Gearhart 1
Gordon Gearhart
Dr. Miller
POL 207
12/5/12
The Correlation Between Social Media and Voter Turnout
The Internet has become an integral part in our lives, a source for information, for
shopping, for entertainment, and for sharing thoughts and images with others. Over the years,
the use of social media has been on a rise. With the use of social media we have the ability to
engage in dialogue with friends, family, and colleagues from all over the world on a wide array
of topics through ‘posted’ statements, images, and videos. Social media has become an open
forum where users can share their opinion about what is occurring in the world, in their own
backyard, or in their own personal lives while giving others the opportunity to respond. In an
election year, major news outlets such as NBC and FOX provide coverage about what is
happening in the political spectrum, allowing users who ‘like’ the page to have the ability to
engage in political debate. While social media serves as a platform for political debate, does it
have the ability to mobilize individuals to engage politically outside of cyberspace? Generally
speaking, do social networking websites help individuals engage in political activism?
As a Political Science major and a politically active young adult who uses social media
and social networking websites on a day to day basis, I am interested in determining if these
outlets have any influence in engaging more individuals to become politically active or if these
outlets influence voter turnout. Sharing politically charged images and offering my opinions on
the 2012 Presidential race has become a daily habit for me; for example, if an image fits in with
my political ideology, I share that picture with everyone that I am “friends” with in order to
indicate my political views. Social networking websites being used for political purposes is a

Gearhart 2
new phenomenon. Gaining more insight into this unexplored arena is a field of research that I am
interested in pursuing.
Stepping across the threshold of the Oval Office a newly sworn in President begins one
of the greatest roles in his life. Winning the White House is not easy. It requires communication
skills, a strategy, and a platform that appeals to the voters. In each campaign during an election
year, highly motivated candidates and their dedicated, supportive constituents are turning to a
new media, social media to be exact, as they make the best case for who should be in office.
While old media is still being used, activism through social media (Facebook, MySpace, and
Twitter) is a mainstay of contemporary political campaigns. As Election Day draws near,
candidates and their constituents will stop at nothing to bring their message to others. While the
intent of using social media during an election year is to keep the voters informed and mobilized
to be part of the election process, does it really do so? Is there a correlation between political
activism through social media and voter turnout?
Social media websites such as Facebook, MySpace and Twitter are online systems
through which individuals have the opportunity to make connections with and communicate to
other users who may or may not share the same values and norms (Ellison & Boyd 2008). The
people who use these websites vary with age, but a significant number of users who utilize these
social networking websites are young adults (Baumgartner & Morris 2010). This particular
demographic relies on these websites as their source for general news, which is offered through
several media networks such as FOX or CNN (Tedesco 2011). For many users who are
politically engaged, social media serves as a forum to share ‘politically entertaining’ user
generated images and videos which support his or her political affiliation that are open for
response and discussion (Towner & Dulio 2011,Wolley & Limperos, Oliver 2010). In addition,

Gearhart 3
these social media websites also give users the opportunity to form groups, where like-minded
individuals who share the same ideologies, political or otherwise, discuss and respond to current
events relating to their interest, resulting in the polarization of viewpoints (Nie et.al. 2010). In
the political spectrum, these groups serve two purposes: to gain membership and encourage
political participation while at the same time allowing socialization with those who are new to
the political realm with the hopes of having them follow in their beliefs (Limperos & Oliver
2010; Zhang et. al 2009; Grabber 2009). Individuals who are politically engaged tend to
gravitate towards communities that support their “pre-existing beliefs” to further solidify their
allegiance to a political party or movement (Boomgaarden, Vliegenthart, de Vreese 2012). Does
this accessibility to political information have an impact on voter participation?
According to some scholars, there is a direct correlation between interactions through
social media and voter turnout. Users of social media tend to be supportive of a few specific
issues that the individual (candidate) advocates; for someone who is not as politically active, nor
informed, the use of social media gives them an opportunity to get motivated about an issue that
they could strongly support, leading to an increase in knowledge and voter turnout (Kushin &
Yamamoto 2010). Users who follow their preferred candidate through social media are able to
gain more insight about how he or she feels from the messages and images these candidates
broadcast; in fact, political candidates have capitalized on this by utilizing symbolic speech
which is often captioned in pictures that politically engaged individuals share (Schweitzer 2012).
According to scholars (Fernandes, Giracau, Bowers & Neely), “…people in general want
substantive information about a candidate’s position on issues” (2010). Through social media,
individuals, (termed as the issue public by Ho et.al. 2011) , who closely follow issues that they
primarily advocate, especially controversial issues, have a greater knowledge of their candidate’s

Gearhart 4
views than those who are not politically engaged through social media (2011). Social media not
only serves as a way for the general public to learn and debate about issues but it also acts as a
way to encourage and mobilize the politically involved to vote. Citizens and political leaders
alike broadcast the importance of voting, with added emphasis on young voters. Studies indicate
that young adult voters have taken heed to the various images and messages encouraging them to
vote; for example, in the 2004 presidential election, the young adult vote increased by 11 percent
and the participation in battleground states significantly increased (Pasek, Kenski, Romer &
Jamieson 2006). According to Lopez, Kirby, & Sagoff (2005), the percentage of young adult
voters increased by 47% (Lopez, Kirby, & Sagoff 2005; Pasek, Kenski, Romer & Jamieson
2006). Since social media is a means of “bottom-up power negotiation”, it allows for a variety of
voices to encourage and promote a healthy democratic lifestyle (Ikufor 2012). Promoting a
healthy democratic lifestyle can only be achieved by two things: becoming an educated citizen
and making an informed decision to vote for a candidate of one’s choosing.
Some scholars argue that there is a disconnect between voter turnout and social media; in
fact, scholars also believe that social media increases voter apathy and cynicism (Pasek, Kenski,
Romer & Jamieson 2006; Baumgartner & Morris 2010; Pasek, Kenski, Romer & Jamison 2006;
Tedesco 2011; Ho et.al 2011; Vassil 2010). Users of social media, young adults in particular,
who engage in these websites for an extended period of time have an adverse tendency to engage
in political activism because these websites take so much of their time (Pasek, Kenski, Romer &
Jamieson 2006). While social networking websites provide an abundance of information, users
who gained knowledge from these sites increased their participation in online debates as opposed
to offline political participation (i.e voting), however, “they are no more knowledgeable about
politics (in general and about the field of presidential candidates) than are their counterparts and,

Gearhart 5
in fact, seem to be less so” (Baumgartner, Morris 2010). Because citizens rely on independent
news sources on social media to gain their knowledge, if these sources “fail to act as watchdogs”,
it may affect their decision to be a part of the political process (Ho et.al 2011). Individuals who
use social networking sites on a daily basis tend to tune out any messages or images from news
media and friends that are not applicable to him or her (Vassil 2010). These messages may be on
topics that hold no interest for the daily user, do not represent their beliefs or viewpoints, or
could actually be considered offensive to their way of thinking. This also extends to mobilizing
forces that encourage users to vote for a particular candidate; the more images and messages that
are being shared by users on a constant basis, there is likelihood that this individual will ignore
the message, regardless if it falls into the individual’s political ideology (Vassil 2010).
While scholarly research has focused on how the information found in social networking
websites correlates with political awareness (Pasek, Kaseki, Romer 2006; Tedesco 2010), there
has not been a focus on how the quantity of information shared between individuals through
these outlets can and have desensitized potential voters. While images and messages sent from
different users attempt to sway voters to favor a certain candidate, it is my view that images that
contain political commentary being repeatedly sent over a period of time to individuals will
eventually cause these individuals to espouse negative views for the candidates and apathy
towards the entire election process. Appearing frequently on individuals’ home pages, these
repetitive images and messages would cause individuals to be less concerned about the substance
of the political commentary or the bias thereof, but instead would be the source of negative
connotations about voting in general.
It is my view that political images repeatedly shared through social media would be
detrimental to the election process in yet an additional way. Political images and messages

Gearhart 6
directed about candidates would make it seem to the politically inactive, uniformed individual
that both candidates do not have the qualifications necessary to become president. These images
would only show how both candidates have failed in their respective office. Repetitive attacks
through social media might cause individuals to question the qualifications of the candidates,
thus causing the individuals’ trust in the candidates to be diminished. While repetitive sharing of
attacking messages, commentaries, and images through social media would solidify the
polarization in each party, it is my view that they would dissuade the typical American citizen
from voting. In order to determine the correlation between social media and social networking
websites with voter turnout, an in-depth study would need to be conducted involving several
research methods and a diverse study group. It is based on the following hypotheses that my
research will be conducted.
In a comparison of individuals, those who feel that they are being bombarded with
unnecessary, repetitive exposure to political images, messages, and commentaries are more
likely to be dissuaded from voting or being politically active than those who do not feel that they
are being bombarded with unnecessary, repetitive exposure to political images, messages, and
commentaries. In addition, those who have a negative response to the level of exposure of
biased social media will become apathetic toward the election process while those who have a
positive response will solidify their political beliefs. In my primary hypothesis, the dependent
variable would be the dissuasion from voting, while the independent variables would be feeling
bombarded with politically charged media. In my secondary hypothesis, the dependent variable
would be the apathy that is felt towards the election process, while the independent variables
would respond to politically charged media.

Gearhart 7
To conduct my research and collect data, I would utilize two methods: sending a survey
to a sample size of 1000 individuals and conducting a smaller focus group of approximately 100
individuals. According to the American Research Group, Inc. Margin of Error Calculator, out
of a population of 8000 individuals with a sample size of (N=1000) for the survey, the margin of
error for this dataset would be relatively low at 2.9%. The timing of both the sending of the
surveys and the conducting of the focus group would be four to six weeks after the 2012
Presidential election cycle so that the individuals would still be able to reflect on their
experiences while having some relief from viewing politically charged media. Utilizing two
methods of data collection would give me a wider range of answers; the survey would provide
the overarching themes and responses related to politically charged media shared through social
networking sites and the focus group would provide in-depth information.
I will focus first on the survey. The survey would be sent to 1000 randomly selected
individuals with the hope of having the most respondents. For those who frequently use social
media, the survey would be sent through social networking websites and email, for those who
rarely or never use social media, the survey would be sent through email. The series of questions
would cover topics related to time spent on networking websites and the reason for time spent on
these websites both before and during the Presidential race, identifying the networking sites
followed and the frequency with which the individual shares/posts commentary, determining as
to whether the person is politically active and how their political views are expressed, their
reaction to shared images and messages that fall outside their political views, determining the
frequency with which the individual observed repetitive images and messages and their impact
on voting. Consult Table A for a complete list of questions.

Gearhart 8
Taken from several original sources and rebroadcast by a multitude of individuals, repetitively
shared images and messages would be those that have the same content, deliver the same
message, and promote the same principles. Raising these questions on a survey to a large,
general audience would help me determine how much time is spent on social networking
websites in general, whether the time spent was more or less during the 2012 Presidential race,
whether people have a tendency to follow and post to major new outlets’ posts, the frequency of
repetitive posts and commentaries and the overall impact on one’s decision to vote.
Secondly, I will focus on the focus group. From the respondents from the
aforementioned survey a sampling of 100 individuals would be randomly selected from across
the different geographical parts of the United States and invited to participate in the focus group.
The focus group, as stated previously, would be held 4 -6 weeks after the 2012 Presidential race.
The focus group would be held at the University of Dayton and conducted by an independent
moderator as to show no bias. Questions raised and documented at the beginning of the focus
group session would include (Appendix - Table B): determining demographics, i.e. age, sex,
race, and whether the individual voted in the election. If the individual voted, he/she would be
asked to specify party affiliation and number of years voting. If the individual did not vote,
he/she would be asked to join another focus group. Both groups would be asked several
common questions while also asking some specifically for their group. The series of questions
for those who voted would cover topics related to their voting practice in the prior election,
understanding their impression of the volume and repetitiveness of images and messages through
social message during two consecutive Presidential races, learning their thoughts on the amount
and source of new information they received about the candidates through social networking
websites, and the impact that social media had on them deciding to vote. Consult Table B for a

Gearhart 9
complete series of questions. Among the questions to be raised to the individuals who did not
vote would be a confirmation of their voting practice in the prior election. From there the
following questions would cover topics related to determining if social networking websites were
part of their routine, determining if new information learned through politically charged
messages turned them against the candidates running, and whether social media discouraged
them from voting. Consult Table C for a complete series of questions. Questions of the nature
referenced in Tables A, B, and C, would 1) offer insight into the individuals’ use of social media
websites, 2) measure the individuals’ political efficacy, 3) indicate whether individuals allow
social media websites to persuade or discourage voting, and 4) measure the individuals’ cynicism
towards the electoral process.
With only weeks away from the Presidential election of 2012, social media is in full
throttle with candidates, media, and the average politically active American sharing images,
messages, and commentaries hoping to persuade or dissuade others in the election process.
Repetitiveness of these images, messages, and commentaries undoubtedly has an impact on those
individuals sharing, receiving, and responding to these posts, but to what extent is this impact?
Does it encourage or deter individuals from voting? According to the literature, there is a
disagreement on the impact social media has on voter turnout and political participation as a
whole. Is there a correlation between the use of social media and offline political activism, i.e.
voter turnout? What we don’t know is what happens to individuals who are exposed to a high
frequency of politically charged images, messages, and commentaries. Are these individuals
desensitized to this information or will these images, messages, and commentaries increase the
level of cynicism towards candidates and the election process. Research and collecting data on
this topic will be conducted using a two method approach. On a grand scale, a survey will

Gearhart 10
capture general information and themes that appear to be recurring. On a much smaller scale, a
focus group divided yet into two smaller groups will capture detailed information as to the true
impact that social media networks had on the decision to vote. As noted by John Zaller in his
book “The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion”, “citizens vary in their habitual attention to
politics and hence in their exposure to political information and argumentation in the media”
(Zaller 1).

Gearhart 11
Appendix
Table A
Questions Responses
How much time do you spend on social
networking websites per week?
_1-7 hours _8-15 _16-24 _more than 24
For what purpose do you spend time on these
websites?
_Entertainment _News _Networking _Other
Which social networking websites do you use? _Facebook _Twitter _Google + _Other
On these social networking sites do you follow
any major news outlets?
_Yes _No
Do you share/offer commentary on the posts
originating with the major news outlets?
_Yes _No
During the 2012 Presidential race, did you
spend more or less time on these social
networking websites?
_More _Less _Not at all
Are you politically active? _Yes _No
How do you express your political views? _Share image/video/link to other website
_Engage in dialogue
_Other
What is your reaction to shared images and
messages in social media that fall within your
political views?
_Approve _Disapprove _Neutral
What is your reaction to shared images and
messages in social media that fall outside your
political views?
_Approve _Disapprove _Neutral
On a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being not
frequent and 10 being extremely frequently,
how often did you observe repetitively shared
images and messages throughout the 2012
Presidential race?
_1 _2 _3 _4 _5 _6 _7 _8 _9 _10
Were these repetitively shared images and
messages a deterrent to voting?
_Yes _No
If these shared images and messages were a
deterrent to voting, why were they?
_Different viewpoint _Harassing in nature
_Other

Gearhart 12
Appendix
Table B
Questions Responses
Demographic: Age _18- 24 _25-40 _41-60 _over 60
Demographic: Sex _M _F _Other
Demographic: Race _Caucasian _African-American _Asian
_Native American _Hispanic _Other
Did you vote in the election? If yes, continue
below. If no, continue to Table C.
_Yes _No
Party Affiliation _Democrat _Republican _Other
Number of years voting _First time _Under 10 _Over 10
Did you vote in the 2008 Presidential election
when social networking was first used as a
political tool?
_Yes _No
Was the volume of images and messages
through social media networking more or less
than in 2008?
_More _Less _Same
If more, were the images, messages, and
commentaries more repetitive than before?
_Yes _No
Did you learn additional information about the
candidates through social networking websites?
_Yes _No
If so, from whom was the additional
information received?
_Friends _Family _Mainstream News Media
_Independent News Media _Candidate _Other
Since you voted, do you believe that social
media encouraged you to vote?
_Yes _No

Gearhart 13
Appendix
Table C
Questions Responses
Demographic: Age _18- 24 _25-40 _41-60 _over 60
Demographic: Sex _M _F _Other
Demographic: Race _Caucasian _African-American _Asian
_Native American _Hispanic _Other
Did you vote in the 2008 Presidential election?
_Yes _No
Are social networking websites a part of your
routine?
_Yes _No
Did you observe politically charged messages
that provided additional information that turned
you against the candidates running?
_Yes _No
Were the images, messages, and commentaries
too repetitive?
_Yes _No
Since you did not vote, do you believe that
social media discouraged you from voting?
_Yes _No

Gearhart 14
Works Cited
Baumgartner, J. C., & Morris, J. S. (2010). MyFaceTube Politics: Social Networking Web Sites
and Political Engagement of Young Adults.Social Science Computer Review, 28(1), 24-44.
Boomgaarden, H. G., Vliegenthart, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2012). A worldwide presidential
election: The impact of the media on candidate and campaign evaluations. International Journal
of Public Opinion Research, 24(1), 42-61. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edr041
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and
scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11.
http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html
Dylko, I. B., Beam, M. A., Landreville, K. D., & Geidner, N. (2012). Filtering 2008 US
presidential election news on YouTube by elites and nonelites: An examination of the
democratizing potential of the internet.New Media & Society, 14(5), 832-849. doi:
10.1177/1461444811428899
Fernandes, J., Giurcanu, M., Bowers, K. W., & Neely, J. C. (2010). The Writing on the Wall: A
Content Analysis of College Students' Facebook Groups for the 2008 Presidential Election. Mass
Communication & Society, 13(5), 653-675. doi:10.1080/15205436.2010.516865
Graber, Doris A. Mass Media and American Politics. Washington, DC: CQ, 2009. Print.
Hanson, G., Haridakis, P. M., Cunningham, A. W., Sharma, R., & Ponder, J. D. (2010). The
2008 presidential campaign: Political cynicism in the age of facebook, MySpace, and
YouTube. Mass Communication & Society, 13(5), 584-607. doi:
10.1080/15205436.2010.513470
Ho, S. S., Binder, A. R., Becker, A. B., Moy, P., Scheufele, D. A., Brossard, D., & Gunther, A.
C. (2011). The role of perceptions of media bias in general and issue-specific political
participation. Mass Communication & Society, 14(3), 343-374. doi:
10.1080/15205436.2010.491933
Ikufor, Presley. "''Elections'' or ''Selections''? Blogging and Twittering the Nigerian 2007 General
Elections." Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 32.3 (2012): 398-414. Print.
Kushin, M. J., & Yamamoto, M. (2010). Did social media really matter? college students' use of
online media and political decision making in the 2008 election. Mass Communication &
Society, 13(5), 608-630. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2010.516863
"Margin of Error Calculator." American Research Group, Inc. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Nov. 2012.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/moe.html

Gearhart 15
Nie, Norman H., Darwin W. Miller, III, Saar Golde, Daniel M. Butler, and Kenneth Winneg.
"The World Wide Web and the U.S. Political News Market." American Journal of Political
Science 54.2 (2010): 428-39. Print
Pasek, J., Kenski, K., Romer, D., & Jamieson, K. (2006). America's Youth and Community
Engagement: How Use of Mass Media Is Related to Civic Activity and Political Awareness in
14- to 22-Year-Olds. Communication Research, 33(3), 115-135.
doi:10.117710093650206287073
Schweitzer, E. J. (2012). The mediatization of E-campaigning: Evidence from german party
websites in state, national, and european parliamentary elections 2002-2009. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 283-302. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01577.x
Tedesco, J. C. (2011). Political Information Efficacy and Internet Effects in the 2008 U.S.
Presidential Election. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(6), 696-713.
doi:10.1177/0002764211398089
Towner, T. L., & Dulio, D. A. (2011). The web 2.0 election: Does the online medium
matter? Journal of Political Marketing, 10(1), 165-188. doi: 10.1080/15377857.2011.540220
Vassil, K., & Weber, T. (2011). A bottleneck model of e-voting: Why technology fails to boost
turnout. New Media & Society, 13(8), 1336-1354. doi:10.1177/1461444811405807
Weiwu, Z., Johnson, T. J., Seltzer, T., & Bichard, S. L. (2010). The Revolution Will be
Networked: The Influence of Social Networking Sites on Political Attitudes and Behavior. Social
Science Computer Review, 28(1), 75-92.
Woolley, J. K., Limperos, A. M., & Oliver, M. B. (2010). The 2008 presidential election, 2.0: A
content analysis of user-generated political facebook groups. Mass Communication &
Society, 13(5), 631-652. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2010.516864
Zaller, John. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge [England: Cambridge UP,
1992. Print