Guy Lachapelle - Political Parties in the Digital Age: The Impact of New Technologies in Politics

Guy Lachapelle, Philippe J. Maarek (Eds.)

Political Parties in the Digital Age

ISBN 978-3-11-040408-1
e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-041381-6
e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-042373-0

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress.

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de .

2015 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Cover illustration: Fakhri-sa/Thinkstock

www.degruyter.com

The evolution of political communication has always been inextricably linked to the evolution of the media, and thereby to the evolution of political systems as a whole. We cannot imagine the rise of the first monarchies without referring to the advent of printed literature, which provided early rulers with a medium for their laws. We cannot imagine the rise of Western Europe without referring to the invention of the printing press. We cannot imagine the emergence of 20 th -century totalitarian ideologies without referring to the coming of radio and other instruments of what was then called propaganda.

The advent of television seemed to mark a milestone in the evolution of political systems by allowing some politicians to bypass, for the first time, the traditional hierarchical pyramid of political parties and make their way into the public arena without party support. Although Eisenhower had certainly been helped by the first political TV spots in 1952, he still owed his presidency just as much to the Republican Party, which had sought him out and accompanied him all the way to the White House. Yet, little by little, in most democracies, male and female politicians were increasingly using their audiovisual charisma to gain pre-eminence independently of party machines. They succeeded with the complicity of TV journalists, who were only too happy to boost their viewership by helping out these good media customers rather than party leaders who often looked drab by comparison. In 1960, John F. Kennedy thus became the surprise winner of the Democratic Primaries to the astonishment of his partys higher-ups. Later, he edged out Richard Nixon, undoubtedly through his great performance during the first televised debate between the two men, thus showing once again how things were changing.

This evolution has also been increased by the emergence of political marketing almost everywhere from the 1960s onward, to the point of becoming omnipresent today. Marketing professionals very soon saw how they could capitalize on TVs increased personalization of political communication and thus better reach out to the undecided and abstainers the swing voters who often decide who wins or loses elections. The argument was simple. Since these voters were politically unmotivated and uninterested in politics, they would have to be convinced through exposure to the candidates personal qualities or their opponents personal liabilities even to the point for example of asking them to attend to entertainment shows, since these media venues are often the most popular among individuals not interested by politics. This is how Arnold Schwarzenegger managed to become Californias governor after running against a political veteran and without hardly ever fielding questions from campaign reporters. He also announced his candidacy on a talk show a tactic later adopted by a politician as traditional as John McCain. In sum, by speaking directly to voters via television, through the special access gained by their personal charisma, and without bothering with political parties, the main leaders have often bypassed the old structures of party activism which have appeared more and more obsolete. As a result, activism declined considerably in the late 20 th century. Activists felt unnecessary and were often disappointed that political communication, which marketing had so professionalized, had become depoliticized through extreme personalization.

The advent of the Internet and the related emergence of social media could have initially been understood as another way for politicians to do without political parties. Howard Dean in 20032004 or Sgolne Royal in 2007 have for instance been able to emerge by astutely and innovatively using new, interactive electronic media, the so-called Web 2.0. The influence of the new media, however, cannot be so unequivocally reduced to politicians having one more tool in their hands. At the same time, thanks to the Web 2.0 simple citizens have now been able to upload videos right away from their smart phones to YouTube or Dailymotion or they can tweet their feelings and get an immediate echo from all kinds of people. These new possibilities for communication seem to have rekindled a spirit of individual activism that political parties can once more try to channel. In addition, electronic media like the Internet are accentuating the trend toward glocalization of the public and political sphere that had earlier begun with the advent of television, while pushing this trend into new areas. In a world where each of us is directly linked to the whole world through media globalization, our relations with intermediate structures, including States, are increasingly tenuous, as Habermas pointed out in The Postnational Constellation. On the other hand, across normal interaction, each of us still enjoys relations of communication with the local sphere, i.e., other individuals with whom we have close relationships, whether centred on our workplace, our business, our friends, or our family. The Internet has completed this glocalization by enabling any individual to become in turn a source of both vertical and horizontal communication, thus breaking the monopoly that politicians had back in the television age which has turned out to have been just a temporary phase.