This article examines the functional, relational and discursive dimensions of the normalization thesis in one study, for both Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 features, in a longitudinal design. It is based on a quantitative content and structural analysis of German party websites in the national elections between 2002 and 2009. The results show that the normalization thesis holds true in all its dimensions over time and in the Web 2.0 era: parties still focus on the top-down elements of information provision and delivery while interactive options are scarce. The digital divide between parliamentary and non-parliamentary parties has narrowed over time, but remains visible for all online functions in 2009. Moreover, the gap is wider in Web 2.0 than in Web 1.0. Finally, German e-campaigns increasingly reflect those patterns of traditional election coverage that have been held accountable for rising political alienation among the public, i.e. strategic news and extensive negativism.
BenoitWL (2007) Communication in Political Campaigns. New York: Peter Lang.
2.
BlätteA (2010) Reduzierter Parteienwettbewerb durch kalkulierte Demobilisierung. Bestimmungsgründe des Wahlkampfverhaltens im Bundestagswahlkampf 2009. In: KorteK-R(ed.) Die Bundestagswahl 2009. Analysen der Wahl-, Parteien-, Kommunikations- und Regierungsforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 273–297.
3.
CarlsonTStrandbergK (2008) Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose? The evolution of Finnish web campaigning 1996–2004. In: StrömbäckJ (ed.) Communicating Politics: Political Communication in the Nordic Countries. Göteborg: Nordicom, 161–179.
4.
de VreeseCElenbaasM (2008) Media in the game of politics: Effects of strategic metacoverage on political cynicism. International Journal of Press/Politics13(3): 285–309.
5.
DruckmanJNKiferMParkinM (2010) Timeless strategy meets new medium: Going negative on congressional campaign web sites, 2002–2006. Political Communication21(1): 88–103.
6.
Elmelund-PræstekærC (2010) Beyond American negativity: Toward a general understanding of the determinants of negative campaigning. European Political Science Review2(1): 137–156.
7.
EsserFHemmerK (2008) Characteristics and dynamics of election news coverage in Germany. In: StrömbäckJKaidLL (eds) The Handbook of Election News Coverage Around the World. New York: Routledge, 289–307.
8.
FootKAXenosMSchneiderSMKluverRJankowskiNW (2009) Electoral web production practices in cross-national perspective: The relative influence of national development, political culture, and web genre. In: ChadwickAHowardPN (eds) Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics. London: Routledge, 40–55.
9.
GibsonRWardS (2000) A proposed methodology for studying the function and effectiveness of party and candidate web sites. Social Science Computer Review18(3): 301–319.
10.
GulatiGJWilliamsCB (2007) Closing the gap, raising the bar: Candidate web site communication in the 2006 campaigns for congress. Social Science Computer Review25(4): 443–465.
11.
GulatiGJWilliamsCB (2010) Congressional candidates’ use of YouTube in 2008: Its frequency and rationale. Journal of Information Technology and Politics7(2/3): 93–109.
12.
HellwegSADionisopoulosGNKuglerDB (1989) Political candidate image: A state-of-the-art review. In: DervinBVoigtMJ (eds) Progress in Communication Sciences, Vol. IX. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 43–78.
13.
Holtz-BachaC (2000) Wahlwerbung als politische Kultur. Parteienspots im Fernsehen 1957–1998. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
14.
Holtz-BachaC (ed.) (2010) Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Das Wahljahr 2009. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
15.
JacksonD (2011) Strategic media, cynical public? Examining the contingent effects of strategic news frames on political cynicism in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Press/Politics16(1): 75–101.
16.
JacksonNALillekerDG (2009) Building an architecture of participation? Political parties and Web 2.0 in Britain. Journal of Information Technology and Politics6(3/4): 232–250.
17.
KaidLLHoltz-BachaC (2006) Television advertising and democratic systems around the world: A comparison of videostyle content and effects. In: KaidLLHoltz-BachaC (eds) The Sage Handbook of Political Advertising. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 445–457.
18.
KaidLLStrömbäckJ (2008) Election news coverage around the world: A comparative perspective. In: StrömbäckJKaidLL (eds) The Handbook of Election News Coverage Around the World. New York: Routledge, 421–431.
19.
KalnesØ (2009) Norwegian parties and Web 2.0. Journal of Information Technology and Politics6(3/4): 251–266.
20.
KleinnijenhuisJVan HoofAMJOegemaD (2006) Negative news and the sleeper effect of distrust. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics11(2): 56–104.
21.
KluverRJankowskiNWFootKASchneiderSM (eds) (2007) The Internet and National Elections: A Comparative Study of Web Campaigning. New York: Routledge.
ProcterDESchenck-HamlinWJ (1996) Form and variations in negative political advertising. Communication Research Reports13(2): 147–156.
24.
ResnickD (1998) Politics on the internet: The normalization of cyberspace. In: ToulouseCLukeTW (eds) The Politics of Cyberspace. New York: Routledge, 48–68.
25.
RömmeleA (2003) Political parties, party communication and new information and communication technologies. Party Politics9(1): 7–20.
26.
Schenck-HamlinWJProcterDERumseyDJ (2000) The influence of negative advertising frames on political cynicism and politician accountability. Human Communication Research26(1): 53–74.
27.
SchweitzerEJ (2005) Election campaigning online: German party websites in the 2002 national elections. European Journal of Communication20(3): 327–351.
28.
SchweitzerEJ (2008) 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 Communication23(4): 449–470.
29.
SchweitzerEJ (2010) Global patterns of virtual mudslinging? Comparing the use of attacks on German party websites in state, national, and European parliamentary elections. German Politics19(2): 200–221.
30.
StrandbergK (2008) Online electoral competition in different settings: A comparative meta-analysis of the research on party websites and online electoral competition. Party Politics14(2): 223–244.
31.
StrömbäckJ (2007) Political marketing and professionalized campaigning: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Political Marketing6(2/3): 49–67.
32.
WardSGibsonR (2009) European political organizations and the internet: Mobilization, participation, and change. In: ChadwickAHowardPN (eds) Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics. London: Routledge, 25–39.
33.
WicksRHSouleyB (2003) Going negative: Candidate usage of internet web sites during the 2000 presidential campaign. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly80(1): 128–144.
34.
ValentinoNABeckmannMNBuhrTA (2001) A spiral of cynicism for some: The contingent effects of campaign news frames on participation and confidence in government. Political Communication18(4): 347–367.
35.
ZielmannSRöttgerU (2009) Characteristics and developments of political party web campaigns in Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States between 1997 and 2007. In: BaringhorstSKneipVNiesytoJ (eds) Political Campaigning on the Web. Bielefeld: Transcript, 69–92.
