Rachel Gibson, a leading expert in party politics, has extensively researched the evolution of digital campaigns, spanning from web 1.0 and email services to the Web 2.0 era marked by blogging and interactive technology. Her interest was piqued early in her career by the emergence of European political parties on the ideological fringes.

"They saw such technology as a means to amplify their voices,” she says. “This led me to investigate whether digital technology held the potential to rebalance power dynamics within the political party system, offering smaller parties a more influential platform.”

Since that time, digital technology has evolved from being perceived as a niche tool to becoming an essential component of political campaigns. Gibson’s comparative study, DiCED, delves into the specific ways this transformation has occurred and its implication for political party campaigns in five countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Poland, and Germany.

"During election campaigns in these countries, we survey a representative sample of 5000 individuals and ask their permission to access their social media data. For those respondents that consent, the combination of these two data sources provides a very powerful insight into their online activity, enabling us to more accurately measure and understand the impact of digital content on their political behaviour and attitudes. This is a complex aspect to research given the vast volume of content and the challenges in tracking individual exposure.”

In the EU, political parties are gearing up for the 2024 European elections. How do you expect their campaign to differ from the one five years ago?

Convincing the public that what they perceive is genuinely real, rather than fake or AI-generated, will pose a considerable challenge. AI has become adept at mimicking reality, demanding a closer examination this time around. Parties must not only persuade the public of the authenticity of their messages but also enhance public awareness regarding the potential presence of manipulated content: a challenge they didn't face to this extent in the past.

Additionally, parties should consider the role of influencers on political and social media channels, especially the rise of micro-influencers. These influencers, seen prominently in the US, could play a crucial role in connecting with diverse communities and younger voters.

Who exactly are these micro-influencers?

These individuals do not belong to political parties, are not candidates, and are not news journalists. They don't fit the conventional profile of formal political actors. However, they possess considerable influence and maintain a significant online presence—a phenomenon that wouldn't have existed in the era before social media. Typically, micro-influencers have around 100,000 followers or so.

The key is that they maintain close relationships with their followers; they are not distant figures. They have influence, but they are also influenced because they understand their audience, and their audience likes them. This interaction is very much based on an authentic kind of engagement. If a political party can connect to these individuals, it can significantly enhance the trustworthiness of its message. Messages delivered by someone who followers trust and admire are more likely to resonate than traditional advertising methods.

In your research, you also discuss data-driven messaging. Could you explain what you mean by that?

It's a fascinating concept because a data-driven approach essentially involves maintaining an extensive database that offers profound insights into your voters. It goes beyond merely considering their demographic traits; it delves into their preferences, personalities, and even psychological profiles. This methodology creates a highly detailed and nuanced portrayal of your target audience. This data isn't collected just for informational purposes; it serves as the foundation for making strategic decisions regarding your political campaign. It informs everything from the content of your messages and the intended recipients to the choice of communication channels.

Essentially, data-driven campaigning relies on computer algorithms and automated systems to guide these decisions, rather than relying solely on human judgment. While no political party has fully transitioned to a completely data-driven approach, it's fair to say that compared to past elections, parties now place greater emphasis on various forms of individual-level data. This shift is particularly pronounced in the United States, where data-driven campaigning is prevalent, while European regulations tend to be more restrictive in this regard.

What aspects in your research have been particularly surprising?

We initially expected the United States to lead in terms of awareness, understanding, and utilization of micro-targeting and data-driven processes. However, even in the United States, a fully computer-driven model hasn't been fully embraced. at the end of the day, there is still an inclination to rely on human intelligence rather than artificial intelligence.

Interestingly, when we analysed public opinion across the United States, Germany, and France regarding data-driven campaigning, we found fewer differences than anticipated. People in these countries had relatively similar levels of understanding about concepts like micro-targeting and personal data use in campaigns. We also observed that in recent U.S. elections, both Donald Trump and Joe Biden campaigns emphasized collective messages like "Make America Great Again" and "Build Back Better," despite the availability of micro-targeting. This was unexpected. It suggests that people may still prefer messages that speak to the collective good and bring people together.

Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter has sparked discussions about the freedom of speech. Are we witnessing a new form of democracy?

In my research on digital politics, I have noticed a trend toward what we might call “micro politics” which centres on more issue-based and individualistic appeals to voters, a greater role for celebrity influencers and shifting coalitions and promotion of minority interests. While this narrowing of the political sphere has been accompanied by growing fears of a rise in extremism, and polarization, it is also clear that regulatory and technological tools are now being developed by governing bodies and tech companies to moderate and reduce this narrowing of the public sphere. I am increasingly convinced we need innovative, multi-actor solutions that combine technology and politics to diagnose the problems associated with micro-politics and work toward restoring broader ‘macro’ outcomes.

In this context, I hope that my project can play a role by providing insights into how technology affects politics and elections. It's a step towards understanding whether these outcomes align with our democratic ideals and, if not, how we can implement changes to shape the kind of democracy and politics we desire.

When you started your project, AI was not as prominent as it is today. Given the rapid developments this field, how do you envision your research evolving?

I anticipate that the next phase will be heavily influenced by Generative AI, particularly large language models and deep fakes, and that this is a game-changing development. The potential impact of these new tools on campaigning is wide open, with many uncertainties. The next step in my research will explore what lies beyond the current stage in the digital campaign era and how AI will shape that evolution. The critical question for researchers and practitioners is whether computers and AI remain tools to augment and enhance human decision making in campaigning or whether they shift to the front seat and drive strategy. We have not yet reached that point in current elections; however, I cannot confidently predict the same for the future. While it may sound like science fiction, this question needs to be explored. The next phase and challenge for scholars in this field will be to closely examine this evolving landscape, and I am eager to take on this task.

Could there be new forms of disinformation emerging?

This is a crucial point to consider. Until now, fake news stories have become increasingly credible and realistic, blurring the line between what's fake and what's genuine. Nevertheless, we have not yet witnessed a major scandal where an entirely fabricated artificial intelligence-generated campaign story, image, or video goes viral and influences people to change their votes. The key question for researchers of digital elections I think is not if, but when this will happen. When will there be a scenario where such content is so convincing that, even when denied, it still raises doubts among voters about its authenticity? How then is it possible for voters to maintain an already weakened trust in the political system, in their leaders and the political parties? This would mark a new phase in politics beyond the campaign sphere, and with vital elections for the EU, the U.S. and the UK coming up in 2024, one that may be closer than we think.

Biography

Rachel Gibson joined the University of Manchester as Professor of Politics in the Institute for Social Change December 2007. In 2016 she was appointed as Director of the Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Research. She had previously served as Professor of New Media Studies at the University of Leicester and a lecturer in politics at the University of Salford. She completed her PhD thesis on the rise of anti-immigrant parties in Western Europe in the late 20th century at Texas A&M University in the US. She has held visiting fellowships at the Mannheim Centre for European Social Research (MZES), the Australian National University (ANU), and the Autonomous University in Barcelona (AUB).