Abstract
To say that author Tim Highfield has written about a timely, pertinent, and relevant topic would be an understatement. Although written prior to Donald Trump’s election as U.S. president and framed using primarily Australian and British examples and anecdotes, it nonetheless offers a framework for studying politics and social media that trickles down to the everyday and the (as the author often calls it) “mundane.” And though the rise of Donald Trump and his unique, often against-the-rules, use of social media to gain political traction do serve as an outlier to some of Highfield’s observations, the author still lays a firm foundation for how we examine the intersection between modern politics and the power of social media, particularly as it relates to the individual. “Consideration of the personal and the political of social media—and the internet in general—should not ignore how the platforms used are themselves parts of the political debate.”
The book is an extension of Highfield’s doctoral research and retains an academic construct in its organization, citations, and stated purpose. Yet it is highly readable, and filled with engaging examples that illustrate the author’s concepts and viewpoints, such as discussions on a parody Twitter account for Queen Elizabeth II and the early use of social media by Howard Dean in his 2004 bid to garner the Democratic presidential nomination. On the subject of parody accounts, Highfield acutely recognizes how these types of accounts can resonate with broader audiences. “Topical comments in particular attract widespread attention from Twitter audiences,” he notes; “tweets framed within the world of the parody have also been found to attract greater attention, and possibly have more appeal or salience for a wider audience, than their more mundane, everyday posts.”
Highfield is right to focus on modern-day constructs such as memes, wordplay, and parody when analyzing the connections between individuals and their consumption, interpretation, and often resistance, to politicians or political acts. Memes, he says, by mixing “contexts that are otherwise unrelated . . . play with the media literacy of their audience, in the creation and understanding of the meme form, and also the comprehension of its social media context.”
The author extends his reach into the broader sphere of “media” to show social media’s particular place and function among more traditional journalistic venues. As a journalism educator, I found Chapter 3 to be a particularly rich section in which Highfield traces the role of early bloggers as “gate watchers” of the gatekeepers (i.e., mainstream media), and notes the predominance of “ideological clustering” among many Internet users. His statements again have particular resonance in today’s political versus media culture in the United States when he raises the role of truth: “The accuracy of social media coverage of news and politics, and whether it portrays truth . . . is an ongoing debate . . . After all, the question of authenticity is central to the social meditation of everyday experiences . . .”
Highfield raises the idea of social media tools as backchannels for other events, actions, or information a few times throughout the text. This is notable in that it points to the often-insidious power of social media on the individual and that individual’s consumption and use of social media content. He warns of the propensity for some to “engage solely in the backchannel without actually watching the programming that is ostensibly shaping the discussion.” This reaction-without-context scenario deserves continued awareness and discussion. Backchannels take on a slightly different construction when Hightower places them in the form of protests and demonstrations; their role is more passive here where live social media interaction such as live-streaming or live-tweeting merely provides the conduit to spotlight the event.
Because of the rise of social media, some politicians have found themselves in the role of “middleman” between the message and the messaging system. In some ways, those in politics have a broader direct line to their audience than at any other time in history. However, the very definition of social media and its potential to have a nearly immediate impact on one or many brings an array of dilemmas to the average politician. As Highfield discusses, there is no one-size-fits-all formula for the success of politicians and their social media use. At the top of the chart of potential missteps is misinterpretation of the intended message or worse, parody of the message.
It is in his analysis of politicians’ use of social media and the extended conversation into “The Everyday of Elections” that the author attempts to bring the discussion full circle. As stated by Highfield, “I have included elections as the focus for this final chapter because they act as a microcosm of the various practices and trends outlined in the previous chapters.” Indeed, the author does tie together several threads that supported earlier sections of the book in looking at the institution of elections. He correctly concludes that “for the coverage of politics and for everyday social media practices, the mainstream and the social, alternative and corporate-owned platforms are all interlinked.”