|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Closing the Gap, Raising the BarCandidate Web Site Communication in the 2006 Campaigns for Congress
Girish J. "Jeff" Gulati
Bentley College, Waltham, Massachusetts, jgulati{at}bentley.edu
Christine B. Williams
Bentley College, Waltham, Massachusetts
This article examines online campaigning for the U.S. Congress in 2006. Increases in web presence have slowed, but with minor-party candidates closing the gap with major-party candidates in Senate races. A content analysis of the campaign web sites of every Senate and House candidate reveals that baseline informational web content and features have become standardized but that Senate sites are more sophisticated technologically. Multivariate analyses reveal that financial resources underwrite the highest levels of content and constitute a moving hurdle for disadvantaged candidates. Democrats, Greens, and challengers demonstrated more interest in relationship building, and the competitiveness of the race increased the likelihood of using the web site for mobilizing supporters. Features and functionality that allow citizens to coproduce content and interact in two-way communication are not being adopted widely, and it is an open question how candidates might integrate new social networking tools into their campaign strategies.
Key Words: campaign web sites • online campaigns • 2006 midterm elections • U.S. Senate • U.S. House
References
- Benoit, P.J., & Benoit, W.L. (2005). Criteria for evaluating political campaign webpages. Southern Communication Journal, 70(3), 230-247.
- Bimber, B., & Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning online: The Internet in U.S. elections. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Chadwick, A. (2006). Internet politics: States, citizens, and new communications technologies. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Conners, J. (2005, September 1-4). Meetup, blogs and online involvement: U.S. Senate campaign web sites of 2004. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
- Cornfield, M., & Rainie, L. (2006, November 5). The Web era isn't as new as you think. The Washington Post, p. B3.
- D'Alessio, D. (1997). Use of the World Wide Web in the 1996 U.S. election. Electoral Studies, 16(4), 489-500.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Druckman, J.N., Kifer, M., & Parkin, M. (2006, April 20-23). Campaigns in a new media age: How candidates use the World Wide Web. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
- Dulio, D.A., Goff, D.L., & Thurber, J.A. (1999). Untangled Web: Internet use during the 1998 election. PS: Political Science and Politics, 32(1), 53-59.[CrossRef]
- Endres, D., & Warnick, B. (2004). Text-based interactivity in candidate campaign Web sites: A case study from the 2002 elections. Western Journal of Communication, 68(3), 322-342.
- Foot, K.A., & Schneider, S.M. (2002). Online action in campaign 2000: An exploratory analysis of the U.S. political Web sphere. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 46, 222-244.[CrossRef]
- Foot, K.A., & Schneider, S.M. (2006). Web campaigning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Gibson, R.K., & McAllister, I. (2006). Does cyber-campaigning win votes? Online communication in the 2004 Australian election. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion, and Parties, 16(3), 243-263.[CrossRef]
- Gibson, R.K., & Ward, S. (2000). A proposed methodology for studying the function and effectiveness of party and candidate Web sites. Social Science Computer Review, 18(3), 301-319.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Gibson, R.K., Margolis, M., Resnick, D., & Ward, S.J. (2003). Election campaigning on the WWW in the USA and UK: A comparative analysis. Party Politics, 9(1), 47-75.[Abstract]
- Graf, J., Reeher, G., Mablin, M.J., & Panagopoulos, C. (2006). Small donors and online giving: A study of donors to the 2004 presidential campaigns. Washington, DC: Institute of Politics, Democracy & the Internet.
- Greer, J., & LaPointe, M. (2004). Cyber-campaigning grows up: A comparative content analysis of web sites for US Senate and gubernatorial races. In R. K. Gibson, A. Römmerle, & S. J. Ward, Electronic democracy, mobilisation, organisation, and participation via new ICTs (pp. 116-132). New York: Routledge.
- Gulati, G.J. (2003, August 28-31). Campaigning for Congress on the World Wide Web and the implications for strong democracy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia.
- Gulati, G.J., Just, M., & Crigler, A. (2004). News coverage of political campaigns. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), The handbook of political communication research (pp. 237-256). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Herrnson, P.S., Stokes-Brown, A.K., & Hindman, M. (2007). Campaign politics and the digital divide: Constituency characteristics, strategic considerations, and candidate Internet use in state legislative elections. Political Research Quarterly, 60(1), 31-42.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Ireland, E., & Nash, P.T. (2001). Winning campaigns online: Strategies for candidates and causes (2nd ed.). Bethesda, MD: Science Writers Press.
- Jacobson, G.C. (2004). The politics of congressional elections (6th ed.). New York: Addison-Wesley.
- Jankowski, N.W., & van Os, R. (2004, July 8-10). The 2004 European Parliament election and the Internet: Contribution to a European public sphere? Paper presented at the annual meeting of Internet Communication in Intelligent Societies, Hong Kong.
- Johnson, C.Y. (2007, March 7). Space for everyone: Social networking websites, once purely teen territory, attract all ages. The Boston Globe, pp. A1, A14.
- Johnson, D.W. (2001, October). Constituents and your web site: What citizens want to see on congressional web sites. Congress Online Project. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://www.cmfweb.org/storage/cmfweb/documents/cmf_pubs/constituentsandwebsites.pdf
- Kamark, E.C. (2002). Political campaigning on the Internet: Business as usual? In E. C. Kamark and J. S. Nye Jr. (Eds.), Governance.com: Democracy in the information age (pp. 81-103). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
- Klotz, R.J. (1997). Positive spin: Senate campaigning on the web. PS: Political Science and Politics, 30(3), 482-486.[CrossRef]
- Klotz, R.J. (2004). The politics of Internet communication. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
- Klotz, R.J. (2007). Internet campaigning for grassroots and astroturf support. Social Science Computer Review, 25(1), 3-12.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Lusoli, W. (2005). Politics makes strange bedfellows. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 10(4), 71-97.[CrossRef]
- Lusoli, W., Gibson, R.K., & Ward, S. (in press). Italian elections online: Ten years on. In J. L. Newell (Ed.), The 2006 Italian elections. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
- Mayhew, D. (1974). Congress: The electoral connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Panagopoulos, C. (2005, April 7-10). Minor parties and the Internet. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
- Puopolo, S. (2001). The web and U.S. senatorial campaigns 2000. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(12), 2030-2047.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Rainie, L., Cornfield, M., & Horrigan, J. (2005, March). The Internet and campaign 2004. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/pip_2004_campaign.pdf
- Rainie, L., & Horrigan, J. (2007). Election 2006 online. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/pip_politics_2006.pdf
- Sander, T.H. (2005, September 1-4). E-associations? Using technology to connect citizens: The case of meetup.com. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
- Sifry, M. (2004, November 22). The rise of open-source politics. The Nation, pp. 14-20.
- Stromer-Galley, J. (2000). On-line interaction and why candidates avoid it. Journal of Communication, 50(4), 111-132.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Van Dijk, J.A.G.M. (2005). The deepening divide: Inequality in the informational society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Ward, S., Gibson, R., & Lusoli, W. (2006, September 7-9). The same the world over? Candidate campaigning online in the UK and Australia. Paper presented at the Elections, Parties and Opinion Polls conference, Nottingham, UK.
- Williams, C.B., Aylesworth, A., & Chapman, K.J. (2002). The 2002 e-campaign for U.S. Senate. Journal of Political Marketing, 1(4), 39-63.
- Williams, C.B., & Gulati, G.J. (2006, August 31—September 3). The evolution of online campaigning in congressional elections, 2000-2004. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia.
- Xenos, M.A., & Foot, K.A. (2005). Politics as usual or politics unusual? Position-taking and dialogue on campaign web sites in the 2002 U.S. elections. Journal of Communication, 55(1), 169-185.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 25, No. 4,
443-465 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0894439307305624
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
E. J. Schweitzer
Innovation or Normalization in E-Campaigning?: A Longitudinal Content and Structural Analysis of German Party Websites in the 2002 and 2005 National Elections
European Journal of Communication,
December 1, 2008;
23(4):
449 - 470.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
