1 / 20

Measures of Non-Traditional Media Consumption During the 2008 Presidential Campaign

Measures of Non-Traditional Media Consumption During the 2008 Presidential Campaign. MAPOR, Chicago 1:30pm – 3:00pm, November 21, 2009 Authors: J. Michael Dennis, Knowledge Networks Trevor Tompson, The Associated Press Mike Henderson, Harvard University Yelena Kruse, Knowledge Networks.

tivona
Download Presentation

Measures of Non-Traditional Media Consumption During the 2008 Presidential Campaign

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Measures of Non-Traditional Media Consumption During the 2008 Presidential Campaign MAPOR, Chicago 1:30pm – 3:00pm, November 21, 2009 Authors: J. Michael Dennis, Knowledge Networks Trevor Tompson, The Associated Press Mike Henderson, Harvard University Yelena Kruse, Knowledge Networks

  2. Research Questions • Who are the consumers of non-traditional media during the 2008 general election? • What were their candidate preferences? • Who did they vote for? • Also: Who are the online donors to campaigns?

  3. Data Source: AP-Yahoo! Longitudinal Election Panel • Field period: Nov. 2007 to Dec. 2008 – 11-wave longitudinal design • Wave1 baseline obtained 2,735 interviews Compressed schedule: ~ 4 weeks between waves Wave 7 field period 9/5 to 10/12/08 – source of independent var data 1,086 respondents completed all 11 waves Sample Source: KnowledgePanel

  4. Data Collected in the Month After Labor Day • Independent variable: Self-reported usage of Internet in the last month to do any of these 12 things: • Read political news stories from a news website • Visited candidates web sites • Participated in message boards, chat rooms, or discussion groups about politics • Gotten information about candidates issue positions • Gotten information about when or where to vote • Contributed money to a candidate or political cause • Looked for more information about candidates positions on the issues • Found out how the candidates were doing in public opinion polls • Checked the accuracy of claims made by or about the candidates • Watched video clips of a candidates television ads • Emailed an election official • Received email about a political candidate

  5. Data Sources • Respondents grouped according to number of self-reported uses of the net for politics/election in last month: “Net Haters” 0 types used n=914 or 48% “Net Friendly” 1 to 4 types used n=662 or 34% “Net Hypers” 5 or more types used n=347 or 18%

  6. Use of Nontraditional Media Related to… • Measured in the weeks after 2008 Labor Day: • Candidate Preference • Certainty of Candidate Preference • Party ID • Political ideology • Age • Pet ownership! • Measured immediately after the election: • Presidential vote choice

  7. Results Data from Post Labor Day Wave 7 Survey Field Period 9/5/08 to 10/12/2008 Most Interviews Obtained between 9/5 and 9/12 All data are weighted using poststratification weights

  8. Candidate Preference – Or Lack Thereof • 22% of Obama supporters are Net Hypers compared to gen pop percentage of 18%; Undecideds mostly Net Haters – only one in 20 • chi-square p-value < .01

  9. Certainty of Candidate Preference • Net Hypers slightly more likely to be certain to vote for their favorite candidate – consistent with expectation that Net Hypers are engaged in politics – however, many still persuadable voters! • chi-square p-value < .05

  10. Party ID: Giving New Meaning to “Net Neutrality” • Dems and Rep equally likely to be Net Hypers; undecideds less likely to be such • chi-square p-value < .01

  11. Party ID: Similar Online Donation Rates • About one in 10 Dems and Reps gave online in past year – about the same

  12. Political Ideology: A Result! • Most powerful result in the analyses: 42% of “Extreme Liberals” are Net Hypers! • “Extreme Conservatives” also more likely to be Net Hypers, compared to gen pop mean of 18% • chi-square p-value < .01

  13. “Liberals” Donated More Frequently Online • Extreme liberals almost three times more likely to report donating online in past year. Moderates hardly do so at all. • chi-square p-value < .01

  14. Age…Surprisingly Not a Factor • For all the talk about young adults being turned on by the web….not a strong measured impact • chi-square p-value > .1

  15. And Pet Ownership Doesn’t Matter Either! • So much for pet-based political segmentations! • chi-square p-value > .1

  16. Results: Actual Vote Choice Measured on the Same Sample in the week after the General Election

  17. Obama Wins (Again): VOTE by Net Type • Obama voters significantly more likely to be Net Hypers – slightly stronger effect than seen in October candidate preference measure • chi-square p-value < 0.1

  18. More Obama Voters Donated Online • 11% of Obama voters donated online, as measured in the Sept-Oct 2008 wave -- slightly more likely to have donated online • chi-square p-value < 0.1

  19. Final Thoughts

  20. Insights • Hyper Net users, as consumers of nontraditional media, represent a significant segment of the electorate • Supporters of both parties report similar levels of use of nontraditional media and online donation • Extreme liberals and conservative both report high levels of use of nontraditional media, with liberals actively donating money online • Undecideds during the campaign and nonvoters less likely to use nontraditional media • Obama turned-out voters slightly more likely to be Net Hypers and online donors, consistent with popular wisdom of his campaign

More Related