Connective Campaigns: A framework for comparing platform-based electoral campaigning

In the first decades of 21st century postmodern campaigning has apparently begun to turn into something else. First in the USA and then in the UK, the renewed attention toward local ground campaigning and the adoption of platform-based digital technologies that lower coordination and communication costs have led to an increased involvement of citizens. This has sparked several optimistic commentaries on the decentralizing and therefore democratizing potential of such new forms of campaigning, apparently substituting hierarchical command with the facilitation of peer-to-peer interaction. However as platforms are still centrally managed and access to data is limited campaign leaders continue to exert a high degree of control over the activities of volunteers. To enhance our understanding of these new platform-based forms of campaigning, I will first of all develop a theoretical framework allowing the comparation of the different models of digitally enabled ground campaigns. The first step starts with the discussion of the concept of connective action proposed by Bennet and Segerberg (2013), in order to develop the concept of connective campaigning. I will then turn to integrating Flanagin, Bimber and Stohl’s (2006, 2012) concepts of interactivity and engagement within Stromer-Galley’s (2014) controlled interactivity framework, to provide a new theoretical framework useful to compare different forms of digital management of interactions within connective campaigns. Having rooted my analysis in this literature, I will then supplement Stromer Galley’s analysis by showing that it is not only the structure of digital platforms that shapes the levels of interactivity and decentralization, but also that of the human infrastructure; with this concept I refer to the ensemble of organizational structures and systems of representation and legitimation that shape the collective use actors make of digital tools. After the discussion of the theoretical frame, I will turn to comparing four cases of connective campaigns: Howard Dean’s primary campaign; Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008; Bernie Sanders’ campaign for the Democratic Party primary in 2016; and finally Labour Party’s campaign for the general election of 2019, with a specific focus on the app My Campaign Map developed by Momentum. The comparative analysis explores the different patterns of mutual adaptation between digital and human infrastructures, trying to formulate some generalizations regarding patterns of interaction and engagement and the mechanisms regulating their integration.