From YouTube announcements to Twitter fundraising, Rhode Island political candidates are embracing virtual campaigning with gusto as the 2022 election season gains momentum.
That doesn’t mean the days of door-knocking and handshaking are over – meeting voters face to face remains vital – but cultural shifts prompted by the pandemic are going to mean candidates will be appearing virtually more frequently this election cycle.
“It’s not surprising that campaigns are following voters to mediums that voters are spending their time on,” said John Marion, executive director for Common Cause Rhode Island.
Twitter and YouTube are hardly new platforms, but the pandemic forced people to use technology not just for entertainment but for work, school and everything else in their lives.
That familiarity with virtual events combined with lingering safety fears made Secretary of State Nellie M. Gorbea launch her gubernatorial campaign via online video. Gorbea has continued to use social media, including in direct messages through Twitter to solicit campaign donations.
In 2014 and 2018, she also used social media to promote her candidacy for secretary of state, she said, but not with the same emphasis.
“In 2014, social media allowed me to get my message out to a larger group of people,” Gorbea said. “In 2021, it became the primary mode.”
It’s also much easier for a political event to “go viral” since reshares and reposts of videos typically gain more traction in social media algorithms than words and photos alone, says Kristen Regine, a marketing professor at Johnson & Wales University.
Fellow Democratic gubernatorial candidate Helena B. Foulkes has already seen the benefits of campaigning virtually to reach more people. The former CVS Health Corp. executive announced her candidacy in a video and plans to continue integrating virtual events into her campaign, having heard from parents of young children, for example, that virtual events made it easier to attend without having to leave the house or find child care, she says.
But Wendy Schiller, a political science professor at Brown University, sees trouble ahead.
A prerecorded video lets candidates control the message, avoiding tough questions by voters or journalists, she says. Even a livestreamed debate over Zoom makes it easier to give a vague answer without much opportunity for follow-up.
“It’s convenient for politicians but bad for democracy,” she said.
On the other hand, online campaigning doesn’t require as much money, giving candidates with less funding a chance to make a splash, Schiller says.
Another case for the benefits of online election events: a March virtual Providence mayoral debate hosted by Rhode Island College students.
“All you need is a Zoom account and a YouTube account, so the barriers to entry are pretty low,” Marion said. “It democratizes the information.”
Of course, more opportunities to share information means more information gets shared, which can overwhelm and confuse voters, especially in an age where misinformation runs rampant, Gorbea warns.
However, in-person events aren’t going away entirely and will likely pick up as the elections draw closer. A Zoom rally can’t replace the energy of a live crowd or a meet-and-greet. In some cases, those interactions can be a deciding factor for voters, according to Schiller.
“Sometimes a literal handshake will win you one vote or family’s vote,” Schiller said.
Nancy Lavin is a PBN staff writer. Contact her at Lavin@PBN.com.
