Election campaigns in hybrid media systems are characterised by the integration of newer and older media. With the rise of social media platforms, newer tools of political communication emerge, such as online campaign posters, complementing older tools, such as traditional campaign posters. This raises the question whether the newer medium online campaign posters replicates strategies of professionalised political communication (i.e. personalisation, de-ideologisation and negative campaigning), and whether major and minor parties differ in their use of these strategies in online campaign posters. Against this background, we conducted a quantitative content analysis of visual and textual elements of online campaign posters and traditional campaign posters (N = 1,069) for the 2013 and 2017 German Bundestag elections. The results indicate that online campaign posters are significantly more negative than traditional campaign posters. Moreover, the use of online campaign posters tends to moderate the inter-party competition in the social media environment.
AuterZJFineJA (2016) Negative campaigning in the social media age: Attack advertising on Facebook. Political Behavior38: 999–1020.
2.
BalmasMRahatGSheaferT, et al. (2014) Two routes to personalized politics: Centralized and decentralized personalization. Party Politics20: 37–51.
3.
BossettaM (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 Quarterly95: 471–496.
4.
BrunsAEnliGSkogerbøE, et al. (2015) The Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics. New York, London: Routledge.
5.
BucherT (2012) Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society14: 1164–1180.
6.
CeronAd’AddaG (2016) E-campaigning on Twitter: The effectiveness of distributive promises and negative campaign in the 2013 Italian election. New Media & Society18: 1935–1955.
7.
ChadwickA (2017) The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power. New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
DruckmanJNKiferMJParkinM (2010) Timeless strategy meets new medium: Going negative on congressional campaign web sites, 2002–2006. Political Communication27: 88–103.
9.
DumitrescuD (2010) Know me, love me, fear me: The anatomy of candidate poster designs in the 2007 French legislative elections. Political Communication27: 20–43.
10.
DumitrescuD (2012) The importance of being present: Election posters as signals of electoral strength, evidence from France and Belgium. Party Politics18: 941–960.
11.
EnliG (2017a) New media and politics. Annals of the International Communication Association41: 220–227.
12.
EnliG (2017b) 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 Communication32: 50–61.
13.
EnliGSkogerbøE (2013) Personalized campaigns in party-centred politics. Information, Communication & Society16: 757–774.
14.
EriksonRSTedinKL (2014) American Public Opinion. Its Origins, Content and Impact. Florence: Taylor & Francis.
15.
GarziaD (2011) The personalization of politics in western democracies: Causes and consequences on leader–follower relationships. The Leadership Quarterly22: 697–709.
16.
GeiseS (2016) Posters, political. In: MazzoleniG (ed) The International Encyclopedia of Political Communication. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
17.
GeiseS (2017) Theoretical perspectives on visual political communication through election posters. In: Holtz-BachaCJohanssonB (eds) Election Posters around the Globe: Political Campaigning in the Public Space. Cham: Springer, pp. 13–31.
18.
GibsonRMcAllisterI (2015) Normalising or equalising party competition? Assessing the impact of the web on election campaigning. Political Studies63: 529–547.
19.
GibsonRRömmeleA (2009) Measuring the professionalization of political campaigning. Party Politics15: 265–293.
20.
GueorguievaV (2008) Voters, MySpace, and YouTube: The impact of alternative communication channels on the 2006 election cycle and beyond. Social Science Computer Review26: 288–300.
21.
HayekL (2016) Design Politischer Parteien. Plakatwerbung in Österreichischen Wahlkämpfen [Design of political parties. Poster advertising in Austrian election campaigns]. Münster: LIT Verlag.
22.
HeywoodA (2017) Political Ideologies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
23.
Holtz-BachaC (2002) Professionalization of political communication. Journal of Political Marketing1: 23–37.
24.
Holtz-BachaCJohanssonB (2017) Posters: From announcements to campaign instruments. In: Holtz-Bacha Cand JohanssonB (eds) Election Posters around the Globe. Political Campaigning in the Public Space. Cham: Springer, pp. 1–12.
25.
Holtz-BachaCLessingerE-M (2017) Indispensable and very much alive: Posters in German election campaigns. In: Holtz-BachaCJohanssonB (eds) Election Posters around the Globe. Political Campaigning in the Public Space. Cham: Springer, pp. 159–186.
26.
JohanssonB (2014) Negativity in the public space: Comparing a hundred years of negative campaigning on election posters in Sweden. In: CanelMJVoltmerK (eds) Comparing Political Communication across Time and Space: New Studies in an Emerging Field. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 67–82.
27.
JungherrA (2012) Online campaigning in Germany: The CDU online campaign for the general election 2009 in Germany. German Politics21: 317–340.
28.
KalnesØ (2009) Norwegian parties and Web 2.0. Journal of Information Technology & Politics6: 251–266.
29.
KalsnesB (2016) The social media paradox explained: Comparing political parties’ Facebook strategy versus practice. Social Media + Society2: 1–11.
30.
KarlsenR (2013) Obama’s online success and European Party Organizations: Adoption and adaptation of U.S. online practices in the Norwegian Labor Party. Journal of Information Technology & Politics10: 158–170.
31.
KarlsenRSaglieJ (2017) Party bureaucrats, independent professionals, or politicians? A study of party employees. West European Politics40: 1331–1351.
32.
KlingerU (2013) Mastering the art of social media. Information, Communication & Society16: 717–736.
33.
KlingerUSvenssonJ (2015) The emergence of network media logic in political communication: A theoretical approach. New Media & Society17: 1241–1257.
34.
Koc-MichalskaKLillekerDGSmithA, et al. (2016) The normalization of online campaigning in the Web 2.0 Era. European Journal of Communication31: 331–350.
35.
KreissDJasinskiC (2016) The tech industry meets presidential politics: Explaining the democratic party’s technological advantage in electoral campaigning, 2004–2012. Political Communication33: 544–562.
36.
LarssonAOMoeH (2014) Triumph of the underdogs? Comparing Twitter use by political actors during two Norwegian election campaigns. SAGE Open4: 1–13.
37.
LauRRPomperGM (2002) Effectiveness of negative campaigning in U.S. senate elections. American Journal of Political Science46: 47–66.
38.
LeeBCampbellV (2016) Looking out or turning in? Organizational ramifications of online political posters on Facebook. The International Journal of Press/politics21: 313–337.
39.
Lev-OnAHaleva-AmirS (2016) Normalizing or equalizing? Characterizing Facebook campaigning. New Media & Society20: 720–739.
40.
McGregorSCLawrenceRGCardonaA (2017) Personalization, gender, and social media: Gubernatorial candidates’ social media strategies. Information, Communication & Society20: 264–283.
41.
MaginMPodschuweitNHaßlerJ, 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 & Society20: 1698–1719.
42.
RahatGSheaferT (2007) The personalization(s) of politics: Israel, 1949–2003. Political Communication24: 65–80.
43.
Samuel-AzranTYarchiMWolfsfeldG (2015) Equalization versus normalization: Facebook and the 2013 Israeli elections. Social Media + Society1: 1–9.
44.
SchillD (2012) the visual image and the political image: A review of visual communication research in the field of political communication. Review of Communication12: 118–142.
45.
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: 449–470.
46.
SchweitzerEJ (2011) Normalization 2.0: A longitudinal analysis of German online campaigns in the national elections 2002–9. European Journal of Communication26: 310–327.
47.
SteffanDVenemaN (2019) Personalised, de-ideologised and negative? A longitudinal analysis of campaign posters for German Bundestag elections, 1949–2017. European Journal of Communication34: 267–285.
48.
StrömbäckJ (2009) Selective professionalisation of political campaigning: A test of the party-centred theory of professionalised campaigning in the context of the 2006 Swedish election. Political Studies57: 95–116.
49.
TenscherJKoc-MichalskaKLillekerDG, et al. (2016) The professionals speak: Practitioners’ perspectives on professional election campaigning. European Journal of Communication31: 95–119.
50.
VenemaNSteffanD (2018) Context matters: Professionalization of campaign posters from Adenauer to Merkel. Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research. Epub ahead of print 17 October. DOI: 10.1515/commun-2018-2020.
51.
VergeerMHermansLSamsS (2013) Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: The exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style. Party Politics19: 477–501.
52.
VliegenthartR (2012) The professionalization of political communication? A longitudinal analysis of Dutch election campaign posters. American Behavioral Scientist56: 135–150.
53.
ZittelT (2009) Lost in technology? Political parties and the online campaigns of constituency candidates in Germany’s mixed member election system. Journal of Information Technology & Politics6: 298–311.
