Twitter and Election Campaigns: Measuring Usage in Nigeria's 2015 Presidential Election - Covenant Journals
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Covenant Journal of Communication (CJOC) Vol. 5 No. 2, Dec. 2018
An Open Access Journal, Available Online
Twitter and Election Campaigns: Measuring
Usage in Nigeria’s 2015 Presidential Election
1
Nkiru Comfort Ezeh Ph.D. &
2
Augustine Godwin Mboso Ph.D.
1
Department of Mass Communication
Madonna University, Okija, Nigeria
2
National Open University of Nigeria,
Study Centre, Uyo, Nigeria.
mail:ezehnkiru_ct@yahoo.com
mail:austinmboso@gmail.com
Abstract: This study put the effectiveness of Twitter on the radar in
Southeast Nigeria with regard to the 2015 presidential electioneering
campaigns of the two leading candidates. The need existed to understand
if the online platform used by the incumbent President Goodluck
Jonathan of the Peoples‘ Democratic Party (PDP) and challenger
Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressive Congress (APC), as part of a
complimentary media strategy, was effective in shaping voter behaviour
in that part of the country. Data generated from 200 respondents showed
that although Twitter provided the information needed via voters‘
interaction with political candidates, it did not significantly alter voter
interest nor affect voting decision. Voters could not recall their use of
Twitter as a factor in casting their ballot owing to post election time
lapse.
Keywords: Presidential election, Twitter, campaign, social networking,
voters, southeast Nigeria.
44Introduction 2003, p. 82). The online interactive
Twitter‘s relevance in politics can option on the platform makes
be seen in its ability to make the presidential campaigns especially
politician connect with the more notable, easier and faster
electorate through text, audio or (Owen and Davis, 2008) compared
video without the gatekeeping to other campaigns. This
interference of the journalist. observation about Twitter as a New
Candidates and their campaigns can Media communication channel
gauge reactions to their messages in prompted this investigation on the
real time. Voters can easily share extent to which the relatively new
their standpoints while politicians channel, used complementarily to
can track and respond to voters' the conventional ones, influenced
evolving views in the course of the voter interest in the 2015
campaign (Kapko, 2016). Twitter presidential elections campaign in
helps voters understand political Nigeria.
issues as they emerge. Voters use Conversely, some scholars (Bentley
the Twitter platform via the Internet College, 2006; Wojcieszak and
to read political news, share political Muntz, 2009; Bushey, 2010; Kapok,
knowledge through information 2016) have argued that though
exchange and obtain responses that Twitter makes political discourse
enable them situate their more accessible, the 140-character
participation in politics. Twitter is limit makes it difficult or impossible
not new to presidential for campaigners to share detailed
electioneering campaigns around the policy proposals on the platform,
world. The 2015 presidential thereby preventing an in-depth
election in Nigeria enabled us to campaign discourse – an action that
ascertain if the use of Twitter did can limit awareness (Oresanya, et
influence voter-behaviour. al., 2017) This they argue makes it
Writers (Palser, 2007; Darly, 2008; difficult for people to get a greater
Pal & Gonawela, 2017) confirm that understanding of the candidates'
Twitter is a source of political news cornerstone ideas. Among these
as it provides new opportunities for scholars, Kopek particularly notes
unmediated dialogue between that social media outlets like Twitter
candidates and voters, and when the are popular for publishing
ensuing messages are accepted by contentious political conversations
these voters, they offer a powerful which fuel widespread polarization
form of endorsement. The result is and partisan animosity, as the
that voters‘ access to information debates at issue turn off more people
increases, leading to ―a revitalized than they attract. These negative
democracy, characterized by a more compliments are further proof that
active informed citizenry‖ (Levin, Twitter should be investigated to
45Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
determine its relevance to a nation with regard to how it contributed to
during election periods. vote-wiseness. The foregoing
Statement of the Problem assertions have been problematized
How to provide credible and into specific objectives and research
relevant online information to questions as stated below.
influence voting decisions is a hot Objectives of the Study
topic among scholars and political To determine the extent to which
observers of Nigeria‘s political candidates in Nigeria‘s 2015
space. Which platform should be presidential candidates utilized
deployed: Is it Twitter, Facebook, Twitter in their electioneering
WhatsApp or the other one, to campaigns to induce voter
stimulate voters‘ decision and participation.
participation toward a candidate? To ascertain the relationship
Voters need authentic between the political information
communication channels to access provided by Twitter during the
the information that could provide campaigns and citizens‘ voting
them with comparative narratives decision during the 2015
necessary to encourage partisan election.
considerations. This paper zeros in To ascertain voters‘ recall of
on Twitter and the way it shaped political information about
voters‘ decision in Nigeria‘s 2015 Nigeria‘s 2015 presidential
presidential election which had two candidates on Twitter and its
main candidates – the incumbent influence on voter behaviour.
Goodluck Jonathan of the PDP and
Research Questions
the main challenger - Mohammadu
Buhari of the APC. To what extent did 2015
presidential candidate in Nigeria
An effective political
utilize Twitter in their election
communication medium should be campaigns to induce voter
capable of providing information participation?
that can guarantee a well-informed
What is the relationship between
citizenry, competent to participate in
the relevance of political
governance (Sawant, 2000).
information provided by Twitter
Political decisions emerge from
during the 2015 presidential
credible and adequate information
election campaigns and decision
about policies, programmes and
making by voters?
activities which the electorate
What is the level of voters‘ recall
requires to vote wisely. The
of political information on
drawbacks of Twitter as asserted by
Twitter about presidential
Kopek and co-critics made it
imperative to study the platform
46Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
candidates and its influence on Literature Review
voter behaviour? Twitter Community
Significance of the Study Twitter, sometimes described as the
Social media is an evolving area of SMS of the Internet (D‘Monteis
study in communication, especially 2019), is basically a website
as it relates to political operated by an organization -
communication. We should be able Twitter Inc. A technology
to tell if the platform enhanced entrepreneur Jack Dorsey started the
democracy and disparaged it. The company in March 2006 and
2015 presidential election in Nigeria launched the platform in July of the
provided that opportunity to same year. Twitter offers social
determine if the political networking and microblogging
information Nigerians received services, enabling its users to send
through Twitter influenced their and read messages called tweets,
voting decisions. This is especially which are text-based posts of up to
timely as Nigeria has scheduled 140 characters, displayed on the
another presidential election for the user's profile page. Tweets are
first quarter of 2019. publicly visible by default, though
The study is beneficial to political senders can restrict message
campaigners, desirous of reaching a delivery to just their followers.
larger number of information Users may subscribe to or ―follow‖
seekers, outside the realms of the other users' tweets (Stone 2009). As
conventional media. It would a social network, Twitter operates
explain how Twitter can be the followership principle. When
extensively used to propagate you choose to follow another
needed information that can lead to Twitter user, the user's tweets
the expected change in attitude, appear in reverse chronological
opinions and political behaviour. order on your main Twitter page. It
The study explains the efficacy of allows users the ability to update
the Twitter as a veritable interactive their profile via text messaging or
communication tool that can by some apps meant for that
influence voter appreciation of purpose.
politics and political issues. The Twitter is regarded by many users as
research report shall also contribute the best social media platforms for
to emerging literature in political conveying political messages in
communication, particularly, as it bite-size pieces to an electorate with
relates to Twitter use in presidential an ever-decreasing attention span
campaigns. (Moore, 2015). Nigerians who were
at the forefront of Internet users in
47Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
Africa (Ayodeji, 2016; Okorie, Loto 24, 2015, a total of 2.6 million
& Omojola 2018; Okorie et al., tweets related to Nigeria‘s elections
2017) keyed into this platform to were recorded, either through hash
increase their voices and visibility in tags or handles.
the 2015 presidential election, held Mohammadu Buhari who only
in March 28, 2015. The key players joined Twitter in December 2014
in the 2015 presidential election had over 160,000 followers prior to
were - the Independent National the election, and was active on the
Election Commission (INEC), platform with tweets personally
Goodluck Johnathan, Mohammadu drafted by him and signed with his
Buhari and their respective parties initials (Moore, 2015). He operated
as well as the electorate - used on the following harsh tags;
Twitter visibly in the build-up to the #Thisisbuhari, #Febuhari,
election and during the election and #Iamready, #Ichoosebuhari,
2015. #march4buhari, #IchooseGMB,
The Independent Electoral #MBuhari, #GMB15. His election
Commission (INEC), a body in campaign kicked off with regional
charge of conducting elections in gatherings in each of the six geo-
Nigeria set up a Twitter handle political zones. These tags provided
account (and hash tags at the opportunity for people to follow
#nigeriadecides, #nigeriaelection him across Nigeria as he delivered
#2015INEC etc.) through which it the message of ―Change‖.
educated people on the voting Goodluck Jonathan also had hash
process, debunked rumours about tags like; #GEJWins, #Goodluck
the commission, and sent reports #gejnigera, #GEJ2015,
from polling booths. It was also #forwardnigeria,
used by both the political parties #continuity@pregoodluck,
and voters to communication #ichoosegej. However, Moore
election issues. Key activists and (2015) notes that Jonathan
influencers who were already abandoned his official Twitter
popular on Twitter leveraged their account set up in May 2011.
popularity among the socially Nevertheless, his media advisor who
connected voting population to was a robust Twitter user with a
inform and persuade voters to elect huge following served as Jonathan‘s
respective candidates, and most mouthpiece, pushing the President‘s
importantly do so peacefully message of ‗Continuity‘, keeping
(Moore, 2015). According to people updated about his political
Oluwatola ( 2 0 15 ) , in t he plans, and responding to campaign
b u i l d -u p t o t h e e l e c t i o n d a y issues.
- December 1, 2014 through March
48Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
Twitter and Presidential Campaign has been widely used in recent years
Effective communication is crucial to support electoral campaigning.
to politics. The ability to Twitter reinforces political
communicate has always been a messages and build online and
useful political skill and politicians offline support that help drive
use persuasive communication to interesting debates about any
canvass an issue or a cause. This is politician or political party. Twitter
particularly important in Nigeria can validly mirror the political
where unemployment, security, landscape offline and can be used to
terrorism, etc. (Morah & Omojola, predict election results to a certain
2011) are the main issues of extent (Stieglitz and Dang-Xuan
discussion in the public space that 2014). Yardi and Boyd (2010)
need to be clarified by political suggest that, in political context,
leaders. They use specific although the Twitter users are more
communication channels to reach a likely to interact with others who
particular target audience with a share the same views as they do in
pre-determined message to generate terms of retweeting, they are also
the knowledge that can influence actively engaged with those with
political behaviour of their whom they disagree. However,
audience. The message and target replies between like-minded
audience will determine, to a large individuals would strengthen group
extent, the most efficient identity, whereas replies between
communication medium to be dissimilar views could reinforce in-
deployed in influencing voters group and out-group affiliations.
(Ezeh, Chukwuma & Enwereuzo, Ahmed, Joidka and Cho (2016)
2015). assesses the use of Twitter in the
The emergence of the Internet as a 2014 Indian general elections,
medium of mass communication has which was the first time the country
elicited competition among the used social media for electioneering
conventional media, like radio, campaigns. The findings suggest
television, newspaper and magazine that the new-and-upcoming parties
among others (Ezeh, Chukwuma & used Twitter for self-promotion and
Okanume, 2017) as noted earlier. media validation, while established
The place of the social media to parties used the platform to
rally political support is no longer in supplement their offline strategies.
doubt. To advance the conversation The authors also observe that the
and mobilize political support, winning party‘s electoral success
social media have become a critical was significantly associated with
political tool for campaign planners. their use of Twitter for engaging
The microblogging service Twitter, voters.
49Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
Ifukor (2010) examines the political discourse. Analyzing how
linguistic construction of textual Donald Trump used the power of
messages in the use of blogs and Twitter to defeat his closest rivalry,
Twitter in the Nigerian 2007 Hillary Clinton in the 2016
electoral cycle comprising the April Presidential election in America,
2007 general elections and rerun Kpako, (2016) asserts that Trump
elections in April, May, and August was also particularly adept at using
2009. A qualitative approach of simple language to share his
discourse analysis is used to present unfiltered views on Twitter in a way
a variety of discursive acts that that matched his campaign
blogging and microblogging branding. When you read a tweet by
afforded social media users during Donald Trump you could almost
the electoral cycle. The data were hear Donald Trump's voice, whereas
culled from 245 blog posts and 923 if you were reading tweets by
tweets. The thesis of the study is Hillary Clinton from her Twitter
that citizens‘ access to social media account you could obviously see
electronically empowers electorates that it was coming from campaign
to be actively involved in staffers. You have a sense that every
democratic governance. Electronic single tweet came from Donald
empowerment is a direct result of Trump to some extent and this had a
access to social media (and mobile very persuasive value to the public.
telephony) by more citizens who The expressed view about Donald
constitute the electorate. This Trump‘s use of Twitter in 2016
encourages more public discussions election shows that self-
about politics and makes the representation matters in political
democratic process more dynamic communication via Twitter.
than in the pre—social media era. Essoungou, (2011) notes that one of
An analysis of the data shows that the most striking novelties of the
there is a dialectical relationship 2011 presidential election in
between social media discourse and Cameroon was the impressive
the process of political number of candidates who
empowerment. incorporated social media into their
Twitter is an important platform for campaign strategies, the meager five
political expression that has helped per cent Internet penetration in that
people find their voices. The leading country as of then notwithstanding.
presidential candidate for America‘s The 2015 Nigeria‘s presidential
presidency used Twitter to energize election also featured this new trend
their supporters and draw citizens in political campaigns as candidates
who wouldn‘t have followed upgraded their message delivery
with the new communication tools
50Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
that Twitter offered. The popularity money spent, race characteristics
of Twitter was such that it presented and so forth (Shannon, McGregor &
considerable hope for a more Logan 2017). Stieglitz and Dang-
informed and active citizenry with Xuan‘s (2014 cited in Larsson and
the attendant conducive media Moe, 2011) study on Twitter use
environment for candidates to during the 2011 Swedish general
promote themselves, articulate their election found that Twitter served as
positions, and interact with voters in a channel for disseminating political
fundamentally different ways unlike contents and not for political dialog.
what obtained in the previous Stoddart (2013) suggests that the
elections. brevity of the 140-character tweet
Ayodeji, (2016), examines how limit has meant that Twitter is being
Nigerian youth formed socio- used by politicians for little more
political networks on social media than broadcasting sound bites. He
platforms of Facebook and Twitter, notes that rather than Twitter
and how these media influenced the attracting more potential voters, it
2015 general elections. The findings seemed to simply report what had
show that not all followers of already been decided. Rather than
political parties and politicians on using Twitter to establish a two-way
Facebook and Twitter were their dialogue which bypasses the media
supporters. Moreover, the platforms and provides a direct connection
raised the consciousness of Nigerian with citizens, Twitter merely
youth during the 2015 elections in reinforced the existing old media
the area of constructive and model of one-way communication
destructive arguments directly with and sound bites.
politicians, which gave birth to new Graham et al. (2013) present a study
socio-political movements of on political candidates‘ behaviour
followers and antagonists. The on Twitter during the 2010 UK
results also show that youth General Election campaign,
networks helped to shape the 2015 focusing on four aspects of tweets:
elections in terms of exposing and type, interaction, function and topic.
preventing insecurity and fraud. The study insists that although there
Conversely, other studies (Larsson were a group of candidates who
and Moe, 2011; Stoddart, 2013; used Twitter to interact with voters
Shannon, McGregor & Logan 2017) by, mobilizing, helping and
suggest that Twitter use has limited consulting them, thus tapping into
power to engage voters and predict the potential that Twitter offers for
electoral outcomes and that its usage facilitating a closer relationship with
and the outcome of that usage may citizens, the politicians mainly used
be predicted by other factors such as it as a unidirectional form of
51Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
communication. This corroborates come from one central source as in
with (Grant, Moon & Grant 2010) the conventional media, but from
findings that Twitter is used more multiplicity of sources - all trying to
for broadcasting than conversing in influence the opinion of one another
Australia. This, Stoddart (2013), especially that of those in position
believes is because politicians are of authority.
often not confident enough to use Political participation does not take
social media in an engaging way, place in a vacuum but within a
perhaps because of fear of losing public realm (Polat 2007).
message control. Deliberative democratic theory
Theoretical Framework gives political organizations an
This study is predicated on the important role in the public sphere.
Public Sphere Theory (Habermas, Habermas (1989) defines the public
1962). The core of this theory is that sphere as a network for
political action is steered by the communicating information and
public sphere, and that the only points of view about the common
legitimate governments are those good. According to Calhoun (1992),
that listen to the public sphere. a genuine public sphere should have
Habermas refers notionally to his the following common features:
public sphere as a space that The focus of the discussion in
provides more or less autonomous the public sphere is on issues of
and open arena or forum for public common concern to the Public.
debate. He states that the public It is inclusive in principle and
sphere is like an intermediary should be equally accessible to
system of communication between all who may be interested in
formally organized, and informal those issues or may be
face to face, deliberations in arenas influenced by those issues.
at both the top and bottom of the The proceeding of this
political system (Habermas, 2006). communicative action is based
To him this type of deliberation is on rational and critical
the hallmark of the liberal or deliberation.
participatory democracy. Public The deliberation itself is subject
sphere as he explains further, is to normative standard of
―rooted in networks for wild flow of evaluation, and should be solely
messages – news, reports, judged on the validity and
commentaries, talks, scenes and rationality of the
images, and shows and movies with communication, rather than on
an informative, polemical, the identity of the speaker or the
educational or entertaining content‖ decision from an arbiter. This is
(p. 415). These contents do not
52Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
reiterated by Omojola (2009; the form of digital music
2011). distribution); a greater freedom of
McQuail (2005) observes that the choice, less constrained by
actors in this sphere of deliberation geography; the capacity to
are politicians and political parties, disseminate, debate and deliberate
lobbyists, pressure groups or actors upon issues and to challenge
of civil society. This deliberation professional and official positions;
has impact on the decision-making and ability to circulate information,
process in national legislatures and ideas, and debate freely as well as
in other political institutions as there the opportunity for eliciting political
is for the learning effects of will (Dahlgren 2005; Szabó 2007).
ruminating political conversations Twitter is a classic example in this
among citizens in everyday life. regard and the centre of the focus of
―The media, when organized in an this study.
appropriate way, especially when Method
open, free and diverse, can be A total of 200 respondents from a
considered one of the most population of 12,123 academic staff
important intermediary institutions that worked in the nine universities
of the civil society‖ (McQuail, (selected out of 18 of such) in
2005, p. 181). But unlike the mass southeast geopolitical zone of
media that manipulate the people Nigeria, completed the
rather than help them form opinions questionnaire. The academia was
in a rational way, access to preferred as respondents because
Habermas‘ space is free and research has shown that they use the
freedoms of assembly, association Internet very well and spend more
and expression are guaranteed. This time online especially with regard to
is because of the gatekeeping the use of Twitter in Nigeria.
process which makes the media The multistage sampling procedure
selective about the people and issues was adopted in this study. The first
that pass through their ‗gate‘. stage involved the selection of
A number of scholars have universities. The researchers made a
identified the possibilities created list of the universities in each of the
by the Internet and digital media three categories (private, state and
technologies to develop a virtual federal) in the five states in souteast
public sphere for greater horizontal zone of Nigeria. Two universities
or peer-to-peer communication; an were randomly selected from each
unrestricted medium for the type. Of the six selected
exchange of information, easy universities, two were privately
access to cultural products (e.g. in owned; two were state universities
53Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
while the other two were federal were valid for analysis. We
universities. observed prima facie that the return
The second stage of the sampling rate could have been higher but for
involved the selection of the the issues respondents had with
colleges in the marked institutions. recalling their experience on
We made a list of all the colleges of Twitter.
which two were selected from each Results
of the nominated university using General Twitter use for political
the simple random method. The participation and voting behaviour
third stage involved the selection of The study sought to know the
the two departments from each percentage of the respondents that
college also using the simple had access to Internet for online
random method. This amounted to communication as a prerequisite for
12 departments selected from the 12 the use of Twitter in political
colleges that emerged from the six communication. Table 1 below
universities. Of the 200 copies of presents the percentage
the questionnaire distributed, 171
Table 1: Respondents’ Access to Twitter
n=171 Internet for on-line Access to Twitter
communication account
Yes 98.4% 48.7%
No 1.6% 52.3%
Table 2: Respondent’s Extent of Use of Twitter
n=171 Extent of tweeting
Frequently 13.7%
Not too often 61.2%
When necessary 14.1%
Not at all 11.0%
54Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
Table 3: Respondents’ extent of following tweets of presidential
candidates during the 2015 presidential campaign
n=171 Following the tweet of
presidential candidate
Regularly 5.5%
Moderately 6.3%
Not sure 74.4%
Not at all 13.7%
Table 3 shows the extent to which the 2015 presidential election
the respondents followed the campaign.
presidential candidates‘ tweets, Presidential candidates’ use of
during the 2015 presidential social media
campaign. The result suggests that Many scholars assert that the
most respondents did not follow the Internet is a significant component
presidential candidates on Twitter as of the sequence that enables a
74.4 percent of the respondents were candidate win a presidential election
not sure of the extent of which they (May Joyce, 2010; Morgan-
followed the presidential candidates Besecker, 2011). The study put this
on Twitter. Another 11.8 percent assertion to the test with regard to
moderately followed the presidential the use of Twitter to solicit votes by
candidates while 13.7 percent of the Messrs Jonathan and Buhari, the
respondents did not follow the tweet two leading candidates during the
of any presidential candidate during 2015 presidential election.
Table 4: Use of Twitter by Jonathan and Buhari according to respondents
None of
Jonathan Buhari Them Others
Candidates that use Twitter more
24.3% 7.8% 52.5% 15.3%
extensively
Candidates that appeal to
38.4% 2.4% 41.6.8% 6.7%
respondents contact with Twitter
Table 4 shows the two leading However, majority of the
presidential candidates used Twitter respondents believed that neither
more extensively than others. Some Goodluck Jonathan nor
24.3 percent of the respondents Muhammadu Buhari extensively
claimed that Goodluck Jonathan used the social media, while 15.3
used the social media more than percent of the respondents believed
Muhammadu Buhari at 7.8 percent. that some political candidates not
55Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
mentioned on the questionnaire used study sought to find out other
the social media more extensively reasons that might have persuaded
during the said campaign. However, respondents to vote in the 2015
Goodluck Jonathan appealed more presidential election. Table 4
to them through Twitter than presents he figures.
Mohammadu Buhari. Next, the
Table 4: Reasons that Influenced Vote
n=171 %
Believable information 9.8
Satisfies my religious
3.9
preference
Likeable personality 48.6
Credible information 31.0
None 6.7
Total 100.0
Table 5: Respondents’ opinion measurement on social media use in political
campaign and participation
n=171 Strongly Strongly
disagree Disagree Not sure Agree agree
Candidates use Twitter to
3.5% 5.1% 45.9% 13.3%
reach some voters 32.2%
Candidates use of social
media to persuade voters to 2.0% 3.1% 34.1% 45.5% 15.3%
participate in election
Social media provided
political information that 36.9%
.4% 2.4% 40.0% 20.4%
persuaded voter-
participation
Social media provided an
interaction platform for 16.9% 7.5% 30.2% 40.0% 17.3%
chatting with candidates
Voting decision influenced
by the interaction from 6.7% 16.9% 41.6% 24.7% 10.2%
social media network
56The Table 5 above implies that more persuasive political information to
respondents believed that Twitter influence voter behaviour. It means
was used by the presidential that more persons and in fact,
candidates in the 2015 presidential majority of the respondents, agreed
elections in Nigeria, to reach some that the social media provided an
voters. Again, majority of the interactive platform through which
respondents at 60.8 person agreed voters were able to chat with the
that candidates used Twitter to urge presidential candidates during the
some voters to participate in 2015 presidential election. It shows
election; and nearly two-thirds of also that social media interactions
the respondents believed that the influenced the voting decision of
social media platform provided about one-third of the respondents.
Table 6: Provision of Political Information by Twitter and Voter Decision Making
n=171 Twitter Twitter Interaction
provided provided from
political political Twitter Twitter
information information influenced largely
that persuaded that persuaded your influenced
voter- voter- voting voting
participation participation decision behaviour
Social media
provided political .805** .326** .401**
1.000
information that
persuaded voter- .000 .000 .000
participation
Social media
provided political .805** .349** .368**
information that 1.000
persuaded voter- .000 .000 .000
participation
Interaction from
.326** .349** .524**
Twitter influenced
1.000
your decision
.000 .000 .000
making
**
Twitter largely .401 .368** .524 **
influenced voting 1.000
behaviour .000 .000 .000
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The result on Table 6 shows that information but had no significant
Twitter provided relevant political relationship with voter decision
57making during the 2015 presidential and participation in the election. The
election. The insignificant value of result therefore, confirmed political
the correlation testified the assertion information provided by the social
from the obtained results. Table 5 networks during the campaigns did
was also used to substantiate that not influence decision making by
Twitter provided political voters during the 2015 presidential
information to voters, capable of election.
influencing their vote decision to Recall of content of political
participate in the election. This view information shared on Twitter
was substantiated by the calculated Recall capability frees content from
mean value of 3.75 which is greater becoming transient and ephemeral,
than the decision point value of 3.0. since user of the media remembers
However, the insignificant value of them and crave repeated access to
0.000 obtained in Table 6 against such communication channels that
the mean value of 0.0 showed the provide the said content. Table 7
low level of those exposed to such sheds light on this.
political information and the
expected influence on voter-interest
Table 7: Content recall on social media as influencing voter behavior
Recall content of political information
posted in the social media network
Count
Expected
Count Yes Not sure Faintly NO Total
Twitter largely Strongly
influenced agree 2.1 6.5 4.8 19.7 33.0
voting behaviour
Agree
5.4 16.9 12.5 51.3 86.0
Not sure
6.3 19.8 14.7 60.2 101.0
Disagree
1.8 5.7 4.2 17.3 29.0
Strongly
disagree .4 1.2 .9 3.6 6.0
Total
16.0 50.0 37.0 152.0 255.0
58Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 88.603a 12 .000
Likelihood Ratio 84.948 12 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 22.307 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 255
The result above shows that there is appreciable number of respondents
no relationship between any (98.4%) who had access to Internet,
likelihood that the voter behaviour but low use of Internet to access
was recalled. At best, the experience Twitter (48.7%) for online
was faintly recalled. It means, in a communication was recorded. it is
nutshell, that the respondents did interesting to know that Internet
not recall their use of Twitter as accessibility is no longer a major
medium that influenced their voting problem to Nigerian academics as
decision in the 2015 presidential many of them now have access to
election in Nigeria. The result the Internet, though their extent of
therefore accepted the null utilization of Twitter is still very
hypothesis and rejected hypothesis low as most of them are not regular
three in respect of the third research tweeters
question. None of the presidential candidates
Discussion of findings under study used Twitter
The first objective of the study was extensively to court voters.
to investigate the extent 2015 However, Jonathan appealed more
presidential candidate in Nigeria to 38.4% of those who accessed the
utilized Twitter in their election Twitter platforms compared to
campaigns to induce voter Buhari‘s 2.4%. The use of Twitter
participation. It is understandable by the two candidates facilitated
that the choice of which platforms democratic participation in the
used for e-campaigning is political process through
determined by how and where communication that could lead to
citizens spend time on the internet. voter decision during the election.
The study therefore sought to know The public sphere theory applies to
the percentage of the respondents this finding since the political
that had access to Internet for online candidates partook of the public
communication as a prerequisite for sphere through chatting with Twitter
the use of Twitter in political users. Through those chats ideas
communication. There was an were shared as part of the
59Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
communication process. The social on voter-interest and participation in
media platform of Twitter, the election.
therefore, enabled citizens to gain Recall that likeability of the
knowledge of political issues of candidates is the major factor that
public significance. influenced the decisions of the
The opinions of the respondents respondents as voters according to
were also surveyed to determine if the finding. This may explain
the use of Twitter during the 2015 succinctly why voters in South-east
presidential electioneering campaign geo-political zone in Nigeria voted
helped them obtain the needed Jonathan (Moore, 2015) in spite of
information that induced their the record showing that Buhari also
participation and decision to vote in used Twitter appreciably as an
the election. It was found that electioneering campaign medium.
majority of the respondents agreed The study also determined if the
that Twitter provided an interactive respondents recalled the use of the
platform through which voters were Twitter for the assessment of the
able to chat with the presidential presidential candidates through the
candidates at the 2015 presidential information disseminated to
election. The individual needs and influence voting decision. The
preferences were freely expressed outcome was that the respondents‘
and published as opinions through rate of recall of the posted
chats which was a clear electioneering information was low.
demonstration of freedom of This translated to low voter
assembly and association and participation and insignificant
freedom to express and publish their influence on voting decision and
opinion, according to Habermas election results.
(1962). There is an issue of note here. The
Caution is imperative at this point time lapse prior to this 2017 study -
with regard to the foregoing finding. nearly two years – is a critical factor
Though Twitter platform users had in the recall sequence and a vital
the freedom to associate with the component of the outcome of this
presidential candidates, this usage investigation. This shows time as an
did not influence them entirely to intervening variable in studies that
participate in 2015 election. The relate to recall. The result accepted
insignificant value of 0.000 obtained the null hypothesis that voters did
in Table 5 against the mean value of not recall their use of Twitter as an
0.0 showed the low level of those influence on voting decision – an
exposed to the political information acceptance shaped by the passage of
and the influence of that exposure time.
60Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
Conclusion be trivialized as a chat medium but
Academic staff, as prospective be used as medium for transmitting
voters, used the Internet extensively political issues of public concern.
for online communication but they Politicians should maximize the
were no regular tweeters. The 2015 benefits of Twitter as a political
presidential candidates did not use channel to improve their
Twitter extensively and therefore relationships with voters as part of
did not appeal to the voters. Though the overall commitment to
Twitter provided an interactive revitalizing democracy and civil
platform on which voters could chat engagement. When usage is
with the presidential candidates in frequent - regular, engaging and
the build up to the election it did not consistent in the presentation of
significantly influence voters‘ persuasive political information -
decision. The effectiveness of voter participation can be assured.
Twitter as a platform for voter There is need, therefore, to
engagement is visible but its use and determine how best to use Twitter
the way its content is recalled by platform for effective inducement of
users remains issues of note. voter participation in elections. It
Recommendations also important for researchers to
Twitter should be used to present know that time is a critical element
public service agenda in order to of posteriority in research.
provoke civic vitality. It should not
References campaign tool; online
Ayodeji A. A. (2016). Youth community fertile ground for
Networks on Facebook And reaching younger voters.
Twitter During The 2015 Ascribe Higher Education
General Elections in Nigeria. News Service. pNA.
Journal of African Elections, Bushey, C. (2010). All a Twitter:
5(2), 28-49. experts and IREM members
BBC News (2011, May, 25). discuss the opportunities and
Twitter's European boss pitfalls of social media
Tony Wang gives legal networking. Journal of
warning. News Technology. Property Management,
Accessed from 75(4), 24-41
http://www.bbc.co.uk Calhoun C. (ed) (1992). Habermas
Bentley College (2006, Oct. 18). and the Public Sphere.
Bentley college professors Cambridge: MIT press.
study 'Facebook' as 2006
61Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
Dahlgren, P. (2005) The Internet, Graham, T., Broersma, M.,
public spheres, and political Hazelhoff, K. and Van‘t
communication: dispersion Haar, G. (2013). Between
and deliberation Political broadcasting political
Communication, 22(2), 147- messages and interacting
162. with voters: The use of
D‘Monte, L. (2009 April 29). swine Twitter during the 2010 UK
flu‘s tweet tweet causes general election campaign.
online flutter. Business Journal of Information,
Standard. Accessed from Communication & Society,
www.business-standard.com. 16(5), 692-716.
Essoungou, A. (2011 August) Social Grant, W., Moon, B. and Grant J.
media boosts Nigeria‘s polls: (2010), Digital dialogue?
Elections redefined, as Australian politicians' use of
candidates and voters go the social network tool
online. African Renewal Twitter. Australian Journal
Online. Accessed from of Political Science, 45(4),
http://www.un.org/africarene 579-604.
wal/magazine. Habermas, J. (1962). The structural
Ezeh, N. C., Chukwuma N. A. and transformation of the public
Okanume, O. B. (2017) sphere: An inquiry into a
Internet and women self- category of bourgeois
empowerment: opportunities, society. Cambridge
strategies, and challenges. Massachusetts: The MIT
International Journal of Press.
Social Sciences and Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of
Humanities Review. 17(1) communicative action:
203-212. Reason and the
Ezeh, N. C and Enwereuzo, N. V. rationalization of society.
(2016). Internet Boston: Beacon Press.
mediatization: New Habermas, J. (1989). The structural
opportunity for women in transformation of the public
politics? in J. Wilson and sphere. Cambridge: MIT
Gapsiso, N. (eds) Press.
Overcoming Gender Habermas, J. (2006). Political
Inequalities through communication in media
Technology Integration. society: Does democracy still
Pennsylvania (USA): IGI enjoy an epistemic
Global, pp.211-224. dimension? The impact of
normative theory on
62Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
empirical research. rewritten political rules.
Communication Theory. Times Leader. pNA.
16(4), 411-506. Nwanna O.C. (1981). Research
Ifukor, P. (2010). ―Elections‖ or Methods in Education.
―selections‖? Blogging and Lagos: Wisdom press.
Twittering the Nigerian 2007 O l a gu nj u L . ( 2 00 9 ) . Politics of
general elections. Sage new media: a look at the
Journals. Accessed from Internet and mobile
www.sagepub.com. telephone as democratic
Kapko, M. (2016, Nov 3) Twitter's tools in Nigeria. Paper
impact on 2016 presidential presented at Iree‘s ICT week
election is unmistakable. of State Polytechnic on
CIO Accessed from Tuesday, 8th December,
https://www.cio.com/article/ Oluwatola, T. ( 2 01 5 , M a r c h ,
3137513. 2 7 ) Nigeria‘s election: Who
Levin, Y. (2002). Politics after the is winning the Twitter war?
Internet. Public Interest, Premium Times. Accessed
16(1), 80. from
McQuail, D. (2005). Mass https://www.premiumtimesn
Communication Theory (5th g.com/features-and-
edition). London: Sage interviews/179304-
Publications Ltd. Okorie, N., Loto, G. & Omojola, O.
Moore, C. (2015, April 03,). Inside (2018). Blogging, civic
Nigeria‘s Twitter election. engagement, and coverage of
PRWEEK. Accessed from political conflict in Nigeria:
https://www.prweek.com/arti A study of nairaland.com.
cle/1341562/inside-nigerias- Kasetsart Journal of Social
Twitter-election. Sciences, 39(2), 291-298
Morah, N.D and Omojola, O. (open access:
(2011). Nigeria, Media and https://www.sciencedirect.co
Economic Effects of m/science/article/pii/S24523
Terrorism. In O. Omojola 15118301607).
(ed), Communication Aspects Okorie, N., Oyedepo, T., Usaini, S.
of Conflicts and Terrorism: and Omojola O. (2017).
A Focus on Nigeria and Global news coverage on
Some Multi-ethnic Societies. victimization and challenges
Lagos: Corel Serve of Roma migrants from
Publishing, pp. 139-159. Romania: An experiential
Morgan-Besecker, T. (2011, April, study. 3rd International
24). Social media have Conference on Creative
63Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
Education (ICCE presidential election? The
2017) Location: Kuala online frontier. American
Lumpur, Malaysia. March Journalism Review, 29(1),
03-04, 2017, 13, pp. 224- 50-65.
230. Polat, R. (2007). Can the Internet
Omojola, O. (2009). English- increase political
oriented ICTs and ethnic participation? Political
language survival strategies Communication Report.
in Africa. Global Media Accessed from
Journal 3(1), 33-45. www.jour.unr.edu/pcr/1702.
Omojola, O. (2011). When Media Sawant Justice (2000) Media and
Exist as if they Don‘t, democracy: A global view.
International Journal of Report of Workshop on
Social Sciences and Media and Democracy.
Humanities Review [Ebonyi Abuja: Nigeria Press
State University],2 (5), 77- Council.
83. Shannon C., McGregor R. & Logan,
Oresanya, T., Ben-Enukora, C., M. (2017), Twitter as a tool
Omojola, O., Oyero, O. and for and object of political
Amodu, L. (2017). Health and electoral activity:
communication and Considering electoral context
awareness of aluminium- and variance among actors.
waste disposal effects among Journal of Information
Ogun state housing Technology and Politics,
corporation residents. 4th 14(2), 154-167.
International Conference on Szabó, A. (2007), The Impact of the
Education, Social Sciences Internet on the Public Sphere
and Humanities and on the Culture Industry:
(SOCIOINT). Dubai, United A study of blogs, social news
Arab Emirates. July 10-12, sites and discussion forums.
2017, pp. 1375-1381. A Master‘s Thesis submitted
Owen, D. and Davis, R. (2008). to the Faculty of Humanities,
Presidential communication University of Vaasa.
in the internet era. Stieglitz, S. and Dang-Xuan, L.
symposium: The president (2014). Social media and
and the press. Presidential political communication - A
Studies Quarterly, 38 (14), social media analytics
658-671. framework. Social Network
Palser B. (2007) Politics: How will Analysis and Mining.
the internet influence the Accessed from
64Nkiru Comfort Ezeh & Augustine Godwin Mboso CJOC (2018) 5(2) 44-65
https://www.researchgate.net Stone, B. (2009, October 30).
/publication/235632721. There's a list for that.
Stoddart, A. (2013), Suggests Accessed from
politicians should use www.blog.Twitter.com.
Twitter to engage more, and Yardi S, Boyd D (2010). Dynamic
broadcast less Accessed from debates: an analysis of group
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/54554 polarization over time on
/1/Ali_Stoddart_democratica Twitter. Bulletin of Science,
udit.com- Technology & Sociology
20(1), 1–8.
65You can also read
