www.agnesevardanega.

eu

Usage of social media in Italian local electoral campaigns in Social Media und Web Science. Das Web als Lebensraum (2. DGI Konferenz 22-23 March 2012) Agnese Vardanega Universit di Teramo avardanega@gmail.com, avardanega@unite.it

1. Introduction For election campaigning and political communication, Web 2.0 has represented a paradigm shift, as it allows users of the Internet to be active producers of content, and to interact with websites, applications, and other people. Many scholars as well as activist groups have thus seen these new media as an epochal opportunity for improving civic participation and developing bottom-up electoral campaigns (Kalnes 2009). Nonetheless, several studies suggest that these effects of Web 2.0, both on the results of elections and on civic engagement, rest, among other factors, on the wider institutional and social environment (Zittel 2001; Anstead & Chadwick 2009; Foot et al. 2009). Research in European countries (Zittel 2009; Bentivegna 2006.a,b; Lilleker & Malagn 2010) reveals a general inclination toward more traditional or limited usage of social tools by candidates and parties. Jackson and Lilleker (2009) introduced the expression Web 1.5 to describe the strategies adopted by British parties to harness the advantages of both Web 1.0 central control of the information flow and Web 2.0 interactivity. Web 1.5 strategies can also be seen as the ways in which parties deal with the problem of continuous innovation, driven by the Internet. While technological change is very rapid, candidates and parties (as well as enterprises) tend to prefer settled practice rather than risking untested strategies especially during an electoral campaign. Nonetheless, citizens are already discussing, producing contents, informing, and mobilising, with or without the support of the major parties. These changes are thus destined to radically transform the public sphere that is, the systemic relations between politics, media, and civil society even if presently the direction is still unpredictable. Like all innovation processes, these developments involve many actors (candidates, as well as parties, civilsociety, experts, and professionals) and many variables, related to several dimensions (organisational, institutional, and personal). Local interactions among all these factors result in various different patterns, making it difficult, if not impossible, to advance general interpretations. 1

www.agnesevardanega.eu

The goal of this study is to describe the use of Web 2.0 tools in Italian local elections, and to explore the main factors affecting candidates web strategies. The underlying question is whether particularly at a local level representative democracy is evolving to include new forms of participation and civic engagement.1 The data presented come from a study on the 2011 local elections in Italy, and from a previous study conducted on the 2010 regional elections (Vardanega 2011). Both studies aimed at exploring interactivity as a way for improving participation, information, and interest within the websites of the candidates, analysing the use of social tools, in terms of presence / absence of certain features.

2. Definitions

2.1. Interactivity and interaction One of the main characteristics of social media is the possibility to create a twoway communication by means of interactive tools, such as forms, emails, commenting systems, online questionnaires, discussion boards, forums, and social network sites (such as Facebook or Twitter). Many critical remarks have been made on the authenticity or effectiveness of these forms of interactivity. Assuming as a starting point the four levels of interactivity proposed by Van Dijk (1999), 2 Stromer-Galley (2000) identifies two types of interactions on the Web: computer or network mediated human interaction, and mediainteractivity, that is, the possibility of interact with the medium itself. This second type of interactivity allows campaigns to create a simulacrum of interaction between campaigns and citizens (Stromer-Galley & Foot 2002; Stromer-Galley 2004). Interaction and communication is a matter of relationship, not of technology: interactivity does not depend solely on the technological solutions adopted in designing a website, but is encouraged (or discouraged) through texts (Trammel et al. 2006). Accordingly, some scholars
1

Even without considering the issue of a deliberative edemocracy, new media can produce changes in the organisation of the relationships between citizens and parties. Chadwick (2007) observed that the Internet encourages the transformation of traditional parties toward a looser network form, similar to social movement: a sort of organizational hybridity.

(a) interactivity between human beings, (b) between human beings and media or machines, (c) between human beings by means of media, and even (d) between media or between machines (technical interactivity) (StromerGalley & Foot 2002)

www.agnesevardanega.eu

definitions have taken into consideration visitors perceptions and usage of interactive features (see, for example, Bucy 2004), and, according to McMillan (2002), perceived interactivity is a better predictor of the behaviours of visitors. From a methodological point of view, it is clear that the study of Web 2.0 and of its interactive potential require the analysis of (a) websites and their features (functional content analysis; see Schneider & Foot 2004); (b) styles of communication (qualitative content analysis, discourse analysis, ); and (c) users behaviours and attitudes. Although all these approaches are relevant in understanding participatory processes, functional definitions of interactivity are generally adopted for analysing web production practices, while research on social media effects is oriented by subjective definitions. This study has thus adopted the functional definition of interactivity (Leiner & Quiring 2008) to analyse Italian candidates web presence by collecting the availability of interactive features within candidates websites and Facebook pages. 2.2. Personalisation and control Starting from the presupposition that the primary goal of electoral campaigning is gaining votes (Stanyer 2005; Lilleker et al. 2010) and that mobilising and involving are subordinate and secondary objectives, the literature considers three classes of factors that affect candidates and parties web practices in ecampaigning: A. Personal characteristics of candidates and their attitudes toward innovation: younger (Michalska & Lilleker 2011) and/or marginal candidates (Latimer 2008) are more likely to embrace social tools. B. Electoral systems: electoral systems that reward individualisation and personalisation encourage web presence and personal engagement on the web (Kalnes 2009; Zittel 2009) ; C. Party size and internal organisation. In general, major parties are more likely to adopt the newest technologies and interactive tools (Foot et al. 2003), probably because of budget reasons. On the other hand, smaller parties interested in involving supporters in grassroots activism may offer social tools to facilitate participation, as was case with the Liberal Democrats in the UK (Ward & Gibson 2003). Major parties try to adapt the new tools for promotional purposes, creating interactive products on their websites, without engaging in a conversational interactive process (Jackson & Lilleker 2009a,b). Smaller and local parties seem more inclined to explore unprecedented opportunities for mobilising electors, obtaining funds and votes, and promoting

www.agnesevardanega.eu

participation. Organisational concerns about the possible loss (or weakening) of control over communication, however, seem to be common to both major and smaller parties: in discussing programmes on the web, in fact, the Liberal Democrats also preferred a weak interactivity, because of internal policymaking concerns (Lilleker et al. 2010). In this perspective, it can be said that Web 2.0 unearths the potential conflict between personalisation and control of the communication, since the creation of a personal and direct relationship between candidates and citizens / voters implies a loss of control over communication as well as over the decision process, a primal element of the innerparty democracy. E campaigning is also referred to as one of the causes of the current situation of permanent campaigning, which compels a greater control over the messages spread by the media, on one hand, and, on the other, a continuous constituency service by individual representatives (Butler & Collins 2001; Jackson 2003).

3. The study: objectives and methodology Italian local elections are an interesting case of study, as they allow the comparison of different cultural and economic contexts (northern and southern regions, for example), electoral systems3, and party strategies. In local elections, depending on the size of the town, major parties can choose to stand alone or in coalition, or to form civic (coalition4) lists. If the electoral system provides a second round of voting, smaller parties and local civic lists, too, are encouraged to propose candidates in the first round. Even the alliances that constitute the so-called bipolar system at the national level can be redefined locally. This fragmented situation appears to lessen the role of national parties in favour of local leaders and candidates. The most important push in the personalisation of local politics, however, is generally considered the direct election of mayors, which creates the space for a more immediate relationship between representatives and voters. This study is aimed at describing Italian candidates web presence, exploring some of the factors affecting their practices, with particular attention on the territorial dimension, including, in
3 4

Regions, provinces, large towns (over 15k inhabitants), and smaller towns have different electoral systems. In small towns, where even the councils are smaller, civic lists are formed by two or more parties, and often correspond to national coalitions (centre-right and centre-left).

www.agnesevardanega.eu

addition to geographical areas and size of towns, the average age of residents (younger electors should be more acquainted with and interested in the use of social media 5) and the share of big users of the Internet6 (also a good indicator of broadband access). In the study on the 2010 regional elections, all the candidates for the presidency (52 in 13 regions) were included. In 2011, the study included all 72 candidates for the presidency of the nine provinces, all 222 mayoral candidates of the 31 provincial capitals, and a stratified two-stage sample of the candidates of the 1,315 smaller towns (332 cases). Strata were defined on the basis of territorial characteristics of constituencies: geographical areas, size of towns (and electoral system: over/under 15 thousands inhabitants), diffusion and usage of the Internet, and average age of the residents. Ninety-four municipalities were selected randomly by strata, and, within the chosen municipalities, all the candidates have been analysed.7 The sample has been weighted on the basis of the numerosity of towns in each stratum: in the end, the estimated number of candidates (3,995) is very close to the actual number (3,976), as well as the percentage of women (13.5% versus 14.0%). 8 Because of the small sample, however, the overall variability could be underestimated.9 To assess candidates web presence and usage of social media tools, the following items have been detected (in both the studies): active personal websites (or blog), Facebook pages, and active Twitter accounts. In 2011, some other items have been considered, among which are party websites (if personal ones were missing), Facebook personal accounts (if pages were missing), and Facebook groups (see Table 2).

4. Results In Italy, access to the Internet (broadband access in particular), is still unequal and much lower than the European average.10 At the beginning of the 2011 local election campaigns, however,
5

Residents do not exactly coincide with electors, mainly because of the presence of foreigners, who lower the average age in many areas. Percentage of people age six and older who used the Internet every day (source: Istat Eurostat, year 2010). Due to the lack of time and funds, some regions have been excluded from the sample. The study, conducted within the project of the website LaDemocrazia.it, is, in fact, self-financed and has been possible thanks to the kind collaboration of volunteers on the web and of two political communication agencies (Proforma and Running).

6 7

8 9 10

Actual data was released by ANCI (National Association of Italian Communes) after the vote (Romagnoli 2009). Tables will show both raw and weighted percentages, but absolute frequencies and totals only for the raw data. According to Eurostat (year 2010), 49% of Italian households have access to the Internet versus over 60% in

www.agnesevardanega.eu

the Italian media environment was rapidly changing: not only had the number of Facebook and Twitter accounts expanded, but the Internet had become a primary source of information. Mainstream media began to use it as an information source, and many politicians started to spread press releases on their blogs and YouTube channels. The electoral campaign was therefore particularly lively and vivacious, and for the first time the Web played also a role, according to many analysts, in the results.11 4.1. Web presence of the candidates In the 2010 regional elections, 84.6% (44 of 52) of the candidates were on the web, and nearly 60% (31 of 52) had a website or a blog (17 allowing comments). Considering the rapid evolution of the media sphere, in 2011 a growth in these numbers was expected. This has proven to be only partially correct; while 91.5% of the candidates in provincial capitals and 82% in the provinces were on the web, in smaller towns the proportion was only 39%. Since provincial capitals and regions may be comparable in terms of political relevance of the vote (parties often participate in both with national leaders), it is possible to affirm that there has been a growth in the use of the web. At the same time, however, data highlight significant inequalities (Tables 1 and 2). Among interactive tools, Facebook is far more common than blogs and Twitter. Used by 80% of the candidates, it was the only platform exploited for e-campaigning by 17.6% of candidates in provincial capitals, 23.7% in provinces, and 33.5% in smaller towns (weighted). When relying only on Facebook, candidates are more likely to use personal accounts rather than pages, especially in small towns. In the present context, the distinction between pages and personal accounts should be considered relevant because the latter can be controlled by the owners, who can refuse friends and also decide whether or not to make contents publicly available; pages, on the contrary, are totally public, better matching the idea of public communication. In this regard, it is also of note that only a minority of websites allow comments. The lack of this feature may correspond to two conceivable situations: blogs where the commenting function has been blocked to limit or control user-generated content, or sites that are obsolete from a technical point of view. The use of Facebook personal accounts, too, can be ascribed to candidates
Europe.
11

See the case of the hashtag #morattiquotes in the mayoral elections of Milan (http://italychronicles.com/twitterawash-with-morattiquotes/ accessed 9-13-2011), or the case of the former prosecutor Luigi De Magistrisan outsider with a relevant web presenceelected as mayor of Naples.

www.agnesevardanega.eu

concerns about control, but also to a lack of awareness of the use of the medium: it is possible, for example, that candidates have exploited their already existing personal accounts, or that they did not even reflect on the difference between a personal profile and a public page. Table 1: Web presence of the candidates (2011)
Provincial Capitals Provinces % Website personal comments list / party Facebook page account group Twitter active Web Presence TOTAL
W% = weighted percentage

Other towns % 17.7 32.7 (n. 19) 20.4 13.5 30.2 10.5 2.7 88.9 (n. 8) 59.3 332 W% 6.1 31.8 18.4 6.6 17.2 8.2 0.4 64.0 38.8 N 209 78 130 164 212 116 65 47 461 629

TOTAL % 33.2 37.3 20.7 26.1 33.7 18.4 10.3 72.3 73.3 100.0 W% 9.3 35.8 18.6 9.2 18.7 9.5 1.7 68.3 42.6

% 45.8 34.4 (n. 11) 15.3 34.7 37.5 12.5 16.7 91.7 (n. 11) 81.9 72

52.5 45.7 (n. 48) 22.9 42.1 37.7 32.3 19.7 63.6 (n. 28) 91.5 223

Table 2: Social Interactivity scores by type of election (20102011)

2010 Regions % 17.31 11.54 5.77 32.69 23.08 9.62 100.00 52 Provincial Capitals % 14.55 28.64 19.55 18.64 11.36 7.27 100.00 220 Provinces % 23.94 25.35 15.49 16.90 14.08 4.23 100.00 71 2011 Other Towns % 54.03 23.58 12.54 6.27 2.99 0.60 100.00 335 W% 74.24 16.33 6.44 1.69 1.19 0.12 100.00

0 1 2 3 4 5

Even considering only Facebook pages, however, it is worth noting that the opportunity of voters to interact with their candidates was at least double that of websites: 21.5% versus 42.1% in

www.agnesevardanega.eu

province capitals, 15.3% versus 34.7% in province elections, and 0.2% versus 6.6% 12 in smaller towns. Twitter accounts are generally activated only by the candidates with a website. To indicate the level of interactivity offered by the candidates, a simple additive index (Social Interactivity) has been calculated from the variables: active personal websites (with comments=2, without comments=1); Facebook (page=2, personal account=1); Twitter accounts (active=1) (Table 2). As for the territorial dimension, both in 2010 and in 2011 the offer of social interactivity did not match actual or potential demand: candidates usage of social tools is not associated with the age of their potential electors or the share of big users of the Internet in their territories (Vardanega 2011), nor does the index seem to be associated with the personal characteristics of the candidates (age and gender in particular; see also Bentivegna 2006a). 4.2. Factors affecting web presence and the use of social tools If in 2010 the number of the candidates considered was too limited to draw any reliable conclusions, in 2011 some of the independent variables (geographical areas, diffusion of the Internet, and age of the residents, in particular) show internal associations. A Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCAsee, among others: Bnzcri 1992; Greenacre 2007) has therefore been conducted13 to obtain synthetic factors of variability, which are mutually independent by definition. The variables used in the analysis to define the factors were those related to (a) territorial characteristics: geographical areas (North, Centre, South and Islands); age of the residents (below/equal to or above the national average); diffusion of the Internet (below, equal to, or above the average); type of election (provinces, capitals, towns with over 15 thousand inhabitants, smaller towns); and (b) characteristics of the candidates/candidacies: gender, classes of age (younger than 45, 4554, 55 and over); size of the party (large, medium-sized, small, civic lists); and coalition candidacy (yes/no). The analysis led to the identification of two main factors, explaining 91% 14 of the overall
12 13

Weighted data; 5.7% versus 13.5% on raw data. MCA is a descriptive multivariate analysis technique, similar to Principal Components Analysis, but for categorical variables. Factorial scores are based on 2 distances between the modalities and the marginal profiles. The output of the analysis (conducted on weighted data; see 3) is available online at the address http://www.box.com/s/4gcxrv7t1tkupzvc385a.

14

Corrected according to the formula of Bnzcri (1979); 25.6% of the original inertia.

www.agnesevardanega.eu

variability (inertia) of the sample. It was then possible to compare candidates behaviours on the web with respect to these factors. The first factor represents the association between the type of elections/size of towns, the age of the residents, and coalition: the negative semi-axis represents candidates of single parties in small towns and/or provinces with older residents, while the positive semi-axis represents candidates of large towns (also, but not primarily, capitals and provinces), and/or major parties and/or in coalition. The second factor represents the geographical division between northern and southern Italy, associated with the diffusion of the Internet: the southern and island regions and/or the lower diffusion of the Internet on the negative semi-axis, central and northern regions and/or a greater diffusion of the Internet on the positive semi-axis. The third factorof little statistical relevancecan be of substantial interest in that it distinguishes candidates of major parties (on the negative semi-axis), from candidates of mediumsized parties, within provinces or provincial capitals (on the positive semi-axis). It also gathers the contributions of candidates age (in classes). All the variables related to candidates web presence and usage of social tools are significantly associated with the first two factors, both in terms of 2 (Table 3) and of 2 distance (Table 4). It is thus possible to say that territorial characteristics are relevant in describing candidates web presence, under two different aspects: the type of election (associated with the size of towns), and the digital divide between the northern and southern regions of Italy. In particular, the presence of a website is associated with the first factor, probably because parties devote more resources to campaigning in larger constituencies. On the other hand, it is also possible that in very small towns interactions quite simply occur face-to-facein piazza, according to the Italian tradition. Table 3: Association between variable and factors (2, 2011)
Website Facebook Facebook Group Twitter Social Interactivity Factor 1 0.1602 0.0982 0.0194 0.0498 0.1424 Factor 2 0.1506 0.1345 0.0009 0.0576 0.1960 Factor 3 0.0576 0.0340 0.0044 0.0226 0.0480

NOTE: In the social sciences, 2 values of about 0.14-0.15 can be considered significant. See also the association values for the single modalities (Table 4).

www.agnesevardanega.eu

Table 4: Association between modalities and factors (test values, 2011)

Variable Website Category Personal Party websites No Updated Website Yes No Facebook Page Personal account No Facebook group Yes No Twitter Yes Inactive No Social Interactivity 0 1 2 3 4 5 Factor 1 13.60 -11.39 1.08 12.61 6.08 10.34 -3.93 -3.23 2.15 -2.15 9.39 5.21 -10.73 -3.00 -7.16 2.84 11.13 6.68 7.69 Factor 2 20.89 5.59 -18.38 20.60 3.12 18.06 10.58 -20.83 2.47 -2.47 11.63 3.12 -11.41 -21.43 6.01 11.37 16.47 9.46 7.41 Factor 3 15.77 0.30 -10.48 14.00 10.14 7.97 10.51 -14.28 8.17 -8.17 10.41 3.29 -10.49 -15.47 7.24 8.28 7.47 4.41 4.72

NOTE: Test values equal to 2 are significant with a p < 0.005; signs indicate the direction of the association, i.e. the semi-axis to which the modality is associated.

The usage of social networking sites (Facebook and Twitter) is associated with the second factor, i.e. the divide between the northern and southern regions: whether this divide has a technical and economic nature or a cultural one remains an open question. Less relevant in explaining these variables is the third factorand the variables that contributed to build it, size of parties and age of candidates15 in particular. Chart 1 shows the projection of some of the analysed variables (both active and supplementary16) on the Cartesian plan defined by the first two factorsthe space of the 2011 Italian local elections. Proximity among points represents association or similarity, in terms of 2 distance.

15 16

Average age=50.54; standard deviation=11.5. Supplementary variables (indicated in Chart 1 with the butterfly symbol) are those that did not contribute to the construction of the factors. The graph represents only modalities associated to the axes with a p < 0.005.

10

www.agnesevardanega.eu

Chart 1: Social Interactivity and Usage of the Internet (2011)

2.5

PROVINCE Twitter_Y

Internet below av. (South) -> over av. (Centre, North)

1.5

SOCIAL_3 SOCIAL_4

SOCIAL_5

Website_Y Facebook Page_Y CENTRE INTERNET> NORTH SOCIAL_2

CAPITALS Site updated_N Twitter_Inactive BIG TOWNS

0.5

INTERNET=

Facebook Account SOCIAL_1 ELDER RES Fac ebook group_Y Twitter_N SMALL TOWNS Website_N Facebook Page_N SOCIAL_0 YOUNG RES

-0.5

-1

SOUTH

INTERNET<

-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Small Towns -> Provinces -> Big Towns

Within this space, the use of both websites and social networking media is associated with the first quadrant: provincial capitals, major towns, provinces, and central and northern regions with a wider diffusion of the Internet. The most frequent situation, however, is described by the points around the origin of the axes (representing the marginal distribution of the sample17): candidates in small towns, without any type of web presence. Worth noting is the association, in the second quadrant, between Facebook personal accounts and candidates of smaller towns (and/or parties), which seems to confirm that sometimes (probably often) this choice has to do with limited budgets and a personal management of social accounts by the candidates, rather than with a strategy aimed at obtaining more control over user-generated content. The Social Interactivity index traverses the plan, from the third quadrant (close to the origin, Social=0) to the first (Social=25, candidates of major towns and/or northern regions), following, of course, the trend of the variables used for its calculation.
17

In case of maximum homogeneity, all the points have the coordinates equal to zero.

11

www.agnesevardanega.eu

5. Interactivity without interaction In 2010, Italian voters did not have many opportunities for interacting with their candidates: about 17% of electoral websites did not offer interactive tools, and, even when they did, comments from visitors were quite infrequent, while the candidates themselves were often not involved in the interactions. Although the mobilisation for supporting campaigns was sometimes solicited, a more active participation in deliberative processes (such as discussing programs) was not encouraged (see also Gibson et al. 2000). In 2011, changes revealed to be relatively modest compared to the blossoming of spontaneous user-generated content on YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter; the large interest in web campaigning showed by the mainstream media; and even the usage of the web by political leaders to spread press releases and various messages. Comparing major and smaller constituencies, this study has confirmed the relevance of this dimension in explaining unequal levels in usage of the Web for campaigning. Not only do national parties devote smaller budgets to campaigning in smaller constituencies, but among candidates who are on the web, we may observe (at least) two different patterns of web presence. Candidates of major towns, provinces, and/or big parties appear to have a planned and professionalised web presence and have both websites and Facebook pages (plus, possibly, an account on Twitter). Among minor candidates and small municipalities, and especially in southern regions, instead, websites are obsolete from a technical point of view, lack means of interaction, and sometimes are evidently made by the candidates themselves or by non-professional volunteers. Sometimes, however, the absence of interactivity is deliberate: We have such a flow of comments on Facebook that we cannot even keep up, said the person responsible for the social media campaign of Nichi Vendola18, stressing the well-known problem of information overload. In fact, candidates of smaller municipalities, although less present on the web, answer more frequently to users comments on Facebook (38.5% versus 29.5% of the sample). From an organisational point of view, the problem of information overload may be related to the need of control over perceived risks or unpredictable events ( 2.2.), which multiplies with the number of visitors, and thus with the popularity of the candidates and/or size of the parties. In general terms, the results of this study confirm the role of the electoral system on the candidates web strategies, even if this point deserves to be better investigated by analyzing candidates web practices (Foot et al. 2009). Related to the electoral system appears to be the role of
18

Leader of the socialist party Sinistra Ecologia Libert (SELLeft Ecology Freedom).

12

www.agnesevardanega.eu

coalitions in the personalisation of communication. Even if the direct election of mayors and provincial presidents has led to the personalisation of local politics, candidates of coalitions avoid using their personal websites as well as the symbols of their own parties. In provinces and provincial capitals, a candidates party can be identified on the website in about half the cases, versus 85% for the smaller municipalities; in these smaller municipalities, however, electoral websites are far less common, and civic lists more frequent. In major towns and provinces, as well as in regional elections (2010), coalition candidates formed new websites or blogs exclusively devoted to campaigning and destined to be closed soon after the elections. Their social accounts share the same destiny, as shown in Chart 2 (referring to the most active candidates on Twitter in 2010). Chart 2: Take the Votes and Run Activity of Twitter accounts during and after the campaign

It is difficult to say whether this strategy is aimed at highlighting individual personalities or at assuring equal chances to all parties of the coalition in the competition for council seats (candidates parties could be advantaged). On the other hand, only established and well-known politicians will be retrieved on the web and actually contacted by voters. This can explain the modality of centralization without brand management, not only among major parties, but also among those small parties and movements whose candidates are not very popular. What is certain is that this exit strategy does not help create a lasting relationship between candidates and their constituencies.

13

www.agnesevardanega.eu

It is possible to conclude by saying that if, from a technical point of view, the quality of candidates web presence is primarily associated with budget devoted to campaigning, the quality of their relationships with citizens and voters brings into play many other factors. These results have in particular highlighted the role of territorial differences, in a country where local traditions have always played a major role in defining the institutional environment of civicness and participation.

References Anstead N. & Chadwick, A. (2009). Parties, election campaigning, and the Internet. Toward a comparative institutional approach. In: Chadwick & Howard eds. (2009). Bentivegna, S. (2006.a). Campagne elettorali in rete. Bari: Laterza. Bentivegna, S. (2006.b). Rethinking Politics in the World of ICTs. European Journal of Communication 21(3): 331-343. Bnzcri J. P. (1979). Sur le calcul des taux dinertie dans lanalyse dun questionnaire. Les Cahiers de lAnalyse des Donnes. 4(3): 377-378. http://www.numdam.org/item? id=CAD_1979__4_3_377_0. Bnzcri J. P. (1992). Correspondence Analysis Handbook. New York Basel Honk Kong: Dekker. Bucy, E. P. (2004). Interactivity in Society: Locating an Elusive Concept. The Information Society: An International Journal 20(5): 373-383. Chadwick A. & Howard Ph. N., eds. (2009). The Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics. London: Routledge. Chadwick, A. (2007). Digital Network Repertoires and Organizational Hybridity. Political Communication 24(3): 283-301. De Blasio, E., Hibberd & M., Sorice, M. eds. (2011), Leadership. Leaders and new trends in political communication. Rome: LUISS University. Foot, K. A., Xenos, M., Schneider, S. M., Kluver, K. & Jankowski, N. (2009). Electoral web production practices in cross-national perspective: the relative influence of national development, political culture, and web genre. In: Chadwick & Howard eds. (2009). Foot, K. A., Schneider, S. M., Dougherty, M., Xenos, M. & Larsen, E. (2003). Analyzing Linking Practices: Candidate Sites in the 2002 US Electoral Web Sphere. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 8(4): online. Gibson R. K et al. (2000). New Parties, New Media: Italian Party Politics and the Internet. South 14

www.agnesevardanega.eu

European Society and Politics 5(1): 123-136. Greenacre, M. (2007). Correspondence Analysis in Practice, Second Edition. Boca Raton (FL): Chapman and Hall/CRC. Jackson, N. (2003). MPs and web technologies: An untapped opportunity?. Journal of Public Affairs 3(2): 124-137. Jackson, N. A. & Lilleker, D. G. (2009a). Building an Architecture of Participation? Political Parties and Web 2.0 in Britain. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 6(3): 232-250. Jackson, N. A. & Lilleker, D. G. (2009b). MPs and E-representation: Me, MySpace and I. British Politics 4(2): 236-264. Kalnes, . (2009). Norwegian Parties and Web 2.0. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 6(3): 251-266. Latimer, C. P. (2008). Utilizing the Internet as a Campaign Tool: The Relationship Between Incumbency, Political Party Affiliation, Election Outcomes, and the Quality of Campaign Web sites in the United States. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 4(3): 81-95. Leiner, D. & Quiring, O. (2008). What interactivity means to the user: Essential insights into and a scale for perceived interactivity. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication 14(1): 127-155. Lilleker, D. G. & Malagn, C. (2010). Levels of Interactivity in the 2007 French Presidential Candidates' Websites. European Journal of Communication 25(1): 25-42. Lilleker, D. G., Pack, M. & Jackson, N. (2010). Political Parties and Web 2.0: The Liberal Democrat Perspective. Politics 30(2): 105-112. Mcmillan, S. J. (2002). A four-part model of cyber-interactivity. New Media & Society 4(2): 271291. Michalska, K. & Lilleker, D. G. (2011). Hello!? Any leaders here? Community leading, knowledge sharing and representation: MEPs use of online environments for e-representation. In: De Blasio et al. eds. (2011). Nam T. & J. Stromer-Galley (2011). The Democratic Divide in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election. Journal of Information Technology & Politics (online). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19331681.2011.579858. OReilly T. (2005). What is Web 2.0. Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html (retrieved Aug. 2011). Romagnoli, F. (2009). Amministrative 2011: Bonea (BN), Merana (AL) e Cuceglio (TO), i comuni con i candidati sindaci pi giovani dItalia. http://www.anci.it/index.cfm?

15

www.agnesevardanega.eu

layout=dettaglio&IdSez=810124&IdDett=29805. Schneider, S. M. & Foot, K. A. (2004). The Web as an Object of Study. New Media & Society 6(1): 114-122. Stanyer, J. (2005). Political Parties, the Internet and the 2005 General Election: From Web Presence to E-Campaigning?. Journal of Marketing Management 21(9): 1049-1065. Stromer-Galley J. (2004). Interactivity-as-Product and Interactivity-as-Process. The Information Society: An International Journal, 20(5): 391-394. Stromer-Galley, J. (2000). On-line interaction and why candidates avoid it. Journal of Communication, 50(4): 111-132. Stromer-Galley, J. & Foot, K. A. (2002). Citizen Perceptions of Online Interactivity and Implications for Political Campaign Communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(1): online. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue1/stromerandfoot.html. Trammell K. D. et al. (2006). Evolution of Online Campaigning: Increasing Interactivity in Candidate Web Sites and Blogs Through Text and Technical Features. Mass Communication and Society 9(1): 21-44. Van Dijk, J. (1999). The network society: Social aspects of new media. L. Spoorenberg (Trans.) Thousand Oaks: Sage. Vardanega, A. (2011). The role of Web 2.0 in Italian local campaigns: the case of 2010 regional elections. In: De Blasio et al. eds. (2011). Ward, S. & Gibson, R. (2003). On-line and on message? Candidate websites in the 2001 General Election1. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations 5(2):188-205. Williamson, A., Miller, L. & Fallon, F. (2010). Behind the Digital Campaign. An exploration of the use, impact and regulation of digital campaigning. London: Digital Papers Hansard Society. Zittel, T. (2001). Electronic Democracy and Electronic Parliaments. A Comparison between the US House, the Swedish Riksdagen, and the German Bundestag. Paper presented to the Joint Sessions of Workshops of the European Consortium of Political Research. Grenoble: 6 - 11 April. Zittel, T. (2009). Lost in Technology? Political Parties and the Online Campaigns of Constituency Candidates in Germany's Mixed Member Electoral System. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 6(3): 298-311.

16