Communicatio

South African Journal for Communication Theory and Research

ISSN: 0250-0167 (Print) 1753-5379 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcsa20

Unlocking the Potential of New Media

Technologies for Political Communication about
Elections in Ghana

Adwoa Sikayena Amankwah & Blessing Mbatha

To cite this article: Adwoa Sikayena Amankwah & Blessing Mbatha (2019): Unlocking the
Potential of New Media Technologies for Political Communication about Elections in Ghana,
Communicatio, DOI: 10.1080/02500167.2019.1639782

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02500167.2019.1639782

Published online: 18 Oct 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 9

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rcsa20
 ARTICLE

Unlocking the Potential of New Media Technologies

for Political Communication about Elections in Ghana

Adwoa Sikayena Amankwah Blessing Mbatha

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5106-0746 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8128-2035
University of Professional Studies, Ghana University of South Africa
asika75@yahoo.co.uk

ABSTRACT
New media technologies encapsulating social, mobile and digital technologies have been
deployed by many countries for political communication agendas ranging from campaign
and voter mobilisation and fostering democratic engagements to electoral monitoring,
tracking and vote counting. Notwithstanding their massive deployment by political
candidates, citizens’ participation in online political communication has been dwindling.
Furthermore, motivations that account for the use of new media technologies as political
information sources by students at the tertiary level, have not been fully explored. The study
interrogated university students’ motivations for using new media technologies as political
communication tools in the 2016 elections in Ghana and the concurrent political informational
gratifications derived. It adopted mixed methods approach surveying of 400 students and
40 participants in focus group interviews. The findings indicated that university students
are motivated primarily by surveillance reasons impelled by features of the technology to
engage on politics. Notwithstanding that guidance motivations did not significantly influence
voting, students reinforced their personal political values by interacting on the online political
agenda of political candidates and their parties. The study contributes to theory and practice
by accentuating affordances of new media technologies and balanced cognitive content as
precursors of motivations for their adoption by university students.

Keywords: new media technologies; uses and gratifications; political communication; political
information; audience

Introduction
New media technologies are increasingly being deployed by Western countries for
political communication and civic processes such as elections (Alec 2014; Bimber

university
of south africa

Communicatio https://doi.org/10.1080/02500167.2019.1639782
http://www.tandfonline.com/rcsa20 ISSN 1753-5379 (Online), ISSN 0250-0167 (Print)
© Unisa Press 2019

1
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

2014; Ceron and d’Adda 2015; Gil de Zuniga and Shanin 2015; Graham, Jackson, and
Broersma 2014). Notwithstanding their growing application to political communication,
studies suggest that the technologies are applied predominantly from a top-down
approach by political candidates in presidential and parliamentary elections, policy
makers, political parties and civil society organisations to engage with their constituents
(Golbeck, Grimes, and Rogers 2010; Gueorguieva 2008; Iyengar 2011; Nielsen and
Vaccari 2013, 2333).
Moreover, research suggests political efficacy is imploding while apathetic attitudes of
citizens towards civic processes such as governance and elections escalates (Alec 2014;
Ceron and d’Adda 2015; Gil de Zuniga and Shanin 2015). Despite citizens’ apathy
toward civic responsibilities, the youth, in particular, are increasingly deploying new
media technologies for social and recreational purposes (Nielsen and Vaccari 2013).
This situation has led new media scholars proposing an application of social science
research methods to interrogate how new media technologies can be effectively deployed
to invigorate citizens’ diminishing interest in governance and civic processes such as
elections (Bimber 2014; Gil de Zuniga 2015; Nielsen 2014).
The new media scholarly terrain is replete with studies on how political actors and
political parties adopt the technologies for political communication, but the reasons
why citizens deploy them for political communication on elections are largely unknown
(Alec 2014; Bimber 2014; Ceron and d’Adda 2015; Gil de Zuniga and Shanin 2015;
Graham, Jackson, and Broersma 2014). Wojcieszak and Rojas (2011) argue for an
interrogation of how citizens construct their notions of online political reality, while
Bimber (2015, 217) affirms this need that new media technologies constitute a significant
dimension of the infrastructure of social and political life through which people engage
in politics. Thus by interrogating this subject, the study hopes to contribute to theory and
practice by applying the Uses and Gratifications theory to facilitate an understanding
of the motivations and political information needs that influence university students
to use new media technologies for elections communication in Ghana as encapsulated
in the research questions. The implications of findings to be derived would serve as
tools to chart more deliberative political engagements between university students and
political actors. Further, it would enable more strategic targeting of university students
in terms of turn out efforts, political messaging and communication as well as political
campaigning (Scholl 2015, 46).

Research Questions
The study addresses the following research questions:
Research Question 1: What motivations account for the use of new media technologies
by university students as political communication tools for elections in Ghana?

2
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Research Question 2: What political information needs of university students determine

the use of new media technologies as political communication tools on elections?
The appropriateness of the Uses and Gratifications theory to this study derives from
the fact that the major variables in the research questions upon which the Uses and
Gratifications Theory is hinged include motivations and gratifications.

Literature Review
New media encapsulates social, digital and mobile media driven by the Internet.
The Internet serves as a source of information for citizens and a channel for incisive
discussions in the online public sphere, thereby promoting free expression (Alec
2014; Barassi 2016; Bimber 2014; Gil de Zuniga and Valenzuela 2011; Gil de Zuniga
and Shanin 2015; Skoric 2015). According to Schill, Kirk, and Jasperson (2017, 71),
new media technologies, particularly social media, are transforming the prevailing
“paradox of technology and political openness” by gradually bringing political actors
and political processes closer to voters. More so, “it is because of what social media
offers that no other movement in communications has been able to offer: a true two-way
communication to the masses” (Shirky 2009 cited in Schill, Kirk, and Jasperson 2017,
71). Simply put, they are “a force for social change” (Wasserman 2011, 147). New media
technologies have been deployed for elections and to mobilise people in Italy (Ceron
and d’Adda 2015); Brazil (Gilmore and Howard 2013, 2); in the 2010 Swedish elections
(Åström and Karlsson 2013; Larsson and Moe 2011); in the 2010 British and Dutch
general elections, where new media technologies were used to “influence politicians
and the media to account” to the citizenry regarding the trust they had reposed in them
(Chadwick and Stanyer 2010, 2; Graham, Jackson and Broersma, 2014); in Spain; and
predominantly in the United States of America, resulting in Barack Hussein Obama
winning the U.S. Presidency two consecutive times—2008 and 2012.
Notwithstanding the increasing use of these technologies by politicians, the reality is
that there is not much evidence of substantive change in citizens’ attitude to politics and
elections. The evidence is seen in decreasing party politics, low voter turnout, distrust in
government and erosion of a sense of political community (Scholl 2015, 46; Skoric 2015,
61). Thus, critics argue that new media technologies detach users from civic processes
as people spend more time online for social utility and entertainment purposes rather
than for political communication purposes (Bimber 2014; Gil de Zuniga and Shanin
2015). Nielsen and Vacarri (2013), for instance, argue that the fact that citizens might
be online is not indicative that they are employing new media technologies for political
communication.
On the other hand, there are those who contend that new media technologies may be the
cure for the public’s malaise, apathy and disinterest in governance and elections (Åström
and Karlsson 2013; Ceron and d’Adda 2015; Larsson and Moe 2011). They indicate that

3
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

the technologies have the potential to foster political communication among citizens and
between citizens and politicians thereby deepening democracy (Alec 2014, 47; Åström
and Karlsson 2013; Towner and Dulio 2011, 22). Castells (2007, 250) asserts that
new media technologies, particularly the Web, could serve as politicians’ and citizens’
most “potent political force.” They could enhance the democratic process by renewing
citizens’ interest and drive to be involved politically (Skoric 2015; Towner and Dulio
2011, 22). Other studies have suggested that the technologies can positively influence
citizens to participate in political processes, mobilise other supporters and engage in
politics (Gil de Zuniga and Valenzuela 2011; Skoric 2015, 63). However, the compelling
motivations for citizens’ political communication on elections are largely undetermined.
The present study hopes to contribute to literature and theory by employing the Uses
and Gratifications theory to interrogate university students’ motivations for using new
media technologies to access political information on elections.
Empirical studies on the utility of new media suggest information-gratification as the
predominant motivation for use (Papacharissi and Rubin 2000, 183). Sheldon’s (2008)
study on the motivations of college students for using Facebook revealed relationship
maintenance, relief of boredom and entertainment as prime motivations. Haridakis and
Hanson (2011, 61) expanded on the subject of motives by studying YouTube, Myspace
and Facebook among older and younger voters in the 2008 elections in the United
States. Their findings revealed that younger voters accessed social media for campaign
and evaluation-related information, while older voters discussed political issues using
interpersonal communication. Sundar and Limperos (2013), in studying gratifications
emerging from Internet use, also found that features of new media technologies produced
new motivations or affordances in users.

Theoretical Considerations
The Uses and Gratifications (U&G) Theory can be traced back to Harold Lasswell’s
(1948) model of communication premised on “who says what through which medium
and with what effect?” Deriving from this model, other researchers interrogated media
use to arrive at the fact that basic needs engage with the characteristics (such as one’s
psychological constitution, status and background) of the individual audience member,
the society and the media to produce anticipated problems and solutions which translate
into motives for communication and other behaviour (Papacharissi and Rubin 2000;
Papacharissi 2009a, 138). Consequently, the theory assumes that audience members are
active, purposive, goal-oriented and rational in consuming media (Papacharrisi 2009).
The U&G theory interrogates variables such as needs, motivations, use and gratifications.
Motives are the inclinations that influence people to take action in order to fulfil a need or
want. Use connotes activity and rationality of the audience member, while gratifications
deal with the satisfaction to be derived by engaging with the media (Papacharrisi 2009b).
According to the theory, a rational individual, driven by a social or psychological need,

4
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

is motivated to take action to use the media in anticipation of being gratified (Kaye and
Johnson 2002; Papacharissi 2009). Consequently, the U&G theory has been applied to this
study because the variables on which the theory hinges run parallel to the major foci
of the research questions, namely motivations for new media use and the informational
gratifications to be derived by deploying the technologies for political communication
on elections (Gil de Zuniga 2015; Nielsen 2013). While prior studies on the U&G
theory indicate that predominantly information-seeking and social utility motivations
impel the deployment of new media for political communication (Garramone, Harris,
and Anderson 1986a; Gil de Zuniga and Shanin 2015, 79; Haridakis and Hanson 2011,
64; Kaye and Johnson 2002, 2004; Nielsen and Vacarri 2013; Papacharissi and Rubin
2000; Papacharissi 2009), it is unclear what motivates university students to deploy
new media technologies for political communication on elections. Therefore, the article
proceeds to unravel the motivations and political information needs that propel them to
use new media technologies in elections seasons.

Application of New Media Technologies to Elections in Ghana

In Ghana, political information derived through new media technologies including
mobile phones have contributed to promoting issues-based campaigns and equality for
many political candidates as part of the process of building public confidence in the
electoral process (Ahiabenu 2013; CODEO 2009).
Advocates on the application of new media technologies to elections aver that in Africa,
the “number of social media users usually surpasses the number or the margin of victory”
of politicians (IPPR 2014, 4). This is against the background that there is an upsurge
in use of new media technologies, particularly mobile phones used by citizens for
elections communication in Africa generally and in Ghana particularly (Ahiabenu 2013;
NCA 2017a). According to the National Communications Authority (NCA 2016b), at
the end of February 2017, the total number of mobile voice subscription in Ghana was
39,234,216, and the rate of penetration was 139.09 per cent (NCA 2017). When this
is weighed against a population size of 28,310,000, it suggests that every Ghanaian is
likely to own a mobile phone (Ghana Statistical Service 2017). The evidence indicates
that “we are quickly approaching a global mobile-cellular penetration where the new
power of political influence is a modern smartphone” (de Bastion, Stiltz, and Herlitz
2014, 5). Thus, the influence new media technologies, particularly mobile phones,
wield, coupled with their increasing rate of penetration and subscription against the
backdrop of citizens’ plummeting civic interest in governance and elections, reinforces
the necessity to conduct a study of this nature.

5
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Methods
The study adopts mixed methods research comprising both quantitative and qualitative
approaches. The University of Ghana is the study area. The quantitative dimension
was measured using nominal scales where variables were rank ordered based on level
of agreement ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree (Hair, Black, Babin,
and Anderson 2010). Variables measuring motivations (surveillance, guidance, social
utility and communications and guidance) and political information are adapted from
Kaye and Johnson’s (2002) study on the uses and gratifications of the web for political
information. A semi-structured questionnaire was administered to respondents through
a survey. Data derived were analysed using simple descriptive statistics, means test and
Pearson’s Correlations to test for association between variables. Using a systematic
random sample and a sampling interval of 8, a sample size of 391 was obtained ensuring
99 per cent response rate. The sample was out of a population of 2,400 students from
the Political Science Department. Students of this Department were selected because
they are more likely to use new media technologies for political communication.
Forty students (based on their proclivity to use new media technologies as political
communication tools) out of the sample volunteered to participate in the focus group
interviews. The data were collected in the last week of October 2016, about six weeks
prior to the presidential elections in Ghana on December 7, 2016. While SPSS was
utilised to generate quantitative data, the qualitative data were analysed using inductive
thematic categorisation where the research questions were analysed based on themes
from the theory and the objectives. The themes are developed by using direct quotes
from respondent and the findings were generalised to the study. In the subsequent
section, quantitative results are presented first, followed by the qualitative.

Results
Items on motivations for the use of new media technologies for political communication
on elections ranged from guidance, surveillance, social utility and communication
as well as entertainment, while variables measuring political information comprised
general political information and candidate and political party information. A nominal
Likert scale range from 1=strongly agreed, 2=agreed, 3=neutral, 4=disagreed and
5=strongly disagreed was deployed to ascertain data from the respondents.
In Table 1 below, respondents agreed (mean 2.4) that they were motivated to deploy
new media technologies for political communication as the engagement on its platforms
provided guidance for them on the important issues at stake in the elections (mean
2.02), strengthened personal political values (mean 2.37) as well as provided knowledge
regarding actions of potential elected candidates (mean 2.31). A mean of 2.77, however,
suggested respondents are largely unsure of the potential of new media technologies in
fostering a desire to vote and of determining personal attributes of candidates.

6
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Table 1: Guidance considerations impelling new media use

Guidance motivations N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
deviation
Determination of how to vote 391 1 5 2.77 1.289
Decide on what the important issues are 391 1 5 2.02 1.056
Know what candidate will do if elected 391 1 5 2.31 1.198
Judging personal qualities of candidates 391 1 5 2.74 1.177
Strengthening of personal political values 391 1 5 2.37 1.210
Valid N (listwise) 391
Source: Field survey (2016)

A cumulative mean of 1.587 revealed respondents’ strong affirmation of surveillance

as a motivation for using new media technologies as political communication tools on
elections. Table 2 below gives the details.

Table 2: Technology-induced gratifications of new media use

Surveillance motivations N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
deviation
Ease of access to information 391 1 5 1.37 .728
Search for specific political information 391 1 5 1.72 .935
of interest
Update on main issues of the elections 391 1 5 1.68 .921
Valid N (listwise) 391
Source: Field survey (2016)

New media technologies are projected as facilitating information acquisition due to their
affordances such as ease of access, provision of updates and opportunity to explore.
Further, respondents largely agreed (mean 2.68) that the quest for social utility and
communication is a motivation for engaging in political communication on elections.
Table 3 below indicates this.

Table 3: Agentic and dialogical gratifications of new media use

Social utility and communication N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
motivations deviation
Opportunity to relate with my political 391 1 5 2.67 1.156
party
Opportunity to communicate with my 391 1 5 2.94 1.213
political leaders
Opportunity to have my concerns 391 1 5 2.67 1.182
addressed

7
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Social utility and communication N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard

motivations deviation
Subject for conversation 391 1 5 2.20 1.047
Persuasive tools for campaigning 391 1 5 2.83 1.261
Valid N (listwise) 391
Source: Field survey (2016)

Respondents agreed largely on the interactional and relational opportunities offered

them for interactions, resolution of concerns and cultivation of relationships with
political parties as well as for campaigning. However, they were unsure of its potential
to bolster communication with their political leaders.
Findings captured in Table 4 below establish amusement gratifications such as relaxation,
entertainment and excitement as motivations for new media use.

Table 4: Amusement gratifications of new media use for electoral political

engagement
Entertainment motivations N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
deviation
Relaxation 391 1 5 1.93 1.127
Entertainment 391 1 5 1.68 .902
Excitement 391 1 5 1.73 .849
Trendiness 391 1 5 1.70 .854
Valid N (listwise) 391
Source: Field survey (2016)

The study proceeds to present data on political information variables. Respondents

strongly agree on the provision of political and public affairs information potential as a
factor influencing use. Table 5 below gives the details.

Table 5: General political information needs precipitating new media technology use
Items N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
deviation
It informs me on issues of politics 391 1 5 1.56 .792
It informs me on issues of public affairs 391 1 5 1.57 .787
Valid N (listwise) 391
Source: Field survey (2016)

Additionally, provision of critical information on political parties and their candidates,

as indicated in Table 6 below, are factors influencing new media usage.

8
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Table 6: Candidates and political party information

Items N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
deviation
It gives me information on political 391 1 5 1.75 .881
candidates
I obtain campaign information on what 391 1 5 1.96 .944
my political party is doing
I obtain information on the manifesto of 391 1 5 1.94 .953
my political party
I obtain information on manifestoes of 391 1 5 2.01 .958
other political parties
Valid N (listwise) 391
Source: Field survey (2016)

To decipher the association between motivations and political information, a Pearson’s

correlations test was conducted. It revealed weak to medium positive correlations that
establish varied associations between the variables under study. For instance, findings
suggested strong association (0.638) between surveillance and information from
political institutions, candidates and political party variables. On the other hand, weak
correlations between entertainment and political information as well as social utility and
communication against general political information suggest a purposeful new media
user. All the correlations are significant at the 99% confidence level. Table 7 below
shows this. The section after the table below presents the qualitative data.

Table 7: Pearson Correlation Matrix between Motivation and Political Information

Entertainment motivations N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard
deviation
It gives me information on political 391 1 5 1.75 .881
candidates
I obtain campaign information on what 391 1 5 1.96 .944
my political party is doing
I obtain information on the manifesto of 391 1 5 1.94 .953
my political party
I obtain information on manifestoes of 391 1 5 2.01 .958
other political parties
Valid N (listwise) 391
Source: Field survey (2016)

9
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Qualitative Analysis of the Use of New Media Technologies as

Political Communication Tools for Accessing Political Information
on Elections
Items tested in the qualitative analysis were derived from the major variables under
study, namely motivations and political information. From a Uses and Gratifications
perspective, motivations arise from an individual audience’s social and psychological
needs and predispositions. However, this study finds that the context and method of
engaging with new media technologies produce motivations that result in other emerging
gratifications largely unexplored. For instance, features of new media technologies
equipped participants with cues that enhanced their mental heuristics and enabled them
to access the policies and programmes of political parties and candidates with ease,
convenience and speed. According to a level-300 student, the technologies guided them
to conveniently access the online political agenda of candidates, thus dislodging the role
of the traditional media gatekeeper: “Political agendas are brought to your doorstep.”
Further, the convenience of access to political agendas also enhanced comprehension
of party and candidate policies and enabled participants break down and simplify the
information for dissemination within their peer networks. Thus, the affordance of virility
of information on new media platforms reinforced participants’ personal political values
and efficacy. In the words of a level-400 participant, “I get a sense of being heard.”
Related to this, the surveillance motive afforded participants the content they deemed
useful as well as updated them on current news. A level-200 focus group participant
indicated that the opportunity to visit the Facebook page of her political candidate
enabled her check on the location for campaign tours and to anticipate subsequent
campaign messages. In her words, “you meet politicians on social media.”
They explained that this engendered within them feelings of loyalty for their political
parties, projecting the parties as capable of winning elections. Another added that the
“online platform is bigger than rally grounds.”
Regarding social utility and communication motivation, participants indicated that the
ease of information access and dissemination together with convenience in terms of
location and networking make the use of new media technologies ideal for accessing
political information on elections. According to a level-100 student, “The ability to
use shorthand messages and emotive signs makes it even easy for illiterates to access
information and use it for campaigning.” In the words of another student, “the emoji
signs make it easier for us to create new messages.” A level-300 participant adds: “With
the hashtag symbol of Twitter, we are able to contribute to dialogue on the elections.”
Another adds that, “we are able to use our favourite quotes to create messages.” A
level-200 participant sums up that the affordability of social media makes it “a preferred
channel for the youth.” Further, level-300 students indicate that it is convenient and time
saving. One of them indicates that: “It can be accessed in the comfort of your home to
avoid danger of stampede at rallies.” This is corroborated by a level-400 participant who

10
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

indicates that: “With the click of a button, you are able to know the ideas of others.”
Another avers that “my world is on my smartphone.”
Regarding entertainment, participants are gratified as the use of new media technologies
for elections communication is fun and stimulates pleasurable emotions in them. For
instance, a level-100 student indicates that: “It is fun to use; we can chat at our own
simple level.” A level-200 participant indicates that, use of the technologies produces
aesthetic feelings. She reveals that, “It is trendy, if you hashtag ‘2016, I’m for change’
and it goes viral, it makes you feel good.” Pertaining to general political information,
new media technologies enabled participants to find out about progress of campaigns
and how the incumbent president’s infrastructural developments are considered by
people.
A level-100 participant indicated that “I am able to find out about new images and
information related to the site as well as the feasibility of new policies.” With regard to
information on political candidates and their parties, a level-100 participant indicated
that, “I am able to see how manifestoes are implemented.” Level-400 students appeared
more interested in the feasibility of projects, work plans and schedules for implementing
manifestoes and tracked them from inception to completion. Responses also suggest
that the drive for political information from political candidates and institutions such as
the Electoral Commission (EC), polling agents and the Institute for Economic Affairs
(IEA) among others is an indispensable political information need influencing new
media technology use.

Discussion

Motivations for Using New Media Technologies as Political

Communication Tools in Elections
Content-related gratifications induced by new media technologies emerge the primary
motivation for university students’ deployment of the technologies. Notwithstanding that
many prior studies on the U&G approach indicate surveillance as a gratification of both
traditional and new media (Gil de Zuniga and Shanin 2015, 79; Haridakis and Hanson
2011, 64; Kaye and Johnson 2002; Nielsen and Vacarri 2013; Papacharissi and Rubin
2000, 183; Papacharissi 2009; Sheldon 2008; 2004), in the present study, university
students identify information-seeking gratifications that do not directly originate from
social and psychological needs of users but from the contextual and methodological
attributes or affordances of the technologies. These affordances are cues emanating
from features of the technologies such as speed, ease, convenience and availability. This
finding corroborates Sundar and Limperos’ (2013, 512) study in which they argue that
new media technologies afford users with heuristics that impel visceral responses aimed
at gratification of new media needs. Similarly, the present study finds that contrary
to the original tenets of the U&G approach that assumes an “active audience,” new

11
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

media users and in the present context, university students are rational and purposeful
users who deploy the technologies to gratify their information-seeking motives. In this
vein, they take cues from the online agendas presented on new media platforms by
intentionally selecting information on candidates, political parties, their manifestoes,
their policies and their programmes in order to monitor political issues from the policy
stage to the implementation stage. Previous related studies expound on the deliberative
potential of new media technologies (Ancu and Cozma 2009; Gil de Zuniga and Shanin
2015, 79; Haridakis and Hanson 2011, 64; Kaye and Johnson 2002; Papacharissi and
Rubin 2000, 183).
Guidance emerged the next preferred motivation. Whereas in earlier studies, gratifications
derived from accessing political broadcasts were reinforcement and vote guidance,
currency of issues and anticipation of likely winner of an election (Gil de Zuniga and
Shanin 2015, 79; Haridakis and Hanson 2011, 64; McLeod and Becker 1974; Williams
and Serge 2011), the present study finds that university students neither rely primarily
on the deliberative platforms offered by new media technologies for guidance on how
to vote nor for illumination on the personal qualities of political candidates. However,
using new media technologies enable university students to reinforce their personal
political values as they scout for indicators that determine the issue stance, plans,
policies and programmes of politicians and their political parties. By this demonstration
of discernment, university students evade traditional media gatekeepers by navigating
the contours of the new media platforms for the online agenda on elections. Regarding
social utility and communication, the study found that university students (68%) use
new media technologies and their various affordances, such as emotives (i.e. emojis and
icons that contribute to the communication experience), largely to engage in symmetrical
communication with their peers on political issues, while politicians use them more for
publicity and mobilisation purposes. According to the students, the virility of new media
platforms serves as an echo chamber that amplifies their voices to peers and politicians
alike. Similar views are shared by Gil de Zuniga and Shanin (2015, 79), Shah (2016, 14)
and Towner and Dulio (2011), who argue that political conversation and issues germane
to the interests of family, friends via social media and various new media technologies
inure to a greater sense of civic responsibility and participation in politics. Further, weak
correlations between entertainment and political information variables suggest students’
posture to online political engagement as serious, opinion-forming yet amusing.

Political Information Needs Influencing New Media

Technology Use
Evidence adduced from the correlational analysis suggests that the capacity to deploy the
technologies for surveillance and information on politics and public affairs, candidates,
manifestoes and political institutions establishes political content gratifications as the
overriding surveillance motive. Lee and Yang (2014) argue that acquisition of information

12
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

from new media channels empowers users. The technologies also provide platforms for
university students to embark on political campaigning for their preferred candidates.
In support of these findings, Papacharissi and Mendelson (2008) as well as Postelnicu
and Cozma (2008) proffer that voters’ search for information on candidates to know for
whom to vote is what precipitates their use of new media technologies during elections
and encourages their participation in political processes. In line with earlier studies on
the U&G theory (Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch 1974; Palmgreen and Rayburn 1985),
the unquestionable preference for political information primarily suggests a highly
informed user who actively initiates choices of new media platforms and content with
an expectation of having his or her gratification for information satisfied.

Theoretical and Practical Contributions of the Study

Findings from the study contribute to both theory in practice in various ways.
Theoretically, the study contributes to the U&G approach by stretching the “active
audience” notion to the “active user” dimension owing to the varied experiences
afforded the new media user.
Further, whereas the U&G theory presents social and psychological needs of individuals
as determinants of motivations for media use, in this study, methodological and
technological features of new media induce motivations for gratification and new media
use. Thus, criticism of the U&G approach as being audience-centred might require
reconsideration in light of this finding.
Additionally, the level of activity, purposefulness, intentionality and adeptness at
harnessing affordance of the technologies demonstrated by the perceptive new media
user intensifies the gratification-seeking process.
In terms of practice, the study avers that political leaders and their parties need to develop
comprehensive online messages and agendas that reinforce the cognitive heuristics of
new media users by enabling them to track the viability of messages and manifestoes
from inception to implementation.
Further, the study elucidates the purposeful nature of the typical new media user. It
avers that they cannot be toyed with. Students require balanced and serious opinion-
forming content to enable them to make informed decisions regarding voting and
political candidate attributes.
Additionally, political actors and institutions need to deploy affordances of new media
technologies effectively to engage with university students and for political campaigning
purposes.

13
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Conclusion
In conclusion, the study, in adopting the mixed methods approach, makes a significant
contribution to the Uses and Gratifications theory by asserting that beyond the social
and psychological factors that are often posited as determinants of motivations, features
of the new media technologies and related affordances such as ease of use, convenience,
speed and availability impel their use for political communication on elections. Thus,
deployment of new media technologies evokes visceral cues in students and, from a
U&G perspective, illuminates the traditional “active audience” concept. This translates
it into the “active user” notion as students are enabled to rationally and purposively
choose content and engage in political communication in a light-hearted manner with
serious opinion-forming intent. Finally, the study provides insight into the dynamics of
how political actors can actively engage with university students by taking cognisance
of the latter’s political informational needs and the nature of communication likely to
arouse their interest and attention and spur them on to deploy new media technologies
for political communication on elections.

References
Ahiabenu, K. 2013. ICTs Influence on Changing Face of Elections in Ghana: Myth or Reality? Accra: NED.

Alec, C. Interactivity 2: New Media, Politics and Society. 2nd ed. Oxford: International Academic
Publishers, 2014.

Ancu, M., and R. Cozma, R. 2009. “MySpace Politics: Uses and Gratifications of Befriending
Candidates.” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 53 (4): 567–83. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08838150903333064.

Åström, J., and M. Karlsson. 2013. “Blogging in the Shadow of Parties: Exploring Ideological Differences
in Online Campaigning.” Political Communication 30: 434–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2
012.737430.

Barassi, V. 2016. “Datafied Citizens? Social Media Activism, Digital Traces and the Question about Political
Profiling” Communication and the Public 1 (4): 494–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047316683200.

Bimber, B. 2014. “Digital Media in the Obama Campaigns of 2008 and 2012: Adaptation to the Personalised
Political Communication Environment.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics 11 (2): 130–
50. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2014.895691.

Bimber, B. 2015. “What’s Next? The Three Challenges for the Future of Political Communication
Research.” New Technologies and Civic Engagements: New Agendas in Communication, edited by H.
N. Gil de Zuniga, 216–30. New York: Routledge.

Castells, M. 2007. “Communication, Power and Counter-Power in the Network Society.” International
Journal of Communication 1 (1): 238–66.

14
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Ceron, A., and G. d’Adda. 2015. “E-Campaigning on Twitter: The Effectiveness of Distributive Promises
and Negative Campaign in the 2013 Italian Election.” New Media and Society 18 (9): 1–21. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1461444815571915.

Chadwick, A., and J. Stanyer. 2010. Political Communication in Transition: Mediated Politics in Britain’s
New Media Environment. London: American Political Science Association.

CODEO. 2009. Final Report on Ghana’s 2008 Presidential and Parlimentary Elections. Accra: CDD.

de Bastion, G., M. Stiltz, and R. Herlitz. 2014. Social Media and Political Participation. Bonn: Gesellschaft
für International Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).

Ghana Statistical Service. 2017. “Statistics for Development and Progress. Provisional 2016 Annual Gross
Domestic Product, April 2017.” Accessed November 20, 2017. www.statsghana.gov.gh.

Gil de Zuniga, H., and S. Valenzuela. 2011. “The Mediating Path to a Stronger Citizenship: Online and
Offline Networks, Weak Ties and Civic Engagement.” Communication Research 38 (3): 397–421.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210384984.

Gil de Zuniga, H., and S. Shanin. 2015. “Social Media and Their Impact on Civic Participation.” In New
Technologies and Civic Engagements: New Agendas in Communication, edited by H. G. D. Zuniga,
79–90. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315750927.

Gilmore, J., and P. N. Howard. 2013. Does Social Media Make a Difference in Political Communication?
Digital Dividends in Brazil’s 2010 National Elections Centre for Communication and Civic
Engagement. Washington D.C.: University of Washington. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2273832.

Graham, T., D. Jackson, and M. Broersma. 2014. “New Platform, Old Habits? Candidates’ Use of Twitter
During the 2010 British and Dutch General Election Campaigns.” New Media and Society: 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814546728.

Gueorguieva, V. 2008. “Voters, MySpace and YouTuble: The Impact of Alternative Communcation
Channels on the 2006 Election Cycle and Beyond.” Social Science Computer Review 26 (3): 288–
300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439307305636.

Hair, Jr., W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle
River: Pearson, 2010.

Haridakis, P., and G. Hanson. 2011. “Campaign 2008: Comparing YouTube, Social Networking and Other
Media Use among Younger and Older Voters.” In Techno Politics in Presidential Campaigning:
New Voices, New Technologies, New Voters, edited by J. Hendricks and L. Kaid, 61–82. New York:
Routledge.

IPPR (Institute for Public Policy Research). 2014. “Social Media and Namibian elections.” Election Watch
5: 1–4.

Iyengar, S. 2011. “The Media Game: New Moves, Old Strategies.” The Form 9 (1). https://doi.
org/10.2202/1540-8884.1425.

Katz, E., J. G. Blumler, and M. Gurevitch. 1974. “Utilisation of Mass Communication by the Individual.”
In The Uses of Mass Communication: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research, edited by E.
K. J. G. Blumler, 19–32. Beverly Hills: Sage.

15
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Kaye, B. K., and T. J. Johnson. 2002. “Online and in the Know: Uses and Gratifications of the Web for
Political Information.” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 46 (1): 54–71. https://doi.
org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4601_4.

Kaye, B. K., T. J. Johnson. 2004. “A Web for All Reasons: Uses and Gratifications of Internet Components
for Political Information.” Telematics and Informatics 21 (3): 197–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0736-5853(03)00037-6.

Larsson, O. A., and H. Moe. 2011. “Studying Political Microblogging: Twitter Users in the
2010 Swedish Election Campaign.” New Media and Society 14 (5): 729–47. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1461444811422894.

Lasswell, H. 1948. “The Structure and Function of Communications in Society.” In The Communication of
Ideas, edited by L. Bryson, 37–51. New York: Harper & Row.

Lee, H., and J. Yang. 2014. “Political Knowledge Gaps among News Consumers with Different News
Media Repertoires across Multiple Platforms.” International Journal of Communication 8: 597–617.

McLeod, J., and L. Becker. 1974. “Testing the Validity of Gratification Measures through Political Effects
Analysis.” In The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research,
edited by J. Katz and E. Blumler, 137–67. Newbury Park: Sage.

NCA (National Communications Authority). 2016a. “Broadband Wireless Access.” Accessed May 29,
2017. https://www.nca.org.gh/assets/Uploads/BWA-Data-December 2016.html.

NCA (National Communications Authority). 2016b. Quarterly Statistical Bulletin on Communications in

Ghana, 1(2). Accra: National Communications Authority.

NCA (National Communications Authority). 2017a. “Telecom Voice Subscription.” Accessed May 29,
2017. https://www.nca.org.gh/industry-data-2/market-share-statistics-2/voice-2.html.

NCA (National Communications Authority). 2017b. “Telecom Data Subscription.” Accessed May 19,
2017. https://www.nca.org.gh/industry-data-2/market-share-statistics-2/data-3.html.

Nielsen, R. K., and C. Vaccari. 2013. “Do People ‘Like’ Politicians on Facebook? Not really. Large-Scale
Direct Candidate-to-Voter Online Communication as an Outlier Phenomenon.” International Journal
of Communication 7: 2333–56.

Nielsen, R. K. 2014. “Political Communication Research: New Media, New Challenges and New
Opportunities.” Journal of Media and Communication Research 30: 5–22. https://doi.org/10.7146/
mediekultur.v30i56.9712.

OECD. 2014. Social Media and New Communication Tools in Good Practices in Development
Communication. Paris: OECD Centre.

Palmgreen, P., and J. D. Rayburn. 1985. “An Expectancy Approach to Media Gratifications.” In Media
Gratifications Research: Current Perspectives, edited by K. E. Rosengren, L.A. Wenner, and P.
Palmgreen, 61–72. Newbury Park: Sage.

Papacharissi, Z., and A. M. Rubin. 2000. “Predictors of Internet Use.” Journal of Broadcasting and
Electonic Media 44: 175–96. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4402_2.

16
Amankwah and Mbatha Political Communication \about Elections in Ghana

Papacharissi, Z., and A. Mendelson. 2008. Friends, Networks & Zombies: The Social Utility of Facebook.
Copenhagen: Association of Internet researchers.

Papacharissi, Z. 2009a. “The Virtual Sphere 2.0: The Internet, the Public Sphere and Beyond.” In The
Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics, edited by A. Howard and P. N. Chadwick, 230–45. New
York: Routledge.

Papacharissi, Z. 2009b. “Uses and Gratifications.” In An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory

and Research, edited by D. Stacks and W. Salwen, 137–52. NY: Routledge.

Postelnicu, M., and R. Cozma. 2008. Befriending the Candidate: Uses and Gratifications of Candidate
Profiles on MySpace. San Diego: National Communication Association.

Rubin, A. M., and E. M. Perse. 1987. “Audience Activity and Television News Gratifications.”
Communication Research 14 (1): 58–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365087014001004.

Schill, D., R. Kirk, and A. E. Jasperson. 2017. Political Communication in Real Time: Theoretical and
Research Approaches. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315669083.

Scholl, R. 2015. “Civic Engagement of Youths during Their Transition to Adulthood.” In New Technologies
and Civic Engagements: New Agendas in Communication, edited by H. G. de Zuniga, 46–58. New
York: Routledge.

Shah, D. V. 2016. “Conversation Is the Soul of Democracy: Expression Effects, Communication

Mediation and Digital Media.” Communication and the Public 1 (1): 12–18. https://doi.
org/10.1177/2057047316628310.

Sheldon, P. 2008. “Student Favourite: Facebook and Motives for Its Use.” Southern Mass Communication
Journal 23 (2): 39–53.

Shirky, C. 2009. “How Cell Phones, Twitter, Facebook Can Make History.” TED video, 15:41. https://
www.ted.com/talks/clay_shirky_how_cellphones_twitter_facebook_can _make_history.

Skoric, M. 2015. “Social Media and Youth Participation in Singapore.” In New Technologies and Civic
Engagements: New Agendas in Communication, edited by H. G. de Zuniga, 59–77. New York:
Routledge.

Sundar, S. S., and A. M. Limperos. 2013. “Uses and Grats 2.0: New Gratifications for New Media.” Journal
of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 57 (4): 504–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.8458
27.

Wasserman, H. 2011. “Mobile Phones, Popular Media and Everyday African Democracy: Transmissions
and Transgressions.” Popular Communication 9: 146–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2011.56
2097.

Williams, A. P., and E. Serge. 2011. “Evaluating Candidate E-mail Messages in the 2008 U . S .
Presidential Campaign.” In Technopolitics in Presidential Campaigning: New Voices, New
Technologies and New Voters, edited by J. Hendricks and L. Kaid, 44–57. New York: Routledge.

Wojcieszak, M. 2015. “Internet, Egocentric Publics and Extremism.” In Technopolitics in Presidential

Campaigning: New Voices, New Technologies and New Voters, edited by J. Hendricks and L. Kaid,
104–21. New York: Routledge.

17