Kornely Kakachia, Tamar Pataraia
104
(The question was asked to respondents who use the Internet)
Source: CRRC, Caucasus Barometer 2011
The above data allow us to develop a profile of an average Georgian
Internet user. In general, the average Georgian Internet user is someone who
goes online at least once a week and regularly accesses social networks and
social websites (in addition to using the Internet for Internet banking services).
Facebook is currently the most popular social network in Georgia, providing
consumers with wide-ranging online services. One of the main reasons for the
popularity of Facebook is that it offers a Georgian-language-friendly interface
created for and used by native speakers.
Another social network, Twitter, has fewer users in Georgia. In the last two
years, only Beeline, a mobile operator with the poorest coverage in Georgia, had
mobile Twitter support. In 2012, the top two Georgian mobile operators,
Geocell and Magti, followed suit and offered this service. As a result, Georgian
customers are now able to send free-of-charge SMS messages via Twitter to
multiple recipients simultaneously. However, Twitter does not recognise
Georgian fonts, so it has rather low popularity in Georgia.
A comparative analysis of the Twitter accounts of the Georgian president,
the leader of the former ruling party, and his opponent, the opposition leader and
now prime minister, in the post-election period (after October 2012) can help to
assess the popularity of Twitter in Georgia. The Georgian president’s account
has only 7,221 friends and 59 followers, and most of them add comments in
English – there are very few comments in Georgian (as of 1 May 2013). Prior
Georgian Political Parties and Online Social Network: Politics as usual?
105
to April 2012, the Georgian president had published only 776 Twitter messages
that were commented by some of the followers. In contrast, the Georgian prime
minister’s Twitter account has 22,132 followers, although it has not been
updated since November 2012 (As of 1 May 2013). Before the elections, the
prime minister (then a leader of the opposition) had published only some 870
Twitter messages, most of them in English. This means that neither the
president nor the current prime minister consider Georgian Twitter users their
main target audience. The prevalence of English messages suggests that both
tend to use their Twitter accounts to promote their views and ideas abroad rather
than at home. As one of the popular party PR group members noted, through
tweets, Georgian political parties “target their international partners and foreign
friends more than that of Georgian followers and party supporters”.
9
The
Georgian experts who are active in social media and who were interviewed
during the research suggested that with the completion of the development of
social networks in 2010-2011, few other social networks will be able to
challenge Facebook’s popularity in Georgia. Consequently, political parties
should pay more attention to Facebook.
Political parties in cyberspace prior to the 2012 parliamentary elections
Although there are more than 190 registered political parties in Georgia,
10
very few of them have real political power. Many commentators on Georgian
politics complain that political parties have not grown out of social cleavages,
do not represent large segments of society (although they may articulate their
sentiments), and are difficult to identify on the left-right spectrum of classical
political ideologies.
11
Competition between parties is often less about policies
than about the rules of the political game and primarily runs along a pro-
governmental and anti-governmental division.
Ten of the most successful political parties’ websites were studied from
December 2011 to February 2013 to develop a comparative picture of their
readiness for activity in cyberspace and their full use of the potential of Internet
9
Interview conducted with G.P., male, 29 April 2013
10
Nodia, Ghia, and Scholbach, Alvaro Pinto. The Political Landscape of Georgia:
Political Parties Achievements, Challenges and Prospects, Eburon Delft, (2006), p99
11
Bader,Max. Fluid Party Politics and The Challenge for Democracy for Democracy
Assistance in Georgia. Caucasian Review of International Affairs Vol. 2 (2) – Spring
2008. P.84
Kornely Kakachia, Tamar Pataraia
106
technologies in the organisation of election campaigns, mobilisation, and the
engagement of supporters.
When analysing the dynamic elements of a website, special attention was
paid to whether it offered opportunities for citizens’ involvement in political
processes, such as feedback, blogging, news, podcasts, video and audio
materials, and open forums. The results show that all but one of the ten
monitored political parties had fully functional websites during the researched
period. The most popular opposition force, the Georgian Dream party, one of
the members of the Georgian Dream Coalition, had not yet been officially
founded as a political party at that time, although it was expected to join the
opposition Georgian Dream coalition (founded in April 2012). However, the
coalition leader’s Facebook page was freely accessible at the time.
The collected data revealed that the political parties tended to publish
mostly static and general information on their websites, which did not require
regular updates. Moreover, the websites were not helpful in understanding the
ideological differences between the parties. The websites were not updated on a
regular basis; therefore, they could not be used as an efficient means of
communication with members and supporters. Although all monitored parties
had their own Facebook pages at that time, communication with supporters was
mainly conducted through a party leadership’s personal Facebook pages
(Facebook monitoring results, see below).
Although websites provided tools to communicate directly with a party’s
leadership or prominent politicians, post questions, recruit new supporters and
members, demonstrate that a party was ready to accept new members, and
mobilise the party for the implementation of its political programme, it was not
appropriate for bidirectional efficient communication. In most cases, the
websites provided only a party’s e-mail and telephone number as a means of
communication, which made it unclear who was responsible for communicating
with potential supporters and members. The then-ruling United National
Movement’s website was a clear example of one-sided communication. Users
were able to send their greetings and well wishes, but there were no feedback
opportunities for questions and complaints, which may have affected the
election, especially among young voters. In addition, the participation of the
general public in online polls, one of the major components of the monitored
websites, was rather low. Overall, 1,000-1,500 respondents participated, which
is considered a rather low turnout for this type of poll, especially because polls
Dostları ilə paylaş: |