IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v99y2018i1p185-200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Media Campaigning: Mobilization and Fundraising on Facebook

Author

Listed:
  • Zachary J. Auter
  • Jeffrey A. Fine

Abstract

Objective We investigate why certain candidates for the U.S. Senate are more likely to use social media for mobilization and fundraising. Methods Through content analysis of nearly 15,000 Facebook posts made by candidates for the U.S. Senate, we examine how candidate and campaign characteristics shape social media use. Results We find this type of campaigning is most common among challengers and Tea Party candidates who lack the name recognition and resources of more established candidates. Additionally, race characteristics, such as competitiveness and the relative positioning of candidates, influence social media posting strategies, with candidates in competitive races and candidates trailing their opponent more actively engaging in social media campaigning. Conclusions While nearly all candidates engage in some level of campaigning on social media, candidates in competitive races, challengers, and underdog candidates adopt these types of strategies most frequently on Facebook.

Suggested Citation

  • Zachary J. Auter & Jeffrey A. Fine, 2018. "Social Media Campaigning: Mobilization and Fundraising on Facebook," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(1), pages 185-200, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:99:y:2018:i:1:p:185-200
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12391
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12391?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Allison Dale & Aaron Strauss, 2009. "Don't Forget to Vote: Text Message Reminders as a Mobilization Tool," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 787-804, October.
    2. Jennifer Golbeck & Justin M. Grimes & Anthony Rogers, 2010. "Twitter use by the U.S. Congress," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(8), pages 1612-1621, August.
    3. Jennifer Golbeck & Justin M. Grimes & Anthony Rogers, 2010. "Twitter use by the U.S. Congress," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(8), pages 1612-1621, August.
    4. Nickerson, David W., 2008. "Is Voting Contagious? Evidence from Two Field Experiments," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 49-57, February.
    5. Bond, Robert & Messing, Solomon, 2015. "Quantifying Social Media’s Political Space: Estimating Ideology from Publicly Revealed Preferences on Facebook," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(1), pages 62-78, February.
    6. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P., 2000. "The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(3), pages 653-663, September.
    7. Gerber, Alan, 1998. "Estimating the Effect of Campaign Spending on Senate Election Outcomes Using Instrumental Variables," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(2), pages 401-411, June.
    8. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2000. "The effects of canvassing, direct mail, and telephone contact on voter turnout: A field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00248, The Field Experiments Website.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Kowal, 2023. "The Value of a Like: Facebook, Viral Posts, and Campaign Finance in US Congressional Elections," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(3), pages 153-163.
    2. Cheonsoo Kim & Soobum Lee, 2021. "Does social media type matter to politics? Investigating the difference in political participation depending on preferred social media sites," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2942-2954, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grácio, Matilde & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Information, get-out-the-vote messages, and peer influence: Causal effects on political behavior in Mozambique," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03384143, HAL.
    3. Alberto Chong & Gianmarco León‐Ciliotta & Vivian Roza & Martín Valdivia & Gabriela Vega, 2019. "Urbanization Patterns, Information Diffusion, and Female Voting in Rural Paraguay," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(2), pages 323-341, April.
    4. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers hal-03384143, HAL.
    5. Julia Cage & Yasmine Bekkouche, 2018. "The Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014," Working Papers hal-03393149, HAL.
    6. Vincenzo Galasso & Tommaso Nannicini, 2016. "Persuasion and Gender: Experimental Evidence from Two Political Campaigns," CESifo Working Paper Series 5868, CESifo.
    7. Bekkouche, Yasmine & Cagé, Julia & Dewitte, Edgard, 2022. "The heterogeneous price of a vote: Evidence from multiparty systems, 1993–2017," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    8. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Galasso, Vincenzo & Nannicini, Tommaso, 2013. "Men Vote in Mars, Women Vote in Venus: A Survey Experiment in the Field," CEPR Discussion Papers 9547, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Bhatt, Rachana & Dechter, Evgenia & Holden, Richard, 2020. "Registration costs and voter turnout," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 91-104.
    11. Leonardo Bursztyn & Davide Cantoni & Patricia Funk & Felix Schönenberger & Noam Yuchtman, 2024. "Identifying the Effect of Election Closeness on Voter Turnout: Evidence from Swiss Referenda," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 22(2), pages 876-914.
    12. Alan Gerber, 2004. "Does campaign spending work?," Natural Field Experiments 00246, The Field Experiments Website.
    13. Alberto Chong & Gianmarco León & Vivian Roza & Martin Valdivia & Gabriela Vega, 2017. "Urbanization patterns, social interactions and female voting in rural Paraguay," Economics Working Papers 1589, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    14. Bekkouche, Yasmine & Cagé, Julia & Dewitte, Edgard, 2022. "The heterogeneous price of a vote: Evidence from multiparty systems, 1993–2017," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    15. Yasmine Bekkouche & Julia Cage, 2019. "The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03393084, HAL.
    16. Chad Kendall & Tommaso Nannicini & Francesco Trebbi, 2015. "How Do Voters Respond to Information? Evidence from a Randomized Campaign," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 322-353, January.
    17. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/2ahul47tb09rvqfl9eelv7o5ca is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Galasso, Vincenzo & Nannicini, Tommaso, 2016. "Persuasion and Gender: Experimental Evidence from Two Political Campaigns," CEPR Discussion Papers 11238, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Nunnari, Salvatore & Galasso, Vincenzo & Nannicini, Tommaso, 2020. "Positive Spillovers from Negative Campaigning," CEPR Discussion Papers 14312, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. repec:rre:publsh:v:36:y:2006:i:3:p:427-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Pereira dos Santos, João & Tavares, José & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Can ATMs get out the vote? Evidence from a nationwide field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    22. Julia Cage & Yasmine Bekkouche, 2018. "The Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03393149, HAL.
    23. Benjamin Marx & Vincent Pons & Tavneet Suri, 2021. "Voter Mobilisation and Trust in Electoral Institutions: Evidence from Kenya," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(638), pages 2585-2612.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:99:y:2018:i:1:p:185-200. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.