Advertisement

Social Media Adoption and Use by Australian Capital City Local Governments

  • Wayne WilliamsonEmail author
  • Kristian Ruming
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 15)

Abstract

This chapter explores social media adoption and use by Australian capital city local governments. Despite digital communication with the community being an integral part of modern local government functions, the types of digital communication being used are not commonly monitored or analyzed in the Australian context. This chapter provides an investigation of the types of social media being employed by local governments and a sentiment analysis of Twitter accounts from a sample of local governments in Sydney. The results suggest that social media is being used in a variety of forms according to the size and function of the local governments and is influenced by the level of Twitter activity undertaken by the mayor.

Keywords

Local Government Social Medium Capital City Sentiment Analysis Adoption Rate 
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.

References

  1. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012). 2011 Census QuickStats. Retrieved June 29, 2014, from http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/quickstats.
  2. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2013). 3218.0—Regional population growth, Australia, 2012–13. Retrieved July 23, 2014, from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/3218.02012-13?OpenDocument.
  3. Australian Government (2014). The Australian Government. Retrieved July 23, 2014, from http://australia.gov.au/about-australia/our-government/australian-government.
  4. Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brabham, D. (2009). Crowdsourcing the public participation process for planning projects. Planning Theory, 8(3), 242–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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
  7. Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fan, Q. (2011). An evaluation analysis of e-government development by local authorities in Australia. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(14), 926–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Foth, M. (2006). Analyzing the factors influencing the successful design and uptake of interactive system to support social networks in urban neighborhoods. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction, 2(2), 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gauld, R., Gray, A., & McComb, S. (2009). How responsive is e-government? Evidence from Australian and New Zealand. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gauld, R., Goldfinch, S., & Horsburgh, S. (2010). Do they want it? Do they use it? The ‘Demand-Side’of e-government in Australia and New Zealand. Government Information Quarterly, 27(2), 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heeks, R., & Bailur, S. (2007). Analyzing e-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods and practice. Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 243–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hofmann, S., Beverungen, D., Räckers, M., & Becker, J. (2013). What makes local governments’ online communications successful? Insights from a multi-method analysis of Facebook. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 387–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kavanaugh, A., Fox, E., Sheetz, S., Yang, S., Li, L., Shoemaker, D., Natsev, A., & Xie, L. (2012). Social media use by government: From the routine to the critical. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 480–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kennedy, H. (2012). Perspectives on sentiment analysis. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 56(4), 435–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Klout (2013) How the Klout score is calculated. Retrieved January 16, 2013, from http://www.klout.com/corp/klout_score.
  17. McMillan, S. (2002). A four-part model of cyber-activity: Some cyber-places are more interactive than others. New Media and Society, 4(2), 271–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mergel, I. (2013a). A three-stage adoption process for social media use in government. Public Administration Review, 73(3), 390–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mergel, I. (2013b). Social media adoption and resulting tactics in the US federal government. Government Information Quarterly, 30(2), 123–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mossberger, K., Wu, Y., & Crawford, J. (2013). Connecting citizens and local governments? Social media and interactivity in major US cities. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 351–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Norris, D. F., & Reddick, C. G. (2013). Local e‐government in the United States: Transformation or incremental change? Public Administration Review, 73(1), 165–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0? Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/whatis-web-20.html.
  23. Picazo-Vela, S., Gutiérrez-Martínez, I., & Luna-Reyes, L. (2012). Understanding risks, benefits, and strategic alternatives of social media applications in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 504–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Reddick, C. G., & Norris, D. F. (2013). E-Participation in local governments: An examination of political-managerial support and impacts. Transforming Government People, Process and Policy, 7(14), 453–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Robinson, D. G., Yu, H., & Felten, E. W. (2010). Enabling innovation for civic engagement. In D. Lathrop & L. Ruma (Eds.), Open government: Collaboration, transparency and participation in practice (pp. 83–89). Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.Google Scholar
  26. Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2012). Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-government among municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29(S1), 72–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shackleton, P., Fisher, J., & Dawson, L. (2006). E-government services in the local government context: an Australian case study. Business Process Management Journal, 12(1), 88–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shi, Y. (2006). E-Government web site accessibility in Australia and China a longitudinal study. Social Science Computer Review, 24(3), 378–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith, A. (2010). Government online. Pew Research Center. Retrieved May 31, 2010, from http://www.pewinternet.org/media//Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Government_Online_2010.pdf.
  30. Sobaci, M. Z., & Karkin, N. (2013). The use of twitter by mayors in Turkey: Tweets for better public services? Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 417–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Teicher, J., & Dow, N. (2002). E-government in Australia: Promise and progress. Information Polity, 7(4), 231–246.Google Scholar
  32. Thelwall, M. (2014). Sentiment analysis and time series with Twitter. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt, & C. Puschmann (Eds.), Twitter and society (pp. 83–95). New York: Lang.Google Scholar
  33. Twitalyzer (2012). Twitalyzer. Retrieved December 16, 2012, from http://www.twitalyzer.com/5/index.asp.
  34. United Nations (2014). United Nations E-Government survey 2014: E-government for the future we want. Retrieved October 22, 2014, from http://unpan3.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2014-Survey/E-Gov_Complete_Survey-2014.pdf.
  35. Wellman, B., & Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). The internet in everyday life. Oxford, England: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Williamson, W., & Parolin, B. (2012). Review of web-based communications for town planning in local government. Journal of Urban Technology, 19(1), 43–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Williamson, W., & Parolin, B. (2013). Web 2.0 and social media growth in planning practice: A longitudinal study. Planning Practice and Research, 28(5), 544–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations and ways forward. Government Information Quarterly, 24(3), 646–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geography and PlanningMacquarie UniversityNorth RydeAustralia

Personalised recommendations