Parties, Candidates and Citizens On-Line - Åbo Akademi

Introduction
Two specific theories have usually been discussed regarding the on-line activity by
political parties and its potential future impact on electoral competition (cf. Margolis &
Resnick 2000: 14-21). The Internet, it has been argued, could serve to equalize the
electoral playing field. The medium has several distinct features compared to traditional
media. It is low cost, interactive and provides speed and ease of multimedia transmission.
Campaign messages conveyed on the Internet also lack editorial intervention (Bimber &
Davis 2003; Kamarck 1999: 114). Smaller and fringe parties could stand a better chance of
keeping pace with the major parties on the Internet than in traditional political outlets and
thus also potentially reach a larger audience via the net (e.g. Margolis et al. 2003: 58). This
line of thought is often referred to as the equalization theory. The second theory
concerning the impact of on-line campaigning on electoral competition perceives a ‘nochange’
scenario. According to this theoretical view, politics on the internet is merely an
extension of off-line politics and will fail to alter established power structures (Margolis &
Resnick 2000: 2; Norris 2003: 23). This would partly be due to the major parties’ higher
off-line visibility, which provides them with more opportunities for guiding voters to their
sites. Moreover, even though Internet campaigning is more affordable than TVadvertising,
the costs of skilful web designers are steadily rising (Margolis et al. 1997,
2003; Margolis & Resnick 2000: 53-74). Smaller parties without large campaign resources
would still be disadvantaged on-line. This theory is usually called the normalization theory.
Several studies relating to party competition on-line have been conducted (e.g.
Gibson et al. 2003; Gibson & Ward 2002; Greer & LaPointe 2003; Kamarck 2002; Norris
2003; Margolis et al. 1997, 2003; Margolis & Resnick 2000). These studies provide
empirical evidence pointing in both directions regarding the theories. Many studies of US
web campaigns support the ‘no-change’ situation (Norris 2003: 42). The results
concerning campaigns in other countries are more inconsistent (e.g. Cunha et al. 2003;
Gibson & Römmele 2003; Newell 2001). However, there have been few attempts to
systematically explore the conditions in which the findings of either normalization or
equalization have occurred. Some researchers note that party web campaigning seems
independent from national and institutional context (e.g. Gibson et al. 2003: 66-7). Others
argue that country specific conditions and institutional settings seem to influence party
web campaigning (e.g. Cunha et al. 2003: 70-4; March 2003: 20; Gibson & Ward 2002:
104).
This uncertainty in the scholarly literature provides an interesting research
problem. Are there any systematic differences in the country settings in which the parties
36