Political communication

Political communication has existed since antiquity. During this era it was common for rulers to use symbols and monuments to communicate power and authority to the masses. In ancient Greece, public speeches such as those delivered by Pericles in Athens, played a crucial role in shaping political discourse and rallying public support for war efforts.{{cite journal | doi=10.1080/15358590903370233 | title=History of Political Communication | date=2010 | last1=Miller | first1=Jerry L. | last2=McKerrow | first2=Raymie E. | journal=Review of Communication | volume=10 | pages=61–74 }}

During the era of the Roman Empire, political communication took on a more sophisticated form with the use of propaganda, rhetoric, and public spectacles in order to try and influence public opinion.Political communication - scholar commons. (n.d.). https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1100&context=comm Figures famed for their political communication skills include Cicero.

After the creation of the print media with the dawn of the modern printing press in modern industrial Britain, this led to the ability to create modern mass media in the 20th century, which transformed political communication, giving rise to new forms of propaganda, advertising, and public relations.{{Cite book |last=S. Herman |first=Edward (and Chomsky, Noam) |title=Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media |publisher=New York Pantheon Books |isbn=0-375-71449-9 |edition=3rd |location=New York |publication-date=1988 |pages=3–4 |language=English}} Political leaders such as Winston Churchill and Franklin. D. Roosevelt utilized radio broadcasts to reach millions of listeners during times of crisis and war. Edward S. Herman notes that the expensive nature of the printing press meant that early on in the technology's existence, labour and co-operative organisations were easily priced out of the press media market due to capital constraints, meaning that corporations obtained an early grip on the market. Herman therefore argues that this meant early on in the mass media of Britain, corporate right-wing voices would self-select editors to run their newspapers, stopping organised working class and left-wing voices from participating in the mass media market.

During the 1990s and the early 2000s political spin had become common place as a form of political communication, with these political communicators known as spin doctors . For example governments like Tony Blair's in The United Kingdom and George W. Bush were known for this.{{Cite news |last=Greenberg |first=David |date=September 24, 2006 |title=Spin Doctors |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/entertainment/books/2006/09/24/spin-doctors-span-classbankheada-columnist-accuses-the-bush-administration-of-replacing-facts-with-public-relations-gambitsspan/5689eebc-9c7d-469a-bf69-bdea1b679d2a/ |access-date=April 14, 2024 |newspaper=The Washington Post}} Tony Blair's Press Secretary Alistair Campbell, who was previously a journalist,{{Cite news |last=Barrett |first=Patrick |date=2003-06-25 |title=Campbell lambasts BBC over Iraq 'lies' |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2003/jun/25/politicsandthemedia.iraqandthemedia |access-date=2024-04-14 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}} had the job of spinning bad situations that showed the British government in a bad light, by using press briefings with the British media.{{Cite news |last=White |first=Michael |last2= |first2= |date=2000-03-15 |title=Inside story of a Campbell briefing |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2000/mar/15/uk.labour |access-date=2024-04-14 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}} Campbell became an influential and controversial addition to the political communication toolkit of Tony Blair's Labour government in the United Kingdom. This practice became standard in subsequent governments in Western countries like the United Kingdom{{Cite web |date=2016-02-19 |title=Gordon Brown's former spin doctor is set for a surprise return to frontline politics |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/damian-mcbride-former-gordon-brown-spin-doctor-set-for-surprise-return-to-frontline-politics-a6884941.html |access-date=2024-04-14 |website=The Independent |language=en}} and the United States, with dedicated 'briefing rooms' whereby members of government address and communicate with the countries' press, which have came to be known as spin rooms.

Today, due to the diversification of media during the digital age, political communication now also includes online platforms like social media, free online news channels on services like YouTube, X (previously Twitter), Meta platforms and online News Websites. This has changed how the public and voters receive their political news and information. For example Barack Obama's presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012 are notable for mobilizing supporters, as they helped innovate the use of social media to engage voters and raise funds.Source/ linked example required. Volodymyr Zelenskyy's successful 2019 Presidential Campaign also featured heavy usage of social media posts.{{Cite news |last=Varshalomidze |first=Tamila |date=16 April 2019 |title=Ukraine media demands access to runoff frontrunner Zelensky |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/4/16/ukraine-media-demands-access-to-runoff-frontrunner-zelenskyy |work=Al Jazeera}}

Today, Political communication continues to evolve quickly, as new technologies such as AI and big data analytics have begun to reshape how campaigns can target and persuade voters. However, this has led to large concerns regarding misinformation, echo chambers, and online polarization.{{cite book | url=https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238174 | doi=10.1515/9783110238174 | title=Political Communication | date=2014 | isbn=978-3-11-023816-7 | editor-last1=Reinemann | editor-first1=Carsten }} Recent election manipulation events like the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal have now become an issue.{{Cite news |last=Wolffe |first=Richard |date=2018-03-21 |title=The evil genius of Cambridge Analytica was to exploit those we trust most |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/21/cambridge-analytica-facebook-exploited-trust |access-date=2024-09-13 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}} The company was found to have assisted Donald Trump's election campaign by unethically mining user's Facebook data, exemplifying increased levels of distrust of corporate and political institutions by the public.{{Cite web |date=2018-04-18 |title=Zuckerberg's apology tour has not done much to regain user trust |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/trust-facebook-has-dropped-51-percent-cambridge-analytica-scandal-n867011 |access-date=2025-01-13 |website=NBC News |language=en}}

Darren G. Lilleker states that key concepts include:Lilleker, D. G. (2006). Key concepts in political communication. Sage.

• Aestheticization
• Agenda-Setting
• Professionalization
• Consumerization
• Dealignment
• Dumbing Down
• Emotionalization
• Framing
• Globalization
• Hegemonic Model of Communications
• Manufactured Consent
• Populism
• Propaganda
• Pseudo-events
• Rhetoric
• Segmentation

Brian McNair states that key areas of study include:{{Cite book |last=McNair |first=Brian |url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781317611721 |title=AN Introduction to Political Communication: Sixth Edition |date=2017-07-06 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-315-75029-3 |edition=6 |language=en |doi=10.4324/9781315750293}}

• Mediation
• Democracy and the media
• Political media
• The media as a political actor
• Political party communications
• The politics of advertising
• Political public relations (PR)
• Political pressure groups and publicity
• Political communication in relation to globalization
• Public opinion and persuasion

Robert E. Denton and Gary C. Woodward, define political communication as concerning the modes and intentions of message senders when attempting to influence the political environment.{{Reference needed|date=January 2025}} This includes public discussion (e.g. political speeches, news media coverage, and ordinary citizens' talk) that considers who has authority to sanction the allocation of public resources, who has authority to make decisions, as well as social meaning like what makes someone American.

"...the crucial factor that makes communication 'political' is not the source of a message, but its content and purpose."{{Reference needed|date=January 2025}}

Political communication has long used political persuasion, which is a key subfield for rhetoric studies. Political figures understand the role of the media in gaining the acceptance of voters.{{Citation |last=Perloff |first=Richard M. |title=The SAGE Handbook of Persuasion: Developments in Theory and Practice |date=2012 |pages=258–277 |url=https://sk.sagepub.com/reference/hdbk_persuasion2ed/n16.xml |access-date=2023-05-09 |edition=2 |place=Thousand Oaks |publisher=SAGE Publications, Inc. |doi=10.4135/9781452218410 |isbn=9781412983136|url-access=subscription }} For example, political communication delivered through social media tends to be accompanied by social interaction and public opinion.{{Cite journal |last1=Gil de Zúñiga |first1=Homero |last2=Barnidge |first2=Matthew |last3=Diehl |first3=Trevor |date=2018-11-15 |title=Political persuasion on social media: A moderated moderation model of political discussion disagreement and civil reasoning |journal=The Information Society |volume=34 |issue=5 |pages=302–315 |doi=10.1080/01972243.2018.1497743 |issn=0197-2243 |s2cid=59248808 |doi-access=free}}

In political communication, rhetorical strategies such as logos, ethos, and pathos are commonly used to persuade audiences.{{Cite journal |last=Mshvenieradze |first=Tamar |date=2013-11-01 |title=Logos Ethos and Pathos in Political Discourse |url=http://www.academypublication.com/issues/past/tpls/vol03/11/01.pdf |journal=Theory and Practice in Language Studies |volume=3 |issue=11 |doi=10.4304/tpls.3.11.1939-1945 |issn=1799-2591}} Techniques include metaphors, narratives, and strategic discourse. These contribute to shaping public perception and opinion.{{Cite book |url=https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/51639 |title=The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology |date=2023-09-18 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-754130-2 |editor-last=Huddy |editor-first=Leonie |language=en |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197541302.001.0001 |editor-last2=Sears |editor-first2=David O. |editor-last3=Levy |editor-first3=Jack S. |editor-last4=Jerit |editor-first4=Jennifer}} These rhetorical techniques contribute to framing, a process that determines how political issues are presented and understood. Through generic framing in the media, political rhetoric can emphasize conflict (contestation), political competition (strategic-game/horse-race), personal stories(human interest), economic consequences, or moral justifications.{{Cite journal |last=Valenzuela |first=Sebastián |last2=Piña |first2=Martina |last3=Ramírez |first3=Josefina |date=2017-10-01 |title=Behavioral Effects of Framing on Social Media Users: How Conflict, Economic, Human Interest, and Morality Frames Drive News Sharing |url=https://academic.oup.com/joc/article-abstract/67/5/803/4642206?redirectedFrom=fulltext |journal=Journal of Communication |volume=67 |issue=5 |pages=803–826 |doi=10.1111/jcom.12325 |issn=0021-9916|url-access=subscription }} These choices shape how the public interprets political events and policies, reinforcing certain viewpoints while downplaying others.

The rhetorical presidency highlights how persuasion and public communication have evolved, particularly through presidential speeches. Originally, directed at Congress, the State of the Union address became a direct appeal to the public, with Franklin Roosevelt leveraging radio and television to transform into a national event. This shift, alongside the increasing use of inclusive language, underscores the growing role of rhetoric in shaping public opinion.{{Cite journal |last=Murphy |first=Chad |date=2008 |title=The Evolution of the Modern Rhetorical Presidency: A Critical Response |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2008.02641.x |journal=Presidential Studies Quarterly |language=en |volume=38 |issue=2 |pages=300–307 |doi=10.1111/j.1741-5705.2008.02641.x |issn=1741-5705|url-access=subscription }} Barack Obama exemplified this modern approach by using rhetorical devices like parallelism, repetition, and metaphor to create emotional resonance, further cementing the presidency as a platform for persuasion.{{cn|date=March 2025}}

Strategic communications concern organisational and group communications designed to further their goals. David L. Swanson and Dan Nimmo define political communication in relation to strategic communications as "the strategic use of communication to influence public knowledge, beliefs, and action on political matters."Reference needed. They emphasize this strategic nature of political communication by highlighting the role of persuasion in political discourse. Brian McNair provides a similar definition when he writes that political communication is "purposeful communication about politics." For Brian McNair, this means that this not only covers verbal or written statements, but also visual representations such as dress attire, make-up, hairstyle or logo design. In other words, it also includes all those aspects that develop a 'political identity' or 'image'.{{Reference needed|date=January 2025}} According to Harald Borgebund, the author of Political Communication and the Realities of Democracy, "Political communication is essential in a democratic polity."{{Reference needed|date=January 2025}}

In terms of political communication and its relationship to modern agenda building, Vian Bakir defines strategic political communication as comprising "political communication that is manipulative in intent, utilizes social scientific techniques and heuristic devices to understand human motivation, human behavior and the media environment in order to inform effectively what should be communicated – encompassing its detail and overall direction – and what should be withheld, with the aim of taking into account and influencing public opinion, and creating strategic alliances and an enabling environment for government policies – both at home and abroad."{{cite book |author=Bakir, V. |title=Torture, Intelligence and Sousveillance in the War on Terror: Agenda–Building Struggles |publisher=Farnham: Ashgate |year=2013 |isbn=9781472402554 |pages=3}}

To further expand on why political communication can be viewed as manipulative, Michael Gurevitch and Jay G. Blumler state that "the very structure of political communication involves a division between movers and shakers at the top and bystanders below." Public access television has been one way in which political communication has been combated. Dr. Laura Stein states that "public access [television] has opened up a space for grassroots political communication on television"

In regards to the Political Strategic Communication in The USA one example is the Bush Administration's torture-for-intelligence policy, initiated after 9/11, which was kept secret for several years.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} While this secret policy was gradually revealed from 2004 onwards, revealed by the Abu Ghraib torture photos, the Bush administration engaged in strategic political communication to attempt to publicly re-frame and protect its policies.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} Strategic political communication during the event included both silencing and persuasive discursive activity.Bakir, V. Torture, Intelligence and Sousveillance in the War on Terror: Agenda–Building Struggles. Farnham: Ashgate (2013)

Discursive activity aimed at silencing consisted of plea bargains, censoring Guantánamo detainees’ descriptions of their own torture in pre–trial hearings{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}}, deals with journalists to censor or withhold information that affected national security{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}}, weeding out personal sousveillance of torture online,{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} and suppression of visual sousveillance of torture while court–martials and criminal investigations proceeded.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} Destruction of videotapes of CIA interrogations and withholding key information from intelligence oversight committees also occurred.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} Those that were complicit aimed at suppressing this information to minimize public interest and discussion.{{Cite journal |last1=Sutanto |first1=Haryo |last2=Purbaningrum |first2=Dwi |date=2022-12-29 |title=Representation of Power and Ideology on Jokowi's Speech |url=https://journal.moestopo.ac.id/index.php/wacana/article/view/2143 |journal=WACANA: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Komunikasi |language=en |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=238–251 |doi=10.32509/wacana.v21i2.2143 |issn=2598-7402 |s2cid=255654982 |doi-access=free}}

Persuasive discursive activity included the propagation and repetition of key messages consistently over time, with the aim of misdirecting public attention from the silence–generating activities. Key Bush Administration messages included: that detainees were evil and dangerous terrorists,{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} that the practice of extraordinary rendition was normal and pragmatic,{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} that interrogation techniques,{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} although were legal,{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} that they were necessary and successful in preventing future acts of terror,{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} and that Guantánamo was a model prison.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} Key British administration messages initially indicated igonorance of the American intelligence agencies’ new strategies, after which intelligence agencies’ guidelines were tightened, and then indicated that no direct involvement of British intelligence agencies were involved in extraordinary rendition.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} Key messages common to both the British and American Administrations were that the Abu Ghraib sousveillance and similar visual evidence involving British soldiers were examples of isolated abuse rather than a torture policy. {{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} This being indicated from changes to Army training and interrogation guidance under both the Bush and Blair Administrations.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} These messages were propagated through a range of discursive activities (including press conferences and media interviews, authorized leaks, real–time reporting, official investigations and public inquiries) and were periodically bolstered by selective public release of once–secret documents.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} The consistency of key messages over time, together with the offering up of specific evidence, gives the appearance of official disclosure and truth–telling,{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} positioning the public as a force to which political administrations willingly hold themselves accountable.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}}

According to Jake Sherman and Albert Trithart, “United Nations peace operations often struggle to communicate their messages to the local population and the broader global community.”{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} It argued, therefore, that “the outdated public information approach of the United Nations must be transformed into more dynamic communications efforts.”, "This required missions to better understand key audiences, make better use of national staff, embrace technology, train leaders in effective communication, proactively engage with local populations, and tailor both the message and means of communication to particular audiences."Ibid., paras. 307–308. Technology was also emphasized in the 2014 final report of the Expert Panel on Technology and Innovation in UN Peacekeeping: “A more modern approach to strategic communications can enhance the mission's ability to deliver across its mandate. In addition, social media, crowdsourcing, big data and traditional public media sources must also be incorporated into the mix, and peacekeeping should maximize its use of open source information and analysis tools.” United Nations, “Performance Peacekeeping: Final Report of the Expert Panel on Technology and Innovation in UN Peacekeeping,” 2015. See also: Ingrid A. Lehmann, “Still Caught in the Crossfire? UN Peace Operations and Their Information Capacities,” in Communication and Peace, Julia Hoffmann and Virgil Hawkins, eds. (London: Routledge, 2015).

The Middle East

Kai Hafez states that when discussing the Middle East concerning projects like e-projects “supported by a U.S. administration, are at best visionary and without any real practical use”.{{Cite journal |last=Hafez |first=Kai |date=April 2002 |title=Guest Editor's Introduction: Mediated Political Communication in the Middle East |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10584600252907399 |journal=Political Communication |language=en |volume=19 |issue=2 |pages=121–124 |doi=10.1080/10584600252907399 |s2cid=144202049 |issn=1058-4609|url-access=subscription }} Concerning censorship, Hussein Amin states that “-because many people view censorship as a sign of social responsibility, civil society has a deep distrust of itself. While admitting that political communication in the mass media has diversified and developed some more liberal patterns in recent years”. Further when it comes to national identities Nisbet et al., state that “Mass media have long been linked to the historical development and emergence of national identities and the modern nation-state by creating bounded spaces of political communication and discourse".{{Cite journal |last1=Nisbet |first1=Erik C. |last2=Myers |first2=Teresa A. |date=2010-10-29 |title=Challenging the State: Transnational TV and Political Identity in the Middle East |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10584609.2010.516801 |journal=Political Communication |language=en |volume=27 |issue=4 |pages=347–366 |doi=10.1080/10584609.2010.516801 |s2cid=5548665 |issn=1058-4609|url-access=subscription }}

In cases like the on-going conflict like in Syria, the majority of media formats are censored towards the Middle East in order to avoid further catastrophization of an event, possibly by the West.{{Clarify|date=January 2025}} For example, in Syria, the Rebel Free Syrian Army was created as an opposition to Bashar al-Assad's dictatorship.{{Cite journal |last=DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WASHINGTON DC |date=2000-09-15 |title=The Army Public Affairs Program |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.21236/ada407635 |location=Fort Belvoir, VA|doi=10.21236/ada407635 }}

{{See|Political economy of communications}}

{{See|Propaganda model}}

During a political economy analysis of U.S. mass communications, Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky developed a model during the 1980s call the propaganda model.{{Citation |last=Harcup |first=Tony |title=propaganda model |date=2014-09-18 |work=A Dictionary of Journalism |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780199646241.001.0001/acref-9780199646241-e-1115 |access-date=2024-04-14 |publisher=Oxford University Press |language=en |doi=10.1093/acref/9780199646241.001.0001 |isbn=978-0-19-964624-1|url-access=subscription }} It theorized that the interests of globalized elites in the US were warping the journalistic integrity of the mass media and its attempts to communicate news, to critique modern Western communications. They suggest that the political consent of the electorate would also be damaged by this type of politicized news in the mass media:

"The more elusive or imaginary the foe, the better for manufacturing consent. The picture of the world that's presented to the public has only the remotest relation to reality."

In terms of political communication, the propaganda model is generally used in the context of the globalized American corporate media and how it organically acts in the interests of corporate elites, specifically in an anti-democratic way. Therefore, Herman and Chomsky argue that the interests of the corporate elites are not overly concerned with the democratic rights of citizens and that this creates a new form of propaganda, which has damaging effects on democracies like the United States Government.{{Cite book |last=Herman, E.S. |first=and Chomsky, N. |title=Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media |publisher=New York Pantheon Books |year=1988 |isbn=0-375-71449-9 |edition=3rd |location=New York |publication-date=1988 |language=English}}

{{main|Social media use in politics}}

Social media has become an increasingly important tool for political communication. For certain demographics it is one of the main platforms from which individuals acquire their news, and allows them to interact with it via commenting and sharing.{{Cite journal |last=Park |first=Chang Sup |date=2019-05-27 |title=Learning Politics From Social Media: Interconnection of Social Media Use for Political News and Political Issue and Process Knowledge |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2019.1581627 |journal=Communication Studies |volume=70 |issue=3 |pages=253–276 |doi=10.1080/10510974.2019.1581627 |s2cid=151230215 |issn=1051-0974|url-access=subscription }} Social media has dramatically changed the way in which modern political campaigns are run.{{Cite book |last=Foster |first=Steven |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/650304204 |title=Political communication |date=2010 |publisher=Edinburgh University Press |isbn=978-0-7486-3114-8 |location=Edinburgh |oclc=650304204}}{{cite journal |last1=Enli |first1=Gunn |title=Twitter as arena for the authentic outsider: exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election |journal=European Journal of Communication |date=2017 |volume=32 |issue=1 |pages=50–61 |doi=10.1177/0267323116682802|hdl=10852/55266 |s2cid=149265798 |hdl-access=free }} With more digital native citizens coming into the voting population, social media has become an important medium where politicians can establish themselves and engage with voters.{{cite journal |last1=Kreiss |first1=Daniel |title=Seizing the moment: The presidential campaigns' use of Twitter during the 2012 electoral cycle |journal=New Media & Society |date=2016 |volume=18 |issue=8 |pages=1473–1490 |doi=10.1177/1461444814562445|s2cid=206728421 }} In an increasingly digitized world, new research has shown that social media is becoming increasingly important in electoral politics.{{cite journal |last1=Wei |first1=Ran |last2=Xu |first2=Larry Zhiming |title=New Media and Politics: A Synopsis of Theories, Issues, and Research |journal=Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication |date=2019 |doi=10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.104|isbn=9780190228613 }}

Social media experience relies heavily on the user themselves due to the platforms' algorithms which tailor consumer experience for each user. This results in each person seeing more like-minded news due to the increase in digital social behavior.Freelon, D., & Wells, C. (2020). Disinformation as Political Communication. Political Communication, 37(2), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1723755 Additionally, social media has changed politics because it has given politicians a direct medium to give their constituents information and the people to speak directly to the politicians. This informal nature can lead to informational mistakes because it is not being subjected to the same "fact-checking processes as institutional journalism."{{Cite book |last1=Graber |first1=Doris A. |author-link1=Doris Graber |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=d2NCDgAAQBAJ&q=political+communication+in+media+society&pg=PP1 |title=Mass Media and American Politics |last2=Dunaway |first2=Johanna |date=2017-07-20 |publisher=CQ Press |isbn=9781506340227 |language=en}}

Social media creates greater opportunity for political persuasion due to the high number of citizens that regularly engage and build followings on social media. The more that a person engages on social media, the more influential they believe themselves to be, resulting in more people considering themselves to be politically persuasive.{{Cite journal |last1=Weeks |first1=Brian E. |last2=Ardèvol-Abreu |first2=Alberto |last3=Gil de Zúñiga |first3=Homero |date=2015-12-31 |title=Online Influence? Social Media Use, Opinion Leadership, and Political Persuasion |url=https://academic.oup.com/ijpor/article/29/2/214/2981869#88132648 |journal=International Journal of Public Opinion Research |language=en |volume=29 |issue=2 |pages=edv050 |doi=10.1093/ijpor/edv050 |issn=0954-2892 |doi-access=free}}

In Australia 86% of Australians access the Internet, and with a 17,048,864 voting age population,{{Cite web |url=http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=AU |title=Voter turnout data for Australia (Parliamentary) | Voter Turnout | International IDEA |access-date=2016-06-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306175234/http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?countrycode=au |archive-date=2016-03-06 |url-status=dead }} around 14,662,023 voting population has access to Internet, and 65% of them use social media, with 9,530,314 Australian voters using social media. The 2013 Yellow™ Social Media Report also found that among internet users, 65% of Australians use social media, up from 62% in 2014.{{cite web|url=http://www.politicalmktg.net|title=Political Campaign and Social Media|publisher=Political Marketing|access-date=2014-01-16|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140116131040/http://www.politicalmktg.net/|archive-date=2014-01-16}}

With almost half of the Australian voting population active on social media, political parties are adapting quickly to influence and connect with their voters.{{Cite web|url=http://www.thesocialsavior.com/benefits-of-social-media-for-business/|title=Benefits of Social Media for Business | the Social Savior|date=28 November 2015}} Studies have found that journalists in Australia widely use social media in a professional context and that it has become a viable method of communication between the mainstream media and wider audiences.Cision (2012). Journalists Views and Usage of Social Media.

http://mb.cision.com/Public/329/9316712/8978ed4b0993062c.pdf

{{columns-list|colwidth=20em|

• E-tenders
• Open government
• Propaganda
• Politainment
• Issue tracking systems in governmental services
• Intelligence cycle
• List of basic political science topics
• Government operations
• Media populism
• Official statistics
• Political campaign
• Political Communication (journal)
• Rhetorics
• Technological nationalism
• Torture
• Sousveillance
• Social media

}}

{{Ibid|date=February 2022}}

{{Reflist}}

• [http://www.politicalcommunication.org/ Political Communication section at the American Political Science Association (APSA)]
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20150625062957/http://www.icahdq.org/about_ica/secdetinfo.asp?SecCode=DIV06 Political Communication section of the International Communication Association (ICA)]
• {{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20110418014901/http://www.ncapcd.org/ Political Communication Division of the National Communication Association (NCA)]}}
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20060618171655/http://ics.leeds.ac.uk/eurpolcom/ Centre for European Political Communications]
• [http://pcl.stanford.edu/ The Political Communication Lab - Stanford University]
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20060618145143/http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/prg/topics_politicalcommunications.htm Working Papers on Political Communications - Kennedy School of Government]
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20060627110904/http://www.crl.edu/content/PolitWeb.htm Political Communications Web Archive Project]
• [http://www.greenwood.com/catalog/subject/Communications/Political+Communications.aspx A list of Political communications books]
• [http://digitalcrusades.com Digital Crusades: observing the political communications of populist-nativist parties SVP, PVV & the FN]

{{Communication studies|state=expanded}}

{{Authority control}}

Category:Communication studies

Category:Political science

Communications