Who would under-18s vote for? - April 29, 2010

Find out what young people think about the policies, politicians and parties in the 2010 general election

Monday 26 April - Friday 14 May

www.headsup.org.uk

A lively debate is happening on the current HeadsUp forum for 11-18 year-olds, arguing about who they would vote for if they could and why? The young people are debating policy proposals, TV Leaders' debates and the impact of gaffes, with many certain about voting intentions if they had the chance.

Although under-18s can't vote, they still have very informed and diverse opinions on politics, politicians and the political parties, visit HeadsUp.org.uk to see more.

So far a variety of views have been expressed in the forum thread Who would you vote for?, such as:

I would vote for Lib Dems because they would most likely introduce a new voting system that I think would improve the general election for future years. I also think that this country needs change, and although that is the campaign of the conservatives, we have not had Lib Dems for a long time:; it would be a great change for Britain.

 The reason I would vote for conservatives is because I dont really think much of Lib Dem's, I'm sorry, but i dont. I also wouldn't vote for labour is because gordon brown hates the idea of grammer schools, and if he had his way then all the grammer schools would shut down, and my school would too!

 I think the Greens should get to run the coutry! They are focused on the enviroment which is what we need right now! If they inforce some laws anout being more Green global warming will be gone in no time!!!

For more information please contact Kate Egglestone/Virginia Gibbons, mediaprog@hansard.lse.ac.uk or 020 7438 1210

Parliamentary Affairs April 2010: The Politics of Britishness - April 21 2010

Essential reading for anyone interested in contemporary politics

Discounted rate for Hansard Society members

The April 2010 issue of Parliamentary Affairs looks at The Politics of Britishness.

As well as abstracts from the articles (see Editor's Notes), Parliamentary Affairs podcasts are also available. These are interviews with the authors designed to explore themes from their work. The podcasts are between 10 and 15 minutes long, and designed to inform researchers and to serve as teaching tools to stimulate discussion amongst students.

Parliamentary Affairs is a long-established journal published by Oxford University Press in association with the Hansard Society. Individual subscriptions cost £60 a year; special reduced subscriptions for Hansard Society subscription members cost £27 a year (UK), €41 (Europe), US$54 (rest of the world).

• Become a member of the Hansard Society and receive a reduced subscription rate

• Individual subscriptions cost £60 a year from jnls.cust.serv@oxfordjournals.org or Journals Customer Service Department, Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons, Head of Communications at the Hansard Society on mediaprog@hansard.lse.ac.uk or 020 7438 1225

How can young people learn about the general election? - April 20, 2010

Get 11-18 year olds discussing their opinions on the policies, politicians and parties in the 2010 general election. Monday 26 April - Friday 14 May

www.headsup.org.uk

The next online HeadsUp forum for 11-18 year-olds will be focusing on the forthcoming general election. Although under 18's don't get to vote, HeadsUp.org.uk provides a platform for them to participate, allowing them to consider the debates and form opinions during and after the election. Themes up for debate include:

• Who would you vote for? - Which party do you think has the best policies? Which party appeals to you?
• Do political parties speak to young people? - How do you want politicians to communicate? What would political parties have to do to get your attention?
• Why do so few young people vote? - Do you think it's a problem that so few young people vote? Do young people care about politics?
• My big issue - what's the big issue of the election for you? What issue would you like the parties to focus more on?

So far the following politicians are taking part - with more to be confirmed:

• David Blunkett (MP for Sheffield Brightside since 1987 & current Labour candidate)
• Philip Davies (MP for Shipley since 2005 & current Conservative candidate)
• Clare Short (Former Labour and Independent MP for Birmingham Ladywood)
• David Kidney (MP for Stafford since 1997 & current Labour candidate)
• Linda Gilroy (MP for Plymouth Sutton since 1997 & current Labour candidate)

For more information please contact Kate Egglestone, k.egglestone@hansard.lse.ac.uk or 020 7438 1210

Parties have uphill job to convince voters on political reform, says Hansard Society - April 16, 2010

Research shows manifesto commitments don't always reflect what public say they want

Research carried out by the Hansard Society over the past seven years for the annual Audit of Political Engagement demonstrates that public attitudes to politics and political engagement are complex, contradictory and rarely uniform. While there is strong agreement that the political system is in need of reform, there is little consensus on what shape that reform should take.

Calm down dear, it's only a tweet, says Dr Andy Williamson, Director of Digital Democracy at the Hansard Society -April 16, 2010

I've talked a lot over the last couple of years about the ephemeral nature of social media - it's a mayfly not an elephant. And last night's leader's debate was perhaps the first real opportunity to test out the veracity of this claim and indeed, to some extent, the value of social media as a democratic enabler. Tweets might persist in the ether but their half-life is in reality incredibly short. The second problem with Twitter is content or, as last night demonstrated, the lack of it. What the leader's debate confirmed was that Twitter is a great place to make a comment, state a strongly held opinion or make a joke or sarcastic remark. Last night it lacked much else and didn't add to the quality of the debate.

The leader's debate confirms that we use Twitter for posture, position and rebuttal. To signal agreement or otherwise (and disagreement is of course always more interesting), to forward and to endorse. Let's not forget that the instant nature makes it gaffe-prone too; @ericpickles's careless omission of the ‘r' in ‘shirt' turned a harmless retort into mass hilarity.

All of this makes tweets a good way to gauge instant mood and response. A handy thing at election time. But caution is needed because we're then obliged to look at who is tweeting and quickly conclude that this not a broad demographic, rather a narrower political and digital elite.

The Digital Election: Bubbling but not boiling says Hansard Society - April 14, 2010

As previous research from the Hansard Society has shown, UK elections are far less candidate-driven, and attract far fewer donations than in the United States. Whilst the parties have evidently invested in online front-end tools during this campaign, there has been little evidence that they have created any meaningful increases in participation during the campaign. What will prove to be important will be the internal use of the internet within the party and campaign offices in order to organise their efforts on the ground.

Digital media serves to inform the press about developments during the campaign, and these will then trickle down to the mainstream.

So far, it does not appear that a direct link has been created online between citizen and candidate/party in this election.

Read more about the digital election at the Hansard Society's Digital Democracy blog

Political parties are digital followers not leaders - April 9, 2010

New research from the Hansard Society

Behind the Digital Campaign, a new report from the Hansard Society published today, examines the work done by the political parties' digital teams in the build up to the 2010 election. It demonstrates how their strategies have been influenced by digital campaigns in other countries and outlines the development of the ‘perpetual campaign'. It concludes that while the internet unlikely to lead to dramatic changes in the electoral landscape in this election, there are some noteworthy aspects to the general election digital campaign:

• UK political parties are largely followers not innovators
• Digital media is more effective in personality-led campaigns than party-led campaigns
• Expenditure and experimentation during the pre-election period has led to the ‘perpetual campaign' building communities of supporters to mobilise during the election period
• Third-party and single-issue digital campaigns are more likely to increase political participation and knowledge
• Social networking tools influence political activists, insiders and the media - stories generated on blogs and Twitter generally only reach the public when mainstream media take them up