In my previous post I asked myself whether it was possible for something not to be affected by the internet and set this as my task to research into. What I found was an online article from the guardian titled “How the internet really affected the election” by Jemima Kiss.
In reflection to reading this article I would say that the biggest influence the internet has had on the election was the audiences participation. Social media websites are a tool for the audience watching the debates to actively participate, as the article states that younger audiences do not want to “consume political messages passively”. The conservative party used this trend in their favour by creating a website that invited people to customise a conservative billboard, which were then published onto twitter and Facebook, meaning a free advertising campaign.
Statistics outlined in the article show the increase of interest the younger population had in this election due to the internet. The majority of news sourced by 18 – 24 year olds was from the web in comparison to television and newspapers.
Going back to the point that younger audiences want to be more active in consuming political messages, social media sites enable then to engage with the debates and this engagement benefits the election as it gives politicians more coverage. Many of the 18 – 24 year olds that sourced their news from the web gained it second hand through friends leaving posts, according to this article. The BBC analysed 1000 tweets and found many of them to be humorous as well as finding serious ones but all that mattered was the commentary, not the tone.