Social Media Indicator and Local Elections in the Netherlands: Towards a Framework for Evaluating the Influence of Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook

  • Robin EffingEmail author
  • Jos van Hillegersberg
  • Theo Huibers
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 15)


Social media has become a popular tool in the political landscape. As a result, it is of increased importance to evaluate social media campaigns of politicians. However, there is currently little knowledge how to measure and evaluate the influence of social media in political campaigns, especially at the local scale. This chapter is a step further towards the development of a theoretical framework and an algorithm that contributes to more reliable impact measurement of social media campaigns by politicians. The Social Media Indicator-2 framework and a related scoring algorithm are introduced to evaluate the influence of individual political candidates via social media on their social environment. The framework is tested by applying it in an empirical pilot study based on the local 2014 municipal elections in the Netherlands. We collected data for the political candidates and their parties in a pre-defined period and were able to relate scores to voting outcome. Positive correlations were revealed between social media contribution scores of politicians and their preference votes within the province of Overijssel in the Netherlands.


Social Media Political Party Local Election Preference Vote Vote Outcome 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The research projects mentioned in this chapter are initiated, supported, and funded by the Social Indicator Consortium as a collaborative project from Saxion University of Applied Sciences, University of Twente and eLabbs in Enschede, The Netherlands.


  1. Bayraktutan, G., Binark, M., Çomu, T., Doğu, B., İslamoğlu, G., & Telli Aydemir, A. (2014). The use of Facebook by political parties and leaders in the 2011 Turkish general elections. In B. Pătruţ & M. Pătruţ (Eds.), Social media in politics (Vol. 13, pp. 165–199). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berthon, P. R., Pitt, L. F., Plangger, K., & Shapiro, D. (2012). Marketing meets Web 2.0, social media, and creative consumers: Implications for international marketing strategy. Business Horizons, 55(3), 261–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29(2), 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bottles, K., & Sherlock, T. (2011). Who should manage your social media strategy? Physician Executive, 37(2), 68–72.Google Scholar
  5. Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2009). Connected: The surprising power of our social networks and how they shape our lives. New York: Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  7. D’heer, E., & Verdegem, P. (2014). An intermedia understanding of the networked twitter ecology. In B. Pătruţ & M. Pătruţ (Eds.), Social media in politics (Vol. 13, pp. 81–96). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deželan, T., Vobič, I., & Maksuti, A. (2014). Twitter campaigning in the 2011 national election in Slovenia. In B. Pătruţ & M. Pătruţ (Eds.), Social media in politics (Vol. 13, pp. 141–163). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Di Fraia, G., & Missaglia, M. (2014). The use of Twitter in 2013 Italian political election. In B. Pătruţ & M. Pătruţ (Eds.), Social media in politics (Vol. 13, pp. 63–77). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dylko, I., & McCluskey, M. (2012). Media effects in an era of rapid technological transformation: A case of user-generated content and political participation. Communication Theory, 22(3), 250–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Edwards, C., Spence, P. R., Gentile, C. J., Edwards, A., & Edwards, A. (2013). How much Klout do you have. A test of system generated cues on source credibility. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), A12–A16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Effing, R., Van Hillegersberg, J., & Huibers, T. W. C. (2011). Social media and political participation: Are Facebook, Twitter and YouTube democratizing our political systems? In Electronic participation: Proceedings of the Third IFIF WG 8.5 International Conference ePart 2011 (Vol. 6847, pp. 25–35). Delft, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Effing, R., Van Hillegersberg, J., & Huibers, T. W. C. (2013). Social media participation and local politics: A case study of the Enschede council in the Netherlands. In Proceedings of Electronic Participation, ePart 2013 (pp. 57–68). Koblenz, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Goode, P. (2013). The value of data in an evolving digital world. Retrieved from
  15. Grönlund, Å. (2009). ICT is not participation is not democracy—eParticipation development models revisited. In A. Macintosh & E. Tambouris (Eds.), Electronic participation: First international conference, ePart 2009 (pp. 12–23). Berlin, Germany: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoffman, D., & Fodor, M. (2010). Can you measure the ROI of your social media marketing? MITSLoan Management Review, 52(1), 41–49. Retrieved November 6, 2013, from you measure the ROI of your Social media marketing.pdf
  17. Jungherr, A. (2012). Online campaigning in Germany: The CDU online campaign for the general election 2009 in Germany. German Politics, 21(3), 317–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lipsman, A., Lella, A., & Dreyer, K. (2014). U.S. digital future in focus 2014. Whitepaper comScore, comScore. Retrieved from
  20. Macintosh, A., & Smith, E. (2002). Citizen participation in public affairs. In R. Traunmueller & K. Lenk (Eds.), Proceedings of Electronic Government (pp. 256–263). Berlin, Germany: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Medaglia, R. (2007). Measuring the diffusion of eParticipation: A survey on Italian local government. Information Polity, 12, 265–280.Google Scholar
  22. Montero, M. D. (2009). Political e-mobilisation and participation in the election campaigns of Ségolène Royal (2007) and Barack Obama (2008). Quaderns del CAC, 33, 27–34.Google Scholar
  23. Nielsen. (2012). State of the media: The social media report 2012 (Public report Nielsen, New York). Retrieved from
  24. Peters, K., Chen, Y., Kaplan, A. M., Ognibeni, B., & Pauwels, K. (2013). Social media metrics—A framework and guidelines for managing social media. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(4), 281–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ren, J., & Meister, H. P. (2010). Drawing lessons from Obama for the European context. The International Journal of Public Participation, 4(1), 12–30.Google Scholar
  26. Rustad, E., & Sæbø, Ø. (2013). How, why and with whom do local politicians engage on Facebook? In M. A. Wimmer, E. Tambouris, & A. Macintosh (Eds.), Electronic participation: 5th IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, ePart 2013 (pp. 69–79). Berlin, Germany: Springer. Retrieved June 18, 2014, from
  27. Sommer, L., & Cullen, R. (2009). Participation 2.0: A case study of e-participation within the New Zealand Government. In R. H. Sprague (Ed.), Proceeding of 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2009 (pp. 1–9). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.Google Scholar
  28. Spierings, N., & Jacobs, K. (2012). Marginal, but significant: The impact of social media on preferential voting. In ECPR Joint Sessions Workshop Parties and Campaigning in the Digital Era, 10–15 April 2012, Antwerp.Google Scholar
  29. Sponder, M. (2012). Social media analytics: Effective tools for building, interpreting, and using metrics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  30. Štětka, V., Macková, A., & Fialová, M. (2014). A winding road from “Likes” to votes. In B. Pătruţ & M. Pătruţ (Eds.), Social media in politics (Vol. 13, pp. 225–244). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2012). Social media and political communication: A social media analytics framework. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 3(4), 1277–1291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Van der Veer, N., & Boekkee, S. (2014). Social media in perspectief: Whitepaper nationale social media onderzoek 2014. Public whitepaper. Enschede, The Netherlands: Newcom. Retrieved from
  33. Vitak, J. (2012). The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 451–470. Retrieved November 6, 2013, from
  34. Withaar, R. J., Ribeiro, G. F., & Effing, R. (2013). The social media indicator 2: Towards a software tool for measuring the influence of social media. In M. A. Wimmer, M. Janssen, A. Macintosh, H. J. Scholl, & E. Tambouris (Eds.), Joint Proceedings of Ongoing Research of IFIP EGOV and IFIP ePart 2013: Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), Koblenz, Germany (pp. 200–207).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robin Effing
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jos van Hillegersberg
    • 2
  • Theo Huibers
    • 2
  1. 1.Saxion University of Applied SciencesEnschedeThe Netherlands
  2. 2.University of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations