Political Communication Trends

Overview

The field of political communication covers the communication acts and texts by governments, political parties, civil society organizations, activists, and all groups that participate in the political communication process and aim to exert influence. Philosophers and scholars have long associated these acts of political exchange with public spaces, both material and metaphoric, from the concept of the ancient Greek Agora, to the Republic of Letters during the Enlightenment, to Jürgen Habermas' seminal proposal in the twentieth century of the public sphere. For Habermas, people are naturally inclined to engaging in dialogue and debate with the purpose of having a political impact; to do this freely and democratically, people need public spaces. This idea was posited in his book The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1989).

Public sphere, or spaces of conversation and political exchange, have always existed; they were, at first, public plazas and cafes. As technology evolved, so did notions of what constitutes the public sphere. In the twenty-first century, much of the public sphere seems to occur in media outlets on the Internet.

Politics includes all processes related to decision-making for the general interest or public good. These come from people or groups in positions of authority, but also, from people from the communities. They often imply the sorting out of conflict because there will not be consensus among all people about the best decisions to adopt, especially because once adopted, these decisions—in the form of elections, laws, regulations, and so on—are obligatory for all. Much of what is harmonious and consensual in a democracy, then, is based on the quality and civility of a society's political communication.

In short, political communication is all communication meant to influence the political process, all social exchanges in which the actors involved are trying to influence a process that involves the common good. Therefore, there are many different types of political communication. Most contemporary political communications broadly fall within the three following types: electoral, institutional, and civil society or lobbying.

Electoral communication pertains to citizens running for public office, candidates who seek to be elected to positions of authority in government or other such positions filled by elections. For example, in primary elections, voting may be limited to the members of a political party. Party members vote to elect an individual to represent them in general elections. Once a political party has elected their representatives, they will support them in their political campaign for general or national elections.

Clearly, different types of political messages are required for primary campaigns and for general campaigns; in the primaries, a party is "preaching to the converted," that is, to a group of people who share a common ideology. In this sense, the target public does not need to be convinced of a political platform, just that a given candidate is best suited to represent the party in the general elections. In general elections, on the other hand, the public includes people who do not share a common ideology and, it follows, the campaign message needs to be different; it might seek to convince voters, first, that their political ideas are best and, secondly, that their candidate is most apt to lead the city, the state, or the nation, depending upon the position under contention.

Institutional communication can also be political, especially if it comes from government institutions or agencies. These communications are meant to inform the public or a group of constituents, of decisions that have been taken or must be taken, or perhaps, provide information about the institution. Sometimes, it may not be clear to a casual observer that a communication is political in nature. Take, for example, a communication from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the federal tax collection agency of the United States, advising the public on the importance of paying taxes. Although it may appear as merely an informational piece, the agency seeks to advance the argument that to avoid paying taxes has a negative effect on public policies for the common good, such as the maintenance of parks and streets, schools and libraries, paying pensions for veterans, and so on. Another example would be communication from a Senate, Parliament, or Congress, which seeks to keep the citizenry informed on the issues up for deliberation and the legislation process, so that they are aware and supportive of these institutions' goals and work.

There is also the political communication from civil society or other citizen groups, meant to influence the political decision-making of government institutions. One of the ways in which this is accomplished is through lobbying. Others are campaigning and protesting. When organized citizen groups want to influence legislation or policy, they often engage in a communicative process which, on the one hand, seeks to gain public support and on the other, convince key individuals in government to vote for their proposals. Examples could include environmental groups lobbying for legislation that protects the environment, anti-war groups seeking to influence nuclear policymaking, and senior citizen organizations, such as the American Association of Retired Persons, whose main goal is to further the interests of Americans older than 50 years of age. Besides convincing key political actors to push for their measures, these groups also tend to depend on public support and thus, must seek their approval.

The main ways in which all these groups communicate their political messages is mass media. Media technologies and news outlets are of paramount importance to the political and democratic process of countries worldwide. Some cultures hold strong freedom of information values, while others prefer to curtail access of the citizenry to some forms of mediatized information. This invariably leads to conflicts between power elites that seek to control mass media production and access, and citizens that try to bypass these obstacles in order to gain access to information. Examples abound, from the existence of underground radio that brings information to listeners in totalitarian states, to dark channels meant to provide access to Internet in places where government forces impede access. Another issue for debate is the notion that the chaotic proliferation of information outlets online has greatly blurred the lines between evidence-based information and unverified or even deliberately false information. Civil society groups and mainstream news media are concerned with identifying and protecting the types of information allowed according to freedom of speech norms, as opposed to those that constitute unacceptable forms of speech, such as hate crimes, online bullying, and fraud.

The proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) is also likely to affect trends in political communication via mass media. Experts predict that about 95 percent of political ads will soon be generated or assisted by AI.

Further Insights

Contemporary political communication has changed much since the 1960s and 1970s. Prior to those decades, political communication relied on traditional modes of mass advertising. Take the model of traditional televised advertising, in which a commercial interrupted programming several times during each show, to engage viewers in commercial information—advertising spots—before returning them to their programming. During these commercial breaks, news flashes tried to raise interest among the audience in the upcoming news programs. With the arrival of cable channels, ads—even political ads—became more targeted.

While much political communication continues to rely on televised commercials, this model is steadily decreasing as ever more voters reject traditional publicity. Different applications and systems exist to date that bypass TV commercials—the simplest one is the "mute" button on remote controls. People have the option of watching their shows on commercial-free streaming channels, such as Netflix, or else use ad-blocking systems both for their TV screens and online.

Political events, such as fundraising to volunteer organizing, is more efficiently organized via social media. For example, Twitter became known as the catalyst for social movement uprisings, such as the Arab Spring in 2010, and Twitter was probably a crucial medium in the 2016 electoral win of President Donald Trump in the United States (Enli, 2017). In fact, the Trump campaign reportedly spent over 50 percent of its publicity budget on digital communication, mainly Facebook and Twitter.

Political communication trends accelerated from the first to the second decade of the twenty-first century. Politics experts realized the growing importance of media content—that is, the encapsulation of information packaged for specific audiences or users—and of the various niche audiences online. Political texts changed; rather than rousing speeches, the contemporary voting public prefers short messages and useful "expert" information.

In 2021, The Pew Research Center published that eight in ten Americans used the Internet as their major source of campaign news. Content information moves fast; it needs to be produced constantly, with catchy items—or "click bait"—that will make people click and share. To be successful, content mixes a series of different media: audios, texts, pictures, and short videos. As for political advertising, the public no longer trusts conventional publicity. Studies show that people with strong online opinion leadership use social media more frequently than those who lack leadership.

On the other hand, political communication experts advise that some tried and true strategies are still important, such as rhetoric or discourse, framing, and priming, among others. These are communicative elements that can be adapted to the new communicative technology.

Rhetoric, a discipline born in ancient Greece, has always been interconnected with politics. Rhetoric and discourse include all sorts of written and speech communications, issued by government, institutions, civil society, and social movements. Some discourse scholars, such as Michel Foucault, explain that all matters pertaining to human relationships are inherently political, because they are permeated with social values and power relations. Politics always involve issues of power, as well as of rights, legitimization, competing interests, and differences in values and interests. In fact, any texts concerning power, freedom, justice, peace, and rights are related to political communication. Other issues pertaining to power and speech, such as attempts to impose censorship on some topics or silencing some groups, also related to political rhetoric (Zaleska, 2012).

The terms "frame" and "framing" are important sociological concepts still used in modern political communications research. Frames are psychological structures underpinned by culture and shared by a society or group, which give meaning to their world. Frames direct how power elites shape information and news producers select topics and disseminate them, as well as how people understand the information. The main idea behind framing in political communication is that political actors, mediatized information, and audiences do not just reflect a single political reality; rather, political news and discourse are subject to different ways of interpretation. In turn political communicators, from politicians to lobbyists or activists, develop their own frames about an issue and disseminate them in public discourse and the media.

Priming, long used in cognitive sciences, is studied in media effects theories as the idea that individuals make decisions based on associations with words and images stored in nonconscious memory. These associations interact with each other and act as a frame of reference for decisions and evaluations. Priming in political discourse is of special value during elections campaigns, as people make decisions about which candidate to select. Priming is especially effective with groups of people who lack knowledge about the candidate or who are not particularly knowledgeable about political issues. Priming can be observed, for example, in how people replicate the behavior presented to them in the media, such as when children mimic the behavior and characteristics of their favorite TV characters. In that same manner, political actors, institutions, and social media, among others, may use priming to send messages laden with keywords and images that align with their audiences' values and beliefs, and that stress the importance of some topics over others. Detractors of priming worry that it may be used for subliminal persuasion and other manipulative practices.

Finally, critics blame online platforms with fostering an untenable climate of political hostility; however, supporters argue that the Internet has expanded the possibilities for citizen engagement overall and provided opportunities for citizens to organize and to interact with their representatives in government.

Issues

It is important to make a distinction between two main types of political communication, since not understanding the difference in communication modes may lead to error and defeat. This differentiation is important in contemporary political communication, as political actors wear many hats and communication managers must be able to move fluidly among different media systems, including digital media. This enables media managers and communicators to select communication strategies and styles as needed.

Although overlapping exists between "electoral" communication and political communication broadly speaking, these are different fields. Political communicators, from government to civil society, and from elected officials to lobbyists and activists, need to be skilled at communicating efficiently and according to their different roles, and communication styles and strategies must be adapted to each. Political organizations, in general, must communicate constantly, not solely during electoral campaigns. For a newly elected government official, political communication—as opposed to electoral communications—begins the very day he or she is elected. This includes maintaining lines of communication with their political parties and supporting groups in civil society, as well as establishing intra-government communication, legislative communication, and so on. Even silence is laden with meaning when it comes to political communication.

Electoral communication, on the other hand, is limited to the campaign. Post-election political communication has more leeway than electoral communication—if there is a misstep after an election, there is more time to correct it. In electoral communications, however, such misstep may lead to an electoral loss. The main objective of electoral communication is simply to transform ideas and emotions into votes. Its political content is designed for the short-term, its discourse designed to be interpreted and consumed short-term too; in other words, political advertising often seeks to prevent the target audience from engaging in a deliberative or thoughtful consideration of its content; rather, it strives to engage the viewers' emotions and call them to action: at the immediate level, to inspire them to share the message with others and, as an end goal, to ensure they vote for the candidate.

Finally, the rate of engagement of a media user is contingent on his or her experience with that technology. The fastest growing mass media to date is social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and other digital platforms, which indicates that growing numbers of people are comfortable with social media and make strong use of it. Furthermore, social media is convenient for media managers, since engagement can be easily quantified by measuring numbers of message replications (e.g., retweets, likes, replies). The downside, however, is that the speed and ease of digital communication, and its potential for anonymity, have loosened the boundaries of civil discourse, leading to a rise in hostile and even violent behavior online across groups with different political ideologies. Experts hope that better media education and raising awareness on the issue will eventually lead to a return to civility online.

Bibliography

Armstrong, J. (2014). Persuasive advertising: Evidence-based principles. New York: Palgrave.

Boczkowski, P. J., & Papacharissi, Z. (Eds.). (2018). Trump and the media. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Enli, G. (2017). Twitter as arena for the authentic outsider: Exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. European Journal of Communication, 32(1), 50-–61. doi:10.1177/0267323116682802

Fabijanic, D., Spahr, C., & Zlateva, M. (Eds.). (2017). Reconnecting with citizens: From values to big data. Communication of governments, the EU and political parties in times of populism and filter bubbles. Konrad Adenauer Foundation.

Helfert, D. L. (2017). Political communication in action: From theory to practice. Lynne Riener.

Kenski, K., & Jamieson, K. H. (Eds.). (2017). The Oxford handbook of political communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ojebuyi, B. R., & Salawu, A. (2018). Are the "born-frees" always politically apathetic? Social media use for campus politics by black undergraduates of north-west university, Mafikeng, South Africa. Bangladesh E-Journal of Sociology, 15(1), 173–188.

Sampedro, V. (2011). Introduction: New trends and challenges in political communication. International Journal of Press/Politics, 16(4), 431–439. doi:10.1177/1940161211418291

Stiff, J. M., & Mongeau, P. A. (2016). Persuasive communication. New York: Guilford Press.

Yotova, Denica. (2023, Dec. 1). What 2024 holds for communication in politics. LinkedIn, www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-2024-holds-communication-politics-denica-yotova-fmpqe/

Zaleska, M. (Ed.). (2012). Rhetoric and politics: Central/Eastern European perspectives. Newcastle, England: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Zinnbauer, D. (2021, May 27). Nurturing the Integrity of Political Communication in the Digital Age. Open Government Partnership. www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/nurturing-the-integrity-of-political-communication-in-the-digital-era/