Gender,party and performance in the 2020 New Zealand general election: politicking on Facebook with Jacinda and Judith

Abstract

New Zealand’s 2020 General Election campaign was unusual, though not unprecedented, in featuring women as both Prime Minister (Jacinda Ardern, Labour) and Leader of the Opposition (Judith Collins, National). To explore the extent to which gender, party and style intersected in their social media positioning, we analysed all posts made on the two Party Leaders’ public Facebook pages. We found both quantitative (post frequency and composition, main topic and policy issues, audience reactions) and qualitative differences (tone, presentational style) but importantly, our research suggests that neither woman ‘performed’ gender in normatively stereotypical ways.

Keywords

authenticity election campaigns Facebook gender Jacinda Ardern New Zealand social media women politicians

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Auxier

Anderson

(2021) Pew research center: Social media use in 2021. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-media-use-in-2021/ (accessed 26 January 2022).

Borah

(2016) Political Facebook use: Campaign strategies used in 2008 and 2012 presidential elections. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 13(4): 326–338.

Bossetta

(2018) The digital architectures of social media: Comparing political campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. Election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 95(2): 471–496.

Cardo

(2021) Gender politics online? Political women and social media at election time in the United Kingdom, the United States and New Zealand. European Journal of Communication 36(1): 38–52.

Duncan

(2020) Two months from New Zealand’s election, National gambles on Judith Collins crushing Jacinda Ardern’s charisma. Available at: https://theconversation.com/two-months-from-new-zealands-election-national-gambles-on-judith-collins-crushing-jacinda-arderns-charisma-142895 (accessed 26 July 2022).

Enli

(2016) ‘Trust me, I am authentic!’: Authenticity illusions in social media politics. In: Bruns

Enli

Skogerbø

, et al. (eds) Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics. New York: Routledge, pp.121–137.

Enli

(2017) Twitter as arena for the authentic outsider: Exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. European Journal of Communication 32(1): 50–61.

Enli

Skogerbø

(2013) Personalized campaigns in party-centred politics. Information Communication & Society 16(5): 757–774.

Farkas

Bene

(2021) Images, politicians, and social media: Patterns and effects of politicians’ image-based political communication strategies on social media. The International Journal of Press/Politics 26(1): 119–142.

10.

Forchtner

Kølvraa

(2017) Extreme right images of radical authenticity: Multimodal aesthetics of history, nature, and gender roles in social media. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology 4(3): 252–281.

11.

Fountaine

(2017) What’s not to like?: A qualitative study of young women politicians’ self-framing on Twitter. Journal of Public Relations Research 29(5): 219–237.

12.

Fountaine

Ross

Comrie

(2019) Across the great divide: Gender, Twitter, and elections in New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Communication Research and Practice 5(3): 226–240.

13.

Goffman

(1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.

14.

Grabe

Bucy

(2009) Image Bite Politics: News and the Visual Framing of Elections. New York: Oxford University Press.

15.

Heiss

Schmuck

Matthes

(2019) What drives interaction in political actors’ Facebook posts? Profile and content predictors of user engagement and political actors’ reactions. Information Communication & Society 22(10): 1497–1513.

16.

Hermans

Vergeer

(2013) Personalization in e-campaigning: A cross-national comparison of personalization strategies used on candidate websites of 17 countries in EP elections 2009. New Media & Society 15(1): 72–92.

17.

Jacobs

Spierings

(2016) Social Media, Parties, and Political Inequalities. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

18.

Kapitan

(2020) The Facebook Prime Minister: How Jacinda Ardern became New Zealand’s most successful political influencer. Available at: https://theconversation.com/the-facebook-prime-minister-how-jacinda-ardern-became-new-zealands-most-successful-political-influencer-144485 (accessed 11 November 2021).

19.

Keller

Kleinen-von Königslöw

(2018) Followers, spread the message! Predicting the success of Swiss politicians on Facebook and Twitter. Social Media + Society 4(1): 11.

20.

Kelm

(2020) Why do politicians use Facebook Twitter and the way they do? The influence of perceived audience expectations. Studies in Media and Communication 9(1): 8–34.

21.

Koc-Michalska

Lilleker

Michalski

, et al. (2021) Facebook affordances and citizen engagement during elections: European political parties and their benefit from online strategies? Journal of Information Technology & Politics 18(2): 180–193.

22.

Kreiss

McGregor

(2018) Technology firms shape political communication: The work of Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, and Google with campaigns during the 2016 U.S. Presidential cycle. Political Communication 35(2): 155–177.

23.

Kress

van Leeuwen

(1996) Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.

24.

Lalancette

Cormack

(2020) Justin Trudeau and the play of celebrity in the 2015 Canadian federal election campaign. Celebrity Studies 11(2): 157–170.

25.

Larsson

(2015) Pandering, protesting, engaging: Norwegian party leaders on Facebook during the 2013 ‘short campaign’. Information Communication & Society 18(4): 459–473.

26.

Larsson

Kalsnes

(2014) ‘Of course we are on Facebook’: Use and non-use of social media among Swedish and Norwegian politicians. European Journal of Communication 29(6): 653–667.

27.

Luebke

(2021) Political authenticity: Conceptualization of a popular term. International Journal of Press/Politics 26(3): 635–653.

28.

Magin

Podschuweit

Haßler

, et al. (2017) Campaigning in the fourth age of political communication: A multi-method study on the use of Facebook by German and Austrian parties in the 2013 national election campaigns. Information Communication & Society 20(11): 1698–1719.

29.

Marder

Slade

Houghton

, et al. (2016) ‘I like them, but won’t “like” them’: An examination of impression management associated with visible political party affiliation on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior 61: 280–287.

30.

McGregor

Lawrence

Cardona

(2017) Personalization, gender, and social media: Gubernatorial candidates’ social media strategies. Information Communication & Society 20(2): 264–283.

31.

Meeks

(2016) Gendered styles, gendered differences: Candidates’ use of personalization and interactivity on Twitter. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 13: 295–310.

32.

Meeks

(2019) Owning your message: Congressional candidates’ interactivity and issue ownership in mixed-gender campaigns. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 16(2): 187–202.

33.

Meeks

Domke

(2016) When politics is a woman’s game: Party and gender ownership in woman-versus-woman elections. Communication Research 43: 895–921.

34.

Metz

Kruikemeier

Lecheler

(2020) Personalization of politics on Facebook: Examining the content and effects of professional, emotional and private self-personalization. Information Communication & Society 23(10): 1481–1498.

35.

Nai

(2022) Populist voters like dark politicians. Personality and Individual Differences. Epub ahead of print 3 January 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111412.

36.

nzvotes (2020) The dynamics of campaign communication on Facebook. Available at: https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/research/strengths/election/facebook-campaign-communication (accessed 2 December 2021).

37.

Parmelee

Perkins

Beasley

(2022) Personalization of politicians on Instagram: What Generation Z wants to see in political posts. Information Communication & Society. Epub ahead of print 18 January 2022. DOI: 10.1080/1369118x.2022.2027500.

38.

Ross

(2017) Gender, Politics, News: A Game of Three Sides. London: John Wiley.

39.

Ross

Fountaine

Comrie

(2020) Facebooking a different campaign beat: Party leaders, the press and public engagement. Media Culture & Society 42(7–8): 1260–1276.

40.

Sørensen

(2016) Political conversations on Facebook – The participation of politicians and citizens. Media Culture & Society 38(5): 664–685.

41.

Stalsburg

Kleinberg

(2016) ‘A mom first and a candidate second’: Gender differences in candidates’ self-presentation of family. Journal of Political Marketing 15(4): 285–310.

42.

Statista (2021) Distribution of Facebook users in NZ as of January 2018, by age group and gender. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/681525/new-zealand-facebook-user-distribution-by-age-and-gender/ (accessed 22 January 2022).

43.

Stetka

Surowiec

Mazák

(2019) Facebook as an instrument of election campaigning and voters’ engagement: Comparing Czechia and Poland. European Journal of Communication 34(2): 121–141.

44.

Sweetser

Lariscy

(2008) Candidates make good friends: An analysis of candidates’ uses of Facebook. International Journal of Strategic Communication 2: 175–198.

45.

Uluçay

Melek

(2021) Self-presentation strategies and the visual framing of political leaders on Instagram: Evidence from the eventful 2019 Istanbul mayoral elections. Visual Communication. Epub ahead of print 28 November 2021. DOI: 10.1177/14703572211057595.

46.

Wood

Corbett

Flinders

(2016) Just like us: Everyday celebrity politicians and the pursuit of popularity in an age of anti-politics. British Journal of Politics & International Relations 18(3): 581–598.

47.

Yarchi

Samuel-Azran

(2018) Women politicians are more engaging: Male versus female politicians’ ability to generate users’ engagement on social media during an election campaign. Information Communication & Society 21(7): 978–995.

48.

Yates

(2019) ‘Show us you care!’ The gendered psycho-politics of emotion and women as political leaders. European Journal of Politics and Gender 2(3): 345–361.