G’Day Mate! Social Media and Politics in the Land Down Under
Approximately one month ago in the land down under, YouTube launched its Australian site. In his inaugural Aussie video, YouTube’s News and Politics editor Steve Grove noted that the site’s launch corresponded with the heart of Australia’s elections for Prime Minister. In sharp contrast to the seemingly endless American campaigns - which practically begin for the next election before the last ballot for the previous election has been cast - Australia’s federal election season is just six short weeks.
This truncated season - combined with the fact that Australia’s remarkable lack of population density makes it difficult and time-consuming to physically meet large groups – may explain why the Australian candidates have so enthusiastically incorporated YouTube into their campaigns.
In a Reese’s-style conundrum (you got peanut butter on my chocolate…) the internet is becoming politicized and politics are moving online.
In addition to professionally written and produced content à la BarelyPolitical, the growing prevalence of sites that allow people to submit their own content and have that content made globally accessible and easily searchable has forever changed the face of politics.
You don’t even have to have the body of Obamagirl to get noticed. Even the most seemingly banal videos can change the course of a campaign and thus a nation. Nominally, a video of an obscure Australian politician making a commonplace speech would not be particularly interesting. But when the person behind the speaker – the guy eating his own earwax – decides to run for Prime Minister, the hits start pouring in.
In American politics, examples abound. John Edwards’ haircut, George W. Bush struggling with a locked door, and Virginia Senator George Allen’s famous “macaca” comment.
These videos can be provided by anyone with a camera and a connection to the internet. Often times you don’t even need a camera – but just a VCR and a willingness to slog through hours of boring tapes, trolling for embarrassing gaffes.
Indeed, technology has advanced to the point that we don’t even have to wait for politicians to embarrass themselves. We can do it for them using iMovie or even free video editing software.
It is hard to measure the influence that these videos have exerted on the political fates of those featured. Indeed, who has heard of an exit poll inquiring whether a particular YouTube video effected the voter’s decision? (On a side note, while these sorts of questions may eventually be asked I do not think that people would admit the extent to which they were swayed by a single video clip) Yet with millions of views it is clear that these online videos can’t help but influence some voters’ perceptions.
(On a side note, Australia’s Federal Elections were held over the weekend and the earwax eating candidate - Kevin Rudd - emerged victorious with nearly 54 percent of the vote. This is merely a factual observation and is not intended to make a statement on the impact social media can have on political elections.)
In spite of the large impact that online videos can have on the political process, I believe that they play a more important role as a means of participation than they do of persuasion. In sharp contrast to the silent onlookers of yesteryear who were only allowed to express their opinion once at the very end of the process (with their ballot), today’s voters can become as involved with the political process as they wish by creating their own content and editing and commenting on that of others. The proliferation of YouTube, blogs and other social media outlets has exponentially increased the avenues of participation.
And we all know that Web 2.0 is all about participation…
Trackback
Trackback url for this entry.