Communicating citizenship online: the web presence of youth organizations

Janelle WardErasmus University Rotterdam

The Netherlands

questions to consider

• how do organizations use their web presence?

• how do they view their supporters in this digital space?

• how can we better understand their web strategy and the choices they make regarding web content?

key terms

• the conventional realm of citizenship

• a mainstream, more traditional means to citizenship: casting a vote, joining a political party, or engaging with government (youth are apathetic here!)

key terms

• the non-conventional realm of citizenship

• encourages participation outside traditional arenas: campaigning for a single issue, like environment or animal rights (youth are more involved here!)

key terms

• one-way online communication: Generally based on a broadcast model (sender to receiver), and is primarily informative in nature

key terms

• interactive online communication: Two-way communication: response and feedback

• ‘transactional’ interactivity: Gathering information from visitors

• ‘coproductive’ interactivity: Encourages users to respond to the org and to other supporters (e.g., enabling comments and feedback)

my research

• 2007: interviewed representatives of 21 youth-focused organizations (civic or political) in the UK

• 2007-2008: analyzed interview findings, compared these findings to online content

• 2010: revisited these organizations online to see how they had incorporated social media (Facebook and Twitter)

overview of organizations

• information portals

• political party youth branches

• connecting youth with government

• single issues/campaigning organizations

• youth and global citizenship

findings: youth organization web strategy

focus on: youth organization web strategy

results: youth organization web strategy

• website as an information provision tool: orgs were positive about the educative function, increased reach, and cost effectiveness

• information provision was, not surprisingly, primarily via one-way communication

results: youth organization web strategy

• inform then involve: an automatic process; flowing from accurate information

• most had no explicit tie to web content

• those that did demonstrated a mix of online and offline action

results: youth organization web strategy

• inform then involve:

• transactional interactivity common (contact producer, provide personal information, become a member)

• coproductive interactivity not often present, though considered an area for future improvement

results: youth organization web strategy

• the ultimate goal: create engaged citizens

• campaigns important, but with a desire to build life-long activists/citizens

• youth encouraged to use their voice, but only in pre-approved directions (socialization)

the move to social media

• as of April 2010, 7 out of 21 orgs had linked to social media (Facebook and Twitter)

the move to social media

• strategic: to establish a presence on a popular social media platform

• an alternative space to be interactive (website can just be brochureware)

• Facebook: transparent - though superficial - interaction with supporters

• Twitter: mainly used as a broadcasting medium

conclusions

• how do organizations use their web presence?

• how do they view their supporters in this digital space?

• how can we better understand their web strategy and the choices they make regarding web content?

conclusions

• in terms of web strategy, all organizations had a similar prescription for success: no large differences were seen between, say, an organization focused on Parliament and one focused on protesting against Parliament

• organizations want to be more interactive with supporters, but most are (still) not doing it. Why not?

• social media presence is no guarantee of interactive content

thanks for your attention!

• The book: Communicating Citizenship Online. Hampton Press: 2012

• Email: janelle.ward@gmail.com

• Twitter: @janelle_ward