Diving in the Shallow End: Are politicians capable of more depth on-line? pp31-35 Ross Ferguson

Ross observes:

• Before the election on May 5th 2005 it was clear that 'e-election' was "little more than hyperbole" (Page 32)
• It is easy to be negative about what was achieved through the on-line campaigning that was carried out
• The positive aspect of the 2005 campaign is that MP's and other electoral representatives gained first hand experience of e-democracies potential to help them listen and learn. (Page 35)

Through a router darkly: How on-line campaigning was reported: Bill Thompson pp. 22-25

Looking at the other side of the coin, the limited use of the Internet during the 2005 General Election in Britain. He observes:

It will be up to the historians, psephologists and political scientists to disentangle the strands of influence and decide whether poster campaigns, e.mails or text messages are a more effective way of reaching the electorate. When the spin doctors, candidates and party press officers try to decide where and how to use the many channels that exist for communication between campaign and voter, they will have little detailed evidence from the coverage of the 2005 election.

The human touch of on-line campaigning:Milica Howell Pages 26-30.

Talking about the blog of a once homeless person (Jamie McCoy) which was set up to raise the profile of homelessness issues during the 2005 British general election Milicia observes:

• The blog was monitored by the mainstream media including the BBC, The Guardian, The FT, The Independent, The Times and CNN. Page 27.
• Although the report has a negative slant on the impact of the Internet on the overall campaign and they observe that it was not an 'e-election' per se. Blogs like Jamie's and the personal e.mails from some senior labour figures helped the election become more personal.

• A more gradual, less sensationalist and transient mode of humanising issues than offered by traditional media is offered through the Internet. Page 30

Logging on or switching off? The public and the Internet at the General election. Stephen Ward and Wainler Lusoli pp 13-21.

They observe:

• About half the population had Internet access at the last election. Over one quarter of those (28%) used the Internet for gaining information about the Election (Pages 13-14).
• Internet access makes no difference to older peoples voting habits, but younger people who use the Internet are more likely to turn out to vote if they had explored the election on-line (15% more likely). (Page 15)
• Humour about elections equated to half of all reported e.mail correspondence. (Page 17)
• Only 8% of on-line users participated in active discussion about the election (through on-line discussion, on-line petition and subscribing to election news). (Page 17)
• Internet information seeking is becoming part of the natural way of doing things. 44% of those people who sought information on-line reported a specific reason for doing so. (Page 18)
• Of the 47% of the voting British public who do not have access to the Internet 9% suggested that they would get access within the next three years. This suggests that by the next general election two thirds of the public will have access. (Page 19)

It’s interactivity, stupid! Digital media and the DIY election campaign. Stephen Coleman

The fundamental misconception underlying much analysis of e-politics is that the Internet is for broadcasting one way messages via web sites. (Page5)

Stephen observes that using the Internet as a means of building relationship between the campaigner and the electorate is the future of on-line campaigning. He observes the use of the Internet under three broad headings:

1. Communication
   He notes the success of the TV red button as well as the BBC interactive features on their web site.
2. Remixing
   The Internet is used for basic satire and remixing of political messages. The ability to replicate the style of the Political adverts with satirical messages was particularly popular. He observes a deeper level of remixing through the use of vote exchanges and tactical voting websites. He calls this approach DIY politics. Where the electorate are using the opportunities afforded to them by interactive web sites to subvert the political process to their own ends.
3. The majority who are not interested.
   Although the statistics about those who show an interest in politics are interesting the majority of his discussion is directed at the majority who are wholly disinterested. He is unable to draw any conclusions about the data other than:
   • Some people went on-line to avoid the general election
   • Some people trust the television as a source of information. Others do not and are turning to alternative sources.
   • Some people sent or received e.mails about the general election and some people would never dream of doing so.
     (Page 12)

His conclusion is based around a response to one of his surveys where 93% of people expected to have no contact with their MP after the election.

if people believe that they are being asked to elect a politicians who won't talk with them or listen to them in between elections why should they talk with or listen to politicians during the election campaign. (Page 12)

Forward to Spinning the Web by Clare Ettinghausen

Spinning the web is a collection of articles about the online habits of voters and campaigners during the general election in the UK of 2005. It is available for download from: http://hansardsociety.org.uk/ assets/Final_HANSARD_ONLINE_A5.pdf In the forward Clare says:

Although it is the time between elections when long-term relationships between the electorate and the elected can be sustained, the campaign its self is an opportunity for the roots of these relationships to be planted. This collection of essays seeks to understand whether these relationships have been esablished and how sensitive they are over the next four or five years.