Political Interaction in Social Media Posts: The Case of Türkiye

Öz

In this study, which focuses on Instagram in social media as a means of political communication, the second round of the presidential election held on May 28, 2023 was examined. In the study, 89 posts shared by presidential candidates and 8900 comment texts of these posts were analyzed by content analysis method. According to the findings obtained, presidential candidates shared the most Reels format content and supported these shares mostly with short explanation texts. The prominent theme in the presidential candidates’posts is “election”; the target audience was determined as “voters”. In the comments made to the shares of the presidential candidates, responses were given with the content of “admiration/personal appreciation” and in the comments, highly supportive evaluations were made to the shares of the presidential candidates.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Media Studies
• Social Media
• Political Communication
• Presidential Elections
• Instagram

Sosyal Medya Paylaşımlarında Siyasi Etkileşim: Türkiye Örneği

Öz

Siyasal iletişim aracı olarak sosyal medyada Instagram’a odaklanan bu çalışmada, 28 Mayıs 2023 tarihinde gerçekleştirilen cumhurbaşkanlığı seçiminin ikinci turu incelenmiştir. Çalışmada, cumhurbaşkanı adaylarının paylaştığı 89 gönderi ve bu gönderilere ait 8900 yorum metni, içerik çözümlemesi yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre cumhurbaşkanı adayları, en çok Reels formatlı içerikler paylaşmış ve bu paylaşımlarını çoğunlukla kısa açıklama metinleriyle desteklemişlerdir. Cumhurbaşkanı adaylarının paylaşımlarında ön plana çıkan tema, “seçim”; hedef kitleyse “seçmen” olarak saptanmıştır. Cumhurbaşkanı adaylarının paylaşımlarına yapılan yorumlarda, “hayranlık/kişisel beğeni” içerikli cevaplar verilmiş ve yorumlarda cumhurbaşkanı adaylarının paylaşımlarına yüksek düzeyde destekleyici değerlendirmelerde bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Medya Çalışmaları
• Sosyal Medya
• Siyasal İletişim
• Cumhurbaşkanlığı Seçimleri
• Instagram

Kaynakça

1. ​​AA. (2023, 1 Haziran). Cumhurbaşkanı 2. tur seçimleri. https://secim.aa.com.tr/ adresinden alındı.
2. ​Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211-236.
3. ​Arslan, D. (2018). Evren-örneklem-örnekleme ve örnekleme teknikleri. D. Arslan (Ed.), Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntem ve teknikleri içinde (ss. 117-130). Paradigma Akademi Yayınları.
4. ​Aziz, A. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri ve teknikleri. Nobel Yayınevi.
5. ​Bene, M. (2016). Go viral on the Facebook! Interactions between candidates and followers on Facebook during the hungarian general election campaign of 2014. Information, Communication & Society, 20(4), 513-529.
6. ​Bene, M. (2017). Sharing is caring! Investigating viral posts on politicians’ Facebook pages during the 2014 general election campaign in hungary. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 14(4), 387-402.
7. ​Bennett, W. (2012). The personalization of politics political ıdentity, social media, and changing patterns of participation. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644(1), 20-39.
8. ​Bossetta, M. (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 Quarterly, 95(2), 471-496.

9. ​Chadwick, A. (2017). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press.
10. ​Drisko, J., & Maschi, T. (2016). Content analysis. Oxford University Press.
11. ​Druckman, J., Kifer, M., & Parkin, M. (2007). The technological development of congressional candidate web sites. Social Science Computer Review, 25(4), 425-442.
12. ​Enli, G., & Skogerbo, E. (2013). Personalized campaigns in party-centered politics: Twitter and Facebook as arenas for political communication. Information, Communication & Society, 16(5), 757-774.
13. ​Gerodimos, R., & Justinussen, J. (2015). Obama’s 2012 Facebook campaign: Political communication in the age of the like button. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 12(2), 113-132.
14. ​Grabe, M., & Bucy, E. (2009). Image bite politics: News and the visual framing of elections. Oxford University Press.
15. ​Graham, T., Broersma, M., Hazelhoff, K., & Van’t Haar, G. (2013). Between broadcasting political messages and ınteracting with voters: The use of Twitter during the 2010 UK general election campaign. Information Communnication and Society, 16(5), 692-716.
16. ​Haggarty, L. (1996). What is content analysis? Medical Teacher, 18(2), 99-101.
17. ​Heiss, R., Schmuck, D., & Matthes, J. (2019). What drives ınteraction in political actors’ Facebook posts? Profile and content predictors of user engagement and political actors’ reactions. Information, Communication & Society, 22(10), 1497-1513.
18. ​Hermida, A. (2012). Tweets and truth: Journalism as a discipline of collaborative verification. Journalism Practice, 6(5-6), 659-668.
19. ​Kelm, O. (2020). Why do politicians use Facebook and Twitter the way they do? The ınfluence of perceived audience expectations. SCM Studies in Communication and Media, 9(1), 8-34.
20. ​Knoll, J., Matthes, J., & Heiss, R. (2020). The social media political participation model: A goal systems theory perspective. Convergence, 26(1), 135-156.
21. ​Krippendorff, K. (1989). Content analysis. E. Barnouw, G. Gerbner, W. Schramm, T. Worth, & L. Gross (Düz.), International Encyclopedia of Communication içinde (ss. 403-407). Oxford University Press.
22. ​Kristensen, J., Albrechtsen, T., Dahl-Nielsen, E., Jensen, M., Skovrind, M., Bornakke, T., & Braunstein, L. (2017). Arsimonious data: How a single Facebook like predicts voting behavior in multiparty systems. PloS One, 12(9), e0184562.
23. ​Kruikemeier, S. (2014). How political candidates use Twitter and the impact on votes. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 131-139.
24. ​Lau, R., Sigelman, L., & Rovner, I. (2007). The effects of negative political campaigns: A meta-analytic reassessment. The Journal of Politics, 69(4), 1176-1209.
25. ​Liebhart, K., & Bernhardt, P. (2017). Political storytelling on Instagram: Key aspects of alexander van der Bellen’s successful 2016 presidential election campaign. Media and Communication, 5(4), 15-25.
26. ​Lilleker, D. (2015). Interactivity and branding: Public political communication as a marketing tool. Journal of Political Marketing, 14(1-2), 111-128.
27. ​Lilleker, D., & Koc-Michalska, K. (2013). Online political communication strategies: MEPs e-representation and self-representation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(2), 190-207.
28. ​Macafee, T. (2013). Some of these things are not like the others: Examining motivations and political predispositions among political Facebook activity. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2766-2775.
29. ​Margolis, M., & Resnick, D. (2000). Politics as usual: The cyberspace revolution. Sage Publications.
30. ​Nave, N., Shifman, L., & Tenenboim-Weinblatt, K. (2018). Talking it personally: Features of successful political posts on Facebook. Social Media+Society, 4(3), 1-12.
31. ​Perrin, A., & Anderson, M. (2019). Share of U.S. adults using social media, including Facebook, is mostly unchanged since 2018. Pew Research Center.
32. ​Prasad, B. (2008). Content Analysis. Research Methods for Social Work, 5, 1-20.
33. ​Qiu, L., Lin, H., & Leung, A. (2013). Cultural differences and switching of in-group sharing behavior between an American (Facebook) and a Chinese (Renren) social networking site. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(1), 106-121.
34. ​Rosenberg, J., & Egbert, N. (2011). Online impression management: Personality traits and concerns for secondary goals as predictors of self-presentation tactics on Facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(1), 1-18.
35. ​Russmann, U., Svensson, J., & Larsson, A. (2019). Political parties and their pictures: Visual communication on Instagram in swedish and norwegian election campaigns. A. Veneti, D. Jackson, & D. Lilleker (Ed.), Visual Political Communication içinde (ss. 119-144). Springer Publications.
36. ​Soon, C., & Soh, Y. (2014). Engagement@ web 2.0 between the government and citizens in Singapore: Dialogic communication on Facebook? Asian Journal of Communnication, 24(1), 42-59.
37. ​Steenkamp, M., & Hyde-Clarke, N. (2014). The use of Facebook for political commentary in South Africa. Telematics Informatics, 31(1), 91-97.
38. ​Stemler, S. (2015). Content analysis. Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences: An interdisciplinary, searchable, and linkable resource, 1-14.
39. ​Stocchetti, M. (2011). Images: Who gets what, when and how? M. Stocchetti, & K. Karin (Ed.), Images in use towards the critical analysis of visual communication içinde (ss. 11-37). John Benjamins Publications.
40. ​Stromer-Galley, J. (2000). Online interaction and why candidates avoid it. Journal of Communication, 50(4), 111-132.
41. ​Stromer-Galley, J. (2003). Diversity of political conversation on the internet: Users’ perspectives. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(3).
42. ​Strömback, J., & Kiousis, S. (2014). Strategic political communication in election campaigns. C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication içinde (ss. 109-128). de Gruyter Publications.
43. ​Svensson, C. (2011). The expressive turn of citizenship digital late modernity. JeDem - eJournal of eDemocracy, 3(1), 42-56.
44. ​Van Santen, R., & Van Zoonen, L. (2010). The personal in political television biographies. Biography, 33(1), 46-67.
45. ​Williams, C., & Gulati, G. (2013). Social networks in political campaigns: Facebook and the congressional elections of 2006 and 2008. New Media and Society, 15(1), 52-71.
46. ​Xenos, M., Macafee, T., & Pole, A. (2017). Understanding variations in user response to social media campaigns: A study of Facebook posts in the 2010 US elections. New Media & Society, 19(6), 826-842.
47. ​YSK (2023, 1 Haziran). Yüksek Seçim Kurulu (2023, 26 Mayıs), Cumhurbaşkanlığı seçim sonuçları ve ikinci tur seçimleri hakkındaki raporu. https://www.ysk.gov.tr/doc/karar/dosya/39645318/2023-1091.pdf adresinden alındı.