communications channel. Design/methodology/approach – Research data were based on content analysis of the web sites and e‐newsletters of parties contesting the 2005 UK General Election, and interviews with party e‐campaigners. Findings – Party size determined whether they had an integrated online communication strategy or not. The Internet did provide a discrete role, that of recruiting new members, encouraging donations and mobilising volunteers. Whereas previous research has focused on the web as an election campaign tool, this study found that it was e‐mail, especially pass‐protected e‐newsletters to party members. Originality/value – The traditional view was that parties used their web sites primarily to promote information. This study suggests that they only do so partially. Parties do not use their web sites as part of an integrated communication strategy supporting the messages carried by other channels. In 2005 UK parties began to develop a positive reason for having an online presence, namely as a resource generating tool, particularly in mobilising volunteers. Previous literature had considered whether parties had entered into dialogue; this study further defined this into asymmetrical and symmetrical two‐way communication. The results suggest that it is smaller parties who are more likely to use two‐way symmetrical communication.

Political parties are increasingly attempting to communicate to sections of the electorate directly, in order to relay targeted messages. E-newsletters are one key communication mode that facilitates this strategy, and previous research indicates that these, like many communications using information and communication technology, offer much potential for the sender. This research focuses on the receiver, explicitly taking a uses and gratifications approach to understanding the function of e-newsletters for the UK electorate. Our findings suggest that the majority of receivers are committed party members who desire to receive information directly from the party that will help them in their campaigning and activist roles. There is, however, a minority of less-active, politically interested, subscribers who also use e-newsletters to aid their voter choice. The data suggest that e-newsletters are able to encourage subscribers to develop and build relationships with a political party, possibly becoming more active in their support than simply offering a vote at election times.

This study was motivated by the apparent discrepancy between guidance for public relations best practice using co‐operation and collaboration to resolve conflict, and the potential to use the positive elements of conflict and competition to lobby more effectively. Game theory matrix was applied to nine lobbying campaigns, and used narrative analysis to identify themes of co‐operation, conflict, and mixed motive lobbying in the transcripts. The primary research identified that: Conflict, co‐operation and mixed‐motive lobbying were apparent in all the case studies. Mixed motive lobbying was unattainable between organizations with diametrically opposed interests and this may limit its application. A further obstacle to mixed motive strategies is the high level of resources it uses. The numerical game theory matrix used in this study was of limited use, however, the conceptual framework the theory provided was effective at modelling conflict and co‐operation strategies. Formal co‐operative alliances were common in the sample. Smaller coalitions appeared to be more effective than the larger ones. Those engaged in high conflict campaigns perceived themselves to be more effective than those engaged in lower conflict campaigns, however, this would need to be examined more exhaustively to establish causality. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

MPs have traditionally relied on the organisation and image of their national Party for the bulk of their voter support, but constituency service is probably more relevant for electoral success than at any other time in history. So far, however, new technology has had a very limited impact on the constituency role of MPs. The emergence of email represents potentially a ‘killer app’ which might revolutionize the way MPs approach re-election. One of the main effects of email is to encourage MPs to consider techniques and terms in common business usage, such as direct marketing and segmentation of their key audiences. By looking at how MPs use email to support their constituency role, this article assesses whether MPs use email as part of a relationship marketing strategy, a traditional transitory marketing approach or ignore marketing altogether. The marketing approach taken, combined with the resources available, will determine whether MPs use email only because they think they should or because they have grasped the campaigning opportunities it represents.

The relationship between an agency and itsclient has a limited timescale. Thus far,research has primarily focused on therelationship between advertising agencies andtheir clients. Based on a study of the existingliterature, most of which is advertising based,this article explores the agency-clientrelationship for public relations agencies in theUK travel industry. Our model concentrates onthe four phases of client-agency relationships:agency selection; successful relationships;failing relationships; and agency switching.Several factors influence these four phases, butthis article focuses specifically on an underexaminedfactor: whether the size of a client’spublic relations agency might influence thenature of the relationship between a client andagency. UK travel companies with differentsized public relations agencies were interviewedto test the model and assess the impact ofagency size. We found evidence to suggest thatagencies should be aware of how their size mayinfluence client perception during the selectionprocess. Agencies similarly should be consciousthat their size might act as an indication of howclients perceive their ability, and indeed mayinfluence their client-agency relationship on anongoing basis. Attention to size-relatedperceptions may help prevent clients switchingagencies.