Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
(2020)
Letter from the information commissioner ICO/O/ED/L/RTL/0181
David Deacon, Emily Harmer, J. Downey, J. Stanyer, Dominic Wring (2016)
UK news coverage of the 2016 EU Referendum. Report 4 (6 May ??? 15 June 2016 )
Hanspeter Kriesi (2016)
The Politicization of European IntegrationJournal of Common Market Studies, 54
V. Schmidt (2013)
Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and ‘Throughput’Political Studies, 61
J. Curtice (2017)
Why Leave Won the UK's EU ReferendumJournal of Common Market Studies, 55
F. Scharpf (2010)
The Asymmetry of European Integration - or why the EU cannot be a Social Market EconomySocio-economic Review, 8
Vivien Schmidt (2007)
L'Union européenne crée-t-elle ou détruit-elle la démocratie ?, 3
A. Bruns, Tim Highfield (2015)
From news blogs to news on Twitter: gatewatching and collaborative news curation
Daniel Rubenson, A. Blais, P. Fournier, E. Gidengil, N. Nevitte (2004)
Accounting for the Age Gap in TurnoutActa Politica, 39
Revista Estudos Do Século XX, 17
A. Muller (2021)
Leave versus remain: the digital battle
Kevin Hickson, J. Miles (2018)
Social democratic Euroscepticism: Labour’s neglected traditionThe British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 20
A. Bruns, Jan-Hinrik Schmidt (2011)
Produsage: a closer look at continuing developmentsNew Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 17
Matt Henn, N. Foard (2012)
Young People, Political Participation and Trust in BritainParliamentary Affairs, 65
S. Hobolt (2016)
The Brexit vote: a divided nation, a divided continentJournal of European Public Policy, 23
(2018)
Disinformation and ‘fake news’: interim report. Fifth report of session 2017-2019
Jcms: Journal of Common Market Studies, 44
Dajana Zečić-Durmišević (2020)
British Press Discourse: Strategies of Manipulation in the Brexit Campaign
H. Davies (2015)
Ted cruz using firm that harvested data on millions of unwitting Facebook users
J. Seaton (2016)
Brexit and the MediaThe Political Quarterly, 87
L. Hooghe, G. Marks (2009)
A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining DissensusBritish Journal of Political Science, 39
(2018b)
Democracy disrupted. Personal information and political influence
P. Dorey (2017)
Towards Exit from the EU: The Conservative Party’s Increasing Euroscepticism since the 1980sPolitics and Governance, 5
(2019)
Disinformation and ‘fake news’: final report. Eight report of session 2017-2019
Danielle Pinto, I. Moraes (2020)
As mídias digitais como ferramentas de manipulação de processos eleitorais democráticos: uma análise do caso BrexitRevista de Estudios Sociales
(2018)
Investigating into the use of data analytics in political campaigns
P. Worral (2018)
Vote leave’s ‘dark’ brexit ads
(2018a)
Investigation into the use of data analytics in political campaigns. A report to parliament
D.A.L. Levy, B. Aslan, D. Bironzo (2016)
UK press coverage of the EU referendum
Adam Badawy, Kristina Lerman, Emilio Ferrara (2018)
Who Falls for Online Political Manipulation?Companion Proceedings of The 2019 World Wide Web Conference
(2016a)
Penny mordaunt: the UK can’t veto Turkey joining the EU, 22 may
V. Bakir, Andrew McStay (2018)
Fake News and The Economy of EmotionsDigital Journalism, 6
L. Schaik, Simon Schunz (2012)
Explaining EU Activism and Impact in Global Climate Politics: Is the Union a Norm‐ or Interest‐Driven Actor?Human Rights & the Corporation eJournal
Hermès, 77
(2016)
Net migration to UK rises to 333,000 – second highest on record”, 26 may
R. Rose (2019)
Referendum challenges to the EU’s policy legitimacy – and how the EU respondsJournal of European Public Policy, 26
(2018)
Vote leave’s targeted Brexit ads released by Facebook, 26 july
T. Theuns, M. Jongh (2017)
Democratic Legitimacy, Desirability and Deficit in EU GovernanceJournal of Contemporary European Research
S. Kröger (2019)
The Democratic Legitimacy of the 2016 British Referendum on EU MembershipJournal of Contemporary European Research
S. Hix, A. Follesdal (2006)
Why is There a Democratic Deficit in the EU? A Response to Majone and MoravcsikPOL: European Markets (Topic)
The purpose of the paper is to reflect on the conditions of referenda as an EU input legitimacy, on the era of social media microtargeting campaigns. Taking the case of Brexit as an example, it takes conclusions for the democracy as an inherent value of the EU multilevel polity and opens prospects for possible solutions.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is interdisciplinary based, complementing political science approaches on EU democratic legitimacy and communication studies on social media and political communication. These are the theoretical frameworks for analysing the case of Brexit referendum campaign, which is based on an empirical tracing of strategies and contents used. This empirical assessment is supported by official reports of the House of Commons and of the UK Information Commissioner’s Office and media news on the case. Analysis and discussion of it allows to come to conclusions.FindingsPrimary finding is that manipulation and disinformation occurred in Brexit campaign, creating a biased, fake and unbalanced information. Second main finding is that microtargeting and suppression of public debate enhances the typical polarisation of binary options on a referendum, and in the case of Brexit deepened the social cleavage that already shaped voter’s preferences, once information consumed by citizens functioned as “eco-chambers”, strengthening preconceptions. The ultimate conclusion in this case is a sign that social media can deepen the historical gap between elites and voters in the EU, with negative consequences for democracy and social legitimacy of the EU political system.Research limitations/implicationsThe almost impossible access to the digital microtargeted adverts used in campaigns, to allow a more detailed analysis of the EU content issued.Practical implicationsConclusions of this research are useful for politicians and advisers of policy-making to reflect on the future of the political system of the EU in terms of democracy, and the Europe as a whole and think about measures to be taken either on the level of improving legitimacy processes or regulation of digital media.Social implicationsIf practical implications are taken from conclusions of this study, enhancing democratic processes, avoiding privacy data manipulation and providing accurate, impartial and trustworthy information to citizens public can be a social benefit achieved mainly through regulation.Originality/valueDespite some studies have been released on Brexit referendum, they have mainly been single-disciplinary. This study innovates because it conciliates political science theoretical views with communications studies’ ones, to produce strengthened reasoning ground on the purposed of this research: to search evidence that new political communication strategies within the social media landscape can be of special negative influence in EU referenda and for the future of the multilevel polity.
Transforming Government People Process and Policy – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jul 14, 2021
Keywords: Social media; Political communication; Brexit; Democratic deficit; EU democratic legitimacy; Microtargeting
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.