The Internet has forever changed American presidential campaigns, says a Texas A&M University professor who notes that U.S. politicians can learn lots from their counterparts in Asia and other parts of the world about communicating in cyberspace.

“New Internet technology – like the videos on YouTube and blogs – have become an integral part of political campaigns in just the past few years,” says Randy Kluver, a research professor in communication and director of Texas A&M’s Institute for Pacific Asia.  “All candidates now have to have an Internet presence, but candidates and their campaign staffs have lost their ability to control either the media or its messages.  Politicians and political parties no longer have a monopoly on media resources or on the distribution of their campaign information.”

Kluver bases his conclusions on observation of U.S. media over the last 10 years and on the research foundation laid in a study edited by him and an international group of collaborators.  The study, begun in 2004 and just published in a book titled The Internet and National Elections: A comparative study of web campaigning, examines how the Internet is being used in election campaigns around the world.

 “The book examines how the Internet is used by different political actors during periods of electoral activity,” Kluver says.  “Our study shows that a variety of factors, including political culture and the genre of the political website, influence how candidates and parties will use the Internet in elections.  And by taking a look at how the Net can be used in elections globally, we can gain a better understanding of how it can be used here in the United States.”

The study by Kluver and 25 other researchers analyzed elections during 2004 in 22 nations in Asia, Europe and North America.  Research teams identified Web sites devoted to political campaigns, then surveyed their content using a methodology called “Web feature analysis.”  Countries studied ranged from technologically advanced nations to those with low Internet diffusion.

“We found that Internet use during campaigns had wildly different effects in different countries,” Kluver notes.  “Because of these observations, I think it’s hard to predict the effect any one candidate’s use of the Internet will have on elections in any given country.  One thing we can say, however, is that Internet use expands the feedback loop available to candidates.  For example, they can judge reactions to a particular platform by surveying responses on influential blogs.

“Therefore, I believe that election campaigns in the digital age will become more chaotic, less controlled by candidates.”

Kluver noted that although the United States is considered to be in the vanguard of development and use of Internet technology, candidates in some other countries, such as South Korea, include more features on their Web sites and prove to be more innovative.

“The current South Korean president, Roh Moo-hyun, has boasted that he won the election because he is the only candidate who understands html,” Kluver says.

Kluver says the group’s research disproves the previously held view that the Internet will energize political campaigns.

 “That’s not true – the Internet will not save a boring campaign,” he notes.  “But in skilled hands, the Net can help a particular candidate distinguish himself or herself from the pack.  That may be happening, for example, in the case of Fred Thompson, a Republican presidential contender, who has, in my opinion, demonstrated brilliant use of YouTube.”

Kluver’s research calls into question another widely held belief – that the Internet will engage youthful voters.  “If young people are not politically interested to begin with, they will not watch political videos or read political blogs on the Web,” he says. 

“In fact, the Internet seems to be creating a ‘superempowered’ class of voters, reinforcing the already existing interest of politically involved groups, not changing the boundaries of participation,” Kluver continues.  “Thus, people who are already empowered – who tend to be educated, affluent and white – become more empowered through their use of the Internet for political purposes.  And traditionally marginalized groups without Internet access fall further behind.”

Kluver noted that fringe groups of voters, those who support the less popular candidates or causes, may be able to use the Internet to “build critical mass, connecting with like-minded others, but will not necessarily be able to use the Web to build greater political power.”

Kluver also predicts the rise of an influential group of Internet advisers, knowledgeable persons who will help candidates take advantage of the medium’s power.  “Such advisers will help candidates grasp not only the technological potential of the Web, but also will help them understand what parts of their message could spin out of control,” he notes.  “Certain current candidates, including Thompson and Barack Obama seem to get how to use the Internet to their best advantage, while others, like Hillary Clinton, are failing in attempts to use the Web to engage their constituents.”

Kluver was the lead editor of the recently published book. His co-editors and co-principal investigators were Kirsten Foot, University of Washington; Nick Jankowski, Radboud University, The Netherlands; and Steve Schneider, SUNY Institute of Technology.

 “There are perhaps dozens of U.S. scholars studying the impact of the Internet on the American electoral process,” Kluver says.  “What’s unique about our perspective is that it is rooted in an international research project.  Our observations are global, cross-national, giving us insights to compare the U.S. election process to those around the world.”

Contact: Randy Kluver at 979-845-3099 or email rkluver@ipomail.tamu.edu.