Social Media Go “Glocal”: The Local and European Arenas

Abstract

In line with the lion’s share of studies in the equalization-normalization debate (Gibson \& McAllister, 2014:2; Larsson, 2013; Larsson \& Svensson, 2014), the two previous chapters analyzed the consequences of social media on the main or “first-order” political arena (national politics) (Reif \& Schmitt, 1980:8). In this chapter, we study whether the conclusions from chapters 4 and 5 also hold in sub- and supranational elections—the “second-order” political arenas. This serves two purposes. First, this helps to establish the robustness of our results. Second, there are good reasons to expect that the adoption and impact of social media is similar but of different strength in second-order arenas. After all, voters might feel there is “less at stake,” which results in lower levels of political participation and better chances for smaller parties. Though second-order arenas are influenced by the national-level dynamics, they have their own dynamics as well. Specifically, different coalitions may be in charge or other players may be competing (Reif \& Schmitt, 1980:9–10). Second-order arenas typically draw less attention from traditional media, which increases the added value of social media in terms of informing the public (advertisement opportunity) and mobilizing specific electorates (target-group opportunity). Let us take a closer look at local and European elections to see whether this really is the case.