Sticks and stones

Comparing Twitter campaigning strategies in the EU referendum

S Usherwood, Katharine Wright

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Both camps made extensive use of social media during the referendum, both to mobilise existing supporters and to convert new ones. However, the three main groups – Stronger In, Vote Leave and Leave.EU – each took differing strategies within this. Drawing on tweets published by the groups, the paper compares the use of different positive and negative frames, as well the thematic content. While reinforcing other work that shows differentials in focus on specific themes – economics for Stronger In, politics and immigration for the Leave groups – the analysis also highlights the use on both sides of “sticks” (capitalisation on the other side’s errors) and “stones” (new issues and framings that the group brings to the debate). If the latter constituted the pre-game plan, then the former became a substantial part of the practical application during the campaign, a development reinforced by the nature of the medium itself.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)371-388
JournalBritish Journal of Politics and International Relations
Volume19
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Mar 2017

Keywords

  • campaigning
  • EU referendum
  • European Union
  • social media
  • Twitter
  • voter mobilisation

Cite this

Usherwood, S., & Wright, K. (2017). Sticks and stones: Comparing Twitter campaigning strategies in the EU referendum. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(2), 371-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117700659
Usherwood, S ; Wright, Katharine. / Sticks and stones : Comparing Twitter campaigning strategies in the EU referendum. In: British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 2017 ; Vol. 19, No. 2. pp. 371-388.
@article{dc6481a81598469fbb339b152cea0273,
title = "Sticks and stones: Comparing Twitter campaigning strategies in the EU referendum",
abstract = "Both camps made extensive use of social media during the referendum, both to mobilise existing supporters and to convert new ones. However, the three main groups – Stronger In, Vote Leave and Leave.EU – each took differing strategies within this. Drawing on tweets published by the groups, the paper compares the use of different positive and negative frames, as well the thematic content. While reinforcing other work that shows differentials in focus on specific themes – economics for Stronger In, politics and immigration for the Leave groups – the analysis also highlights the use on both sides of “sticks” (capitalisation on the other side’s errors) and “stones” (new issues and framings that the group brings to the debate). If the latter constituted the pre-game plan, then the former became a substantial part of the practical application during the campaign, a development reinforced by the nature of the medium itself.",
keywords = "campaigning, EU referendum, European Union, social media, Twitter, voter mobilisation",
author = "S Usherwood and Katharine Wright",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1177/1369148117700659",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "371--388",
number = "2",

}

Usherwood, S & Wright, K 2017, 'Sticks and stones: Comparing Twitter campaigning strategies in the EU referendum', British Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 371-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117700659

Sticks and stones : Comparing Twitter campaigning strategies in the EU referendum. / Usherwood, S; Wright, Katharine.

In: British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 19, No. 2, 31.03.2017, p. 371-388.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sticks and stones

T2 - Comparing Twitter campaigning strategies in the EU referendum

AU - Usherwood, S

AU - Wright, Katharine

PY - 2017/3/31

Y1 - 2017/3/31

N2 - Both camps made extensive use of social media during the referendum, both to mobilise existing supporters and to convert new ones. However, the three main groups – Stronger In, Vote Leave and Leave.EU – each took differing strategies within this. Drawing on tweets published by the groups, the paper compares the use of different positive and negative frames, as well the thematic content. While reinforcing other work that shows differentials in focus on specific themes – economics for Stronger In, politics and immigration for the Leave groups – the analysis also highlights the use on both sides of “sticks” (capitalisation on the other side’s errors) and “stones” (new issues and framings that the group brings to the debate). If the latter constituted the pre-game plan, then the former became a substantial part of the practical application during the campaign, a development reinforced by the nature of the medium itself.

AB - Both camps made extensive use of social media during the referendum, both to mobilise existing supporters and to convert new ones. However, the three main groups – Stronger In, Vote Leave and Leave.EU – each took differing strategies within this. Drawing on tweets published by the groups, the paper compares the use of different positive and negative frames, as well the thematic content. While reinforcing other work that shows differentials in focus on specific themes – economics for Stronger In, politics and immigration for the Leave groups – the analysis also highlights the use on both sides of “sticks” (capitalisation on the other side’s errors) and “stones” (new issues and framings that the group brings to the debate). If the latter constituted the pre-game plan, then the former became a substantial part of the practical application during the campaign, a development reinforced by the nature of the medium itself.

KW - campaigning

KW - EU referendum

KW - European Union

KW - social media

KW - Twitter

KW - voter mobilisation

U2 - 10.1177/1369148117700659

DO - 10.1177/1369148117700659

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 371

EP - 388

IS - 2

ER -

Usherwood S, Wright K. Sticks and stones: Comparing Twitter campaigning strategies in the EU referendum. British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 2017 Mar 31;19(2):371-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117700659