The different means by which we publish material are transformative and constantly evolving. From stone carvings, that date back 800,000 years, to the three-dimensional printing that has emerged over the past number of years, the publishing industry has always sought new ways for information to be distributed. As the technology for means of distribution changes, so too does its impact on society. By looking at specific publication technologies we are able to compare the impact they have had on different aspects of our society such as education, creative industries, science, entertainment, but in particular, politics. This blog post will aim to investigate and compare the impact that the printing press (Einstein, 1979) and the social media platform Twitter, have had on politics and political discussion within society. In doing so it will highlight how governments and politicians use publishing as a persuasive tool to disseminate explicit information (Cray, 2013). The printing press came about in the middle of the 15th Century, after demands grew for a less costly method of reproducing the written word (Kreis, 2000). “The first man to demonstrate the practicability of movable type was Johannes Gutenberg (c.1398-1468), the son of a noble family of Mainz, Germany. A former stonecutter and goldsmith, Gutenberg devised an alloy of lead, tin and antinomy that would melt at low temperature, cast well in the die, and be durable in the press. It was then possible to use and reuse the separate pieces of type, as long as the metal in which they were cast did not wear down, simply by arranging them in the desired order. The mirror image of each letter (rather than entire words or phrases), was carved in relief on a small block. Individual letters, easily movable, were put together to form words; words separated by blank spaces formed lines of type; and lines of type were brought together to make up a page. Since letters could be arranged into any format, an infinite variety of texts could be printed by reusing and resetting the type” (Kreis, 2000). The printing press, said to be one of the most revolutionary inventions in human history (Dittmar, 2011) made it much easier for information to be distributed than it previously had been before, and on a much larger scale. Kreis (2000) states that the development of the printing press initiated an “information revolution,” allowing ideas to be publicized and disseminated, quickly and with greater impact. Dittmar (2011) believes that the printing press changed the way in which society shaped itself, and played a key role in the evolution of business practices. “Beyond literacy, print media fostered the development of new, bourgeois competences and the ‘social ascent of new professionals.’ The urban middle classes were the principal purchasers of books. Printing spread to meet, ‘demand for books among the merchants, substantial artisans, lawyers, government officials, doctors, and teachers who lived and worked in towns…men who needed to read, write, and calculate in order to manage their businesses and conduct civic affairs.’ The new technology underpinned an emerging culture of information exchange and the development of an urban, bourgeois public sphere” (p. 1140) The printing press developed a new, informed public and enhanced the ability for political discussion within the developing media industry, by enabling a cheaper means of distribution and more periodically (Weber, 2006). “At the same time, then, as the printing press in the physical, technological sense was invented, ‘the press’ in the extended sense of the word also entered the historical stage” (Weber, 2006, p. 387). Weber explains the importance of the printing press in the development of periodical distribution, and the impact this had on political discussion. He states that the Messrelation, a German publication, is the earliest example of a political periodical. “Its importance from the educational point of view is that the sphere of political authority was now constantly exposed to public view and a larger, anonymous readership could keep the political process under consistent scrutiny” (Weber, 2006, p. 398). This highlights how the printing press enabled political thought to be expressed and ultimately distributed, therefore enhancing debate and discussion. However with the ability to distribute new information so rapidly and widely came the ability to develop the publishing of propaganda within the newly formed mediascape. Propaganda has progressed from what was at first for religious reasons during the Protestant Reformation (Strauss and Edwards, 1995), to being much more politically driven. Nazi Propaganda of WWII illustrates this: “In 1933, over 4,700 daily and weekly newspapers were published annually in Germany, more than in any other industrialized nation. When Hitler came to power, 81% of all German newspapers were locally owned. However, within a few months, the Nazis gained control of the press and were able to regulate the messages sent from Germany” (The Holocaust and the Printed Word, 2010). The printing pressed was the technology that provided the means of publishing political propaganda, but powerful dictatorship and governmental control affected what was actually being distributed. “According to Jeffrey Herf (2006), the texts and images of wartime propaganda are a revelatory means of understanding why anti-Semitism led to the Holocaust (p. 1). The Nazi regime gained control of the printing industry under the Reich and used carefully crafted language in order to convince millions to follow its vision of anti-Semitism. While doing this, the Germans also sought ways to enhance its image in America, even going as far as hiring American public relations firms to assist them (Lipstadt, 1986, p. 6). At the forefront of Nazi hatred was anti-Jewish propaganda” (The Holocaust and the Printed Word, 2010). We can see from the previously discussed information that the printing press directly and immediately affected the ability for political discussion and debate within society, as well as the dissemination of information and political propaganda (Cray, 2013). Another publication technology that has had a significant impact on politics is social media platform Twitter. Twitter emerged from the spotlight in 2006 and has since accumulated more than 500 million users worldwide (Investor.twitterinc.com, 2014). Not only a virtual platform for thoughts and views to be expressed, through the use of the hashtag (Bruns and Burgess, 2011), Twitter has become a publication technology that connects users to specific channels of discourse therefor enhancing a sense of community online and constructing a networked audience (Zappavigna, 2014). Hashtags are a search-based mechanism by which all tweets sharing specific textual attributes are accumulated (Bruns & Burgess, 2011). This function has highly impacted upon politics within society today, as it has not only enhanced the ability for political discussion and debate, it has also become heavily integrated into election campaigning and other forms of political communication (Enli & Skogerbo, 2013). Enli and Skogerbo (2013) illustrate how Twitter has become an important political tool in the disseminating of information, and discuss how social media platforms expand the political arena for increased personalized campaigning. “Social media have over the past few years become integrated into election campaigning and other forms of political communication. As such they provide new impetus to the personalization of politics, a returning theme in political communication” (2013, p. 758). Their article uses data from interviews and social media updates from two Norwegian election campaigns, “and asks for what purposes Norwegian politicians use social media as a tool for political communication. The findings show that politicians’ report both marketing and dialogue with voters as motives for their social media use and their practices varied, too. Politicians’ reported motive to use social media for marketing purposes was reflected in their actual use” (2013, p. 757). They found that, “Politicians’ appearances on social media not only result from their own efforts to reach voters, but also they are part of the parties’ central campaign strategies” (2013, p. 757). A recent article published by the BBC News’ political reporter, Chris Mason (2012), explains how the hashtag has shaped political debate: “A dominant hashtag on a particular topic can become impossible for even the establishment being railed against not to embrace #telldaveeverything, a hashtag dripping in sarcasm, suggested people should share their greatest secrets with the prime minister, when the government set out plans to broaden online surveillance.The Home Office published a response using the #telldaveeverything hashtag. For Mark Wallace, a PR man and blogger, the hashtag is a vital tool at the heart of an increasingly mainstream platform for conversation amongst the political classes. And so for that reason it matters, whether we as individuals want to embrace it or not. "There is no way to avoid the impact that Twitter has had on politics, business and communications generally," he says. "Ultimately people are sitting down all around the country and asking one of the first questions they ask is how will this look on Twitter. This can't be avoided. Whether you are on Twitter or not the messages you will be hearing from politicians will be shaped by it.” The presence of politicians on social media not only result in their own efforts to reach voters, they also play a key role in campaigning stratergies (Enli & Skogerbo, 2013). By using the hashtagging system within Twitter, politicians have enabled a certain type of discourse that has impacted upon they way in which election campaigns are run (Mason, 2012). There are now a number of different elements that should be considered before published content can be distributed. Twitter adds “to the spaces where candidates may involve voters in personal encounters. These encounters may serve several purposes, e.g. market their candidacies, mobilize voters for the upcoming election, discuss politics or a combination” (Enli & Skogerbo, 2013, p. 758). Twitter enables a symbiotic relationship to be established between politicians and their followers and enhances participation online. When we compare the impact of the printing press and Twitter on an aspect of society such as politics, we can see that both have made significant contributions to the way in which information is disseminated enabling political objectives to be further reaching and more integrated within society itself (Mason, 2012). The printing press, as discussed, had a significant impact on what was being produced, and enhanced the ability for political discussion and debate (Dittmar, 2011). It also contributed to the distribution of the periodical and ultimately propaganda, as highlighted by the Nazi regime in WWII. The impact that Twitter has had on politics, on the other hand, demonstrates the technologies clear ability to establish political discourse and enhance personilzed campaigning (Enli & Skogerbo, 2013). In conclusion, by having investigated and compared the impact of two different publication technologies on politics, we can see how not only is the industry of publishing transformative, so is society. References: Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. (2011). The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics. 6Th European Consortium For Political Research General Conference, 1-8. Crary, Jonathan (2013) ‘Chapter Three’ in 24/7—Late Capitalism and the Ends of Sleep London: Verso: 61-89 Dittmar, J. (2011). Information Technology and Economic Change: The Impact of The Printing Press. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(3), pp.1133-1172. Eisenstein, Elizabeth (1979) ‘Defining the initial shift: some features of print culture’ in The Printing Press as an Agent of Change Vol. 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 43-163 Gunn Sara Enli & Eli Skogerbø (2013) PERSONALIZED CAMPAIGNS IN PARTY-CENTRED POLITICS, Information, Communication & Society, 16:5, 757-774, DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.782330 Investor.twitterinc.com, (2014). Twitter Reports Second Quarter 2014 Results (NYSE:TWTR). [online] Available at: https://investor.twitterinc.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=862505 [Accessed 6 Nov. 2014]. Kreis, S. (2000). The History Guide: Lectures on Modern Europe Intellectual History. [online] Historyguide.org. Available at: http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/press.html [Accessed 4 Nov. 2014]. Mason, C. (2012). Twitter effect: How the hashtag has shaped political debate. BBC News, pp.1, 2. Strauss, G. and Edwards, M. (1995). Printing, Propaganda, and Martin Luther. History of Education Quarterly, 35(3), p.301. The Holocaust and the Printed Word, (2010). The American press and the Holocaust. [online] Available at: http://sefershoah.wordpress.com/the-american-press-and-the-holocaust/ [Accessed 6 Nov. 2014]. Weber, J. (2006). Strassburg, 1605: The Origins of the Newspaper in Europe. German History, 24(3), pp.387-412. Zappavigna, M. (2014). Networked Audiences. Lecture, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
