Pandering, protesting, engaging. Norwegian party leaders on Facebook during the 2013 ‘Short campaign'

References

• Bechmann, A., & Lomborg, S. (2012). Mapping actor roles in social media: Different perspectives on value creation in theories of user participation. New Media & Society, 15(5), 765–781. doi: 10.1177/1461444812462853
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2010). Social transmission, emotion, and the virality of online content. Wharton Research Paper. Retrieved from http://opim.wharton.upenn.edu/~kmilkman/Virality.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1995). The crisis of public communication. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Blumler, J. G., & Kavanagh, D. (1999). The third age of political communication: Influences and features. Political Communication, 16(3), 209–230. doi: 10.1080/105846099198596
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronstein, J. (2013). Like me!: Analyzing the 2012 presidential candidates’ Facebook pages. Online Information Review, 37(2), 173–192. doi: 10.1108/OIR-01-2013-0002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruns, A., & Stieglitz, S. (2012). Quantitative approaches to comparing communication patterns on Twitter. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 30(3–4), 160–185. doi: 10.1080/15228835.2012.744249
   Google Scholar
• Bucher, T. (2012). Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society, 14(7), 1164–1180. doi: 10.1177/1461444812440159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calenda, D., & Meijer, A. (2009). Young people, the internet and political participation – findings of a web survey in Italy, Spain and The Netherlands. Information, Communication & Society, 12(6), 879–898. doi: 10.1080/13691180802158508
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chadwick, A. (2003). Bringing e-democracy back in – why it matters for future research on e-governance. Social Science Computer Review, 21(4), 443–455. doi: 10.1177/0894439303256372
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, D. S., & Yoo, C. Y. (2008). Audience motivations for using interactive features: Distinguishing use of different types of interactivity on an online newspaper. Mass Communication and Society, 11(4), 375–397. doi: 10.1080/15205430701791048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conway, B. A., Kenski, K., & Wang, D. (2013). Twitter use by presidential primary candidates during the 2012 campaign. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(11), 1596–1610. doi: 10.1177/0002764213489014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Druckman, J. N., Kifer, M. J., & Parkin, M. (2007). The technological development of congressional candidate web sites. Social Science Computer Review, 25(4), 425–442. doi: 10.1177/0894439307305623
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enjolras, B., Steen-Johnsen, K., & Wollebaek, D. (2013). Social media and mobilization to offline demonstrations: Transcending participatory divides? New Media & Society, 15(6), 890–908.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enli, G. S., & Skogerbø, E. (2013). Personalized campaigns in party-centred politics. Information, Communication & Society, 16(5), 757–774. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.782330
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foot, K. A., & Schneider, S. M. (2006). Web campaigning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, R. (2004). Web campaigning from a global perspective. Asia-Pacific Review, 11(1), 95–126. doi: 10.1080/13439000410001687779
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, R. K., & McAllister, I. (2014). Normalising or equalising party competition? Assessing the impact of the web on election campaigning. Political Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Glassman, M. E., Straus, J. R., & Shogan, C. J. (2010). Social networking and constituent communications: Member use of Twitter during a two-month period in the 111th Congress. Congressional Research Service. CRS Report for Congress, Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress, September 21, 2009. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R41066_20100203.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Graham, T., Broersma, M., Hazelhoff, K., & van 't Haar, G. (2013). Between broadcasting political messages and interacting with voters. Information, Communication & Society, 16(5), 692–716. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.785581
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griggs, B., & Mendoza, D. (2012). Obama photo a social-media sensation. Retrieved March 11, 2014, from http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/07/tech/social-media/obama-photo-twitter-facebook/
   Google Scholar
• Gulati, G. J., & Williams, C. B. (2013). Social media and campaign 2012: Developments and trends for Facebook adoption. Social Science Computer Review, 31(5), 577–588. doi: 10.1177/0894439313489258
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77–89. doi: 10.1080/19312450709336664
   Google Scholar
• Herkman, J. (2012). Convergence or intermediality? Finnish political communication in the New Media Age. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 18(4), 369–384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermans, L., & Vergeer, M. (2012). Personalization in e-campaigning: A cross-national comparison of personalization strategies used on candidate websites of 17 countries in EP elections 2009. New Media & Society, 15(1), 72–92. doi: 10.1177/1461444812457333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, N. (2011). Perception or reality: How MPs believe the internet helps them win votes. Journal of Political Marketing, 10(3), 230–250. doi: 10.1080/15377857.2011.588099
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, N., & Lilleker, D. (2011). Microblogging, constituency service and impression management: UK MPs and the use of Twitter. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(1), 86–105. doi: 10.1080/13572334.2011.545181
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, N. A., & Lilleker, D. G. (2004). Just public relations or an attempt at interaction?: British MPs in the press, on the web and ‘in your face’. European Journal of Communication, 19(4), 507–533. doi: 10.1177/0267323104047671
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, N. A., & Lilleker, D. G. (2009). Building an architecture of participation? Political parties and Web 2.0 in Britain. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(3), 232–250. doi: 10.1080/19331680903028438
   Google Scholar
• Jaeger, P., Paquette, S., & Simmons, S. (2010). Information policy in national political campaigns: A comparison of the 2008 campaigns for President of the United States and Prime Minister of Canada. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7(1), 67–82. doi: 10.1080/19331680903316700
   Google Scholar
• Jungherr, A. (2014). Twitter in politics: A comprehensive literature review. Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2402443
   Google Scholar
• Kalnes, Ø. (2009). Norwegian parties and Web 2.0. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(3), 251–266. doi: 10.1080/19331680903041845
   Google Scholar
• Kamarck, E. C. (1999). Campaigning on the internet in the elections of 1998. In E. C. Kamarck & J. S. Nye, Jr (Eds.), Democracy.com? Governance in a networked world (pp. 99–123). Hollis, NH: Hollis Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Karlsen, R. (2009). Fear of the political consultant: Campaign professionals and new technology in Norwegian electoral politics. Party Politics, 16(2), 193–214. doi: 10.1177/1354068809341055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpf, D. (2010). Online political mobilization from the advocacy group's perspective: Looking beyond clicktivism. Policy & Internet, 2(4), 7–41. doi: 10.2202/1944-2866.1098
   Google Scholar
• Klinger, U. (2013). Mastering the art of social media. Information, Communication & Society, 16(5), 717–736. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.782329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klinger, U., & Svensson, J. (2014). The emergence of network media logic in political communication: A theoretical approach. New Media & Society.
   Google Scholar
• Kruikemeier, S., van Noort, G., Vliegenthart, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2013). Getting closer: The effects of personalized and interactive online political communication. European Journal of Communication, 28(1), 53–66. doi: 10.1177/0267323112464837
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. O. (2011a). ‘Extended infomercials’ or ‘Politics 2.0’? A study of Swedish political party Web sites before, during and after the 2010 election. First Monday, 16(4). doi: 10.5210/fm.v16i4.3456
   Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. O. (2011b). Interactive to me – interactive to you? A study of use and appreciation of interactivity on Swedish newspaper websites. New Media & Society, 13(7), 1180–1197. doi: 10.1177/1461444811401254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. O. (2013). ‘Rejected bits of program code’: Why notions of ‘Politics 2.0’ remain (mostly) unfulfilled. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(1), 72–85. doi: 10.1080/19331681.2012.719727
   Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. O. (2014). Everyday elites, citizens, or extremists? Assessing the use and users of non-election political hashtags. MedieKultur. Journal of Media and Communication Research, 30(56), 61–78.
   Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. O., & Kalsnes, B. (2014). ‘Of course we are on Facebook’ – Social media adoption in Swedish and Norwegian parliaments. European Journal of Communication.
   Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. O., & Moe, H. (2012). Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign. New Media & Society, 14(5), 729–747. doi: 10.1177/1461444811422894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. O., & Svensson, J. (2014). Politicians online – Identifying current research opportunities. First Monday, 19(4). doi: 10.5210/fm.v19i4.4897
   Google Scholar
• Lau, R. R. (1982). Negativity in political perception. Political Behavior, 4(4), 353–377. doi: 10.1007/BF00986969
   Google Scholar
• Lau, R. R., Sigelman, L., & Rovner, I. B. (2007). The effects of negative political campaigns: A meta-analytic reassessment. The Journal of Politics, 69(4), 1176–1209. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00618.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D. G., & Jackson, N. A. (2010). Towards a more participatory style of election campaigning: The impact of Web 2.0 on the UK 2010 general election. Policy & Internet, 2(3), 67–96. doi: 10.2202/1944-2866.1064
   Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D. G., Koc-Michalska, K., Schweitzer, E. J., Jacunski, M., Jackson, N., & Vedel, T. (2011). Informing, engaging, mobilizing or interacting: Searching for a European model of web campaigning. European Journal of Communication, 26(3), 195–213. doi: 10.1177/0267323111416182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D. G., & Malagón, C. (2010). Levels of interactivity in the 2007 French presidential candidates’ websites. European Journal of Communication, 25(1), 25–42. doi: 10.1177/0267323109354231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28(4), 587–604. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00826.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lomborg, S. (2012). Researching communicative practice: Web archiving in qualitative social media research. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 30(3–4), 219–231. doi: 10.1080/15228835.2012.744719
   Google Scholar
• Margolis, M., & Resnick, D. (2000). Politics as usual: The cyberspace‘revolution’. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2002). Democratic phoenix: Reinventing political activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rieder, B. (2013, May 2–4). Studying Facebook via data extraction: The Netvizz application. Paper presented at the WebSci'13 Conference, Paris, France.
   Google Scholar
• Sadow, J. D., & James, K. (1999). Virtual billboards? Candidate web sites and campaigning in 1998. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, GA.
   Google Scholar
• Sartori, G. (1990). A typology of party systems. In P. Mair (Ed.), The West European party system (pp. 316–350). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schweitzer, E. J. (2012). The Mediatization of e-campaigning: Evidence from German party websites in state, national, and European parliamentary elections 2002–2009. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 283–302. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01577.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sennett, R. (1992). The fall of public man. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Small, T. A. (2012). e-Government in the age of social media: An analysis of the Canadian government's use of Twitter. Policy & Internet, 4(3–4), 91–111. doi: 10.1002/poi3.12
   Google Scholar
• Strandberg, K. (2009). Online campaigning: An opening for the outsiders? An analysis of Finnish parliamentary candidates’ websites in the 2003 election campaign. New Media & Society, 11(5), 835–854. doi: 10.1177/1461444809105355
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strandberg, K. (2013). A social media revolution or just a case of history repeating itself? The use of social media in the 2011 Finnish parliamentary elections. New Media & Society, 15(8), 1329–1347. doi: 10.1177/1461444812470612
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strömbäck, J. (2007). Political marketing and professionalized campaigning. Journal of Political Marketing, 6(2–3), 49–67. doi: 10.1300/J199v06n02_04
   Google Scholar
• Stromer-Galley, J. (2000). On-line interaction and why candidates avoid it. Journal of Communication, 50(4), 111–132. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02865.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweetser, K. D., & Lariscy, R. W. (2008). Candidates make good friends: An analysis of candidates’ uses of Facebook. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 2(3), 175–198. doi: 10.1080/15531180802178687
   Google Scholar
• Vaage, O. F. (2012). Norsk mediebarometer 2011. Oslo: Statistisk sentralbyrå (Statistics Norway).
   Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C. (2008a). From the air to the ground: The internet in the 2004 US presidential campaign. New Media & Society, 10(4), 647–665. doi: 10.1177/1461444808093735
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C. (2008b). Surfing to the Elysee: The internet in the 2007 French elections. French Politics, 6(1), 1–22. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.fp.8200139
   Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C. (2013). From echo chamber to persuasive device? Rethinking the role of the internet in campaigns. New Media & Society, 15(1), 109–127. doi: 10.1177/1461444812457336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C. (2014). You've got (no) mail: How parties and candidates respond to email inquiries in western democracies. Journal of Information Technology & Politics.
   Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C., & Nielsen, R. K. (2012). What drives politicians’ online popularity? An analysis of the 2010 U.S. midterm elections. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(2), 208–222.
   Google Scholar
• Vergeer, M., & Hermans, L. (2013). Campaigning on Twitter: Microblogging and online social networking as campaign tools in the 2010 general elections in the Netherlands. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(4), 399–419. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Cunha, C. (2012). Web campaigning in the 2009 European Parliament elections: A cross-national comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 15(1), 128–148. doi: 10.1177/1461444812457337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Sams, S. (2011). Is the voter only a tweet away? Micro blogging during the 2009 European Parliament election campaign in the Netherlands. First Monday, 16(8). doi: 10.5210/fm.v16i8.3540
   Google Scholar
• Ward, S., & Vedel, T. (2006). Introduction: The potential of the internet revisited. Parliamentary Affairs, 59(2), 210–225. doi: 10.1093/pa/gsl014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, S., Hofman, J. M., Mason, W. A., & Watts, D. J. (2011). Who says what to whom on Twitter. Paper presented at the International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2), Hyderabad, India.
   Google Scholar
• van Zoonen, L. (2005). Entertaining the citizen: When politics and popular culture converge. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar