Chapter One – INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

While Nigeria’s 2015 presidential elections have largely been acknowledged as a

victory for democracy — with the first ever victory of an opposition candidate –it

was also a model in how social media brings transparency to the electoral process.

President-elect Muhammadu Buhari’s All Progressive Congress’s (APC) party

lead in the vote last year quickly became apparent a few hours after polling units

closed. Thanks to technology that enabled Nigerian voters use social media to

share each step of the process. The use of social media in elections has become a

key tool in determining the fate of candidates and parties at polls, and in

checkmating electoral fraud. With social media and digital communication

increasingly being used for reporting incidents in elections, political parties and the

electoral body INEC need to come to terms with the power of citizens in

monitoring elections and preventing the alteration of results. To this extent, social

media makes it possible for citizens’ votes to count. Nigerian democracy and

Nigerians have more to gain than to lose in the social media sphere that has taken

over ways of communication among people globally.

A tremendous change in the Nigerian political process has been the rise of

social media. How social media has influenced politics in Nigeria is prominently

shown in the way that political parties were unable to change election results as

they were coming out of the various polling stations. The use of platforms such as

Facebook, Blackberry Messenger, WhatsApps, Twitter, Blog, YouTube and

Instagram has emerged as an important means of electioneering and the policing of

election results. The power of social media played a prominent role during the

2015 presidential election in Nigeria.

At the March 28, 2015 Nigeria presidential election, social media played a

prominent role not only during the electioneering campaign but also during

mandate protection by ensuring election results were broadcast before the official

announcements by the INEC.

Fourteen political parties that comprises of PPN, HOPE, APA, UPP, KOWA,

ACPN, UDP, PDP, ADC, NCP, APC, AD, CPP, AA contested for the 2015

Nigeria presidential election. The main focus is on the two leading political parties

in Nigeria: PDP and APC.

Few hours after voting, observers and citizens had started broadcasting election

results announced in their respective voting centers through social media. This

drew the attention of political parties, local and international observers towards the

comprehensive tracking and analyses of these results trending on different

platforms, giving a clear lead to the All Progressive Congress (APC) in the North-

East, North-West, South-West, and a struggle with PDP in the North Central. It

also quickly revealed the People’s Democratic Party’s lead in the South-East and

South-South parts of Nigeria. The agitation spawned by the election results on

social media subsequently led the PDP to accuse APC of posting fake election

results, while charging Nigerians to totally disregard results issuing from these

platforms and to wait for INEC to announce the official result. Indeed, Nigerians

waited for the official announcement from INEC. However, there was no major

difference between the results announced by INEC and those that had trended on

social media. Oseni, Audu Liberty. “Nigeria: Social Media Revolutionizes

Nigerian Elections.” Premium Times. Premium Times, 5 April 2015. Web. 16 May

2016.

The extent to which social media proves effective in attracting young

Nigerians to electoral activities now makes it possible for citizens’ votes to count.

Democracy and Nigerians have more to gain through social media that has taken

over communications among young citizens globally. Oseni, Audu Liberty.

“Nigeria: Social Media Revolutionizes Nigerian Elections. “ Premium Times.

Premium Times, 5 April 2015. Web. 16 May 2016.

The emergence of social media in elections has obviously frustrated Nigerian

politicians and stopped criminal strategies of changing election results by returning

officers in collaboration with political parties. The social media age is a revolution

for Nigerian democracy; those who must win election must win the will of the

people. The days of changing election results by the returning officers have gone!

This indeed has shown that the media had a major impact in the outcome of 2015

Presidential election in Nigeria. Oseni, Audu Liberty. “Nigeria: Social Media

Revolutionizes Nigerian Elections. “ Premium Times. Premium Times, 5 April

2015. Web. 16 May 2016.

In summary, the emergence of social media and it’s utilization in elections have

obviously frustrated unscrupulous Nigerian politicians and forestalled the erstwhile

strategy of changing election results through the collaboration between corrupt

returning officers and political parties. This is a revolution to Nigerian democracy;

those who must win elections must win the genuine support of the people. Youth

engagement and participation were the game changers in the 2015 Nigerian

elections. Taiwo, Jide T. “Youth Engagement and Participation: The Game

Changer in the 2015 Elections.” Medium. Medium, 1 April 2015. Web. 16 May

2016.

1.2 Rational/Theoretical Framework

Use of Social Media for Political Activities

According to Kaplan and Haenlein (2010, 60-61), social media are “a group of

internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological

foundations of Web 2.0 and that allow the creation and exchange of user generated

content” (p. 61). The terms Web 2.0 and ‘user-generated content’ serve as

significant factors in social media. Web 2.0 is a platform in which content and

applications are created and modified by all users (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010).

Thus, ‘user-generated content’ is “the various forms of media content that are

publicly available and created by end users” (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010, p.61).

Social media, especially Facebook and Twitter, have many active users in

Nigeria. Facebook as you know is a social networking site created by Mark

Zuckerberg and his friends in early 2004. Originally, Facebook was launched for

student of Harvard University, with a harvard.edu email address. In 2006,

Facebook became open to the public. Now, after a decade, Facebook has grown

tremendously and became the largest social media site in the world according to

(Constine, 2014).

Creating a social media strategy for use during political campaigns has

become an essential part of every candidate’s plan to get into office. With social

media sites often getting more traffic than an official campaign website. It’s

important for candidates to get connected (Arev0005, 2016).

“The use of social media in today’s campaign is not only important – it is

critical,” says Hubert “Sonny”. Nearly 2.5 billion on total user on different

platform around the world which means this is a good opportunity for candidates to

target a large number of voters quickly, constantly and at low cost.”

Expert says that social become a common practice for politicians to spend a

huge time campaigning through social media website as part of their marketing

strategy.

Expert says that social media become a common practice for politicians to spend a

huge time campaigning trough social media website as a part of their marketing

strategy.

“From now on, social media will have a huge impact on elections,” Massey says.

“With the speed of communications and the numbers of people involved, the

impact has to be significant.” But sometimes social media is also being used

against certain candidates. Spreading blog against each other trying to create

something that we sometimes called unethical behavior is completely normal on

their part which is most of us are not surprise at all.

1.2.1 Social media introduction; from traditional media to web 2.0

The earth has a population of around 7.1 billion people. The number of social

media users and internet users increases on daily basis. Nearly 50% of the today’s

population uses some sort of social media sites. A look into the 2013 info graphic

of global internet, mobile and social engagement, carried out by

Wearesquared.com; showed the tremendous increase in social media users from

1.47 billion users in 2012 to 1.73 billion in 2013. This is an 18% increase in one

year only and it has even been predicted that the number of social networking

audience will reach 2.55 billion by 2017 (Ahmad, 2013).

The internet began as a giant bulletin board system (BBS) which allowed its

users to exchange software, data, messages and news. The increasing popularity of

social media as well its platform in facilitating exchange of information between

users can consequently be seen as an advancement back to the internet’s roots.

However, because of the technical evolution over the past 20 years, and a different

form of virtual content sharing, social media is obviously becoming ever more

powerful and influential than the BB of the late 1970’s (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010,

60).

Social media concept came to existence around the millennium. In

understanding the formal meaning of the term social media it is expedient to

explain the two related concepts that are often named in conjunction with it. The

first one is known as “web 2.0” and the second one “user generated content”

(UGC). Social media is built on web 2.0, a term that is used to describe the

significant changes that occurred on the World Wide Web around the millennium.

The online information environment has evolved from a world in which users

searched and consulted information (Web 1.0) to a world where they are now able

to generate and spread information themselves (Web 2.0). As a consequence,

traditional sources of information lose control over the content and distribution of

the message resulting in a more complex communication process. A unique feature

is that a message on social media is spread by users themselves while direct

contact with the source is minimal (Helm, 2008).

The term social media covers a wide array of different communication

outlets including social networking, video- and picture-sharing, blogs, and

microblogs (Tinker & Fouse, 2009). The channels differ in terms of their purpose,

i.e. some channels are used for dissemination purposes only (e.g. RSS feeds) while

other channels allow engagement (i.e. the source can engage/communicate directly

with the audience). As a consequence, the resources (i.e. time, staff effort and

cost) required on each channel differ.

User generated content is a recently established term that achieved

increasing popularity in 2005 when describing publicly available forms of media

content that was created by users. It focuses on all the different ways in which

people can use social media.

Users generated content needs to fulfill three requirements to be considered as such

according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

(OECD). Firstly it has to be published on a publicly accessible website or on a

social networking site. It also needs to show a certain amount of creative effort and

finally it needs to have been created outside of professional routines and practices

(Kaplan & Haenlein 2010, 61).

Social media is a group of internet-based applications that are built both on

the ideological and technological foundations of web 2.0 but also the creation and

exchange of user generated content. There are various types of social media within

this general definition, e.g. Wikipedia, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are all part

of this large group of different social media platforms. Social media is in other

words where users can participate, create and share content (Kaplan & Haenlein

2010, 61).

The World Wide Web has given the public new ways to access information.

It can therefore be argued that people have become less dependent upon traditional

media outlets such as printed media for information about current events. The

public has in a way become its own medium, by sharing information on social

media (Thevenot 2007, 287-289). One could argue that with the increased

popularity of social media it is making traditional media outlets outdated to a

certain extent. It has become easier for social media to gain a critical role as

agenda setters and to steer the public discourse, thus coming closer to becoming a

prominent media source in its own right.

1.2.2 Agenda setting theory and surrounding impacts

Several sources of media outlets have huge impact in our regular life. Whether at

work, home, or basically remaining in an open spot one is never a long way from

being presented to some kind of media. It scatters data to us day by day in daily

papers, magazines, radio, and TV, through our cell telephones, the web or through

other advanced media sources, for example, online networking. With different

types of new correspondence innovations coming into focus every day we are

continually being presented to new sorts of media (Hodkinson 2011, 1-2). As

illustrated before, social media is an active and fast moving domain which is

changing rapidly. One might think that social media and traditional media are poles

apart but in fact they are closely connected (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010, 61-68).

At the point when the World Wide Web made its passage into the regular

lives of individuals, conventional media outlets, for example, daily papers

additionally exchanged on to the web. It is possible that they did as such solely or

in blend with their customary structure. The media is successful with regards to

advising the general population about which issues are critical at a given time and

the force of the media lies by the way they can pick themselves what issues are

talked about or boycotted. Motivation setting hypothesis concentrates on the

capacity the media has in affecting the themes that are on general society's plan. At

the point when an issue is often and unmistakably secured in the media, the

residents will begin seeing it as more essential than the ones that get lesser scope

(Coleman, et al 2009, 147).

The bases of this mass communication hypothesis can be followed back to

the year 1922 when Walter Lippmann contended that the news media builds the

general opinion of the world. From that point forward contemporary researchers

have extraordinarily extended that thought (Coleman, et al 2009, 147). Agenda

setting hypothesis was consequently created by Maxwell McCombs and Donald

Shaw in their investigation of the 1968 presidential decisions or "The sanctuary

slope study". In their study, they figured out how to show how the media decides

the popular's sentiments on issues, demonstrating a solid connection between's

what the media secured as the key decision issues and what the voters in Chapel

Hill, North Carolina, respected to be the essential issues in the races. The

discoveries in the Chapel Hill study showed a solid correspondence between

various media outlets, for example, daily papers, magazines and TV. McCombs

and Shaw figured out how to demonstrate that the need issues on the news begin to

be considered as the need issues of people in general (McCombs & Shaw, 1972).

After the study of Chapel Hill, the plan setting model has been reproduced in

more than 400 studies, covering a wide assortment of issues and stretching out to

expansive scope of nations (McCombs 2004, 36). Whenever editors, newsroom

staff or telecasters choose to present news, they are assuming a huge part in

forming political reality, which consequently plays a vital variable in political

battles. With regards to legislative issues, the media can set the plan for a crusade

by picking an applicant that will get more scope than another and specific points to

cover (Baran & Dennis 2011, 294-295).

Media sources give people in general pieces of information about which

issues are thought to be the terrific issues confronting society today. They do this

by showing news in a specific way. The news that is thought to be essentially more

critical gets an unrivaled arrangement in the daily paper is featured on sites or gets

the front of a magazine. Nonetheless, news that end up in the less unmistakable

areas of the papers or increase less scope when all is said in done wind up being

seen as less vital in the general population's eye (McCombs 2004, 2).

The media scene is changing quickly and it is hence vital to address the

appropriateness of motivation setting hypothesis to the new media environment.

Intuitive web applications are increasing more impact and conventional media is

no more the particular motivation setter. Web organizing locales like online

networking destinations and web journals are not bound by the bureaucratic

schedules and sources like the customary media. That gives them chance to report

through the dynamic, ongoing array of pertinent assessments and points of view

shared by other online media outlets (Meraz 2009, 700-702).

With regard to agenda setting, the media also holds the power to be able to

set the perspective on current issues which results in them being framed in a

certain way. This has been called framing effects (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010, 65).

The public does not have the ability to be up to speed with everything that is on the

daily agenda. That is why some trusts in the media to inform them on important

issues with reliable and detailed information. Democracy is partly based on the

rights of the public to accurate information. But even though the information

presented in the media can be accurate, it might not be impartial. Since the media

choose which issues are covered they can also choose if they want to interpret

news material in a positive or negative manner (Coleman, et al 2009, 147).

In The Handbook of Journalism Studies from 2009, it is talked about how

antagonistic news appears to have more noteworthy effect on individuals' lives

than positive news. Negative news scope for the most part tends to wind up more

unambiguous and newsworthy (Entman, et al 2009, 165). Different studies have

demonstrated that adversely surrounded messages have more prominent effect than

decidedly confined messages. It is along these lines not astounding that the media

tends to talk about occasions in a negative light. In this way it can be contended

that it is more hard to get positive scope than negative scope (O‘Neill & Harcup

2009, 165).

This is particularly inconsistent with the individuals who have a personal

stake in enhancing their picture, for example, government officials. As of late

legislators have demonstrated an enthusiasm for exploiting online networking as

opposed to utilizing the conventional media. That way they can get their

conclusions crosswise over and connect with people in general without dealing

with editors or journalists. Since government officials can't control the scope that

they get in the conventional media they tend to utilize online networking locales to

enhance their picture. Utilizing online networking themselves they can control how

rapidly and proficiently the news achieves the general population and in the

meantime they can advance a positive reputation about their battles. It can be

contended that having government officials swinging to social networking has

besides opened the civil argument amongst them and people in general, as

legislators and the general population can make inquiries and get answers to them

rapidly and effortlessly on the web. Support and coordinated effort is one of the

fundamental belief systems for online networking as beforehand examined. It is

available for everyone online who looks to acquire data quickly or make a

commitment to the level headed discussion (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010, 65). It can

consequently be contended that online networking has fairly made ready for a

superior deliberative vote based system forms and a more open discourse (Cogburn

& Vasquez 2011, 193-194).

1.2.3 Social media and deliberative democracy

As already talked about there has been an expanding enthusiasm for utilizing

online networking as a political device in the late years. Political administration is

by all accounts more customized with assistance from web 2.0, with government

officials attempting to be more available through long range interpersonal

communication locales wanting to build their notoriety among voters. At the point

when people in general is not dynamic or doesn't participate in political exchanges,

it debilitates popular government. The World Wide Web has made another type of

stage for open interest. It has fashioned another path for individuals to take an

interest in legislative issues (Gunnar Helgi Kristinsson 2007, 45-60).

Jürgen Habermas is very much known for his hypothesis on deliberative

majority rules system and the general population circle. He had a place with the

supposed Frankfurt School and his compositions have been basic for hypothetical

talks in regards to majority rules system (Boham & Rehg 1997, 36). As indicated

by the idea of Habermas, general society circle is an unbiased social space for

basic open deliberation among individuals who assemble to talk about matters

uninhibitedly that worries them all in all. Political interest is instituted through the

medium of talk and subjects purposeful about their basic issues. People in general

circle are open and available for the general population. Political open circles

incorporate media that screen and reprimand the state, social developments and

gatherings that take political activities (Habermas 1991, 27-31).

Deliberative democratic circle hypothesis has turned out to be progressively

famous while analyzing web majority rule government. Backers of this hypothesis

see the Internet as a stage for deliberative popular government prompting the

development of discerning general conclusion. As indicated by numerous

scientists, professionals, and web popular government reporters, the web is a

deliberative advanced open circle which can be a perfect spot for expanded

investment in legislative issues (Şen 2012, 490).

The World Wide Web gives a chance to communication and serves as an

essential in the deliberative procedure as an examination device. Long range

interpersonal communication outlets energize opportunity of expression and with

the immeasurable number of sites data turns out to be more open. The web has

some of the time been alluded to as a ''deliberative space'' that can be exceptionally

vote based (Boham & Rehg 1997, 36). Jürgen Habermas recommends that data,

citizenship, government, and the general population circle are interconnected

through media (Habermas 1991, 147-147). Taking a closer look at web 2.0 and

social media from the Habermas' open circle viewpoint, they can be seen as

"facilitators" of a pondering space where individuals can trade their thoughts and

contemplation's transparently and uninhibitedly. As to this another idea called

"digital vote based system" has been presented, as a techno social objective that

expects to make a superior working open circle. This is accomplished by giving

individuals access to political guidance, feedback, and representation through the

mass correspondence media (Cogburn & Vasquez 2011, 194).

Political life is turning out to be progressively pervasive with web 2.0 since

it cultivates a more extensive cluster of routes for the general population and

private life to happen. With new correspondence innovations and social base, the

string between general society and private life are turning out to be hazier

(Cogburn and Vasquez 2011, 194). General society circle is consequently subject

to significant changes. Some have even gone so far as to contend that it is very

nearly eradication, with the PC interceded correspondence scene getting all the

more intense and that it has assumed the position of café talks (Boeder, 2005).

Web 2.0 and social media have an awesome potential to enable subjects and

permitting them to impact change. A few researchers have even gone so far as to

stamp the web 2.0 as another "coliseum for investment in broad daylight life''. The

web could hence be seen as an effective political instrument where free and open

talk inside a basic open circle assumes an unequivocal part (Gimmler 2001, 21).

Social networking is directly connecting people in ways that were not possible

aforetime. Web 2.0 hence becomes a tool that can motivate citizens to take

collective action and effect change (Cogburn & Vasquez 2011, 193-194).

It can be argued that social media has created a new political dialogue. It has

taken the power of political messaging away from the traditional mass media

model and has instead put it into the peer-to-peer public discourse. It has allowed

information and opinions to travel across networks allowing different people to

participate as opinion leaders (Rutledge, 2013). Social media does not create

democracy itself, but it can encourage people to be involved in community

discussion through social media (Shirkey, 2011). With regard to democracy, the

potential of social media lies in its support of the civil society and the public

sphere. It can be seen as a platform for national liberation and pro-democracy

movements (Şen 2012. 490).

1.3 Statement of the Problem

The following statement of problem represents the foundation of this research:

To what extent did the use of social media impact the 2015 presidential election in

Nigeria?

1.4 Purpose of the study

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between social media

use and politics during the 2015 Presidential in Nigeria; and therefore, to add to

and expand on previous findings. Based on the fact that, recently, some scholars

discovered a difference in the effect of media use for acquiring news and media

use for entertainment purposes (Gil de Zuniga et al. 2012: 321), this paper

concentrates on the impact of using social media with the purpose gathering news

on political participation. In addition, due to social media’s interactive nature, the

author of this paper argues that it is not only necessary to use these platforms as a

source of information (as in traditional forms of media or Web 2.0 media), but

beyond that, it is essential to be politically active on these platforms (liking,

posting, sharing political content, etc.).

In order to explore this issue, both theoretical and empirical perspectives are

employed. The study is based on quantitative research design and the chosen

strategy of inquiry is survey research. Based on a literature review of relevant

existing studies within (social) media use and political participation, a

questionnaire is designed for collecting data from Nigerian young adults aged

between 18 and 35 years old.

The purpose of this research strategy is to gain a quantitative description of the

target population’s use of social media (Facebook, Blogs and Twitter, etc.) during

the 2015 presidential elections and their levels of engagement in political activities.

The data collected from the questionnaire is used in a hierarchical multiple

regression, testing the correlation between social media use and political

participation, while controlling for socio-demographic factors and known

predictors of political participation (such as political knowledge, political efficacy

and political discussions)

1.5 Research Question

This research question for this research thesis is:

Main Question: What is the effect of use of social media in political campaigns on

Individual voters in Nigeria?

To further address this question, the following three sub-research questions were

researched:

Sub-Questions:

1. Is social media increasing voter participation in elections?

2. Does a social medium have influence only on younger generation during

elections?

3. Is Social Media successful in engaging the first time voters in elections?

The objective of this research is to examine the impact of social media in 2015

Nigeria Presidential election and also, the analysis of how social media users

utilize social media networking for political purposes. The research will also help

in understanding if social media actually have any impact on Nigeria individual

voters and help them decide their final casting ballot.

1.5.1 Summary and Hypothesis

The evolution of social media has raised different opinions about the impact it has

during political elections. As these technologies evolve and change, their use by

citizens also evolves and changes. As a result it becomes increasing challenging to

measure the impact these sources have on the electorate. These issues contribute to

the lack of acceptance for weather or not social media is an effective tool for

targeting voters during election in Nigeria.

I draw the hypothesis constructed in this research from the existing literature on

social media’s role in electoral participation, voter behavior and on general

politics. Based on the past research and the trends in Nigeria, I hypothesize that:

H1: The existence of social media in a political campaign positively impacts

participation among voters aged 18-35 in Nigeria.

H2: There is a significant positive relationship between the use of social media in

a political campaign and the support for a candidate among voters aged 18-35

years in Nigeria.

These both hypotheses are based on the literature facts and arguments presented

below in the research.

1.6 Significance of the Study

It is the right time to identify broad trends in social media, which are and have

influencing power on the voter’s behavior. This data would also be of significance

to political campaigning heads, future political contenders and election

commission of India. The research can help them formulate their strategies for

future upcoming elections.

The research will also help to improve the public understanding of what role social

media plays in a election campaign in today’s scenario. Social media is a latest

development in Indian political scenario but has great potential for growth. All the

stakeholders will have keen interest of such kind of a research.

1.7 Limitations of the study

This research is for young Nigerians between the ages of 18-35 years. It is

not possible to know the influence of social media on older voters as they

are not active on social media, not educated and internet facility not readily

available.

Because of the mass rigging and under age voting witnessed in the last

presidential election, especially as reported in the northern part of Nigeria,

the classification of ages of 18-35years is not error-proof and again it is not

possible to know who is a first time voter based on the age declared by the

voters.

The testing of the hypothesis we have proposed here will be sort of

backward-compactible. Elections in Nigeria are held every 4 years. The

outcome of the test of the proposed hypothesis would have been more

credible if research is done during an election year and hypothesis are tested

pre and post-election.

Coverage of sampling is limited due to funding and violence in some parts

of the country. A broader study would have covered all the regions of the

country so that analysis of influence of social medial will not only be based

on the more educated southern region of the country but also the less

educated northern region.

Due to the limited funding, primary research was limited to survey samples.

It would have been better to engage in interviews with various key players in

the social media campaigns in the last election especially as the key political

parties all have offices of social media under their media departments.

Due to poor electricity, high cost of the internet and poor use of technology

coverage of social media is still poor in Nigeria. The study concentrates on

the very few who could afford the high cost associated with participating in

social media in developing countries such as Nigeria

1.8 Scope/delimitation of the Study

In Nigeria democracy, elections finalize political decisions (The Independent

2014). Elections are evidently important to the political parties and candidates,

who are running with the objective of getting victory, which are receiving a

majority of the votes. To achieve this, candidates must have their followers and

supporters both cast a ballot, and cast it in the favor of the contender. This research

therefore, examines what influence Facebook, Blogs and Twitter had on voters

when, as a social media platform was used to send specific messages asking

individual voters to cast their ballot during 2015 Nigeria presidential election.

The research is limited to the scope of registered voters in Nigeria who use

Facebook, Blogs, and Twitter as a social networking tool. The scope of the

research does not include unregistered voters who have not previously casted a

vote or do not cast a ballot currently. The research also does not include the

discussion on political party’s strategies, political campaigns and parties standing

on social issues. Although these play a role in influencing individual voters and

their decision to vote, are outside the scope of this research.

The scope of the study is limited to only three social media platforms, which are

Facebook, Blogs and Twitter and particularly in all Nigerian states. However, the

data is also gathered for two other social networking sites – Google+ and LinkedIn

to have a broader interpretation scope.

1.9 Operational definition of terms

Social media: Are computer mediated tools that allow people to create, share or

exchange information, ideas and pictures/videos in virtual

communities and online networks.

Voter: A person who has attained the voting age and has the right to vote for

a candidate in an election.

Web 2.0: A term that is used to describe the significant changes that occurred

on the World Wide Web around the millennium

Internet: An interconnected group of computer networks allowing for

electronic communication.

Election: The formal process of selecting a person for public office or of

accepting or rejecting a political proposition by voting.

Facebook: A popular free social networking website that allows registered users

to create profiles, upload photos and video, send messages and keep in

touch with friends, family and colleagues.

Twitter: A free social networking micro blogging service that allows registered

members to broadcast short posts called tweets

Blog: A web site on which someone writes about personal opinions,

activities, and experiences

Campaign: An organized effort which seeks to influence the decision making

process within a specific group.

INEC: (Independent National Electoral Commission) is the electoral body

which was set up to oversee elections in Nigeria in 1998. The INEC's

origin goes back to the period before Independence when the Electoral

Commission of Nigeria was established to conduct 1959 elections.

Registered Political Parties for 2015 presidential election in Nigeria

PPN: Peoples Party of Nigeria.

HOPE: Hope Party.

APA: African Peoples Alliance.

UPP: United Progressive Party.

KOWA: Kowa Party.

ACPN: Allied Congress Party of Nigeria.

UDP: United Democratic Party.

PDP: People’s Democratic Party.

ADC: African Democratic Congress.

NCP: National Conscience Party.

APC: All Progressives Congress

AD: Alliance for Democracy

CPP: Citizens Popular Party

AA: Accord Alliance