A short message to pollies: think before you tweet, and don't believe all you read

Twitter screengrab

WHETHER or not you have an account, whether or not you understand it, even if you think it is the digital equivalent of scribbling on a dunny door, Twitter is having an impact on politics. And probably, so far, not for the better.

On one level it is merely another way to spread a message. When a story broke in newspapers last month that Labor's parliamentary whip Joel Fitzgibbon was recruiting support for Kevin Rudd's return to the prime ministership, he chose Twitter to respond. "I thank my colleagues for the publicity," he tweeted, "but no one does more to support the PM and the government than me!"

The tweet was good enough for Julia Gillard, who said in a media conference: "Look, Mr Fitzgibbon's made a statement this morning and I think his words speak for themselves."

But many politicians have been caught out tweeting insults and observations they would never make in a formal interview. When elderly anti-carbon tax protesters interrupted proceedings in Canberra, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Mike Kelly attracted attention for the wrong reasons by tweeting from the chamber: "Couldn't quite hear, thought it might have been something about dental plates and brain dead." Labor MP Stephen Jones this week referred to opposition spokesman on immigration Scott Morrison as "that maggot Morrison". NSW upper house Liberal MP Peter Phelps caused a storm late last year tweeting to a critic: "go fk yourself, commie".

New MPs will now be trained - implored - by their respective parties to think before they tweet. But, given the immediacy of the medium, no doubt many more politicians will yet embarrass themselves.

Some political users are more subtle. Since he lost his challenge to win back the prime ministership, Rudd has been able to stay out of the public eye while continuing to communicate directly to more than 1.1 million followers. It is the perfect way for him to constantly demonstrate his public appeal while not doing anything overtly to undermine Gillard. "Heading out to the big game here in Sydney tonight," he tweeted this week, "with son Nick and big Blues backer West Syd MP Ed Husic." It was a folksy, uncontroversial public notice that he and one of his caucus supporters were out and about.

Politicians are also using Twitter to assess feedback from the public. When Wayne Swan came under fire over his essay attacking mining magnates, he pointed out "the essay was the No 1 topic on Twitter after it came out". The Treasurer needs to understand that, if trending on Twitter were a measure of political success, Seal or Lara Bingle might be prime minister. This reliance on the distorted feedback from Twitter could be its most dangerous political trap, especially for Labor.

To comprehend the political repercussions of Twitter you have to understand how it works and, importantly, who uses it. People follow those whose messages interest them or follow, through the use of hashtags, the topics that take their fancy.

But the Twitter politics crowd is heavily loaded to the Left. This is largely a factor of the demographic: experts say the majority of the traffic is generated by 18-35 year olds. But in Twitter's political streams there are high numbers of journalists, university students, union officers, political staffers and bureaucrats, so this mix also tends to drag the conversation to the Left.

Of course, it is not exclusively so. There are rationalist stirrers like me (@chriskkenny), right-wing warriors (some of whom are just as abusive as the nasty Left), and many mainstream politicians and voters. But the weight of numbers seems to be around an undergraduate version of the Left.

It is difficult to gather empirical data on this, mainly because so many accounts are anonymous or unverified. So assessments are largely subjective. Queensland University of Technology's new mapping research certainly shows how the politicians and issues of the Left tend to be central to the Twitter feed, while conservative issues are more marginalised. Still, if you doubt the Left bias just join Twitter and make up your own mind or watch the on-air tweets during ABCTV's Q&A.

Part of QUT's research showed that 90 per cent of Twitter traffic under a major political hashtag (#auspol) is generated by just 10 per cent of users.This demonstrates the dangers of taking any Twitter response as a guide. Social media consultant Thomas Tudehope, who operated digital communications for Malcom Turnbull, says Twitter "skews to the Left" and can be seen in the issues that tend to dominate, such as climate change and gay marriage.

"Twitter can be an unrepresentative echo chamber and in that sense politicians must attempt to reach out beyond the converted," Tudehope says. "Left-wing activist groups have been particularly effective at using the medium to generate traffic."

Seeking to engage can be perilous, especially for Tony Abbott, who is perhaps the most mocked Australian politician on Twitter. His effort this week under the #askTony hashtag quickly attracted a range of abusive and ridiculous tweets. To be fair, whether you tweet from the Left, Right or centre you will get your share of anonymous abuse. But it is apparent that those from the Left receive considerably more support and respect. The government struck similar trouble yesterday with MPs from the Prime Minister down using the hashtag #cashforyou to spruik the Schoolkids Bonus. The slogan was just too crude to escape mockery, although many sought to defend it.

Still, it is the affirmation from Twitter that is the danger for progressives. Politicians, particularly from the Left or the moderate wing of the Liberal Party, often have been lured off course by playing to the Canberra press gallery rather than the political mainstream. Placing too much emphasis on the approval of the gallery tends to be a mistake because their judgment comes from a broadly green-Left perspective. Twitter takes this temptation to another level, intensifying the problem because it is such a narrowly focused echo-chamber. If Twitter is your guide, you will end up in Greens territory, endearing yourself to the most progressive 10 per cent of the political marketplace.

While experts say that there are up to two million Australian accounts, there are certainly fewer than a million regular users. And, with so many anonymous and multiple accounts possible, and adolescent users, the Twitter political pool could be very shallow.

Political parties run official accounts to try to spread messages and shape the Twitter debate. No doubt they run fake accounts, too, to confect their own endorsements. It is a place where online pressure groups such as GetUp! can make a lot of noise, and hear their views reverberate. But if politicians read too much into that noise they are likely to be misled. Witness the over-reaction last year to the Indonesian abattoir story, reflected in mainstream media but magnified online.

Arguably, the same effect can be seen in the media, with the Twitter feed and online emphasis of Q&A helping to lure that program away from the mainstream towards a place where Tim Flannery and Bob Brown seem very much at home. The ABC is heavily represented in the Twitter conversation through many of its journalists and programs, and has at least one dedicated social media reporter.

Managing director Mark Scott is active on Twitter and, naturally enough, receives plenty of positive feedback for ABC programming. It tends to tell him mainly what he wants to hear. For instance, Scott tweeted a link this week to his speech defending the ABC against claims of groupthink. Immediately, the Twitter echo-chamber endorsed his (in my view thin) arguments as "thoughtful".

It reminded me of the scene from Life of Brian that, come to think of it, seemed to preconceive Twitter. Waking to find his home surrounded by unwanted disciples, Brian tells the assembled crowd that they are all individuals. "Yes," they chanted back in a biblical re-tweet, "we're all individuals." Then one ironic dissident at the back pipes up: "I'm not."