Government communication in the digital age: Social media’s effect on local government public relations

Abstract

Using data collected from interviews with public information officers (PIOs) in local governments, this study explores the use and perceptions of social media as a communication tool. It specifically addresses how social media are used as a public relations function to promote democratic, participatory, and transparency models in government. Results indicate that social media are highly regarded as a beneficial communication tool for local governments. Four primary themes emerged from the data analysis: dialogue promotion, engagement, unconstrained, and barriers. The first three themes focus on the opportunities that social media provide PIOs to communicate with citizens and the fourth theme presents the challenges faced by local governments that utilize social media. The insights shared by PIOs in local governments are useful for public relations professionals and scholars to help them understand and apply social media practices to build relationships with citizens and enhance communication practices.

Keywords

Government public information officer social media transparency

The popularity of social media in recent years has revolutionized the way the world communicates. The instantaneous, direct, and interactive communication components that social media provide can be particularly beneficial to governments at all levels as they pledge to be more transparent, participatory, and collaborative with their citizens (Bertot et al., 2010). Social media usage enhances governments’ ability to interact with and engage citizens. This more open form of government public relations that social media usage provides is particularly beneficial to local governments, as it is the local level of government where citizens often feel the most direct access and potential importance in governance. Since more and more citizens are going online to get information, public information officers (PIOs) have to be cognizant of this reality. A recent survey showed that two-thirds of adults use social media platforms (Smith, 2011). In addition, 40 percent of Internet users go online for information about government operations (Raine, 2011).

A social media presence has become a trademark of a vibrant and transparent communication strategy, and its growing appeal has changed the practice of public relations. Because of this, PIOs in government are adjusting their communication strategies and incorporating social media into their communication plans. Governments have more opportunities to interact with and engage stakeholders, and social media are an inexpensive and swift communication channel for them to do this. The open, dialogic nature of social media eliminates many of the barriers in communication that governments have experienced in the past. Communication with constituents can be more frequent, open, and targeted. Historically, governments have relied heavily on traditional mass media to disseminate public information. The advent of blogs, podcasts, and social networks provides government officials the means to communicate directly with their publics without the intervention of editors and reporters who can act as gatekeepers. In addition, with the decline in newspaper readership (Kingsley, 2010), the quality of local coverage of news and information is waning, thereby forcing officials to find new outlets to reach their publics. Social media are outlets that hold great promise for governments because of their ability to foster democracy by allowing for greater citizen participation, knowledge of government actions, and more opportunities for engagement. This is achieved through the two-way flow of information that is facilitated through social media use.

The transformative capabilities that social media can bring to governments are significant (Bertot et al., 2010). Social media provide governments with the ability to enhance and improve government–citizen relations; yet, little research exists as to the extent to which local governments are actually using social media to inform and engage publics. This exploratory research fills that gap and provides an in-depth analysis of social media use by local governments in their efforts to inform and engage citizens.

Literature review

Social media and public relations

The benefits of social media use are being recognized by organizations and public relations professionals across all industries. According to a 2007 survey conducted by the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and Dow Jones & Company, the majority of participating public relations practitioners and students believe social media have positively impacted the public relations practice; 5 years later, this conviction is no doubt infinitely stronger. Additionally, the survey results showed the technology-driven channels that provide the best opportunities for the practice of public relations are online news web sites, blogs, and social networking sites – all social media tools. Since more people are going online to get information, these are all online information channels that public relations practitioners can utilize. Furthermore, the innovation of online communication is becoming a necessity for organizations, and they are quickly incorporating them into their communication and operating plans (Taylor and Doerfel, 2003).

Research has documented that public relations professionals have eagerly adopted the more established and institutional online tools such as email and the intranet and are somewhat comfortable with blogs, but they are slower to integrate more technologically complicated tools such as social networking and text messaging (Eyrich et al., 2008). Not surprisingly, a diffusion of innovations study by Taylor and Perry (2005) that analyzed adoption of Internet tools among public relations practitioners by type of organization found that high technology firms are among the earliest adopters of an innovation. Of the adopted social media tools, the one that has been studied the most to date are blogs. One study showed that public relations practitioners use blogs to enhance their power within their organizations (Porter et al., 2007). According to a study by Yang and Kang (2009), blog use can create a personal connection with the user and a favorable attitude toward the company or organization by the user.

A recent study by Sweetster and Kelleher (2011) examining the motivations for social media use among public relations practitioners found that those who are more influential relative to others in the same group are more likely to see the positive benefits of social media. Leaders in public relations should look at individual motivation factors when trying to cultivate their subordinates. As community leaders, who are most likely also influential individuals, local government officials would be expected to place high importance on the use of social media in government.

Social media are being heavily incorporated by public relations practitioners into crisis communication, with 48 percent of participants in a recent survey saying they have integrated social media into their crisis plans (Wigley and Zhang, 2011). Practitioners recognize the importance of controlling information and developing and disseminating key messages to the media, and public information and direction are critical in crisis situations (Shin and Cameron, 2005). Given the current media landscape where anyone can post information online, it is important for various publics to have a place to go online to seek accurate information. This accessibility is especially important for local governments, which would be a logical source of information in a community crisis.

Governments’ usage of social media

Decades ago, governments began using the Internet to communicate with citizens through the automation of routine government operations, which later evolved to web sites, RSS feeds, blogs, and wikis (Dixon, 2010). Commonly referred to as e-government, these technologies had initially and primarily been used as one-way methods of communication, allowing citizens to access services or retrieve information. In contrast, social media emphasize interactivity and co-creation of content fostering a two-way exchange of information (Kingsley, 2010), which offers great potential for enhanced democratization of information exchange at the local level.

The use of information technology to transform government operations is not new. In 1993, the US Vice President Al Gore led the Reinventing Government initiative, and during the George W. Bush administration, the Office of Management and Budgets initiated several projects guided by the E-government Act of 2002 (Bertot et al., 2010). The efforts of the two previous administrations were intended to make government more open and efficient; however, neither sought to actively engage citizens through new technology to obtain feedback or to become a part of the government process. The Obama administration set the current stage for governments at all levels to have open and participatory government by instructing the Director of Management and Budgets to issue the Open Government Directive which, among other things, required agencies to create and implement open government which many government agencies accomplished through social media (Peter R. Orszag, 8 December 2009, personal communication). Most federal agencies have a social media presence that includes blogs, social networking sites, YouTube channels, and more (Bertot et al., 2010).

The majority of relevant literature pertains to new media adoption at the federal level and, to a smaller degree, at the state level. Research on adoption and use of new technologies at the local level is only recently emerging. Hand and Ching (2011) examined the use of social media by local governments in the Phoenix metropolitan areas and found that ‘using social media at the local level government level seems to offer promise of increased citizen engagement, reaching citizens on a common platform, and allowing for citizen comments’ (p.379).

Qualitative research by Briones et al. (2011) that analyzed the use of social media by the American Red Cross found that one of the most frequently cited barriers to using social media was resources, specifically time and staff. Since local governments are often operating with limited budgets and competing interests, adequate resources might not be allocated to conduct public relations using social media effectively. If sufficient staff is not available to strategically manage social media, it is difficult for organizations to achieve commitment, which in turn shows whether organizations are dedicated to online engagement with their publics (Hallahan, 2008). Another challenge that participants face in adopting social media to build relationships is getting the ‘buy-in’ from executive leadership (Briones et al., 2011). This could also be an issue for local governments that need support from management to successfully implement social media relations.

The size of the community may impact the rate of adoption of social media, as demonstrated in an analysis of local public health departments. Public relations practitioners in health departments have been slower to adopt social media technologies than practitioners in other industries, and there are significant differences depending on the size of the community (Avery et al., 2010). Specifically, research has found that urban communities exhibit the highest adoption rates, followed by suburban, large town, and rural communities because although rural communities were making progress in achieving Internet services, they still lag behind both urban and suburban communities in wireless services (Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2004). Additionally, among those who used social media to disseminate health information, the most commonly used tools were social networking sites (Avery et al., 2010). One of the reasons offered for these disparities is that resources may be more difficult to obtain in more rural areas than in cities. A 2004 Pew study concluded that rural communities were making progress in achieving Internet services, but they still lag behind both urban and suburban communities in wireless services. This study will assess whether there are differences in the use of social media by local governments serving different sized communities and whether the findings are similar to the practice of social media use among community health departments.

Democratic theory and dialogic theory

Joint theoretical lenses – democratic theory and dialogic theory – are used here to analyze the meaning of social media to PIOs in local governments. Concise and purposeful communication between a government and its citizens is a pragmatic practice as well as a moral obligation that derives from the principles of democracy (Viteritti, 1997). Democratic theory emphasizes open, interactive, and participatory government. To address this need for transparency in public organizations, Fairbanks et al. (2007) developed a model for transparency in government communications. The model can be visualized best as a three-dimensional triangle. The base of the model is a commitment to transparent communication processes. The key elements of the model, or the three sides, are communication practices, organizational support, and the provision of resources. The most important part of a public communication model, according to Heise (1985), is for governments to communicate in an open, honest, and timely way with their publics, without manipulating the information they share.

E-government initiatives involve all online communication and activities by governments. The e-government paradigm is well suited for this era of networking and governance with an emphasis on users as partners in governance (Anttiroiko, 2004). A key component of e-government is e-democracy, which is particularly strengthened by social media’s ability to interact directly with citizens. E-democracy is an emerging concept that denotes the transformation of citizen involvement in democratic and purposeful processes mediated by social networking media. The classic theories of democracy distinguish among pluralist, representative, and direct theories of democracy. Norris (2004) outlines the differences in the competing democratic theories and their relation to e-government and e-democracy. The key attributes of pluralist theory illustrate that elections are important to garner accountability and legitimacy of government and that a robust civil society is the key to the resilience and effectiveness of a democracy. New technologies reduce the cost of information. Under the representative theory of democracy, democratic governance occurs through citizen representatives. New technologies can improve representation by allowing citizens the ability to evaluate the records of governments and elected officials by providing the means for citizens to interact directly with government officials. Direct theory proposes that democracy works best when people are directly involved in policy debate, actions, and decisions. Citizens who are disengaged can become reengaged through the use of new technologies. E-democracy can ‘overcome space and time constraints on public involvement, as well as those associated with status differentials, such as age, gender, ethnicity, and wealth’ (Scott, 2006: 344).

A strategic framework for creating dialogic relationships with publics through the Internet was provided by Kent and Taylor (1998, 2002) more than a decade ago. Dialogue is ‘any negotiated exchange of ideas and opinions’ (Kent and Taylor, 1998: 325) and represents efforts by those involved in a relationship to participate in an open and honest exchange. This perspective is attuned with the current thinking about the role communication plays in relationship-building, where healthy relationships between an organization and its stakeholders are cultivated through communication managed by public relations practitioners (Ledingham, 2003). This ‘socially informed’ generation calls for and expects dialogue as governments shift their view of citizens from consumers, allowing citizens to contribute online to the development of government (Azyan, 2012). One unique advantage of social media tools in public relations practitioners’ outreach efforts is their ability to engage many constituents in two-way communication even when an organization has a limited funding structure (Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2004). This premise follows the tenets of dialogic theory and is a compelling characteristic to justify the active use of social media by local governments.

A recent study by Kent (2013) asserted the need for public relations professionals to end the practice of using stakeholders to justify organizational ends, instead focusing on rebuilding democratic ideals and awareness. This can be accomplished by using technology dialogically. The following suggestions put forth by Kent (2013) can help organizations be successful in these endeavors:

When social spaces are constructed for individuals and publics, the conversation should focus on what stakeholders and publics want to discuss.

Social media is different than social marketing. It needs to be used socially and symmetrically or not at all.

Public spaces and collective decision making need to be revived. Public relations practitioners can push for more inclusiveness, transparency, and input through the use of social media.

Public relations practitioners need to have a solid understanding of the big picture so that they can act as counselors to their organization.

Focus on the long term rather than on the short term.

Social media technologies can help to stimulate democracy, and public relations activities can help achieve this end.

This study is an attempt to better understand the impact that social media have on political public relations at the local level of government. Specifically, it addresses the perceptions and usage of social media by PIOs. This is especially important to consider since citizens are increasingly offered the chance to communicate with local governments in a variety of online arenas including social media. This revelation opens new communication channels for government officials to communicate with their key stakeholders, the citizens they represent. Nearly one-third of online adults report using online social media sites to get information about government agencies or officials (Pew Research Center, 2010). To obtain an in-depth understanding of how and why social media are being adopted by local governments, the following research question is asked:

RQ: What is the meaning of social media to local government PIOs?

This study expands existing literature and makes an important contribution for public relations practitioners, government officials, analysts, and scholars.

Methodology

Using qualitative research methods, 13 in-depth interviews with PIOs, or officials with similar titles, were conducted to explore the meaning of social media to local government officials. Because it ‘properly seeks answers to questions by examining various social settings and the individuals who inhabit these settings’, qualitative research is ideal (Berg, 2009: 8). The goal in participant recruitment is to achieve redundancy in the themes (McCracken, 1988). Once this crucial point is reached, no additional themes emerge in the interviews. Participants were recruited through snowball sampling that was initiated from personal contacts of the researcher. An email was sent to potential participants asking for their participation. After the initial email, follow-up emails and phone calls were used to schedule the interviews.

A wide continuum of participants was sought, from those who were early adopters and those who had only been using social media for a short time, to provide a comprehensive picture of social media efforts of local governments. Participants’ titles included PIO, communications director, and director of special services. Total time working for their local government ranged from 5 to 23 years. In all, 10 of the participants had a college education: 5 in communication, 1 in business administration, 1 in hospitality management, 2 in political science, and 1 in elementary education. Data collection was concluded after reaching data saturation.

The lived experiences of PIOs in local governments were central to the research objective, making interviews the appropriate research method (Appendix) (Lindlof and Taylor, 2002). Telephone interviews were conducted with all 13 participants. After being read a statement of informed consent, the researcher used a semi-structured interview guide to follow when conducting the interviews. All interviews were audio recorded and the tapes were transcribed shortly following each interview. The interviews lasted between 17 and 27 minutes. Drawing from the information presented in the literature review, the interview transcripts were analyzed using Pardun and Krugman’s (1994) procedure of open coding to identify emerging themes and classifications. Axial coding was then used to fit the data into categorical themes and identify data that expounded on the concepts presented in the literature review.

Analysis

Four primary themes emerged from the data analysis about the meaning of social media to PIOs working in local government: dialogue promotion, engagement, unconstrained, barriers. The first three themes focus on the opportunities that social media provide PIOs to communicate with citizens and the fourth theme presents the challenges faced by the local governments that utilize social media. All of the participants did personally use social media and all believed that this made incorporating social media into their job duties much easier since they were already familiar with it.

Dialogue promotion

The participants discussed common strategies for open communication and relationship development with key stakeholders using social media. They talked about the value of having a two-way dialogue and how this was an essential component to building relationships. ‘We find people going to our Facebook page because they can actually interact with me and ask me questions’, said one participant. Similarly, another participant affirmed,

I believe with Facebook you can provide details and explanations … it is like you are personally talking to someone without having to write all of these facts and I think that is what people enjoy about it is just being able to say something and get a quick answer back. They say well now I understand, or I did not realize that or now I see why you are doing it when inquiring about activities or projects that are happening in the community.

These comments illustrate how local governments are using social media dialogically, representing Taylor and Kent’s (1998) dialogic theory principles through their active response to posts and their allowance for the open exchange of information and ideas online. Online interactions can allow governments to build relationships with stakeholders, solve problems, and set forth socially responsible goals (Kent, 2013).

The social media tools that local governments use the most to connect with citizens are Facebook and Twitter. A participant from a state in the southeast said, ‘I post to our Facebook and Twitter accounts at least a couple of times a day’, and added, ‘we use it [social media] to put out everything that is happening in our community and at our town hall’. The majority of local governments use it as an announcement board for programs and events, bridge and road closures, community issues, and the like. Providing information about government actions and activities promotes and encourages democracy (Bertot et al., 2010). An interview participant remarked,

So that is what we are using Facebook and Twitter for as another way to let folks know what is going on. This [social media] is part of our community involvement [efforts] because that is what we are all about, having our community engaged in what we are trying to do and making our community a better place.

In addition, these statements follow the premise of democratic theory that suggests governments must be actively involved with its citizenry (Viteritti, 1997). One participant declared that social media allow citizens to be part of the local government process even if they cannot physically attend meetings. ‘We put our Board of Mayor and Alderman and our Regional Planning Commission meetings online, so folks can go back and watch them if they were not able to be present at the actual meeting’, she said. Allowing citizens to be partners in government without constraints or restraints is a product implementing e-government initiatives (Anttiroiko, 2004), which helps to promote democracy.

Engagement

Unanimously, local government PIOs felt that their citizens expect them to have a social media presence. Furthering democratic ideals, citizens expect that online government initiatives must attend to issues of transaction, transparency, and interactivity in order to garner trust (Welch et al., 2004). For instance, one participant said,

Citizens expect us to be on Facebook and Twitter or some sort of social media. They are using it a lot and they kind of expect you to be on there so they can get timely information from their government.

Another participant made a concurring statement: ‘I do think it is a necessary part of today’s world and it is not going away and I hope we can continue to utilize it the way our citizens expect’. Furthermore, one respondent said that she was utilizing social media as a sort of ‘customer service tool’ for the citizens in her community. They could post information about issues and concerns and government officials can investigate and properly respond to citizens. This finding is congruent with Scott’s (2011) assertion that citizens expect an open government more today than ever before and demand accountability and transparency through direct input on the issues that affect them. PIOs in local governments are mindful of this and of the perceived effectiveness of utilizing social media tools, which demonstrates their understanding of how well their publics are responding to their social media use.

Moreover, the steady increase in the number of ‘friends’ or ‘fans’ on social media pages of local governments supports the idea that citizens expect a government presence online and are seeking it out to be a part of it. One of the research participants stated, ‘we continue to get friends daily that shows people want the information and are seeking it’. As the popularity of social media increases, it is probable that the increase in participation on social media sites of local governments will also increase. Another participant reported,

I do not think you can ignore social media any more. I know a lot of companies still probably try to do that but you know just for us getting 700 fans or likes or whatever we have I think that that shows that it is important to citizens … why would we not do that it is another way to let people know what we are doing and another way to get people engaged.

The value and importance of social media are being recognized by the public, and organizations at all levels, including local governments, are also recognizing the positive benefits of social media and utilizing their many features, thereby meeting citizen expectations.

Unconstrained

Several of the participants felt that they had greater control over their message through the use of social media. ‘There are so many ways you can control what is posted on your page’, said one participant, ‘There are so many ways you can direct and lead the conversation’. Another participant noted that there are only two communication vehicles that she has direct control over regarding what information gets posted, ‘I can control our website and our Facebook page’, she said. Since most Americans rely on a blend of both new and traditional sources to get their information (Rosenstiel et al., 2011), it is not surprising that PIOs in local governments embrace the freedom and control of information that they have on their social media sites. ‘I do not need the general media anymore to get messages out’, one participant proclaimed.

Much of the research on government use of social media has focused on the use of social media during a crisis. Local governments are also utilizing this medium to communicate with key publics during crisis. Social media played a large part in the communication efforts of one community in the southeast after the historic flooding in May 2010. Since the floods affected the entire region, our community ‘was pretty low on the totem pole in terms of getting information to our residents … the media focused on the “larger communities”’, said one participant. ‘That is when people turned locally to get information … and as people around here know, we don’t have many media outlets and it provided us with an outlet to drive people to get information about the recovery efforts’, she said. She felt like social media proved its worth during that crisis and started the boom in social media following of the community by interested parties. Utilizing social media during a crisis allows for PIOs to control and direct the messages being communicated during a crisis situation (Shin and Cameron, 2005).

In addition, a PIO from a medium-size community in the Midwest believed that citizens are getting their information from social media and are reading the newspaper ‘less and less’:

I think our young people want the news to fit them and I don’t think they want to go out and look for the news. I think social media for local government is the perfect avenue for getting the message out. We do not have to rely on the newspaper to tell our story. We can tell our own story in our own words and it’s delivered to the people that want to hear it.

Another participant had similar comments while discussing a current revitalization project in the community. ‘This is a different population that is on Facebook’, she said, ‘People aren’t reading the newspaper anymore and we have to make all of our announcements and road closures and we direct them to our website and Facebook’. As newspaper readership declines (Kingsley, 2010), citizens are turning to online channels to get information.

Barriers

In addition to the enormous potential that social media bring to local governments, the participants also highlighted several of the challenges they face in incorporating it into their communication strategies. The most frequently cited barrier to using social media was resources, specifically money, time, and staff. Facebook was the most widely used social media tool, and participants revealed that budgetary issues were the main reason why they have not taken advantage of other social media tools, especially YouTube:

We are not really in the world of video at this point and that is really because of staff limitations and budget limitations because I am the only one doing public relations and we really don’t outsource anything. We try to do everything we can with our small staff.

With YouTube, there are restrictions on the length of videos and the amount of ‘space’ that is allowed per person/organization. To have adequate ‘space’ and be able to post all of the videos that would be of interest to the citizens, local governments would have to purchase additional space on YouTube. ‘We do things on the free and cheap’, said a PIO who had been an employee of her local government for over 23 years, ‘if it cost any type of money we have to look at it very carefully and decide if it would be a valid use of tax payer money’. Another PIO proclaimed that if social media did require a large investment of time and money, his government would probably not have the resources and would not use it at the capacity they currently are.

With so much going on in local communities and so many things that could potentially be posted on social media, many communities simply do not have enough time and/or staff to manage it all. For example, a PIO from a medium-sized community pointed out, ‘There are times when we have so many things going on and so much to talk about that not everything makes it to our social media sites’. Not having sufficient resources to strategically manage social media makes it difficult for organizations to achieve commitment from their publics and illustrates a lack of dedication on the part of the organizations (Hallahan, 2008).

Another challenge to implementing social media that local governments face is the acceptance of this still relatively new technology by management. Several of the participants noted that when they first approached their municipality leadership about incorporating social media into their communication efforts, many leaders were skeptical. ‘It was a hard sell to management because I was selling to a generation that had never seen the benefits of social media and [they] did not really see a need’, said one participant. She went on to say that while there is still hesitation about the use of social media by some city officials, the majority have embraced it and see its value. An analogous comment came from another participant who stated that when she originally approached the City Manager about using social media, the City Manager thought that people would visit the social media page once and never look at it again:

He thought this because we were not selling something per se, but we actually are, we’re actually trying to make sure our citizens know what we are doing and where we are at … most of that was in the [news] paper and still is, but now a lot of people are looking at the news online, so, if you want to be connected and know what is going on with your city, you have to get it online.

Convincing management of the benefits and potential of social media was a real issue for some PIOs in local governments. Similar challenges were reported by the American Red Cross in a 2011 qualitative study that found resources and management ‘buy-in’ to be a concern for them as well (Briones et al., 2011).

Conclusion

Results of this research yielded several considerations for social media use in local governments and raises several pressing considerations for promoting democracy and encouraging dialogue through social media use. It is evident that the study’s participants realize the importance of social media and how these tools can be used to provide information and build relationships with citizens. Facebook and Twitter were the most widely used social media tools and both were seen as a way for local governments to promote programs and activities, communicate in a crisis, and engage and interact with various publics.

Through the use of social media, local governments are enabling democracy through the open, transparent, and interactive ways they are utilizing this new medium. Citizens are given another channel to learn about and participate in government activities. In addition, local governments are taking advantage of the interact features of social media and allowing for dialogue with citizens about information, questions, and ideas related to their local government.

By having a two-way dialogue through social media, PIOs in local government report being able to quickly address citizen concerns and mitigate negative feelings and comments. This encouragement of both positive and negative feedback makes the government’s efforts to provide transparency and accountability more plausible. Moreover, local governments’ social media undertakings seem to support democratic and participatory citizen engagement. This is in line with Kent’s proposition that effective dialogic use of social media by organizations can contribute to democracy (Kent, 2013). This research shows local governments are promoting democracy with their citizenry through their social media use.

Since two-thirds of the world’s Internet population had visited a social networking or blogging site and that the time individuals were spending on these sites was growing at more than three times the rate of overall Internet growth (Nielsen, 2009), it is not surprising that a social media presence is believed to be an expectation of citizens. Through the use of social media, local governments are fostering government transparency by informing, educating, and reporting about government activities, policies, and community issues on their social media pages. Providing this type of transparency builds trust and accountability in government (Bertot and Jaeger, 2010).

With social media, local governments are able to publish information that the more traditional news establishments might not deem newsworthy or relevant and they are able to get information out instantaneously. Furthermore, one-third of online adults get information about government agencies or officials from social media sites (Pew Research Center, 2010), which highlights the importance of a social media presence.

In terms of barriers to social media implementation and effectiveness in local governments, resources were reported to be the primary barrier. Specifically, PIOs reported they often lack the money, time, and staff to utilize social media to its greatest capacity. In addition, lack of management support of social media efforts can greatly hinder the achievement of the positive aspects that can result from social media use by local governments.

One of the biggest takeaways from this study is that PIOs in local governments are able to be more efficient and their jobs have become streamlined and somewhat easier through the use of social media. It is clear that social media have made PIOs’ jobs easier in many regards by allowing them more opportunities to communicate with citizens and have given them more control over when, how, and what message gets disseminated. In addition, a social media presence is an expectation of citizens, and local government officials recognize the need to be online where many of their citizens get information. Furthermore, while barriers to social media use do exist, PIOs have found ways to mitigate this challenge and are making the most of their social media efforts in spite of these barriers.

Limitations and implications for future research

Although these findings are important in a practical and theoretical sense, there are limitations that must be considered. First, the results are specific to the local level of government. It illustrates the success that local governments have with social media and could be used as a model for other levels of government. Also, only municipalities in two states participated in this research, which would not reveal geographic trends or issues faced by local governments in their use of social media. Finally, the lack of experience by the researcher in conducting qualitative interviews is a limitation of this study.

To further extend this research, a larger sample size should be used to further explore this issue. In addition, state and federal levels of government can also be studied to see whether their social media usage and perceptions are comparable to that of local governments. Focusing on one particular type or community size of local government would help narrow the focus of the research and might more accurately answer the research question. Local governments are demonstrating how social media can benefit and advance government communication efforts, and public relations professionals and scholars alike can learn from their example.

This study illustrates the many opportunities and consequential challenges that local governments face in incorporating social media into their communication strategies. These same opportunities and challenges could be applied to governments of all structures and levels. The impact that social media has on the practice of public relations cannot be ignored. One of this study’s participants emphasized this point by saying, ‘I do think it is a necessary part of today’s world and it is not going away and I hope we can continue to utilize it the way our citizens expect’.

Footnotes

Appendix

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author biography

Melissa W Graham (PhD, University of Tennessee, USA) is an assistant professor in the College of Business at the University of Central Oklahoma where she teaches courses in business communication. Her research interests include organization–public relationships, interactivity and digital engagement, crisis/risk communication, and corporate reputation and identity. Her research has been presented at academic conferences and published in public relations and strategic communication journals. Prior to entering academia, Dr Graham spent over a decade practicing public relations in both the government and non-profit sectors.

References

Anttiroiko

(2004) Introduction to democratic e-governance. In: Malkia

Savolainen

Anttiroiko

(eds) E-transformations in Governance: New Directions in Government and Politics. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, pp.22–49.

Avery

Lariscy

Amador

. (2010) Diffusion of social media among public relations practitioners in health departments across various community population sizes. Journal of Public Relations Research 22: 336–358.

Azyan

(2012) Government-to-citizen communications: Utilizing multiple digital channels effectively, March. Available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/32362140/Government-To-Citizen-Communications-Using-Multiple-Digital-Channels-Effectively (accessed 24 March 2013).

Berg

(2009) Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Bertot

Jaeger

(2010) Designing, implementing and evaluating user centered and citizen centered e-government. International Journal of Electronic Government Research 6(2): 1-17.

Bertot

Jaeger

Munson

Glaisyer

(2010) Social media technology and government transparency. IEEE Computer Society. November Issue.

Briones

Kucj

Liu

. (2011) Keeping up with the digital age: How the American Red Cross uses social media to build relationships. Public Relations Review 37: 37–43.

Dixon

(2010) Towards e-government 2.0: An assessment of where e-government 2.0 is and where it is headed. Public Administration and Management 15: 418–454.

Dow Jones & Company and Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) (2007) Wired for change: A survey of public relations professionals and students: Attitudes, usage and expectations in the new communication technology environment. Available at: www.prsa.org/SearchResults/view/2D-0010/0/Wired_for_Change_A_Survey_of_Public_Relations_Prof#.U9ZWVpWrjdk (accessed 25 March 2013).

10.

Eyrich

Padman

Sweetster

(2008) PR practitioners’ use of social media tools and communication technology. Public Relations Review 34: 412–414.

11.

Fairbanks

Plowman

Rawlins

(2007) Transparency in Government Communi-cation. Journal of Public Affairs 7(10): 23–37.

12.

Hallahan

(2008) Organizational–public relationships in cyberspace. In: Hansen-Horn

Neff

(eds) Public Relations: From Theory to Practice. Boston, MA: Pearson, pp.46–73.

13.

Hand

Ching

(2011) You have one friend request: An exploration of power and citizen engagement in local governments’ use of social media. Administrative Theory and Praxis 33: 362–382.

14.

Heise

(1985) Toward closing the confidence gap: An alternative approach to communication between public and government. Public Affairs Quarterly 9: 196–217.

15.

Kent

(2013) Using social media dialogically: Public relations role in reviving democracy. Public Relations Review 39(4): 337–345.

16.

Kent

Taylor

(1998) Building dialogic relationships through the World Wide Web. Public Relations Review 24: 321–334.

17.

Kent

Taylor

(2002) Toward a dialogic theory of public relations. Public Relations Review 28: 21–37.

18.

Kingsley

(2010) Making the Most of Social Media: 7 Lessons from Successful Cities. Philadelphia, PA: Fels Institute of Government, University of Pennsylvania.

19.

Ledingham

(2003) Explicating relationship management as a general theory of public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research 15: 181–198.

20.

Lindlof

Taylor

(2010) Qualitative Communication Research Methods. Sage.

21.

McCracken

(1988) The Long Interview. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.

22.

Nielsen (2009) Global faces and networked places. The Nielsen Company. Available at: http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/corporate/us/en/newswire/uploads/2009/03/nielsen_globalfaces_mar09.pdf (accessed 25 March 2013)

23.

Norris

(2004) Deepening democracy via e-governance. UN World Public Sector Report. Available at: http://www.pippanorris.com (accessed 25 March 2013)

24.

Pardun

Krugman

(1994) How the architectural style of the home relates to family television viewing. Journal of Broadcast & Electronic Media 38: 145–162.

25.

Pew Internet and American Life Project (2004) Older adults and the Internet, March. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2004/Older-Americans-and-the-Internet.aspx(accessed 25 March 2013)

26.

Pew Research Center (2010) Government online: The internet gives citizens new paths to government services and information. Available at: http://www.pewresearch.com (accessed 25 March 2013).

27.

Porter

Trammell Sweetster

Chung

. (2007) Blog power: Examining the effects of practitioner blog use on roles and power in public relations. Public Relations Review 33: 92–95.

28.

Raine

(2011) Social media and civic life. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/Presenta-tions/2011/Oct/NASCIO.aspx (accessed 25 March 2013)

29.

Rosenstiel

Mitchell

Purcell

K, et al

. (2011) How people learn about their community. Available at: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Local-news/Part-1.aspx (accessed 25 March 2013)

30.

Scott

(2006) ‘E’ the people: Do U.S. municipal government web sites support public involvement? Public Administration Review 66: 341–353.

31.

Scott

(2011) Evaluation of Public Sector Governnance Reforms 2001–2011: Literature Review. Oxford: Oxford Policy Management. Retrieved from http://www.gsdrc.org/docs/open/Scott2011_PSGRLiteratureReview.pdf (accessed 25 March 2013).

32.

Shin

Cameron

(2005) Different sides of the same coin: Mixed views of public relations practitioners and journalists for strategic conflict management. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 82: 318–338.

33.

Smith

(2011) Why Americans use social media. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Why-Americans-Use-Social-Media.aspx (accvessed 25 March 2013)

34.

Sweetster

Kelleher

(2011) A survey of social media use, motivation and leadership among public relations practitioners. Public Relations Review 37: 425–428.

35.

Taylor

Doerfel

(2003) Building inter-organizational relationships that build nations. Human Communication Research 29: 153–181.

36.

Taylor

Perry

(2005) Diffusion of traditional and new media tactics in crisis communication. Public Relations Review 39: 209–217.

37.

Taylor

Kent

(1998) Building Dialogic Relationships through the World Wide Web. Public relations review 3: 321–334.

38.

Viteritti

(1997) The environmental context of communication: Public sector organizations. In: Garnett

(ed.) Handbook of Administrative Communication. New York: Marcel Dekker, pp.79–100.

39.

Welch

Hinnant

Moon

(2004) “Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(3)3: 371-91.

40.

Wigley

Zhang

(2011) A study of PR practitioners’ use of social media in crisis planning. Public Relations Journal 5(3): 1–16.

41.

Yang

Kang

(2009) Measuring blog engagement: Testing a four-dimensional scale. Public Relations Review 35: 323–324.