Reykjavík.
The next speaker at ECPR 2011 is Øyvind Kalnes, whose focus is on Norwegian nationalist parties online (very topical given recent events, of course). The three main nationalist parties in Norway are the Progress Party (around 16% of the votes), the Democrats, and the Coast Party (around 1% each). Local elections are coming up soon – so how are new technologies adopted by these parties?
Øyvind focussed on their online presences on Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter since 2007, and also conducted interviews with key party personnel, he also engaged in some preliminary data analysis following the 22 July massacre. What is the timing and ambition of these parties’ adoption of online technologies, what interparty competition exists here, who drives these processes and what form and content does the Web presence take? How does this relate to offline politics?
The immigrant integration debate in Norway has highlighted a division between ethnic (based directly on ethnicity) and civic (based on the ability of immigrants to adapt to liberal society) nationalism; the latter means that leftist parties can have nationalist traits, too. Some 50% of Norwegian voters are worried about immigration, with 25% quite holding negative attitudes; there are also some worries about national sovereignty (though Norway is not a member of the EU).
What are the effects of online media on party organisations and activities, then? Online media provide a direct and spontaneous channel for individual radical politicians, of course, but this also reveals the dark underbelly of extreme nationalist politics, with inappropriate online statements or images creating strong ripple effects especially also in the mainstream media. Online-savvy extremist politicians can be good ambassadors for their causes, therefore, but also become loose cannons damaging their parties.
Web 2.0 technologies were introduced to Norwegian politics from about 2007 onwards, starting with significant grassroots activity before gradually being adopted by party organisations. Nationalist parties hesitated at first, and largely took a top-down approach to implementing Web 2.0 technologies (and these parties are generally following a top-down organisation and don’t have a large party base). These parties are also worried about allowing their rank and file to voice their opinions online on behalf of the party because they may easily fall foul of Norway’s strong anti-hate speech legislation (as has happened a number of times already).
Online media have few effects on interparty competition, then; parties hesitate to use online media and follow a Web 1.0 mindset; there is balkanisation rather than deliberation amongst the nationalist parties. Web 2.0 is seen as a threat because of the attention paid to their online presences by the mainstream media, in particular.
