Lindsey Nichols 

Department of Journalism

College of Media, Communication and Information

University of Colorado Boulder

 

 

Dr. Elizabeth Skewes, Thesis Advisor, Department of Journalism

Dr. Kenneth Bickers, Thesis Committee Member, Department of Political Science

Dr. Christine Larson, Thesis Committee Member, Department of Journalism

 

 

Abstract

         The American political landscape is ever-changing with new members of government, new issues arising, and new forms of communication shaping our country. Perhaps the most important player in this landscape, however, is the newest voting population: Generation Z. Many Generation Z voters (born between 1997-2012) will come of age just in time for the 2020 election, and they are a population unlike any previous generation. The chiefly-digital manner in which they communicate and the varying issues they care about will be crucial for political candidates to understand, especially if they are seeking re-election in contested races in which the youth vote may be critical. As communication becomes increasingly digital with social media sites, these outlets are becoming major channels for political information. These sites, particularly Twitter and Instagram, are also dominated by younger Americans, making them prime avenues for politicians to connect with potential first-time voters (that is, if candidates succeed in mastering the social norms of each platform and young voters succeed in overcoming historically low voter turnout rates). The 2020 election marks the peak convergence of this new demographic of voters and the new landscape of online communication that they inhabit. This study aims to analyze the interaction among Generation Z voters, political candidates seeking elected office, and social media. In order to understand this complex relationship, I will utilize Colorado Senator Cory Gardner’s 2020 re-election bid in a battleground state as a case study, examining his campaigns’ use of social media, juxtaposing his online presence with other politicians, and analyzing his overall communication efficacy with young voters. Drawing upon social media analysis of Gardner and, his likely opponent, John Hickenlooper, as well as other prominent politicians on social media, as well as interviews with Generation Z voters and social media experts, this study will analyze how this generation views politics through the lens of social media and what that entails for politicians and the future of politics as a whole in the United States.  

 

Chapter One: Literature Review and Rationale

​

Who is Generation Z?

Generation Z became the largest generation in the world in 2019, comprising 32% of the global population (Spitznamen, 2020) and reigning 66.5 million strong in the U.S., according to Pew Research Center (Fry & Parker, 2018). They are the most racially and ethnically diverse generation, projected to be majority nonwhite by 2026, and are on track to be the most well-educated demographic in America with more students choosing college over the workforce post-high school (Fry & Parker, 2018). Business Insider reported in 2018 that Generation Zers comprise 27% of the United States population (Business Insider Intelligence, 2018). While the age range of Generation Z is somewhat disputed, Pew Research Center posits that it includes those born between 1997 and 2012, making most Gen Zers between eight and twenty-three years old by the 2020 election. This means that many Generation Zers will reach voting age by 2020, so a major challenge for politicians will be increasing typically low youth voter turnout (Fraga & Holbein, 2019). Perhaps a key to fostering the youth vote is meeting them where they’re at, which happens to be, a majority of the time, online.

         Generation Z has the greatest access to information through the internet and social media sites—more than any other generation before them at such a young age (Fox & Rainie, 2014). Generation Z is unique in their digital use, as they are considered the generation that has never known life without the internet. A study found that 100% of all Generation Zers surveyed said they are online at least one hour a day, with almost three-quarters of those within one hour of waking up (Seemiller & Grace, 2016). The authors of this study call this “ability to connect with others around the clock” one of the major reasons that young people claim to be constantly “suffering from FOMO— the fear of missing out” (Seemiller & Grace, 2016). FOMO causes people, mainly adolescents, to spend copious amounts of time on social media out of fear that they will miss out on “developments in social networks…regarding others and experience fear of social exclusion” (Coskun & Karayagız, 2019). According to the Global Web Index, Gen Zers spend approximately 3 hours and 38 minutes online on their smartphones each day, which is 50 minutes longer than the average American (Young, 2017). The amount of time they invest in their online presence reinforces their near-constant need to keep up with their friends or public figures that they follow. This could be an important attribute for politicians to tap into when considering how to encourage youth voting.

​

Generation Z on Peer Influence

         According to a survey by the authors of, “Generation Z Goes to College,” Gen Zers are motivated chiefly by advocating for a cause they are passionate about, helping others make a difference, earning credit or opportunities for advancement, and fearing that they may let others down (Seemiller & Grace, 2016). Their desire to not be left behind and to join forces for a cause relates to their high response to peer influencers, or individuals with an exceptionally large following of peers on social media (Pilgrim & Bohnet-Joschko, 2019). These influencers get Gen Zers to try new products, styles, and experiences, with one study illustrating that 40% of people ended up buying a product after viewing an influencer’s post containing a product that the influencer claims to use (Swant, 2016). This persuasive concept could be replicated as a potential social media tactic for campaigns to select a prominent peer influencer and have them motivate their peers to vote for a candidate, or simply to vote in general. While the involvement of social media in this process is relatively new with the advent of smart phones, this method of influence is nothing new. In fact, this powerful tool of influence has been around for decades and was developed to explain how the general public received their political information.

         This framework on politics, studied in the 1950s by Elihu Katz and Paul Lazarsfeld, was called the “influential hypothesis,” indicating that voters are heavily influenced by individuals called “opinion leaders” (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955). Opinion leaders are individuals of higher education and social status, and they are often more interested in mass media and politics than the average American to begin with. Essentially, influential figures like preachers, professors, and lawyers could shape public opinion regarding what was heard in the media and from politicians. Lazarsfeld also developed the “two-step flow” of influence framework, which demonstrates that the mass media reaches opinion leaders, who in turn reach the less-active portions of the American public, which was first published in 1944 (Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1944; Lazarsfeld, 1955). This power dynamic indicates that the average American will not necessarily be persuaded or even reached by candidates themselves, but rater by opinion leaders they know, respect, and trust. This gives opinion leaders the opportunity to share information through their own lens rather than delivering the meticulous, controlled message that the candidates and their campaigns want to disseminate. While the candidates may believe they are reaching the majority of the American public with their messaging, Lazarsfeld’s framework poses that, in reality, they are predominantly reaching opinion leaders who then spread their message to the average American.

         The two-step flow of influence is applicable in the 2020 election, though the opinion leaders may have shifted from the pastors and professors that Lazarsfeld identified to social media influencers and peers. Young people are especially impressionable and influenced by the opinions of others in their adolescent stage of life, and since they already demonstrated that they gravitate towards individuals on social media whose opinions they trust regarding products, perhaps the same is true for politics. These opinion leaders with large social followings possess a great deal of power not only in encouraging young people to vote, but also in shaping their ideologies on certain political issues, because young people are more likely than most Americans to “protest politics and express their views in an online forum” (Sloam, 2014). What exactly are the views that Generation Zers are likely to express in online forums? If politicians want to engage with young people on social media sites where they are likely to express their opinions, politicians must first understand the social and cultural events that have influenced Gen Z’s political ideologies in order to engage with them on these forums.

​

Generation Z and Politics

         Ideologies developed in the adolescent period are often clung to for the remainder of an individual’s life, so this period is crucial for politicians to gain their loyalty (Green, Palmquist, & Schickler, 2002). There is conflicting research when it comes to political parties and Gen Z, however. On the one hand, the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) released poll results just prior to the 2018 midterms suggesting that young people continue to follow a national trend of moving away from organized parties. Just more half of the 18- to 24-year-old survey respondents affiliated with a political party, with more than 33% of them identifying as “Independent” (CIRCLE, 2018). More Americans, particularly youth, “are disassociating from the two major political parties and are striking out as Independents” (Twenge, Honeycutt, Prislin, & Sherman, 2016). CIRCLE finds that this lack of Democratic or Republican affiliation has less to do with being uninformed and more to do with “doubts that the parties represent their views and interests” and “skepticism about their efficacy.”

         Nonetheless, a key trait for Gen Z is “the need to belong” and to pledge loyalty to a group that merits them “peer acceptance” (Williams, Page, Petrosky, & Hernandez, 2010). An important finding from CIRCLE’s survey also suggests that the parties have the potential to reach young voters as “most youth say they have never been asked to be a member of a political party” (CIRCLE 2018). These young voters may be unsure whether or not to make one of the parties a key part of their identity, but even if they are wrestling with that decision, they aren’t being approached by parties for help in deciding. This generation hasn’t been widely marketed to or approached by major parties, unlike the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, when political party identification was more prominent. A 2019 Gallup News Poll concluded that the number of Americans who identify as independent has increased each year since 1951 (Jones, 2019). Perhaps this choice comes from feeling excluded or overlooked by major parties. By combining this lack of exposure to the parties with Generation Z’s desire to belong to a group, it could indicate an important opportunity for political parties to market themselves to young, independent and unaffiliated voters.

         If these parties can understand how to obtain voters’ loyalty at 18 when they’re entering adulthood, they are more likely to remain loyal party voters for the rest of their lives (Green, Palmquist, & Schickler, 2002). The key will be garnering their support when they begin voting, and that lies in understanding their political stances. Generational differences and the political and social contexts in which people come of age (especially of voting age) are correlated with voter turnout and political participation (Highton & Wolfinger, 2001). Fisher claims that political ideologies embraced early on in adulthood remain fairly constant as time goes on, becoming “highly resistant to more than transient change” (Fisher, 2018). He proposes that the “generational replacement” of eligible voters aging out of the system and new ones coming of age has the power to deeply alter U.S. politics in coming years due to extreme ideological differences among the youngest voters and the oldest voters (Fisher, 2018). The political leanings of Generation Z stem from growing up around “global terrorism, the aftermath of 9/11, school violence, economic uncertainty, recession, and the mortgage crisis” (Williams, Page, Petrosky, & Hernandez, 2010). The more social side of their political ideologies may stem from the same-sex marriage Supreme Court case that was passed during their lifetimes, as well as racial diversification in the United States and their witness to the first African-American president (Brauer, 2018).

         A Pew Research Center study indicated that the president’s approval and popularity at the time of Americans’ formative years had a strong correlation with how they voted at 18 (Kohut, et. al., 2011). For the older Generation Zers, that means that Bush’s low approval ratings may cause them to vote Democratic when they have the chance; for younger ones, perhaps Obama’s high approval ratings inspired them to vote Democratic as well. In general, though, Generation Z is not as fiercely liberal as Millennials have been branded; 78% of Gen Zers considered themselves liberal to moderate on social issues while 83% labeled themselves moderate to conservative when it comes to financial issues, indicating an opportunity for politicians of either party to gain their votes in 2020 (Seemiller & Grace, 2016). To get the attention of these potential voters, political candidates must be relevant on the forums they frequent: social media sites.

​

Generation Z and Social Media

         Social platforms are dominated by young people, who have near-constant online presences. According to the Pew Research Center, 94% of Americans ages 18 to 24 are active YouTube users (Anderson, M., & Jiang, J., 2018). Although Pew’s data only includes adults (and only the 18- and 22-year-olds would be considered Generation Zers), there are also numerous YouTube users under 18. There isn’t an accurate estimate of just how many young people under 18 have accounts on YouTube, but YouTube’s user policy allows children 13 and up to create accounts. Including minors, there is a large portion of Generation Z that is represented by these statistics. This social video streaming site has essentially replaced cable television for young Americans, and in order to reach them, people must put out entertaining content for them to pay attention to because of the wealth of other sources they can choose from.

         Many Generation Zers are on social networking sites “on a regular basis to interact with these information sources” (Fox & Rainie, 2014). Social media is mainly accessed through cell-phones by Generation Z, and there are fewer homes with landline phones and more cellphone-only households, as 90% of adults in the U.S. own a cell phone and 81% own a smart phone, according to Pew Research Center (2017). Seventy-eight percent of older Generation Zers had a phone before they arrived at college (Madden, et. at. 2013). All of these technologies have lent themselves to the prevalence of social media networks for both personal and professional use.

Social media was initially created out of a need to connect with friends in an online format but has quickly become a platform for everything: socializing, gaming, organizing and attending events, receiving entertainment news, streaming and watching media, business and professional networking, and, increasingly, engaging in politics.

​

Social Media and Politics

         The utilization of social media outlets for political news and information is relatively new, as popular social media platforms have garnered widespread popularity and increased exponentially within the past decade (Clement, 2019).  From 2005 to 2019, the percentage of Americans with active profiles on at least one social media site increased by 67% (Pew Research Center, 2019). According to Statista, 79% of Americans (roughly 244 million) had at least one social media profile, as of March 2019. Statista predicts that that number will increase to 257 million by 2023 (Clement, 2019). The main platforms Americans use political communication are Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram. Although people still seek out news on television, in newspapers, and on radio, the prevalence of the internet and social media increases the likelihood of users being indirectly exposed to news, whether that was their intention or not (Gil de Zúñiga, Weeks, & Ardèvol-Abreu, 2017). In Colorado specifically, 39.1% of residents said they receive political information on Facebook, 24.5% on Twitter, and 27% on YouTube (Stapleton, C., Sokhey, A., & Adler, E.S., 2019).

         Some political campaign strategists understand the importance of being where the voters are and using those forums to understand who is going to vote, what they care about, and how they communicate about it. President Obama was one of the first presidential candidates to reap the benefits of social media use and engage with segments of the voting population that he perhaps otherwise wouldn’t have been able to reach, as noted in the book by Walker, Brooks, and Goings (2017). “By bolting together social networking applications under the banner of a movement, they created an unforeseen force to raise money, organize locally, fight smear campaigns, and get out the vote that helped them topple the Clinton machine and then John McCain and the Republicans” (Carr, 2008). Obama’s engagement and understanding of where voters congregated and discussed, particularly young voters like Millennials, clearly helped him in both the 2008 and 2012 elections, in which he garnered two-thirds and over three-fifths of Millennial voters, respectively (Fisher, 2018). Obama had a 7.2% lead in the popular vote against McCain in 2008, and 80% were Millennials (6.8 million out of the 8.5 million voters that made up 7.2%) (Walker, Brooks, & Goings, 2013). In fact, without the Millennial vote in 2012 specifically, Obama would not have won his re-election bid. As the oldest Millennials are deep into adulthood at 38, Generation Z is the new young voting population that political strategists must learn to understand.

         While many politicians have attempted to insert themselves into these mediums, many of the candidates and their social media strategists are not native to the platforms. People that were “not born into the digital world but have, at some later point in life, become fascinated by and adopted many or most aspects of the new technology” are referred to as “digital immigrants” (Prensky, 2001). These individuals are type-casted as immigrants because they learn “to adapt to their environment” and “always retain, to some degree, their ‘accent’, that is their foot in the past” (Prensky, 2001). In contrast, Generation Zers are “digital natives,” who are users that “have spent their entire lives surrounded by and using computers, video games, digital music players, video cams, cell phones, and all the other toys and tools of the digital age” (Prensky, 2001). Prensky notes that older generations are basically learning a new language by using social media and the internet, and that “language learned later in life goes into a different part of the brain” (Prensky, 2001). This can cause older people to have a foreign-like presence on social media sites, and that can do more harm than help when it comes to older political candidates using social media campaigns to relate with young people. Gen Z highly values authenticity, as “realness is a core value of the current generation” (Williams, Page, Petrosky, & Hernandez, 2010). This means they will be able to tell when posts or interactions are not genuine, and that places many older politicians on social media in danger with young voters. This may be fatal in competitive races for already endangered politicians, like Colorado Senator Cory Gardner, who was called “the most vulnerable Republican Senator of 2020” if they do not act strategically (Rothenberg, 2019).

​

Gardner’s Re-election in a Purple State

         Cory Gardner is running for re-election in Colorado after serving his first term in the U.S. Senate. After two consecutive terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, Gardner was elected to the Senate in 2014, a midterm that marked the “largest turnover in Senate seats since 1958 and gave the GOP its largest Senate majority since 1930” (Draper, 2015). Gardner has never known the Senate outside of the Republican majority. Of the 14 Senate races in 2014 that were in states Obama won, Colorado was one of only three states that the Democrats lost, which was an incumbency upset in “a competitive purple state” (Draper, 2015).

         The term purple state comes from the combination of the typical colors representing Republicans and Democrats: red and blue, respectively. Colorado has been considered a purple battleground state over the last several decades, as it was relatively Republican pre-1992 but recently has been deemed a “blue-leaning swing state” (Preuhs, et. al., 2018, pg. 179). Swing states are those that have competitive races with a 5% voting margin, which usually include Colorado, Florida, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia for a total of 75 electoral college votes (Draper, 2015). Colorado is unique in that it is a longer-wave swing state, not a contemporary swing state, which means that a political party controls the state “for two or three election periods and then reverses course” (Preuhs, et. al., 2018, pg. 179). This could potentially make it easier to determine which way the state will lean in 2020. Political analysts say Colorado will experience “a very close and highly contested presidential election in 2020” as 36% of voters in 2017 were unaffiliated while Democrats and Republicans accounted for around 31% each, meaning either party needs half of the unaffiliated voters to win (Preuhs, et. al., 2018, pg. 183). Large contributors to Colorado Democrats include urban growth, population growth due to more people moving to the state, and increasing Latino population and political participation, while the consistency and high turnout of rural and older voters give Colorado Republicans strong numbers each year (Preuhs, et. al., 2018, pg. 198). While both major parties continue to fluctuate according to these factors, another increasingly-associated determiner for state election turnout is the nationalization and ties to presidential elections.

​

Nationalization in Senate Races

         Senate elections in particular have become more nationalized in recent years as a result of growing party loyalty and partisan divides. Nationalization is “an increasing linkage between presidential voting patterns with subpresidential contests at the federal, state, and local level” (Sievert & McKee, 2019). In 1980, the same political party that won the presidential election also won 52% of its Senate elections. However, by 2012, the political party that won the presidency also won 84% of its Senate elections (Sievert & McKee, 2019). This increasing nationalization can be dangerous for Republican senators heading into the 2020 election with a same-party president whose national approval rating is around 40%, according to Gallup News Poll (McCarthy, 2019). Sievert and McKee say that “the electoral fortunes of the president’s co-partisans may be determined by political decisions and forces far beyond their immediate control” (Sievert & McKee, 2019).

         Republican senators are also impacted by the growing ideological divide between Senate Democrats and Republicans, which “is now larger than at any time in the past century” (Abramowitz & Webster, 2016). This divide has drastically increased straight-ticket voting among those with a party preference, with the American National Election Study finding the highest levels of party loyalty and straight-ticket voting since their first surveys of party identification in 1952 (Abramowitz & Webster, 2016). In 2012, 90% of voters straight-ticket voted in the presidential and Senate elections, breaking the 89% record from 1960 (Abramowitz & Webster, 2016). There is an increasingly strong effect of presidential partisanship on Senate races, as Abramowitz and Webster’s regression indicates that “the effect of state presidential partisanship increased considerably over time with the largest increases occurring during the past two decades” (Abramowitz & Webster, 2016). While presidential partisanship gains power over Senate races, Senators lose the power of incumbency (Abramowitz & Webster, 2016), which is a crucial advantage for Gardner in 2020.

​

Gardner’s Incumbency

         Incumbents typically have more established voter bases and fundraising networks, while challengers often have fewer resources. This means that incumbents are theoretically much safer electorally with name recognition and funding which often deters them from using “social media in the same way as challengers and underdogs who must turn to all available means to promote and organize their campaigns” (Auter & Fine, 2017). This could be detrimental for Senator Gardner, who may perceive his incumbency advantage as greater than it actually is. Candidates in competitive races embrace social media to increase their chances of success in heated contests, but if Gardner does not recognize his need to engage on social media, his re-election campaign could prove unsuccessful (Auter & Fine, 2017). This is particularly dire, as his main challenger to date is former Colorado governor and former 2020 presidential candidate John Hickenlooper.

         Incumbents are not only losing their advantage through presidential partisanship, but also through quality challengers, especially former governors. Governors who seek election to the Senate receive the largest boost in votes over any other type of challenger, as they received an additional 13.4% of votes over the last the 10 election cycles, from 1994 through 2012 (Duquette, Mixon & Cebula, 2017). With many of these factors challenging Gardner, perhaps it is more important than ever that he engage on social media with younger voters who had the ability to turn the tide for President Obama and could potentially have the same effect for him.

​

Gardner and Generation Z

         In 2017, the Colorado State Demography Office reported that there were 1.3 million Generation Zers in the state (or what they call “Post-Millennials”). This is the second largest age demographic in Colorado behind Millennials. While not all of the Colorado Gen Zers will be of voting age by 2020, a significant portion will be able to cast their first ballot and, as stated earlier, are very impressionable and likely to be independent. Since young voters typically have lower turnout in elections, campaign strategists don’t often devote time or resources to winning their vote. The U.S. Census indicates that voting rates for 18- through 29-year-olds had decreased from 50.9% in 1964 to 38% in 2012 (File, 2013). However, in the 2012 election, Colorado was one of 14 states with statistically higher youth voting rates than the 45% national average, with Colorado’s young adults turning out at a rate of 55.7% (File, 2013). The Census says that while youth voter turnout has decreased in the past 60 years, “historical age-based voting patterns are not set in stone” (File, 2013).

         Recent statistics from Pew Research Center also indicate that youth turnout could be changing, as the three youngest generations (Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z) outvoted all older generations in the 2018 midterm election due to an increase of 21.9 million votes for the younger generations from 2014 to 2018, compared to a 3.6 million vote increase for the older generations over the same period (Cilluffo & Fry, 2019). By combining only the Gen Z and Millennial vote, these young people accounted for a quarter of all midterm votes in America in 2018, with Gen Z casting 4% of all votes. Pew projects that they’ll account for 10% of potential voters by November 2020 (Cilluffo & Fry, 2019). With this in mind, it could be worthwhile for candidates like Gardner to try to connect with the eligible voting portion of the 1.3 million Generation Zers in Colorado. The opportunity to gain these young, undecided voters is clear, and the chief manner in which to reach them is online.

         The “adoption of social media has the potential to change the playing field for candidates who were previously restricted to target audiences and voting demographics and assist in swaying formerly hard-to-reach demographics, such as young voters” (Straus, et. al., 2016). Younger people are more likely to use social media to access and share news, and a regression shows that younger people in the U.S., as well as the UK, Spain, Australia, Germany, and Ireland are more likely to follow politicians on social media than any other age demographic (Newman, et. al. 2017). These voters are untapped potential with their combined lack of party affiliation, constant online presence, and strong peer influence, but it will take more than just being present on social media sites to hold their attention.

         The ratio of intended use to actual use on social media for politicians is 57% to 30% (Marcinkowski & Metag, 2014). A survey found that six weeks prior to elections, candidates claim to plan on using social media while three days before the election, only a handful actually did (Marcinkowski & Metag, 2014). They also found that candidates use social media more symbolically, as “it is less the expectation to win votes that leads candidates to use social media but the hope not to lose voters (young voters in particular) by portraying oneself as modern, open minded, and up-to-date” (Marcinkowski & Metag, 2014). Generation Z, with their avid use of social media as digital natives, understand the difference between politicians truly being authentic and wanting to engage youth voters and politicians simply having an account because they believe it represents their digital competency. If politicians want to appeal to Gen Z voters, it will take more than just having a Twitter or an Instagram account; they must be authentic, engaging, and relevant on those accounts.

​

Campaigning on Social Media to Gen Z

         In order to use social media forums accurately in a way that will speak to Generation Z users, politicians must be authentic. One way to do that is implementing a balanced strategy on Twitter, meaning that tweets should include both professional and private aspects of their lives as opposed to strictly professional aspects (Colliander, et. al., 2017). A longitudinal study showed a balanced strategy increased both interest in the politician's party and intention to vote for that party, regardless of users’ prior political interest, social media usage intensity, gender, or, most importantly, age. (Colliander, et. al. 2017). Twitter and other social media networks can also be beneficial in free advertising for candidates if their message is favorited or re-tweeted, because “non-followers” are exposed to campaigns’ Twitter messages when someone in their social network retweets their posts to a broader audience (Marwick & Danah, 2011). This could potentially increase the reach that politicians can have on social media if they are generating quality content and interacting with constituents in such a way that their posts are being disseminated amongst social networks. One way to increase popularity and generate conversation among constituents is to identify what their concerns are and actively address them.  

         Senators who are nearing the end of their term without a re-election bid are less attentive to voter preferences than those seeking re-election (Griffin & Newman, 2005). Therefore, senators like Cory Gardner who are up for re-election in 2020 may have a prerogative to understand the issues their potential voters care about and campaign with those in mind. Since they cannot possibly speak with every single constituent in their state or engage with every single voter on social media, they hear and respond to potential voters “who are politically engaged and active because they are more likely to follow electoral campaigns than rank-and-file voters” (Lloren & Wüest, 2016). The same etiquette that once applied to campaigning to politically active constituents in the pre-internet era applies today on social media: make your voice heard to the influencers, the opinion leaders, and the politically-engaged citizens who may have large networks of “non-followers.” If these prominent figures share or mention a politician’s content, that could be a huge boost for their social media presence and their re-election campaign, all for free.

         In addition, by using social media authentically, politicians can remove themselves from traditional media gatekeepers and communicate their platforms directly with the public and control their content “without fear of distortion by journalists and other media” (Gainous & Wagner, 2014). In a study of the U.S., UK, Spain, Australia, Germany, and Ireland, young voters from the United States have the lowest overall trust in the news and are most dissatisfied with mainstream news media, which explains their appeal to authenticity and “desire to hear directly from politicians without the information being filtered by others” (Newman, et. al., 2017). This indicates that authenticity will go a long way with younger voters.

         Being the most technologically-centered, most diverse, and most educated generation will surely impact their role in political campaigns and elections moving forward. This up-and-coming voting bloc will be crucial for candidates to reach in 2020, particularly if they are running in competitive elections in battleground states like Gardner. For political candidates to run a successful campaign with this demographic, they must understand the lens of technology, education, and diversity through which Generation Zers view the world. These characteristics create a rather moderate voter, often branded as socially liberally and economically conservative, that may be persuaded by candidates from any party. This will be a key detail in purple states where Republicans are campaigning, as the GOP has not garnered much youth support in the past few elections and midterms. Instead of overlooking this demographic and continuing to rely heavily on the votes of older generations, perhaps younger members of the GOP like Gardner can capitalize on this opportunity to change the way Republicans campaign and target the youth population more directly by maintaining an authentic social media presence to potentially win their vote and gain their loyalty for years to come.

​

​

Chapter 2: Creative Work

         Creative products of this project include social media data analysis, multiple in-depth interviews, a long-form text-based story with data interspersed throughout, multiple videos and an interactive website showcasing all of these elements. The intended audience for this final project is the Council on Undergraduate Research National Conference in the Media and Politics Discipline. The conclusions drawn from the social media analysis will also be useful for an audience of politicians and political strategists, as well as individuals who maintain large-scale social media accounts. In addition, the entire package will be presented to faculty, students, and attendees the Norlin Scholars Conference in April 2020. As a Norlin scholar, I will showcase my work at this interdisciplinary conference featuring various creative, research, and scholarly works.

​

Data Element

         The data analysis component stems from the social media accounts (Twitter and Instagram) of Senator Cory Gardner and his major opponent for 2020, John Hickenlooper, as well as Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY-14) and Dan Crenshaw (R-TX-2). I selected Gardner and Hickenlooper because their Senate race is the main case study for my analysis of social media and Generation Z voters. I also chose to incorporate Rep. Crenshaw and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez because they are social media “stars” with millions of followers. They each embody what a “successful” politician on social media looks like on both the Republican and the Democratic side.

         The social media analysis surveyed the overall statistics of the candidates’ personal and congressional accounts (number of followers, frequency of posts, etc.), as well as engagement with other social media users and the content that is disseminated. This analysis is important because it compares how each candidate is utilizing social media for their campaign and/or their office and determines whether or not those tactics resonate with Generation Z in particular. Both Ocasio-Cortez and Crenshaw, like Gardner, are running for re-election in 2020. I chose to juxtapose their social media activity with Gardner’s to determine which candidates are capitalizing on the two mediums in the most effective ways as they prepare for the election this fall.

         I gathered this data over the course of six months, from September 2019 to February 2020. After it was categorized, I transformed it into a variety of charts and graphs that make it easier for the audience to understand. This will allow readers to visualize the differences and understand the data in a different way. It will break up the long stretches of writing and keep the readers interested in the work as well.

​

Journalistic Element

         The written element is a long-form, journalistic piece, approximately 6,000 words. I performed 12 in-person, phone, and email interviews with all of the characters quoted in the story. I interviewed eight Generation Zers who care about politics and have different political ideologies. It was also important to me that I interview a diverse group of Gen Zers with varying educational backgrounds (no college, some college, post-college.), socioeconomic backgrounds, geographic backgrounds, as well as varying lifestyle characteristics (mothers, military members, married individuals, full-time employees, etc.). I also interviewed three members of academia who perform extensive research on digital and political communication, social media usage, and political campaign strategies. Lastly, I interviewed the communications director for Senator Gardner’s campaign to understand the behind-the-scenes social media strategy.  

         This component incorporates quotes and different perspectives from all of the stakeholders that I am studying in this project. It will allow readers to hear from voices other than my own and bring a creative spirit to the overall product. The intended audience for this specific piece is anyone, but particularly Coloradans, interested in politics, social media, and young voters. I hope to publish my piece with a regional news outlet, such as The Denver Post, or a national political news outlet, like National Review or POLITICO Magazine.

​

Visual Element

         After conducting video interviews with members of Gen Z, I created several short videos that address political issues they care about (and don’t care about), politicians they enjoy following on social media and why, their recommendations for politicians using social media, and their observations and reactions to the social media feeds of Gardner, Hickenlooper, Crenshaw, and AOC. I chose to create several short videos as opposed to a singular, long-form video because they can easily be shared on social media, and they truly embody the type of media that resonates with Generation Zers (similar to BuzzFeed or NowThis videos) and captures their attention. These videos will also allow the audience to pair a face with the quotes in the story and connect with the different viewpoints offered in the thesis. These audio-visual elements will make the project more dynamic overall, lifting the words and data off the pages and presenting them in a different, and perhaps more engaging, medium.

         I hope that my creative project resonates with readers of all ages who seek to understand more about social media, particularly with politicians who use the medium to communicate and campaign. This project brings attention to the interaction between politicians and young Americans on social media, and it emphasizes the increasing importance that social media will continue to have in American politics.

​

​

Chapter Three: Discussion

Description

         Conducting a literature review on Gen Z, social media, politicians, and re-elections allowed me to discover the different discussions around all of these topics and determine where to insert my own findings into the conversation. This up-and-coming generation will play an increasing role in transforming the political landscape of the U.S., and my literature review reiterated how important it is to understand them when looking towards the future of politics. With their varying political views and potential to comprise 10% of the electorate this fall, the opportunity for politicians and political parties to connect with them was unmistakable. Combining these characteristics with the rise of social media and politicians capitalizing on its power, I felt it would be important to study how politicians can succeed at reaching Gen Z.

         By interviewing members of this generation, social media and political experts, and a member of Gardner’s campaign staff, I was able to incorporate many different perspectives into the creative project and make it more personal. With each individual I interviewed, it became clear to me just how prevalent social media is in our society today, particularly for young people, and the unquestionable need for public figures to utilize it (and utilize it well) to connect with others.

         As I was researching and reporting on these issues, politicians’ efforts to be relevant and interactive on social media were more apparent each day with the Democratic debates, caucuses, primaries, and the impending 2020 election. In addition, the COVID-19 global pandemic has put politicians and world leaders in the spotlight more than ever as the public observes and scrutinizes their every move. It has been fascinating to watch breaking news stories play out on politicians’ social media accounts as they grapple with the best strategies to share, interact, and engage with the American public on these digital platforms.

 

Evaluation        

         This project was strong in its ambition and creativity, but perhaps limited in tangible data and conclusions. Combining several, broad topics together was a daunting task. Social media, Gen Z, and re-elections are all in-depth topics themselves, let alone after intersecting them. However, I believe that the creative project contributed something unique to the conversation regarding young voters and social media. It is difficult to make concrete claims because the circumstances surrounding each politician are vastly different. Their age, party, personality, and campaign strategies all factor into how much connecting with Gen Z on social media matters to them. If they are searching for suggestions to bolster youth support, perhaps this could be useful to them.

         If I were to expand upon this project in the future, I would be interested in finding more campaign staffers of high-profile politicians (such as Obama’s social media manager). This project predominantly focused on the perspectives of Generation Z, but if I were to conduct it again, I would try to incorporate more individuals who work in political social media strategy. In addition, it would be interesting to interview politicians of varying ages and ideologies to understand their personal thoughts, reservations, and experiences with social media.

​

Reflection

         This project radically evolved over the last year. I was first inspired during my semester interning in Washington, D.C. While living, learning, and working in a city filled with other young people interested in politics, it became clear to me that these were the future political leaders of America. Yet, there was often a disconnect between older and younger politicians and staff members. I witnessed major generational disparities when it came to technology and strategy, and I felt that the root of these differences must be explored to have a greater understanding of the future of politics. I am grateful to have had this opportunity and hope to return to Washington D.C. after graduation to continue researching and reporting on political issues.

​

References

 

Abramowitz, A. I., & Webster, S. (2016). The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of US elections in the 21st century. Electoral Studies, 41, 12-22.                                                 

            doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2015.11.001

 

Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from

            https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/

 

Auter, Z.J. and Fine, J.A. (2018). Social Media Campaigning: Mobilization and Fundraising on Facebook. Social Science Quarterly, 99, 185-200.

            doi:https://doi-org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/ssqu.12391

 

Brauer, J. (2018). Understanding Generation Z. The Ripon Forum, 52(1). Retrieved from https://www.riponsociety.org/current-issue/?issue=february-2018

 

Business Insider Intelligence. (2018). Generation Z: Latest Characterists, Research, and Facts. Business Insider. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/generation-z

 

Carr, D. (2008). How Obama tapped into social networks’ power. The New York Times.

            Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/business/media/10carr.html

​

Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE). (2018). Young People's Ambivalent Relationship with Political Parties. CIRCLE. Retrieved from                                          https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/young-peoples-ambivalent-relationship-political-parties

 

Cilluffo, A., & Fry, R. (2019) Gen Z, Millennials and Gen X outvoted older generations in 2018 midterms. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from

            https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/29/gen-z-millennials-and-gen-x-outvoted-older-generations-in-2018-midterms/

 

Clement, J. (2019). Percentage of U.S. population with a social media profile from 2008 to 2019. Statista. Retrieved from

            https://www.statista.com/statistics/273476/percentage-of-us-population-with-a-social-network-profile/

 

Colliander, J., Marder, B., Lid Falkman, L., Madestam, J., Modig, E., & Sagfossen, S. (2017). The social media balancing act: Testing the use of a balanced self-presentation strategy for politicians                   using twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 277-285. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.042

 

Colorado State Demography Office. (2018). Crosstabs - A Closer Look at the Economics & Demographics of Colorado Generations (re)Defined. Colorado Department of Local Affairs. Retrieved                     from https://demography.dola.colorado.gov/crosstabs/Generations-reDefined/

​

Coskun, S. & Karayagız Muslu, G. Community Ment Health J (2019). 55, 1004-1014. doi:https://doi-org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10597-019-00422-8

 

Draper, A. (2015). The US 2014 Midterm Elections and Their Aftermath. Political Insight, 6(1), 36–39. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-9066.12088

 

Duquette, C., Mixon, F. G.,  & Cebula, R. J. (2017) Candidate quality and US Senate elections. Applied Economics Letters, 24(3), 193-197. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2016.1176107

 

File, T. (2013). Young-Adult Voting: An Analysis of Presidential Elections, 1964–2012. Current Population Survey Reports, P20- 572. U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from

            https://www.census.gov/prod/2014pubs/p20-573.pdf

 

Fisher, P. (2018). A political outlier: The distinct politics of the millennial generation. Society, 55, 35-40. doi:http://dx.doi.org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s12115-017-0209

 

Fox, S. & Rainie, L. (2014). The Web at 25 in the U.S. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center.

 

Fraga, B., & Holbein, J. (2019). Measuring youth and college student voter turnout. Electoral Studies, 102086. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2019.102086

​

Fry, R., & Parker, K. (2018) Early Benchmarks Show ‘Post-Millennials’ on Track to Be Most Diverse, Best-Educated Generation Yet. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from                                                         https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/11/15/early-benchmarks-show-post-millennials-on-track-to-be-most-diverse-best-educated-generation-yet/

 

Gainous, J., & Wagner, K. M. (2013). Tweeting to power: The social media revolution in American politics. Oxford University Press.

 

Gil de Zúñiga, H., Weeks, B., & Ardèvol-Abreu, A. (2017). Effects of the news-finds-me

            perception in communication: Social media use implications for news seeking and learning about politics: NEWS FINDS ME PERCEPTION. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,                22(3), 105-123. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12185

 

Green, D. P., Palmquist, B., Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

 

Griffin, J. D., & Newman, B. (2005). Are voters better represented? The Journal of Politics, 67(4), 1206-1227. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2005.00357.x

 

Highton, B., & Wolfinger, R. (2001). The First Seven Years of the Political Life Cycle. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 202-209. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2669367

 

Jones, J. (2019). Americans Continue to Embrace Political Independence. Gallup. Retrieved from

            https://news.gallup.com/poll/245801/americans-continue-embrace-political-independence.aspx

 

Katz, E., & Lazerfield, P. (1955). Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communication. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

 

Kohut, A., Taylor, P., Keeter, S., Doherty, C., Dimock, M., & Parker, K. (2011). The generation gap and the 2012 election. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from

            https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/legacy-pdf/11-3-11-Generations-Release.pdf

 

Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people’s choice. How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

 

Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications: a Report of the Bureau of Applied Social Research. Columbia University: Free Press.

 

Lloren, A., & Wüest, R. (2016). Are opinion leaders better represented? West European Politics, 39(4), 800-834. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2015.1125200

​

Madden, M., Lenhart, A., Duggan, M., Cortesi, S., & Gasser, U. (2013). Teens, technology and friendship. Pew Research Center.  Retrieved from       

            http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media/Files/Reports/2013/PIP_TeensandTechnology2013.pdf

 

Marcinkowski, F., & Metag, J. (2014). Why do candidates use online media in constituency campaigning? an application of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Information Technology &                        Politics: Chasing the Digital Wave: International Perspectives on the Growth of Online Campaigning, 11(2), 151-168. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2014.895690

 

Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133.                                                        doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313

 

McCarthy, J. (2019). Trump Job Approval Higher Than Approval of Him as a Person. Gallup. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/poll/267182/trump-job-approval-higher-approval-person.aspx

 

Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., Levy, D. A., & Nielsen, R. K. (2017). Reuters Institute Digital News Report. Oxford, UK: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

            Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Digital%20News%20Report%202017%20web_0.pdf

​

Pew Research Center. (2017). A third of Americans live in a household with three or more smartphones. Pew Research Center Fact Tank. Retrieved from

            https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/25/a-third-of-americans-live-in-a-household-with-three-or-more-smartphones/

 

Pew Research Center. (2019) Social Media Fact Sheet. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from  https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/

 

Pilgrim, K., & Bohnet-Joschko, S. (2019). Selling health and happiness how influencers communicate on Instagram about dieting and exercise: Mixed methods research. BMC public health, 19(1),                   1054. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7387-8

 

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.

            doi:https://doi-org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/10.1108/10748120110424816

 

Preuhs, R. R., Provizer, N., & Thangasamy, A. (2018). Still Contesting Colorado? Presidential Swing States. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.

 

Rothenberg, S. (2019). The most vulnerable Republican senator in 2020. Roll Call.

            Retrieved from https://www.rollcall.com/2019/03/05/the-most-vulnerable-republican-senator-in-2020/Bottom of Form

 

Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2016). Generation z goes to college. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

​

Sievert, J., & McKee, S. C. (2019). Nationalization in US Senate and Gubernatorial Elections. American Politics Research, 47(5), 1055-1080.

            doi:https://doi-org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1532673X18792694

 

Sloam, J. (2014). New Voice, Less Equal: The Civic and Political Engagement of Young People in the United States and Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 47(5), 663-688. 

            doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414012453441

 

Spitznamen, E. (2020). Generation Z is bigger than millennials — and they’re out to change the world. New York Post. Retrieved from

            https://nypost.com/2020/01/25/generation-z-is-bigger-than-millennials-and-theyre-out-to-change-the-world/

 

Stapleton, C., Sokhey, A., & Adler, E.S. (2019) Colorado Political Climate Survey. American Politics Research Lab, University of Colorado Boulder. Retrieved from                                                                      https://www.colorado.edu/lab/aprl/colorado-political-climate-survey

 

Straus, J. R., Williams, R. T., Shogan, C. J., & Glassman, M. E. (2016). Congressional social media communications: evaluating Senate Twitter usage. Online Information Review, 40(5), 643-659.                     doi:10.1108/OIR-10-2015-0334

 

Swant, M. (2016). Twitter says users now trust influencers nearly as much as their friends. ADWEEK. Retrieved from 

             www.adweek.com/digital/twitter-says-users-now-trust-influencers-nearly-much-their-friends-171367/

 

Twenge, J. M., Honeycutt, N., Prislin, R., & Sherman, R. A. (2016). More polarized but more independent: political party identification and ideological self-categorization among US adults, college                   students, and late adolescents, 1970-2015. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(10), 1364-1383. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146167216660058

 

Walker, L. J., Brooks, F. E., & Goings, R. B. (2017). How the Obama Presidency Changed the Political Landscape. Santa Barbara, California: Praeger, An Imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC.

 

Williams, K. C., Page, R. A., Petrosky, A. R., & Hernandez, E. H. (2010). Multi-generational marketing: Descriptions, characteristics, lifestyles, and attitudes. The Journal of Applied Business and                     Economics, 11(2), 21. Retrieved from https://colorado.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.colorado.idm.oclc.org/docview/815978214?accountid=14503

 

Young, K. (2017). Chart of the Day: Gen Z Spending Over 3.5 Hours on Mobiles Daily. Global Web Index. Retrieved from                                                                                                                                          https://blog.globalwebindex.com/chart-of-the-day/gen-z-spending-3-5-hours-mobiles-daily/

        

Appendix A

​

Article:

Retweeting Your Way to Re-Election

by Lindsey Nichols

​

 

Appendix B

 

Social Media Data Analysis 

​