Politico and Compete.com analyzed how political interested individuals used the Internet for political information:
The study, performed for Politico, is simply a snapshot of online activity; it followed only those readers projected to have visited an official candidate website at least once in September.
But the results reveal interesting online habits among the politically attuned. A significant number get their news from mainstream media versus political blogs. YouTube, meanwhile, is one of the most reliable ways for candidates to communicate directly to voters. But the candidates’ official Meetup, Facebook and MySpace pages appear less effective at that.
Despite their seemingly small numbers, these social networking sites still offer candidates big potential audiences. “There are roughly 80 different Facebook groups” dedicated to Romney, said his online communications director, Stephen Smith. “They have dozens or hundreds or tens of thousands of members alone. They’re not even necessarily touching [former Massachusetts] Gov. Romney’s official Facebook page.”
Readers like social networking websites in general. Half of those tracked by Compete visited MySpace in September, and 54 percent visited YouTube. Nearly two-thirds went to Wikipedia, a quarter logged on to Facebook and 7 percent visited Meetup.
But candidates’ specific pages on social networking sites were considerably less popular. Meetup, the darling of the 2004 election cycle, barely registers with any candidate other than Internet phenom Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas). Overall, only 1 percent of readers who visited an official campaign website last month also visited a candidate’s Meetup page. Two percent checked out the candidates’ MySpace pages, and 1 percent hit his or her Facebook page.
While only one to two percent of respondents checked out candidates MySpace or Facebook pages, this doesn’t necessarily make them useless.
Though the number of people visiting the candidates’ social networking sites may be small by percentage, campaigns still see value even in low numbers. “Even if you’re reaching 1 or 2 percent — and I think it’s more than that — it’s a no-brainer,” Finn said. “When you’re reaching someone who has 500 friends on Facebook, they have a lot of influence. Maybe through that 1 or 2 percent you’re reaching 20 percent.”
The notion that (presumed) voters who check the candidates’ social networking sites are more active is supported by the data. There’s the obvious example of Paul, who enjoys an enormous amount of online buzz. But it’s also true that the more popular a candidate is in general, the smaller proportion of his followers — if indeed they can be called that — visited the personalized sites.
Traditionally the candidate’s website has been the hub for their online activities. Such sites work for traditional voters, who were the target of this study. But for nontraditional (ie - younger or new) voters, social networking sites may be the first or only way they find out about some candidates. The no cost set up and easy upkeep make these sites very worthwhile to a campaign, not just as a gateway but as a source of viral campaigning.